“Pulpit politics”

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32666, 23 July 1971, Page 12

“Pulpit politics”

Sir,—My life has been enriched by clergymen, regardless of denomination, who, by their concern for today’s problems, ire witnesses to Christ. They, like me, have been called trouble-makers, scaremongers, etc., whether it be in the field of social justice, racial equality, or peace movements. It is a joy to work with these ministers, they do not sit around debating whose religion is right, but act, which is the reverse of most politicians. A Christian is supposed to be a follower of Christ. Who was Christ? A bearded, longhaired, rabble-rouser, who said, “Blessed are the peacemakers,” not “Might is right.” A forceful speaker who was able to make people give up their material wealth. A man who was crucified for sedition, but about whom God said, “This is My Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Oh for more outspoken clergymen and less boring politicians!—Yours, etc., M. O'NEILL. July 21, 1971.

Sir,—The treatment by the "Methodist” of my dissenting view on the best progressive road for New Zealand went well beyond Mr Lilburn’s portrait of the matter. The Rev. R. M. O’Grady is quoted as saying, “History has taught us that the .’attempt to silence dissenting voices on moral issues is the last refuge of fools and dictators.” If he had been fair, he would have said, “of fools, dictators,' and some church newspapers.” The main point is, some ministers think that being Christian gives them some magic aid to right judgment on moral and political questions. But when one looks at the results, for instance the last Methodist conference’s support for absolutely unlimited immigration of Pacific Islanders to New Zealand, or some ministers who childishly think supporting proCommunist positions makes them "progressive,” one realises that the effects of high moral pretensions unbacked by adequate thought can easily become simply silly.— Yours, etc., MARK D. SADLER. July 22, 1971.

Sir,—The main point in the arguments that have been produced on the subject of politics versus religion has been missed. This is that clerics are claiming the right to talk politics from the pulpit for one reason, and one reason only. This is that the sanctity of the pulpit en-

ables them to propound facts that have little if any connection with truth, without interruption and in safety. This especially applies to matters concerning Southern Africa and Vietnam. One has only to listen to a sermon over the radio on a Sunday to appreciate what one means. On a soap box, similar remarks would meet with dire consequences. It is a matter for deep concern for Christianity that so many of our leading churchmen have now replaced the Gospel of St Mark for that of Marx.— Yours, etc., THE WALRUS. July 21, 1971. [This correspondence is now closed. Editor, “The Press.”]