 |
Massachusetts Conference Edition
|
COMMENTARYReviving Election Day sermonsby Prof. Mark S. Burrows, Theologian-in-Residence at Old South Church and Professor of the History of Christianity, Andover Newton Theological School August/September 2008
What were these sermons? The name is somewhat misleading, since these were not occasions for the clergy to tell citizens how to vote. The great themes that weave their way through preaching in this genre emphasized how those governing should fulfill their duties in office. Imagine the scene: the gathering in the Meetinghouse included those holding or aspiring to office together with citizens with voting rights. These sermons focused on how communities were to fulfill God’s mandate of public faithfulness. As a contemporary remarked, these occasions invited communities “to give thanks to the God of heaven for the many great and distinguishing privileges, both civil and religious, which we are favored with; and to ask direction and a blessing from on high, upon all the administrations of government in the land.” It was a time when ministers expressed how public responsibilities might be both inspired by and expressive of a properly Christian and appropriately political witness. This pulpit tradition reminds us that our responsibilities as Christians who are also citizens require that we seek to give public expression to our faith. This remains one of the core commitments, even if often misunderstood, of the Reformed tradition: namely, that religious life presumes a commitment to safeguard and promote the common good. What Thomas Jefferson famously described as a “wall of separation” between church and state did not presume to separate religious life from political convictions; far from it. The question we face within this tradition is not whether but how we are to shape such commitments, not individually but corporately in churches as communities of discernment. Many ministers might find the notion of an Election Day sermon distasteful or impracticable. For good reason they might avoid taking explicit political stands in their congregations, at least in controversial matters, because of the fear that their views might offend – and, if carried too far, unsettle the fragile consensus within their congregation on which their professional credibility (and salary!) depend. But Election Day sermons were not about the specifics. They focused on general principles related to matters of public justice and peace, and left legislative particularities to those elected to govern – who faced regular (re)election and also knew the importance of “fragile consensus.” What might we learn from this tradition of pulpit oratory? First, that our faith is a public matter, and not a private opinion. Of course, this is easier said than done, at least within congregations that increasingly mirror the pluralism of the wider society. Many in our churches also presume that “religion” like sex or money is a personal and hence private matter, and would rather avoid any debate that might involve conflict. What we must realize is that believing in the God of the prophets and of Jesus will lead us to reflect on the kind of society we wish to inhabit and secure for future generations. Second, how we express our views should always be seen as part of a broader discernment. We may make resolutions within the gatherings of the wider church, but these become the arena for conversation and enactment within our congregations. “Think globally, act locally”: our witness in such matters involves a shared process. And, third, how we engage political issues requires an attention to multiple authorities. We continue to read and interpret the scriptures within our churches and so discern how God might be “still speaking” among us. But within a pluralistic society like ours, we also need to offer our contribution to the wider public conversation by engaging others respectfully whose convictions, authorities, and opinions differ from our own. What would an Election Day sermon look like in our time? It would:
Election Day sermons in our day might offer instruction to candidates and citizens alike, challenging those considering various political platforms how they might fulfill their public responsibilities – imagining, perhaps, that candidates were listening from the front row, as happened in Puritan New England. Such sermons would probe rather than pronounce, exploring the horizon of political responsibility and suggesting how our public commitments as citizens succeed or fail in expressing the church’s faith. The revival of this sermon genre would emphasize what it means to live this faith publicly, and suggest what it means to believe in the God who “so loved the world.”
| |
Return
to main page
Election Day sermons represent a venerable but long extinct New England tradition. What are they, and how might ministers preach them today – and keep their jobs?