Dear Bishop Budde,
That was some sermon you preached this week! Philip Pullman, the noted atheist creator, loved it and suggested you have to be the subsequent Archbishop of Canterbury. Alastair Campbell, he of ‘we do not do God’ fame, declared that you have to be made person of the 12 months. He cited you as a primary example of somebody ‘speaking truth to power’. Does it not make you’re feeling just a little uncomfortable that those that don’t think in God think that your sermon was the very best thing for the reason that Communist Manifesto?
As a fellow preacher I assumed your delivery was perfect. Clear, well enunciated and with the appropriate tone – like an angel of sunshine. I loved the theme of unity and indeed much of the way you expanded that within the quarter-hour you had. But perhaps you’ll allow me, a poor Presbyterian minister who doesn’t have the sort of pulpit to the powerful that you’ve, to also speak truth to your power?
You are in a robust position. You belong to what has long been some of the elitist denominations within the USA – the last word WASP church. You are a bishop in a prestigious cathedral, and also you get to evangelise to presidents. (You preach to presidents in regards to the poor, I preach to the poor about presidents). I’d hope that each of us would preach Christ, and never our own politics – in spite of everything that’s what we’re paid to do.
I discovered it greater than just a little ironic that for 12 minutes and 30 seconds you spoke about unity after which, turning to the newly installed President, you addressed him in such partisan and political terms, that you just contradicted and negated what went before.
Perhaps there may be a task for such political comment (some might call it prophetic) but I believe not at a service which is imagined to be about national unity, and at the tip of a sermon which warned us about doing precisely that. I feel you knew what you were doing. Every word of your sermon was rigorously crafted. It is greater than just a little disingenuous to make a plea for unity after which issue what amounted to a private political attack on the President. The result was – as you could have seen on X and in the remaining of the media – that you just again polarised the country you said you were looking for to unify. As you stated, “there is not much to be said for our prayers (or sermons may I add) if we act in ways which deepen the divisions amongst us”.
However, I agreed completely together with your comments in regards to the culture of contempt which seeks to demonise and threatens to destroy us – what’s often known as the outrage industrial complex. I assume you may even apply this to those that demonise people like President Trump – and that you’ll demand that folks don’t use your sermon to further fire up hatred and division?
In that regard it was lower than helpful to scold the President about LGBT children who you said were scared – some for his or her lives. Even if this were true (and what’s your evidence for this somewhat scary statement?), it just isn’t your job to feed such false fears. Because false they’re. President Trump has nowhere threatened the lives of LGBT children (incidentally as a bishop are you not greater than just a little concerned in regards to the labelling of youngsters in this manner?). For you to imply that these fears were legitimate was either dishonest or ignorant. Stoking fear to make a political or perhaps a theological point is something that no preacher should do. We should speak the reality in love. As you stated in your sermon, honesty is foundational to unity. At this point you were lower than honest. Practice what you preach!
The same may be said about your remarks on immigration. The situation just isn’t as simplistic as you set it. Although it needs to be admitted that straightforward political (progressive) fundamentalism does help you engage in tremendous sentimental rhetoric, immigration is a far more complex issue than your 1-minute soundbite portrayed. Donald Trump and JD Vance each married immigrants – it is obvious that they will not be against all immigration. The query is what needs to be done about illegal immigration? If you’ve any ideas, then engage constructively – don’t virtue signal from a pulpit 12 feet above contradiction.
You will forgive me saying this but there was also an inherent contradiction in your statement in regards to the dignity of each human being. Your denomination doesn’t consider that. The Episcopal Church within the USA supports abortion on demand as much as birth. That is an astonishingly evil and anti-Christ position to take. You cannot possibly take the high moral ground on humanity if you teach such anti-human doctrines. Your plea for mercy if you support such cruel policies is, to say the least, somewhat hypocritical. What about mercy for probably the most vulnerable human beings – those still of their moms’ wombs?
I loved what you needed to say about humility: “We are most dangerous once we are persuaded surely that we’re absolutely right and another person is totally improper. We are only a number of steps from labelling ourselves the nice people and others the bad people.” Amen and amen. But you then taught your political doctrines as if they were self-evidently right – and anyone who disagreed with them have to be absolutely improper. You think that men can grow to be women, that moms have the appropriate to kill their babies, and that those that need a more limited immigration are evil.
You definitely gave those that agree with you a loud and clear dog whistle. The trouble is that not only are you absolute in your political dogmas, but you preached them from a pulpit, by implication, stating that these were not only your opinions but God’s! It’s hard to be more absolutist than that!
Perhaps the one thing that bothered me most about your sermon was how little of Christ and his Word it contained. He was sort of a bit player – an illustration who supported your political ideology. But he was definitely not the centre.
Even if you quoted him, you misinformed. For example, you stated that Jesus said unity was the solid rock on which to construct the nation. He said nothing of the kind. He did say that He is the rock. I could be really encouraged to listen to you say that the nation of the US needs to be built on the rock that’s Jesus – but would you say that? To your Muslim, Hindu and atheist friends? It’s what needs to be said by a Christian minister, but I believe it just isn’t your position.
Finally let me end on a note of agreement (sort of). Your prayer at the tip: “May God give us the strength and courage to honour the dignity of each human being, to talk the reality to at least one one other in love and walk humbly with one another and our God for the nice of all people on this nation and the world.”
We do must honour the dignity of each human being – including the kid within the womb. We do must speak the reality – God’s truth as given to us in his word. If we’re to hunt the nice of all of the people on this planet, then we must make certain that we proclaim the Good News of the Gospel, not the politics of this world. We won’t get the plaudits from the world if we achieve this, but we are going to get the commendation of Christ – “well done, good and faithful servant”. And in proclaiming His word we are going to do some good and convey that true unity – the unity of Christ – reasonably than the false unity of a partisan political ideology. Preach that, sister!
Yours,
David Robertson,
Minister in Scots Kirk, Newcastle, Australia
