Press Release: IPC condemns the recent attack on the Christianity of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on MSNBC
Washington DC June 27, 2007 The Institute for Progressive Christianity condemns recent neoconservative attempts to denigrate mainstream Christians as godless. An eggregious example occurred in an exchange between Andrew Ferguson of the Weekly Standard and host Tucker Carlson on the June 14, 2007 edition of MSNBC's Tucker, when Ferguson claimed that Sen. Clinton, a longtime member of the United Methodist Church does not believe in God.
Carlson: "Can you imagine a scenario, though, where the Democrat gets religious voters? Or is abortion is still the stumbling block?"
Ferguson: "Only in -- religious in the way that Hillary Clinton is religious, which is to say of a very liberal Protestant sort of view, in which they believe in everything but God."
"Andrew Ferguson probably thought he was terribly witty to claim that Senator Clinton does not believe in God," said IPC Director Reverend Mark Farr. "This is gutter politics."
Fellow IPC Director Frank L. Cocozzelli pointed out, "This technique is employed by neoconservatives and the religious right to demonize Christians who embrace the liberal Social Gospel tradition." Cocozzelli continued. "There is nothing lower in public life than claiming that people with whom you disagree politically do not believe in God."
"Ferguson is the Don Imus of the question of faith in public life," adds IPC Director Stephen Rockwell. "No responsible broadcaster should allow such malicious denigration of the faith of others to go unchallenged. Carlson's silence is complicity."
About The Institute for Progressive Christianity
We are Progressive
We are progressive in that we desire to promote: the Love of God, Neighbor and Self; Compassion; Justice; and the Common Good.
We are Christian
We are an ecumenical group of Christians of different theological orientations: Liberal, Mainline Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, and Evangelical. We believe in being in community that maintains unity while acknowledging and supporting our diversity. We are united in our conviction that our progressive values flow directly from our understanding of the message and example of Jesus.
We are an Institute
We have faith that we can positively confront the ills of this world with a progressive Christian witness that is coherent, convicted, intelligent, and passionate. In a spirit of being affirmative, we believe that engaging society's questions should be done transparently and authentically from a reasoned yet inspired place of substance. We research, analyze, and discuss the issues with an eye to welcoming other people into a dialogue where we can encourage and provoke each other to fulfill our destinies as unique but interdependent reflections of the Creator.
http://instituteforprogressivechristianity.org/joomla/
CrossLeft
IPC's Blogging and Activism Website:
| Institute for Progressive Christianity |
Institute for Progressive Christianity
- Stephen Rockwell's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Good Point Paul
Paul, I think its an excellent point Paul. While its a good thing that Democratic candidates are opening up about their faith, its important that the profession of faith does not become a litmus test for political office. The fact is that many of the great leaders in American history did not profess a deeply held faith.
religious tests for politicians...
The idea of any religious litmus test for politcians - including belief in God - imo works directly against freedom of religion. Although I consider myself religious, as an American I believe that freedom of relgion includes being free not to be religious.
The far right has turned this idea on its head. Where once Americans, both religious and non relgious, were in widespread agreement that relgion shouldn't play an overt role in politics - think, for example, of how John Kennedy had to allay fears that he'd be taking orders from the pope - politicians now feel it incumbent on them to work God-talk into their speeches. I think it dimishes spiritual authenticity, makes way for abounding religious hypocrisy, and does the nation no good. We can govern without continual appeal to God. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. If one's religion or spirituality plays a role in one's life then let it be reflected in one's actions rather than in continual public displays of piety.
I wonder if anyone's ever done a study of presidents and religious language: I bet that Bush, if you go by the language, is the "most religious" president we've ever had...