Confessions of a Reluctant Patriot

My husband put up our flag for the Fourth of July and came back into the house singing the Star Spangled Banner. We both love our country. We both are grateful for this nation we call home. But, on that particular day, I was surprised to realize how ambivalent I feel about the national anthem and about this flag waving to me from my front yard.

Maybe it’s our checkered past.

I will stand on the portico of our County Courthouse this weekend and take my turn reading aloud the Declaration of Independence. It has fallen to me to read the paragraph complaining about the ways King George “excited domestic insurrections amoungst us, and endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontier the merciless Indian Savages…” Never mind the fact that Europeans mercilessly slaughtered and displaced the Native Peoples as we took over the New World. Never mind the merciless savagery inherent in every war – even our war for our own independence.

It is timely that I had read Mark Charles’ blog just recently: Reflections from the Hogan: The Dilemma of the Fourth of July. A wise, bold Native American blogger, Charles calls us to remember our shared history with all its complexity. Even as we proclaim that “all men are created equal,” we must also acknowledge how many years it has taken this nation to grow toward the understanding that “all” means all.

Maybe it’s our blind practice of national religion.

Although I go to church most Sundays, I usually avoid attending on a patriotic Sunday. As a minister, I am deeply troubled by the way authentic Christianity has been co-opted by an American civil religion. On the 4th of July weekend, in sanctuaries across the nation, I have to wonder who – or what – is actually being worshiped. flags-1024x508


I am happy to recite the pledge and sing our anthem at the fireworks show this Fourth of July; that’s an excellent and appropriate venue. But I believe absolutely that it is crucial for religious people to remember to keep church and state separate.

Maybe it’s our checkered present.

Yes, America (finally) turned from our original sin of slavery, but I grieve the ways we continue to allow the underlying sin of racism to skew our society. White supremacy is still very much a thing all across America. Some people live out that value with brazen, dangerous animosity. Other people live out their belief in white privilege more politely. “Benevolent racism” I call it – feeling (and often expressing) discomfort and disdain whenever some people speak different languages, practice different religions, wear different clothing or celebrate different holidays.

So I understand why I am ambivalent about my patriotism. America is a mixed bag and many Americans are blind to that truth.

Even so, my good husband reminded me that the ideal is indeed beautiful. Our national anthem sings of the spirit of resilience among our people. Our national flag signals the unity inherent within the diversity of our people.

America is a dream, a hope, an aspiration.

Maybe not a dream come true – not yet. Maybe not ever. But it’s still worth believing in. And it’s absolutely worth working for.

I guess my challenge to myself is to get over my funky ambivalence and get to work. I will march with my NAACP friends in our local parade and then keep partnering together for our community. I will wFullSizeRender (1)rite letters to my local newspaper and to my elected officials. I will vote. I will do what I can to help my little piece of America live up to its ideals and grow into its dream. I will do what I can to nudge this nation to embody its stated values of equality and justice… I will do what I can; that’s all any of us can do.


Flag Meme credits

Meme: David R. Henson
Text: Frederick Buechner
Original Photo: Frankileon

Guest Blog: How White Christians Used The Bible — And Confederate Flag — To Oppress Black People


On Jan. 4, 1861, a Catholic bishop named Rev. A. Verot ascended a pulpit in The Church of St. Augustine, Florida, and defended the right of white people to own slaves.

The apostle Paul, Verot claimed in his sermon, instructs slaves to obey their masters as a “necessary means of salvation.” Quoting Colossians 3:22, he said, “Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh, not serving to the eye, as pleasing men, but in simplicity of heart, fearing God.”

It’s no secret that hundreds of Christian pastors like Verot used the Bible during the Civil War to justify slavery. But the massacre last week of nine black people inside Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, has once again forced white Christians in America to re-examine the white church’s historical ties to racism — and how hateful rhetoric like Verot’s had more power because it came from the pulpit. Continue reading Guest Blog: How White Christians Used The Bible — And Confederate Flag — To Oppress Black People

Guest Blog: “Piss Christ” And Drawing Muhammad: On Not Being Offended

Reflection by Lindsey Paris-Lopez

June 11, 2015
I recoiled a little just typing the title to this article.

The title of the infamous photograph by Andres Serrano, “Piss Christ,” makes me bristle as much as the content of a crucifix submerged in blood and urine. I can’t get used to the language on a gut level, even as I have come to appreciate it on an intellectual and even spiritual level. My visceral repulsion to this juxtaposition of the filthy and the sacred is probably similar to the feeling Muslims get when they see the beloved Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) degraded in crass and crude caricatures. It can feel like a blow to the stomach, with anger and disgust rising up in response, to see or hear that which we hold most sacred defiled. Continue reading Guest Blog: “Piss Christ” And Drawing Muhammad: On Not Being Offended

Guest Blog: A Straight Christian Mom Responds to James Dobson’s Attack on Gays

blog by Susan Cottrell


James Dobson doesn’t really “Focus on the Family”… he just focuses on SOME families. Marriage equality is only a matter of time—and Dobson’s newsletter attack, which includes a speech by Robert George, is basically a call-to-arms to resist “the homosexual activist movement” and its “master plan” of “destruction and redesign of the family.”

As I have written before, God does NOT define marriage as a man and a woman. My mentor pointed out years ago that Dobson would have been much more helpful all these years if he’d had a “Focus on Jesus” – instead of idolizing the nuclear family as he sees it. (Anyone who knows Jesus knows he is all about breaking down our boxes!)

Sarah Herndon is straight. She is a Christian and she and her husband have a one-year-old son. Sarah’s uncle, a conservative pastor, forwarded Dobson’s letter for his whole family to see, and he may have assumed that everyone was on board with his opinion. Instead of just deleting his email, Sarah spoke up with the response below to say that no, they’re not.

If you’ve been in this battle for any length of time, you’ve heard all the misleading, anti-gay rhetoric before. Sarah’s answer represents a broader Christian—and Christlike—perspective, the relevant perspective.

If you are being pummeled with panic-induced appeals to “fight gay marriage and the evil gay agenda,” let this letter encourage you.

Hi Uncle,

Normally, I would not respond to forwards of articles on religion, spirituality, faith, etc. However, I am compelled, for several reasons, to respond to you. Please know that I do so out of a desire not to attack you, but for you to hear something that needs to be heard by a great many more people in the Christian and Catholic community, especially those in positions of spiritual leadership.

Since you made the decision to share this, I made the decision to tell you what I think, and to let our family members know as well. And yes, I did read everything both men wrote before I wrote this.

You are a pastor. Your message is supposed to be that of love. What is sobering and disturbing to me is that you’re so wholeheartedly standing with these men who say that so many people out there, who just want to be loved and cared for equally, without fear of persecution, like everyone else, are less than you, less than me, less than anyone else who is straight.

What makes you think that condemning an entire group of people and claiming they will lead to the destruction of society has anything whatsoever to do with Christ’s teaching to love one another as we love ourselves?

Do you truly think that if a person is blessed to find a partner in life who will support them, love them as they are, without conditions, and they are able to affirm to each other, their families, friends, and community that they are committed to sharing both joys and sorrows for the rest of their lives, this will lead to the destruction of society? That love that expresses itself differently than yours is going to lead to the end times?

That way of thinking is dangerous. That way of thinking is destructive. That way of thinking has brought thousands of people to commit suicide every year, because they were rejected from the families who were supposed to love them the most. I have to wonder how that figures into your evaluation of the sanctity of life.

If you want to talk about the destruction of modern society being brought about by one group of people, I would point you in the direction of the people who have spent billions of dollars to control everything about our government and economy. Guess what? Those conservative politicians they prop up aren’t actually interested in who is gay, in who uses birth control, in who is a “good Christian” and who is “ungodly.” They are interested in making money.

Ungodly amounts of money, I would say. While they spend millions of our tax dollars trying to push through smokescreen “morality legislation,” they are hurting the very people they claim to represent, by failing to protect them from the powerful corporations that seek to subjugate us into an oligarchy where those who have money have 100% of the power.

I promise you, the people who shout the loudest about so-called family values do not care about them in the slightest. They’ve figured out that fear-mongering by claiming that your rights as a Christian will be infringed upon by giving someone else who is different than you the same rights has worked well for them. I can tell you something about these wild claims about businesses being forced to serve gay people: If some baker says they don’t want to make a gay couple a wedding cake, they aren’t going to demand that baker make it. They are going to find a baker who will. If a pastor doesn’t want to officiate at their wedding, they’ll find a different pastor. They’ll vote with their wallet. But I could go on about that all day, and that’s not the main thing I wanted to say to you.

It is not that long ago that, in this country, a mixed race couple’s marriage was considered to be an aberration and unlawful and not pleasing to God. It was thought to be a union that was less than a marriage between a white man and a white woman, and therefore, not deserving of equal protection.

It was not that long ago that, in this country, it was acceptable for people (including all of our founding fathers by the way, who keep getting trotted out as the ultimate Christians) to own people… slaves. Slaves were considered less than fully human and not worthy of equality. Our society, by and large, has realized this was terribly wrong.

For thousands of years, wars have been fought over who knows better how to worship God. On which people are the chosen ones, and which ones should be eradicated from the face of the earth. The concept of one group of people deciding who gets full privileges and membership to enjoying the love of God is a deadly one.

Christianity was never meant to be an exclusive club only straight people can join. Fortunately, millions of Christians, and thousands of churches in America, know that.

These human-imposed limits—of who is valuable and who is not, on who is worthy of God’s love and who is not, on who is going to heaven and who is going to hell—were not dictated by God or Christ. Our churches, Catholic and Protestant, are meant to be a welcoming body of Christ, a family where every member, though different, is equally valued, equally useful, equally loved, equally welcomed.

Robert George asks, “Do you believe, as I believe, that every member of the human family, irrespective of age or size or stage of development or condition of dependency, is the bearer of inherent dignity and an equal right to life?”

Absolutely I do. That’s why you’re wrong about gay people. That’s why James Dobson is wrong about gay people. That’s why Robert George is wrong about gay people. So so so so so so wrong.

Gay people just want to be treated with inherent dignity, and an equal right to life, a life without persecution. A life where people aren’t shouting from the pulpit that they don’t deserve the love that makes them happy. Gay people have much more to fear from you than you have to fear from them.

Lip service about “love the sinner, hate the sin” and all of that other hypocritical hogwash that tries to dress up condescending homophobia as a pious wish for people to get closer to God by rejecting a part of themselves will not fly with me.

Now, if saying these things makes me a “tame Christian” according to one man’s personal definition, frankly, I don’t give a damn. It doesn’t bother me what James Dobson or Robert George thinks, because I am 100% sure that after I die, no one is going to ask me why I didn’t hate more people. No one is going to ask me why I didn’t try harder to keep more people from being happy and loved and accepted by their community.

You’re wasting a lot of time and energy, a lot of opportunities to do good, by focusing on condemning some people. It is not courageous to hate people. It is courageous to love them. Love is always the answer. That is what Jesus wanted us to remember. How easily we can forget.

— Sarah


Read article on the Patheos website here:

Guest Blog: Unaffiliated and Underrepresented

op-ed by Charles M. Blow

President Obama is a Christian (despite the fact that most Republicans apparently still believe that his “deep down” beliefs are Muslim, according to one poll conducted last year.)

In fact, according to the Public Religion Research Institute, there have only been four “religiously unaffiliated heads of state in American history,” the last being Rutherford B. Hayes, who left office in 1881. This, however, does not mean that they did not believe in God.

Perhaps the most famous unaffiliated president was Abraham Lincoln, who wrote in 1846:

“That I am not a member of any Christian Church, is true; but I have never denied the truth of the Scriptures; and I have never spoken with intentional disrespect of religion in general, or of any denomination of Christians in particular.” Continue reading Guest Blog: Unaffiliated and Underrepresented

Guest Blog: Pastors’ Letter – Texas public schools are not ‘Godless environment’

Speaking passionately and personally, we pastors are for Texas children, and we are alarmed at the language and legislation coming from some of the most powerful people in our land. It attacks neighborhood and community schools and the dedicated, faithful educators who nurture and instruct our children.

The Texas Senate recently passed Senate Bill 4, providing tuition tax credits to donors giving scholarships to private schools. These are plainly private school vouchers.

The lieutenant governor’s hand-picked advisory board issued a letter calling every public school classroom “a Godless environment.”

We are offended. Several of our spouses and many of our members work in public schools, and many of our children attend them. We are certain they take God with them.

We see first-hand the dedicated servants committed to the moral, ethical and emotional well-being of children as well as their academic preparation. We know the love with which counselors, administrators, classroom teachers and other staff work with the broad range of students.

They encourage all, fretting over those with particular challenges, pouring their hearts, their hours, their energies into the precious lives of children, no matter their native ability, economic background or ethnicity. Former U.S. Sen. John Danforth, R-Mo., also an Episcopal priest, points out that objects — like chewing gum — may be kept out of schools, but not God. God is the creator of heaven and earth.

Pickpocketing public coffers while simultaneously attacking public schools — anchor of the common good — seems to us inadequate leadership.

We applaud the 12 senators who opposed the disappointing voucher legislation, and we urge our representatives in the Texas House to defeat vouchers. Here’s why:

Our state Legislature has repeatedly rejected private school vouchers because they divert public money to religious schools in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits any establishment of religion.

This time the ruse is not to give religious schools money directly but simply to allow a reduction of funds in the public treasury to be diverted to private schools.

Religious liberty is at stake. The separation of church and state is intended not to protect the state from the church, but to protect the church from the state.

With Thomas Jefferson, we believe it is sinful and tyrannical for government to compel people to pay taxes for the propagation of religious opinions with which they disagree, or even with which they agree. Authentic religion must be wholly uncoerced.

Faith should be dependent on the persuasive power of the truth it proclaims and not on the unwanted, and unneeded, assistance of the Texas Legislature.

George W. Truett, pastor of Dallas’ First Baptist Church for the first half of the 20th century, said on the steps of the nation’s capital: “Religion needs no prop of any kind from any worldly source, and to the degree it is thus supported, it is a millstone hanged about its neck.”

As a practical matter, vouchers channel public monies to private schools with no public accountability. Private schools could use public money to discriminate on race, gender, religion and special needs.

Private schools define and meet their constituency’s needs, but public money must come with public scrutiny.

Vouchers have always been defeated in Texas because they neglect the lawful, public system and, thus, violate the Texas Constitution.

Article 7, Section 1, says: “A general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools.”

Texas benefits from a robust economy, yet hovers near the nation’s bottom in per-pupil spending. We feast at bounty’s table while some children subsist on crumbs.

Education is God’s gift to all persons. Education is a core component of democracy.

We pray the Texas House will defeat vouchers by whatever name.

Let us, rather, defend and protect public education in Texas, and let us affirm and support those who shape children on our behalf.


The authors are the Rev. Brent Beasley, Broadway Baptist Church; Tim Bruster, First Methodist Church; Carlye J. Hughes, Trinity Episcopal Church; Tom Plumbley, First Christian Church; Larry Thomas, University Christian Church; Karl Travis, First Presbyterian Church, all in Fort Worth.

Continue reading Guest Blog: Pastors’ Letter – Texas public schools are not ‘Godless environment’

“How Corporate America Invented Christian America:” A Reflection

I’ve been reading Kevin Kruse’s book, One Nation Under God, and I’m intrigued by his analysis of how “corporate America invented Christian America.” Oftentimes our national debate circulates around the Founders and how they understood the relationship of church and state. Even with a fairly adequate historical record available to us, Conservatives and Liberals argue ad nauseam about what the authors of our Constitution and Bill of Rights intended. Kruse also downplays the theory that the Christian revival of the 1950’s was primarily a reaction against Communism. Kruse only nods to these discussions and instead posits an economic domestic agenda: that “a Christian America” was intentionally created in the 1930’s by anti-FDR corporate magnates in league with Evangelical preachers. Continue reading “How Corporate America Invented Christian America:” A Reflection

Charlotte’s Earth Day Letter to Sen. Ted Cruz

Earth Day 2015

Dear Senator Cruz,

On this Earth Day 2015, I thought I would write my fourth letter pondering our relationship to the earth from the perspective of our shared Judeo-Christian heritage.

I’ve read the email reports you send to us, your constituents, and I’ve researched the NASA sub-committee you now chair, the Senate Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness. This committee could be a significant place for you to use your voice to influence the larger conversation and motivate Americans to be more actively involved in the care of our planet. But then I watched the video of your interview with NASA Administrator Charles F. Bolden, Jr. and heard you contest the agency’s request for an increase to NASA’s earth science budget. 27398e432a4402f66006738cee989ce8This puzzles me.

As best I can tell, Mr. Bolden and his team are quite experienced and competent at their jobs. If they recommend having the budget support their original and continuing mission to focus on earth and atmospheric science as well as space and aeronautics, then why would you consider that a problem? From its inception, NASA has helped safeguard this planet by offering scientific data that allow policy makers to create sound approaches in our relationship with the earth. Right now, with all the environmental issues facing us, we need more of that, not less. Continue reading Charlotte’s Earth Day Letter to Sen. Ted Cruz

How to Talk to “Those People”

Civil conversation is hard.

Whenever people in a multifaceted, multicultural civilization try to have a civil discussion, things can get complicated very quickly. Our past experiences, our societal conditioning, our moral assumptions can place us in very different worlds when it comes to communicating. We talk to each other—sometimes using identical vocabulary—but we discover that words don’t necessarily mean the same things for people whose very lives function with an entirely different complex of meaning than our own. This happens in every day normal dialogue, so consider how challenging it is to carry on a meaningful conversation when deeply held values are at stake.

Civility is hard. These days, some people think it hardly matters. But it does.

As a pastor, I have done my share of marriage counseling, family counseling, congregational conflict counseling. Two things are particularly important when I help people find a peaceful way through painful differences: one is honesty and the other is respect.

Honesty demands that we speak clearly about the issues that spark our own passion.

Respect demands that we listen deeply in order to understand the issues that spark the passion of another.

Honestly does not mean saying whatever we think and feel and believe in a disrespectful manner. Respect does not mean hiding the truth of what we think or feel or believe just because we may offend. In a civil conversation, we say what we think with words that invite ongoing discussion and we respect the humanity of the other person enough to hear them out no matter how much we may disagree with what they say. ( I repeat: we respect the humanity of the person even when we disagree with their words and ideas.)

I found some helpful suggestions for civil conversation recently. David Gushee, an ethicist at Mercer University writing for the Baptist News Global, reflected on a recent lecture by Professor Alan Brownstein, a constitutional law and church-state expert—and a practicing Jew. That may sound like a joke (an ethicist, a Baptist and a Jew walk into a bar…) but Gushee loves to write (as I do) about intersections between faith, culture and politics and he thought Brownstein’s speech on Civility and Tolerance When Absolutes Clash was “riveting” and “brilliant.”

(David Gushee went on to reflect on the recent clashes concerning “religious freedom” laws using Brownstein’s guidelines of civility and tolerance. I think his essay is quite helpful. Read more here.)

How does one engage in civil conversation with honesty and respect when our core values seem to be dishonored by someone else’s deeply held beliefs? It’s hard. But Brownstein offers these guidelines:

Neither side may trivialize or dismiss the concerns of the other.

Neither side should define the “other” according to one single characteristic or identity marker.

Both sides should aim to help each other understand their own experience and perspective using a type of speech that can be heard by the other.

Both sides should accept the fundamental ground rule of life in a free society: the essence of liberty is the right to be different and to act wrongly in the eyes of others.

That statement made me stop and read it again: the essence of liberty is the right to be different and to act wrongly in the eyes of others.

Professor Brownstein went on to highlight the fundamental role of fear in situations of public conflict that we end up facing in our culture, politics, and law:

The fear of being excluded from full participation in public discourse or public life;

The fear that the other side is trying to coerce change of my side’s core identity;

The fear that the other side will use the power of law to force my side’s conformity with beliefs and practices that we find abhorrent.

The fear of losing or betraying deeply valued relationships of love, either with the Divine or with people, or both.

I find Brownstein’s guidelines helpful on several levels. His first suggestions are practical and workable. I’ve said for years that “communication is a skill to be learned.” Talk-To-Me-Image-300x233From the time we were babies, learning to speak, learning how to discern language, learning that some behaviors communicated an invitation to relationship while other behaviors alienated—from our earliest years, we have been learning how to communicate with others.

And we’re not done yet; we will never be done with learning and improving. Brownstein reminds us that there are many down-to-earth kinds of things we can do (and refrain from doing) that can help us speak and help us listen.

The other thing I like is Professor Brownstein’s insight about the covert power of fear. This rings true for me. When I think I am in danger in some way—my reputation, my ideas, my “truth,” my deeply held beliefs—then I am tempted to respond to another with defensiveness and attack. But whenever I step back and consider that the other person is struggling with their own fears—even if from a very different perspective than mine—then I am more inclined to work from the “honesty-respect” paradigm. Whenever I consider the very real possibility that I could be wrong (or at least partly wrong and only partly right) then I am more able to give others the liberty to be different and to act wrongly in my eyes. (I’ve written about this before in my blog: Sincere Differences Discussed Sincerely.)

My volunteer work with the Coffee Party USA has reminded me how uncivil our communication patterns have become in America in this 21st century. Maybe it’s the political climate. Maybe it’s the anonymity of cyberspace. Maybe it’s a devaluing of common courtesy across the broad spectrum of our society. Maybe it’s our culture’s dualism that tends to categorize people and ideas into boxes marked: black or white, right or wrong. Maybe we all are living with too much fear. Whatever is going on, incivility is damaging us in deep ways and it’s time to turn this around.

Some people won’t care; they are in this to “win” by using speech as a weapon that destroys its opponents (as Dr. Brownstein points out.) 6a00d8341c500653ef012877186c7e970c-800wi

But lots of us do care; we want to find ways to employ honest, respectful civil dialogue as a tool for breaking down walls and building bridges. We who share this commitment are the ones who carry the greater responsibility to model civility and to persevere in actually acting like civilized people.

We’re not so far-gone that we can’t improve our skills of speaking and listening.

We’re not so hardened that we have lost our ability to respect our shared humanity—even for an adversary.

We’re not so inept that we can’t express our honest differences of opinion with courtesy and civility.

“You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one.”


Charlotte Vaughan Coyle lives in Paris TX and blogs about intersections of faith, culture and politics on her website and Intersections Facebook page. She frequentlyIntersections logo shares her thoughts with Coffee Party USA as a regular volunteer.

Charlotte is an ordained minister within the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and also blogs about Scripture from a progressive Christian approach in her Living in The Story Musings.

Charlotte’s Letter to Sen. Cruz on Church and State

Dear Senator Cruz,

I have written numerous letters to you pondering our shared Christianity and how faith intersects politics in this nation of ours. Unknown+copy Although you and I see faith quite differently, still as a pastor, it is important for me to share my thoughts with you because you are my senator, but also because you are a candidate seeking to be President of the United States.

I have to say: the way you use your faith in the public arena disturbs me. What I see is more a profound and dangerous misuse of faith.

As a Christian, I believe fervently in America’s promise to keep faith and politics separate in our official policies. State legislatures and local municipalities struggle to balance the importance of both religious freedoms and civil rights. However, in too many actual and proposed public policies, a particular fundamentalist version of Christianity has unbalanced the discussion and demanded that this way of being religious should be inordinately privileged.

Many different people have written about appropriate applications of religious liberty within our secular society.  I am no expert on constitutional law but it is clear to me that the faith I love is being severely misrepresented and misused in this public debate. When some Christians claim victim status and demand special protection, I am disappointed and offended. 2dbb9186aaf3996a953dd8e78a9c1e3eIn spite of our Constitution’s explicit call for government to avoid “the establishment of religion,” Christianity still does and always has had immense privilege in this nation. And now you want to assert that it is Christians who are being persecuted? (“Jihad” !?!? Really now, Senator Cruz.)

Too often your words are divisive and accusing. Too often you fuel the fires of fear and disrespect. This may be the standard practice of politicians but a president must strive to unite the nation’s citizens while honoring the wide range of diversity inherent among Americans.

That said, as much as I am concerned that the rights of everyone should be protected, as a pastor I am even more concerned about the rampant misuse of faith and how that damages Christian witness.

When a Christian baker or florist or pizza parlor owner claim it is their “right”—because of their faith—not to serve someone, I will claim they do not understand how authentic Christian faith is to behave.

It was Jesus who taught his disciples:

“…love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matthew 22:37-40)

“Love your enemies …” (Matthew 5:43-45)

“In everything do to others as you would have them do to you…” (Matthew 7:12)

“If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.” (Matthew 16:24)

Christians who claim that their own rights are more important than Jesus’ call to love and serve others demonstrate a sadly inadequate faith. Christians who claim they are entitled to wield corporate power in order to avoid serving those of whom they disapprove show they have no real understanding of the Christ who loved and welcomed “sinners.” Self-serving self-righteous self-centeredness has no place in either faith or politics—no matter how pious or fervent it may sound.


When you conflate faith and politics and encourage followers of the Christ to elevate their own rights over the rights and needs of their neighbors, you pervert the faith of these who have put their trust in you.

When you conflate faith and politics and applaud the misuse of corporate power in the name of Christ, you betray both third-party citizens and Christ.

When you conflate faith and politics for your own presidential ambitions, you damage the witness of the gospel of Jesus Christ (a word of good news for the truly oppressed but a severe word of warning for religious hypocrites.)

 This fusion and confusion of faith and politics disturbs many of us.

Religion inappropriately wed to political power has been a bane throughout human history and so I urge you: please do a better job of maintaining a wall of separation between your Christianity and your politics. Any one version of religion with its particular doctrines and dogmas has no place determining broad public policy in a diverse nation such as ours. Make your arguments as a public servant and leave your dogma out of it.

data-1Or—if you would really be true to authentic faith within the public conversation, then let your words be grounded in these core tenets: “Love your neighbor” and “Do to Others as you would have them do to you.”

If you would be President, then show us an active concern for the rights of ALL Americans, not just some.

Respectfully yours,

Rev. Charlotte Vaughan Coyle


Charlotte Vaughan Coyle lives in Paris TX and blogs about intersections of faith, culture and politics on her website and Intersections Facebook page. She frequentlyIntersections logo shares her thoughts with Coffee Party USA as a regular volunteer.

Charlotte is an ordained minister within the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and also blogs about Scripture from a progressive Christian approach in her Living in The Story Musings.