Politics Belong on the Pulpit Too

 

There is a strong case to be made, not only for keeping religion out of politics, but for keeping politics out of religion. “A rabbi should never discuss politics on the pulpit,” the rabbi of a large Conservative congregation told me. “Everyone who walks through the door of the synagogue should feel welcome, and any discussion of politics will alienate someone.”

This sentiment is echoed by Bruce Bialosky in a recent article at Townhall.com. Non-Orthodox Jews are notoriously left of center, and Bialosky finds himself a distinct minority in his Reform Jewish congregation and the movement generally. He describes his rabbi’s alienation of his right-of-center congregants, and asks: “At a time when Temple membership is floundering across the nation, why would any rabbi antagonize part of their congregation because of their personal political views?”

Separately, Bialosky makes another compelling point: Rabbis are often less knowledgeable about politics than their congregants.

If the purpose of the pulpit is to espouse opinions on public policy, then I should be giving sermons every Friday night and Saturday. I am a committed Jew, and I am more well-versed on public policy then virtually any rabbi in America. I have been studying, reading, and writing about it for 40 years and can do a 15-minute sermon on virtually any public policy you want to discuss, and could probably tie it somehow to Judaism. But that is not why a religious pulpit exists, nor what people seek in the pews.

Bialosky’s piece was prompted by an op-ed written by Rabbi David Wolpe last month, entitled “Why I keep politics off the pulpit.” Numerous Reform and Conservative leaders have written in opposition to Wolpe. America’s condition and new direction under Trump, they say, demands that religious leaders speak up for Judaism’s prophetic truths. Unfortunately, as under George W. Bush, those prophetic truths always seem indistinguishable from the Democratic Party platform. Even more unfortunately, the rabbis in question seem oblivious to their own partisanship.

Nor are liberal rabbis (both politically and theologically) the only ones to overstep. Orthodox rabbis, too, have landed in hot water over political blogging, for example.

But while I think Wolpe’s critics are wrong in their politics, I think they are correct in their argument. Religious argument must be big enough to embrace politics.

While many Reform and Conservative rabbis are indistinguishable from social justice warriors — and may even consider themselves the same — the default mode for Conservative and Orthodox congregations is to eschew politics altogether. Politics, however, is how we nonviolently resolve conflict in a civil society. If you avoid political topics, you avoid precisely those topics that most matter to people. You avoid precisely those topics that people crave spiritual guidance over.

Last summer, I visited a friend who works as clergy in a small Conservative synagogue. There had been a disturbing terror attack during the preceding week, and I know I was not alone in my hope that the rabbi — experienced, sensitive, and accomplished — would have something meaningful to say. Yet the rabbi did not mention it. I later asked my friend why, and he explained that the rabbi was gunshy; she had aroused the ire of some Trump supporters not long before, and the criticism had turned ugly. She subsequently determined to keep the congregation together by avoiding discussion of current events. The result was a response inadequate to the moment.

Meanwhile, Orthodox rabbis, who have more politically diverse congregations as a rule, retreat to the minutia of religious observance, where their training makes them more comfortable. I am somewhat sympathetic to the careful professional who is reluctant to go beyond the scope of his or her knowledge. But this reluctance can become self-reinforcing. One Orthodox rabbi I know describes an episode in which a sometime synagogue attendee asked why the rabbi had nothing to say about Iran. “Because I don’t know about Iran,” he answered.

That answer, too, is inadequate to the moment. If we’re talking about a matter of existential importance to the Jewish people, it’s your job to know.

And not only the existential communal matters. Congregants are deeply concerned about terrorism, economic dislocation, and the failure of public institutions. They want guidance for raising children in an era of social media. They care about the character of their leaders and the morality of their government’s decisions. They crave meaning — the meaning that comes from integrating spirituality into the challenges of everyday life. Many of those challenges have a political dimension. Meanwhile, as with our public servants and public institutions generally, rabbis seem to be preoccupied with the preservation of brittle institutions rather than the concerns of the people those institutions are supposed to serve.

When rabbis avoid these “political” issues, or worse, address them only with generic platitudes, they circumscribe and shrink religion and reinforce the idea that religion has little of substance to add. That rabbis and other leaders don’t understand congregants’ lives. That religious teaching offers only superficial answers and is inadequate to the moment. Who will offer wisdom? Is it any surprise that congregations are aging and shrinking? That increasingly people look to academics and radio talk shows to understand the world at large? Or that they look to other authorities — TED talks, pop psychologists, behavioral economists — for guidance on the things that really matter to them?

And as more and more of our societal questions are being subject to government intervention, more of our society is being subsumed by politics. Avoiding political topics just contracts the scope of religious wisdom until, in Obama’s substitution, religion shrinks to mere “worship.”

My grandfather was fired from five pulpits in six years for expressing political opinions: During World War II, he railed against President Roosevelt for not doing enough to stop the ongoing Holocaust. Does this reflect badly on his leadership? Perhaps. Maybe he could have had greater influence by toning down his rhetoric. Nonetheless, I believe it reflects worse on those congregations that refused to embrace a Judaism which encompasses politics.

Rabbi Wolpe argues for a Judaism that is bigger than politics:

All we hear all day long is politics. Can we not come to shul for something different, something deeper? I want to know what my rabbi thinks of Jacob and Rachel, not of Pence and Pelosi.

Don’t tie your Torah to this week’s headlines. We are better, bigger and deeper than that.

I agree that the Torah is bigger than partisanship. What Rabbi Wolpe misses, however, is that politics is bigger than partisanship too. We have become too accustomed to deciding political questions by selecting either all from column A, or all from column B — often with only superficial understanding of what motivates the other column. In contrast, Judaism often has lessons to teach both sides, or (for example, in the case of abortion politics) takes a completely different approach than either mainstream view. Bringing politics to the pulpit does not have to mean picking a side.

But it does mean approaching issues with humility, sensitivity, and nuance. The Torah, not to mention the Prophets, has a lot to say about this week’s headlines. Can rabbis — both liberal and Orthodox — educate themselves, transcend partisanship, and engage political questions with religious wisdom? Then again, can they afford not to?

Published in Religion & Philosophy
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 25 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    And as more and more of our societal questions are being subject to government intervention, more of our society is being subsumed by politics. Avoiding political topics just contracts the scope of religious wisdom until, in Obama’s substitution, religion shrinks to mere “worship.”

    You are inevitably going to believe more in either a creator or the state. Some believe in the state exclusively, which is not good, IMO.

    In general, I don’t think people get why and how the state makes the poor, poor and some get unfair advantage from it, so they think they  can improve government by voting. Not happening.

    • #1
  2. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Excellent essay SoS. I appreciate your input. I have to say, however, as a secular Jew who used to go to the Temple sporadically, I had to stop even occasional attendance because of the politics of the Rabbi. It galled me to have to sit in the chapel and listen, without the ability to respond, as the Rabbi expounded upon his left wing ideology. Yet as you make your case for political involvement from the pulpit, I cannot say I disagree with your intellectual argument. Perhaps I was just looking for an excuse. I know that African American churches never gave up politicizing from the pulpit. It seems that our current President and his Justice Department stand with them, and you.

    • #2
  3. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    The media are all statists as this article explains, so people are confused about the efficacy of religion to make for a fair world and keep progress going. This is a real mess.

    • #3
  4. Sandy Member
    Sandy
    @Sandy

    Very thought-provoking, as always, SoS.  Just as I thought you were coming down on one side, the other side popped up. I need to mull this over, but I believe that there is one political issue that the pulpit must not ignore, and that is the well-known attacks on various religious doctrines and even on religion itself.  That some of these attacks may be supported by some of the liberal branches of synagogues and churches makes it even more important to address the problem from the pulpit, I would say.

    • #4
  5. CB Toder aka Mama Toad Member
    CB Toder aka Mama Toad
    @CBToderakaMamaToad

    At Mass on Sunday, our visiting Polish priest gave a beautiful homily that touched on politics and current events but managed to completely avoid partisanship. He used the day’s readings from Scripture to explicate his meaning, and he spoke forcefully and yet gently.

    It can be done.

    • #5
  6. Vice-Potentate Inactive
    Vice-Potentate
    @VicePotentate

    In my opinion, religion properly expressed leads towards a conservative world view. Making this connection explicit is unnecessary. A different set of passions is roused in us around politics and these passions colour the way we listen and understand. Pulling this Sturm und drang into an otherwise consistent environment clouds the listeners judgement and can be counter-productive.

    • #6
  7. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Sandy (View Comment):
    That some of these attacks may be supported by some of the liberal branches of synagogues and churches

    Sign up for all of the the United Church Of Christ newsletters. You won’t be disappointed.

    • #7
  8. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    I disagree, SoS. (I don’t remember your being a Contributor–congratulations!) I think that even if a rabbi is knowledgeable about current events, it is extremely difficult to avoid partisanship. Someone will be offended. Even if the rabbi is skilled at navigating conflict in a political discussion, it’s unlikely that the other person will have those skills and cooperate. I lead a meditation group, have been training people for years about managing conflict, and I refuse to let the people in the meditation group (which is almost all liberal) discuss politics. I feel that way, not just because of the potential for conflict, but because people are not knowledgeable about the different sides of an issue, and their viewpoints usually have an emotional base. The only exception I made (and it wasn’t partisan) was our talking about the conflicts with family and friends and Facebook before the election; rather than talk about specific viewpoints, participants discussed what was happening, how it was affecting their relationships, and so on. I think it was very helpful that despite our political perspectives, we were all suffering through that time.

    • #8
  9. Weeping Inactive
    Weeping
    @Weeping

    Vice-Potentate (View Comment):
    In my opinion, religion properly expressed leads towards a conservative world view.

    Not according to many I know. In fact, according to them, it’s the exact opposite. That disagreement is why I believe politics should be kept out of the pulpit.

    • #9
  10. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Weeping (View Comment):

    Vice-Potentate (View Comment):
    In my opinion, religion properly expressed leads towards a conservative world view.

    Not according to many I know. In fact, according to them, it’s the exact opposite. That disagreement is why I believe politics should be kept out of the pulpit.

    They don’t get that Keynesianism is theft of the lower and middle classes, so they think forcing charity or social engineering with government makes sense. Minnesota religious organizations are going nuts with this stuff. We’re doomed.

    • #10
  11. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    Nice to see you as a contributer!

    As to religion and politics, I’m not sure.  Maybe it depends what you mean by politics.  Let me illustrate the question it raises for me with an example:

    When Gov Scott Walker embarked on his attempted union reform in Wisconsin it raised huge opposition on the left.  This included a letter from rabbis in Madison denouncing his proposal as “an affront to our Jewish values”, and opposing it as immoral (they also declared collective bargaining a fundamental human right).  There is certainly a legitimate policy debate one could have had on Walker’s proposal but it is bizarre to characterize it as immoral.  For instance, one of its provisions allowed local school boards to purchase health insurance by competitive processes rather than being required to purchase it from the teacher’s union captive insurer under the existing law.  The result after passage of the law was that insurance costs dropped substantially (I have a family member who is a retired Wisconsin teacher and saw his costs drop several hundred dollars a month).  Some school boards used part of the savings to hire additional teachers.

    My point is I doubt the rabbis knew, or understood, the details of the proposal, just as in 2009 and 2010 many supporters of Obamacare never understood the difference between declaring healthcare is a human right and the details of a 2000 page piece of legislation.  Policy disputes are not always synonymous with morality and that holds true on both right and left.  I don’t expect or necessarily want religious leaders to be policy wonks.   There are a limited number of issues that transcend the normal back and forth of politics that rise to true moral questions and maybe everyone’s fire should be reserved for those.

     

     

    • #11
  12. Son of Spengler Member
    Son of Spengler
    @SonofSpengler

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    As to religion and politics, I’m not sure. Maybe it depends what you mean by politics. Let me illustrate the question it raises for me with an example:

    Whenever a rabbi teaches, he or she has a dual responsibility to (a) understand the situation completely, and (b) understand the applicable scripture and rabbinic interpretation completely. If one element is missing (and certainly if both) it is impossible to teach in a way that people will respect your answer. In too many cases on the left, rabbis satisfy neither condition and in the process diminish both Judaism and themselves. The example you cite of rabbinical partisanship is exactly the kind of pulpit politics that should be avoided.

    Even so, to avoid the issue entirely would also be wrong. Scripture and the rabbinic tradition did not dictate a particular solution in WI, but they have a lot to say about teachers and society, about how a minority must conduct itself, about protest and disagreement, about public service and responsibility, and a whole host of other issues relevant to the situation. So many in Wisconsin cared passionately about what was going on in the capital. They may not have wanted to hear about those ways in which Jewish tradition would contradict their views, but IMO that is precisely the reason rabbis need to educate. And to demur because the subject stirs passions also diminishes Judaism. Where else should people go for moral guidance?

    I completely agree that not every policy dispute should be an issue of morality. The Torah doesn’t take a position on net neutrality as far as I can tell, or say whether the state tax rate should be 6.35% or 6.99%. But even (especially?) in those cases, when passions flare and moral charges are thrown around, it is a rabbi’s job to address the question. Sometimes the answer may be, “The moral dimension here is ambiguous and/or exaggerated, so tone it down.”

    • #12
  13. Songwriter Inactive
    Songwriter
    @user_19450

    As always, an interesting and enlightening post, SoS.  Thanks for that.  It comes at a time when a certain large evangelical church is taking some heat in the blogosphere for doing a recent event in DC with President Trump as part of the evening.  (The pastor is an open Trump supporter.) Also, every year around July 4, “God and Country” themed Sunday services are very popular among conservative evangelical churches, particularly in the South. But – those services are considered inappropriate by some Christians.

    Personally, I prefer to keep my politics and my church experiences separate.  For certain, I could not regularly sit through services in which left-wing ideas were spouted. From your post, I gather that the primary purpose of the sermon in a synagogue is somewhat different than in an evangelical church, where sermons tend to focus on the examination of specific Bible verses, most often with an evangelical theme.

    btw – Congrats on becoming a Contributor. Well-deserved.

    • #13
  14. Son of Spengler Member
    Son of Spengler
    @SonofSpengler

    Songwriter (View Comment):
    From your post, I gather that the primary purpose of the sermon in a synagogue is somewhat different than in an evangelical church, where sermons tend to focus on the examination of specific Bible verses, most often with an evangelical theme.

    The word “rabbi” literally means teacher, and historically they did not give sermons in the synagogue. Instead, they taught public daily and weekly classes. They also “teach” individually, e.g. when a congregant has a question about daily practice (“I dropped milk in the chicken. Can I eat it?”) Their role changed in the 19th and 20th centuries, especially in America, when synagogues became more all-encompassing of Jewish communal life and Jews began expecting rabbis and synagogues to operate more like pastors and churches. But most synagogue sermons are still structured as exposition of scripture.

    every year around July 4, “God and Country” themed Sunday services are very popular among conservative evangelical churches, particularly in the South. But – those services are considered inappropriate by some Christians.

    A few years ago, my synagogue placed US and Israeli flags on the pulpit. This is not all that unusual these days. My older daughter is much more liberal than I, both theologically and politically, but she and I both consider it a mistake. The synagogue is a place of divine worship and should not be a place for other symbols. Unfortunately, the evolved nature of the synagogue and placing a sermon in the service does muddy the waters – either the sermon brings matters of public concern into the worship service, or avoids discussion of them.

    • #14
  15. CB Toder aka Mama Toad Member
    CB Toder aka Mama Toad
    @CBToderakaMamaToad

    Son of Spengler (View Comment):
    A few years ago, my synagogue placed US and Israeli flags on the pulpit.

    My parish has an American flag and a papal flag in our church at the back, right below the choir loft.

    • #15
  16. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    CB Toder aka Mama Toad (View Comment):

    Son of Spengler (View Comment):
    A few years ago, my synagogue placed US and Israeli flags on the pulpit.

    My parish has an American flag and a papal flag in our church at the back, right below the choir loft.

    My Lutheran parish has an American flag.  We also keep it in the back.   It gets moved to the front for Memorial Day and the Sundays closes to Independence Day and Veterans Day.

    We seldom hear politics in our sermons, but politics does get mentioned from time to time.  Sanctity of life, religious liberty and racism are probably the only political topics that get mentioned more than once per year.  Other topics may be brought up in order to point out how a passage of scripture has bearing on some current political debate.  The only time an entire sermon is devoted to what would be considered a political topic is every other year on Life Sunday.  (Pastor thinks every year would be too much, and I agree.)

    Our general prayer of the church includes prayers for political leaders.  This rotates between national, state, and local political leaders.

    I do not consider our prayers for martyrs around the world to be politics.

    • #16
  17. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    In my area there are a few high-profile large Black churches with politically-active pastors.  They have been endorsing Democrat candidates for political office for decades, with the full knowledge that the IRS will leave them alone.

    It has only been in the past five years that some local white Evangelical pastors have taken to doing that, since a political movement arose to organize those opposed to the IRS muzzle.

    Sometimes there is a clear moral aspect to a political choice.  The churches and synagogues should be willing to speak out.   There are serious disagreements.

    I hear complaints about Leftist preaching a lot more than I hear complaints about other political speech from pulpits.  I think this is because Leftism is its own religion, and it does not mix well with traditional faiths of any sort.

    • #17
  18. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    That law was created by LBJ when he was in the Senate. I forget the dynamics but it wasn’t good for the Right.

    Minneapolis has progressive Jewish and Christian organizations  that get all hysterical about stuff and they never can articulate policy very well, especially with gun policy. I get the impression they are more like TV minister organizations that get government graft as well as donations. I’m not clear on how much political power they actually wield. They get used in the media by politicians quite a bit.

    *EDIT*

    I need to add, those organizations are led by for real ministers and rabbi’s.

     

    • #18
  19. CB Toder aka Mama Toad Member
    CB Toder aka Mama Toad
    @CBToderakaMamaToad

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    That law was created by LBJ when he was in the Senate. I forget the dynamics but it wasn’t good for the Right.

     

    Both Candidate and President Trump have spoken out forcefully against the Johnson Amendment. 

    • #19
  20. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Thanks @CB Toder aka Mama Toad

    • #20
  21. DHMorgan Inactive
    DHMorgan
    @DHMorgan

    CB Toder aka Mama Toad (View Comment):
    At Mass on Sunday, our visiting Polish priest gave a beautiful homily that touched on politics and current events but managed to completely avoid partisanship. He used the day’s readings from Scripture to explicate his meaning, and he spoke forcefully and yet gently.

    It can be done.

    I’ve heard a few similar sermons and it can be done.  But it’s rarely attempted.  It is possible, to take two examples, to preach from the pulpit that abortion is “killing babies” and that capital punishment is “morally abominable,” without mentioning your preferred political solution.  But, like it or not, most people in the congregation would draw some conclusions on your political stance.

    One problem may be the trend toward ever increasing encroachment of government at all levels.  The “seven deadly sins” are no longer just moral sins but injustices in need of political adjudication.  I don’t believe that “the personal is the political,” but there seems less space between the two than a decade ago.

    Each Saturday or Sunday many of us sit in congregations with people of different political persuasions.  According to some research, our country is becoming more ideologically segregated than in the recent past.  In many instances -though not all – our congregations are much more ideologically inclusive than society at large.

    As much as I might secretly relish hearing a sermon that is in sync with my political views, I say to the SJWs: Please don’t drive overt political wedges between the various factions in our churches and synagogues. (Sadly, we don’t need the help since we are more than capable of stirring up internal controversies on our own.  We are, after all, sinners in need of God’s grace).
     

     

    • #21
  22. Nanda Panjandrum Member
    Nanda Panjandrum
    @

    A thought-provoking read, my friend! How have you been?

    • #22
  23. skipsul Inactive
    skipsul
    @skipsul

    I have been pondering this and am of 2 minds.

    I have a couple of very very liberal Christian friends who attempt to proof-text support for abortion, gun control, soak-the-rich taxes, and easy divorce laws.  Such people can be ostensibly “politics free” in the pulpit while twisting scripture and teaching people deep error.

    It is easy for us to say “obviously the Word teaches us this and not that” and think we are justified, but the liberals think the same of themselves.  Can we both be right?  I have seen preachers whip congregants into a frenzy against this or that issue, often out of deep error and a misplaced sense of justice.

    So for me the question becomes: what is our worship service even for?  Are we there even to worship?  Or are we there to have our intellects and emotions gratified?

    I am not comfortable with bringing politics into the presence of worship.  I am not comfortable with keeping it out either.

    • #23
  24. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    skipsul (View Comment):
    So for me the question becomes: what is our worship service even for? Are we there even to worship? Or are we there to have our intellects and emotions gratified?

    It’s been a very long time since I was in a Conservative synagogue, but my perception of the Orthodox Jews (and I haven’t been through a full service) is that they are there to commune with G-d in the company of other souls of like mind. I don’t think there are sermons, but I could be wrong. And women are not required or expected to attend. As I said earlier, I’m quite happy leaving politics out of it. In my discussions with my Torah study partner, we barely touch on politics. But we do relate the reading of the week to our everyday lives. That’s at least one important goal, isn’t it? There’s a lot to discuss without politics. If a rabbi wants to share his ideas, he can do it in other venues. And even there, he should steer clear of politics.

    • #24
  25. Nanda Panjandrum Member
    Nanda Panjandrum
    @

    Since politics often intersects with values/morals decision-making, spiritual leaders/guides can remind congregants about the ingredients for deciding: authoritative teaching on given matters, guidance from sacred texts, life examples to consider.  Offering tools for how to think, not what to think.

    • #25
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.