Clergy Urges Congress To Unite Behind Push For Civility

By Nicole Neroulias
Religion News Service

(RNS) A coalition of more than 50 Christian, Jewish and Muslim leaders sent an open letter to Congress urging a "time of soul searching" and national dialogue about "violent and vitriolic political rhetoric."

The letter was released Thursday (Jan. 13), a day after President Obama led a memorial service for the six people killed and nearly two dozen wounded by a gunman at a Tucson meet-and-greet for Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz.

Some commentators have linked the shooting to America's heated political climate, though accused shooter Jared Lee Loughner's motivations remain unclear.

The clergy statement, printed in a full-age ad in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call, was signed by megachurch pastors Bishop T.D. Jakes and the Rev. Joel Hunter, Sojourners founder Jim Wallis, Nathan J. Diament of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, Sayyid M. Syeed of the Islamic Society of North America, and religious leaders from Arizona.

"In our churches, mosques and synagogues, we come together not as members of a certain political ideology or party, but as children of God and citizens called to build a more perfect union," the letter said. "We pray that you do the same."

A November poll by Public Religion Research Institute and Religion News Service found that four out of five Americans think the lack of respectful discourse in our political system is a serious problem.

Faith-related calls for civility, however, have met with limited success so far. The Civility Project, a Christian-based effort launched in 2009 and sent to all 585 members of Congress and sitting governors, shut down Jan. 3 after only three lawmakers had signed on.

Several Jewish organizations, including the Anti-Defamation League and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, have also put out civility statements in the past year.

Comments

[JulieKay]

01:15 PM on 01/15/2011

I have not seen the list of clergy that signed the document, but I am doubtful that the religious right signed it. Why? Because it was a coalition that includeed Jewish and Muslim leaders. In addition, the religious right would reject anything associated with Jim Wallis.

Not all Christians are alike. The religious right also spew hate toward the middle to left leaning Christians. Even Rick Warren has called the three Methodist, Presbyterian, and other mainline churches, "Marxist in Christian clothing."

[ethicssage]

10:30 AM on 01/15/2011

I blog about these issues at: http://bit.ly/9nmlk1.........................
One June 22, 2010, Weber Shandwick, Powell Tate and KRC Research released new research that explores the state of civility in America. The survey asked 1,000 American adults to express their views about the tone and level of civility in government and traditional and social media. Here are some of the results: (1) two in three respondents believe civility is a major problem while three in four believe the problem has gotten worse; (2) three in four said the financial crisis and recession made the level of civility in America worse; (3) just one in four expect civility to improve while one in three think it will get worse; (4) not surprisingly, the government and politics were identified as having the least civil discourse and a majority characterized America’s high schools, talk radio, and Hollywood celebrities as uncivil.
Civil discourse was an important value to our founding fathers. Perhaps Ralph Waldo Emerson said it best: “There can be no high civility without a deep morality.”

[Thedoghouse]

05:47 PM on 01/14/2011

Frankly, I'd really appreciate it if the 'clergy' stayed out of this, civics and government altogether. Keep your faiths out of my face.

[SangZe]

12:34 PM on 01/14/2011

The clergy should look first to their religious right, then, perhaps, address others. They are putting themselves into the "do as I say and not as I do" position once again. When they actually begin to tell their congregations that civility is essential to discourse, religious or otherwise, and unacceptable in their religion, then they might be taken seriously. I have my doubts.

[jbarelli]

02:35 PM on 01/14/2011

What, exactly, would you expect them to do?

Respectfully disagree with the angry voices on the right? Okay. While respectful disagreement including public statements from church leaders doesn't make news, they've done that. Many times.

How about keeping their own statements, when they do take stands on public issues, civil and respectful? No problem. While the very few inflammatory statements make good news segments, the vast majority of statements from religious leaders (even the ones I don't like or agree with) are couched in respectful, civil language.

I often read inflammatory rhetoric describing what some religious leader "really meant" when he or she made some public statement, but that rhetoric is almost always added afterwords by the pundits.

Yes, there are exceptions. Unfortunately, those exceptions make so much better news copy than the careful, reasoned statements of the religious leaders respectfully disagreeing that we never hear them.

Find one person that signed the letter asking for civility that has made or issued uncivil statements. I can find lots of statements from various groups that I disagree with, but even they manage to be civil.

And that's all they're asking us to be.

[JazzyJim]

11:56 AM on 01/14/2011

A couple of observations - 1) The Religious Right Wing is only moral in name only; in practice they're becoming a closed cult and religion needs to be removed from our political theatre - blind faith indoctrinated people do very strange things in their beliefs that have no place in our governing of our country - please worship in your own way at home and house of worship and 2) The snake oil salesman TV Evangelicals that shake down the elderly for the savings for their promise of a trip to their version of heaven (Falwell, Haggard (sp?), Pat Robertson, etc., etc.) and their stadium services that operate as part KKK rally and part RNC convention - are part of the brainwashed indoctrination that fuels the Teabagger events as sponsored by Fox and the RNC PACs (Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, Heritage Foundation, et. al.). Casually flip through your cable "religious programming" and you'll find it amazing the hatred coming from these charlatans. Sure, it's all under religious freedom, but it doesn't make it right. They're putting something in the kool-aid. I hate to generalize, but the right-wing has played this group like no other; and as Pat Robertson might say, "I believe they've made a deal with the devil that no body talks about..." (Robertson on the tragic earth quake in Haiti a year ago. Don't let science get in the way Pat. Create a mental picture that you want to sell to your flock)

[horseshrink]

07:54 AM on 01/14/2011

... all successful politicians have at least a capacity to imitate civility and compassion in a way that makes voters willing to believe them to be human. (Hence the practicing fire breathers calling for an end to fire breathing. Hypocrisy is a nod of vice to virtue.) You call it a sense of decency. I consider it a connection to reality.

Our journalist friends, on the other hand--including some on both sides of the political divide--do not require such capacities. They don't need people to vote for them or identify with them, only to notice them. The more hostility they incite, the higher their ratings. They are rarely made accountable to good taste or any standard of decency.

... In recent years, though, journalists have pretended that they are participants in the political contest, rather than mere critics or cheerleaders. They fail to acknowledge that they are not bound by any rules and are not subject to any tally of points scored.

A politician is the "man in the arena," in Teddy Roosevelt's phrase. Each one puts his name on ballots and suffers real consequences for his bad taste, lack of empathy, or any mistaken sense of public approval. Journalists pretend to compete with the politician, but they aren't in the same game. They get to grade themselves, and they get to declare victory every time they knock over a straw man. Those characteristics can give them a sense of invincibility.
- Quoted from Don Rubottom

[ColumbusMike]

02:03 AM on 01/14/2011

"...four out of five Americans think the lack of respectful discourse in our political system is a serious problem."

So why do they reward the ones who engage in it the most?