Apologies for the delay in a full post on last week's letter from the Catholic Dems in the House. Was in Durham for a conference on Southern values, and then spent the weekend in the company of great friends down in Chapel Hill. I can now tick 'Roam Franklin Street After UNC Beats Duke' off my list of life accomplishments.
The cynic and the realist (are they the same?) will say that the letter is just an example of shameless Democrats pandering to pollsters. 'What's that, you say? We need religion to win elections? Brilliant!' There's likely a grain of truth in this (after all, the Grillmaster owes his job to the post-2004 upswing in interest in faith and progressive politics), but I don't see any more reason to doubt the sincerity of these Democrats than that of their Bible-thumping counterparts in the GOP. Politics is the art of the possible for all involved; these politicians did an admirable job of explaining how pragmatism meets principle in their very public lives.
At least two things bear particular note from the letter. First, it is signed by some of the strictest 'pro-lifers' in the House and some of those most loyal to the 'pro-choice' community. Can this be? Maybe, just maybe, it's actually possible that reasonable people on both sides of this argument can disagree on the particulars of the issue at hand, and have the courage to acknowledge the legitimacy of that disagreement. Whether motivated by party bonds or the ties of faith, this is a significant acknowledgement. It bodes well for the tone of our public discourse, the health of our courts, and the honesty of our political life.
Second, the signatories of this letter do not fall into the blasphemous rhetorical game of claiming exclusive ownership of faith in politics that characterizes the fringes of the Religious Right. As more faith voices gain the courage to speak up on behalf of progressive political causes, they ought to never replicate the arrogance and pride of Robertson, Dobson, and Falwell. Faith in public life is frought with compromise and ambiguity. Denying the reality of this compromise may be the surest sign of someone so deep in the moral murk of politics that they can't see any light from above.
