Mr. Swanson,
Based on this post, I'm going to assume you are under the age of thirty because this, and the phrase you are looking for is called "Buzzwords", has been employed with American Christians, and religionists...not sure what to call the Americans who are "christian" by culture...by all political parties (a pox on all their houses). In fact, it's used a lot with all groups of people...hence the reason why Marketers always view the election season with glee...big money for cool talking points.

This has been going on for at least fifty years, if not more, but it's good to talk about it, even though thats all we, as a church, have ever done with the subject.

Sheerahkahn - True that this kind of political marketing has always existed. In some ways, however, it does seem that politics is more divisive and partisan than in the past. (But then again, maybe that's because I'm under the age of 40 and not a political history major...) :)

Anyway, maybe what we find reflected in Swanson's post is the beginning of a new level of maturity forming within the American church, taking steps toward recognizing the dangers of its own majority cultures.

In that maturity process local churches begin asking the questions featured in this article: How do non-majority American residents perceive political campaigning? And more importantly: How do non-majority American residents perceive the political discussion in our churches???

These and others like them are great questions for all our local churches and the American Church as a whole to be asking.

@sheerahkahn- I was born in 1977. As you point out, my memory about this conversation doesn't reach back very far. I do hope that we might learn to do more than talk, though I'll take civil conversation to be a very positive sign.

@drew- Maturity is a great way to talk about this. I hadn't thought about it quite like that, but it seems a helpful way for majority-culture churches to consider these potentially divisive issues.

"...not a political history major."

Neither am I, however, I'm over forty, and I watched with shock the open marriage of politics and christianity occur in 1980.

"How do non-majority American residents perceive political campaigning?"

My own biased perception is that for [certain political group] it's all political theater...or as one talking head said once, "no one takes this seriously."
Apparently, as you can plainly see, a lot of people are taking the political theater seriously.

"How do non-majority American residents perceive the political discussion in our churches?"

Well, in my church, I have learned that just by putting up a bumper sticker in our car window saying, "G-d is not a Republican, nor is he a Democrat" has gotten my wife and I labeled as "dyed in the wool liberals."

I don't know how they came to that conclusion with that bumper sticker, but there you go.

"I'll take civil conversation to be a very positive sign."

Well, I wish you well in this endeavor, Mr. Swanson, I really do.

@sheerahkahn - I'm not saying it hasn't always existed, but only that it seems to continually intensify, even since the '80s in some ways. And this isn't just to speak of the evangelical merger with the political right, but of pure partisanship.

I have to laugh at the response you got from your bumper sticker, though. My experience as well... But again: What concrete steps are we taking to move our people forward? Sideline bitterness won't get us anywhere. And to allow alienation will only further the damage. Our church has been blessed to see an increasingly diversifying congregation, in terms of politic as well as racial & ethnic make-up. It's exciting to see the Gospel's power of reconciliation at work. And these questions about how majority-culture assumptions are received by minority culture are things we're continually thinking through. I guess that's why I resonated well with quite a bit of what Swanson has to say. Thanks for refining our thoughts...

Thanks for addressing the issue of speech that reveals ungodly prejudices and casts a shadow on the value of whole groups of individuals. I agree that the same habits can creep into the church. The suggested action points of application at the end are very practical. I trust we all take note and guard our attitudes and our speech while these issues are being hotly debated.

I'll get this out of the way up front: I am not a political conservative. I am critical of many political figures who use the kind of language you condemn, here, David.

That said, I think we should be careful not to ascribe bigotry to Americans that really do feel passionately about limited government. There are people that really do feel that expansion of government regulation, taxation, and assistance has taken something from them--the ability to be autonomous, to spend money they work hard to earn as the choose, etc. If politicians and governments are beholden to special interest groups and individuals with money to spend, it does follow that supporting a limited government is advocating for the disadvantaged and marginalized.

Now, I disagree with this whole line of reasoning. But it is not racist. It does not seek to threaten or diminish minorities. And someone who holds these beliefs would resonate with the phrase "take our country back."

I think it's important for Christians to understand what "take our country back" communicates to minority cultures. That, intended or not, it communicates hatred or, at the least, indifference to their plight. I think, as a people defined by God's perfect love, we should reject politics that fear the outsider. We should be explicit about our embrace of outsider. But we also should be careful when reading the motives behind people's actions or words, for only God knows our hearts.

"It's exciting to see the Gospel's power of reconciliation at work."

Hmm...I'm going to let you know this is a buzz-phrase which, in this instance made me think "alrighty, which subtext is being employed here?"
So, to let you know how this plays out off-line and in a church setting, which oddly enough, is part of my life experience in how this has occurred to me, and others I've witnessed...is how that buzz phrase you just used is employed and taken...

I've seen it employed for dissembling of a target so they don't suspect they're being separated out because the target "doesn't get" the spiritual dimension of the groups crusade while others of like mind do.
Thus the target of the dissembling is left unaware and/or wondering why people are snickering, or "in the know" while being condescendingly "nice" to him or her for their inexcusable ignorance which is oft translate-able to "You're not really saved, are you?"
Often times the group statement to the gaijin is "why don't you go find a community that you belong in." with the subtext being that the "Community" being spoken of is something other than the Church.
Or...
A warning for the target to get with the program or face aforementioned spiritual isolation.

I suspect because of the forum we are in that you are sincere in your view of watching the unfolding of G-d's will on earth...me, I'm tapping my fingers thinking, "yeah, he's taking his sweet time about it, too."

Anyway, I'm sorry you experienced the "labeling" as well.

:)

Well, sheerahkahn, I guess all I'm saying is that we're trying. We're in the first couple years of trying to build a generous and united other-focused, servant-oriented faith community. Have we made mistakes? Absolutely. Have I or anybody else been completely selfless with everything we've ever done? --how can I arrogantly claim perfection? But we do try, and I think we've seen some real progress in building a community that is loving and other-focused.

As for our diversity, we don't have goals or gauges trying to achieve some artificial level or quota. Our people aren't trained to "be nice" to those who look or act different than them, putting on a show. In a lot of ways I wish I could say our diversity was because of some great plan of mine, but it's not. Now, we do talk a WHOLE LOT about selflessness and servanthood and humility and putting everybody before self and about how as community we must love at great personal cost. But that's it. That's my whole "plan." And somehow in the midst of it, God is just lighting this place up and one byproduct is that it is drawing a greater diversity of disciples and curious-onlookers. And along the way, it seems community is "just happening" as people come together, worship together, pray together, eat together, do service projects together. We try to do positive and think positive and God seems to fill in the rest.

Whether I use buzzwords or not, I'm aware of the buzzwords. I suppose I do use some, but only the ones I like / resonate with / see truth in... My intentions in writing are to contribute to discussion and encourage others in order that we can all take steps in doing this discipleship thing a little better, but I keep getting the sense that you're a touch bitter or making assumptions about things I bring up, reading into them things I'm not saying. If I'm reading this into your comments, I'm sorry, but I'm really trying to be constructive.

Excellent post! As the Bible says, in Christ there is no Jew or Greek, or any ethnic/cultural divisions whatsoever. Jesus is Lord of all nations, and every tribe and every tongue will join in praise of God when the end times come. Petty ethnic divisions between Christians is definitely a no-no.

Your final 3 points are excellent. The paragraphs before seemed to me to be quite a bit of projection and exaggerating of ill intent. At least they are not outright lying about immigration issues by referring to "undocumented" instead of illegal or accusing border controllers as racists.

What do you think should be the reaction of a Christian to a pastor who displays a moveon.org bumper sticker?

I live in the South and we very well know what the phrase "take back our country" means and it isn't pretty. To those who think some of this political talk isn't racist, please get your head out of the sand and face reality. Yes, there are racists living in America.I know some. Just the other day I saw this man call this guy a nigger because he was angry with him although, mind you, it was he the racist who was the one at fault as I saw the whole incident.

I don't care for political churches or political pastors. Pastors need to stick to preaching and teaching about Jesus. If the christian church can't even come together in love and unity as the bible tell us to do, why would we expect non-Christians to come together in love and unity.

Politics and religion don't mix well. I've seen Pastors try to pull it off and it always gets messy and disastrous. Congregational members may have varying political beliefs and a Pastor should not force his or her viewpoint on them. Congregational members are entitled to their opinion just as the Pastor is entitled to his or her opinion. God is not an American, he doesn't get up every morning and salute the flag, nor does he belong to any political party. God will always be for justice and righteousness. He will never bless sin just as he will never bless the sin of racism in this country.

Another thing...how about we also start saying God bless the whole world instead of always thinking about ourselves by saying God bless America. It really starts to sound like we are saying God bless us and no one else.:)

I too do not know where I stand on all issues political but I do stand for limited government and "ever expanding body of Christ" in the area of helping others. This seems to be the Biblical model and after going through an incredible world view series, The Truth Project, four times, I see nothing but danger in a country reliant on government ( a lot of this ties into your ultimate view of man - is man born a sinner or born NOT a sinner?). This was and is not God's plan. This being said, I am sick and tired of others calling me "a bigot," " a hater," "not compassionate," etc because I think ILLEGAL immigration is wrong (emphasis on illegal here) and giving over 1/2 of my income to a corrupt bunch of elitists who may try to get 1/2 of that into the hands of those who need it. I think you have a lot of nerve coming from this angle as we are NOT the haters right now and we are sick and tired of being PC. Do I need to tell you how many of us in the evangelical mainstream support children every month with groups like Compassion, adopt children from other cultures, and get involved with handicapped children because of love?? Give me a break. Mr. Swanson, you have been drinking the Kool Aid.

"What do you think should be the reaction of a Christian to a pastor who displays a moveon.org bumper sticker?"

My opinion, for whatever it is worth, is that as long as it remains on his bumper, and not on the pulpit...it's all good.

The problem is when Pastors take positions on politics from the pulpit...whether conservative or liberal, the pulpit is not the place to advocate for one's personal political beliefs, or to influence people in the audience with one's personal political beliefs.
Pastor Rick Warren is one such case.
I like the way the man approaches the bible, how he is able to fold what the bible teaches into his personal life...but the one thing I hold against him is that he brings his politics to the pulpit and tells people how they should vote.
Not good.
I have heard, though not seen myself, that there are politically liberal pastors who bring their politics to the pulpit as well, and that, too, is not good.

"but I keep getting the sense that you're a touch bitter or making assumptions about things I bring up, reading into them things I'm not saying."

Guilty as charged.

I have long sought to deconnect the politics from the church...and I have become...yeah, sensitive to the buzz-words.
Churchy phrases make me think a person is trying to drop the "Well, I'm in, and since I know the phrase-ology, you better respond as well in like manner, or else you are one of the 'them'"
So, I let them know how that buzz-word/phrase sounds like...but, as I reread your post I can see where I thought you were...employing the phrase, but as I said, rereading it again I can also see you were not being dissembling, or seeking to put me in my place.
My apologies.

I am neither a liberal or a conservative.
I am a follower of G-d, and the way I have grown into this position is that I have found that worldy solutions to spiritual problems never work.
In fact they just make things worse.
And the other thing I have come to understand that tries my patience is that spiritual solutions don't happen overnight.
They take time.
A person who has spent a life-time engaged in self-abuse is not suddenly, overnight, going to excise all the tragedies they have been party too in just one bout of lucid confessions.
Forgiveness happens overnight, reconciliation is a process of choices that occur over time which leads to a changed mind as well as a changed life. Those choices are simply put, obedience to G-d's way.

But there are people on both sides of the political spectrum who forget themselves, place their own wisdom above G-ds, and think, arrogantly or ignorantly, that they can shorten that process with legislative writ.

I have yet to see a person's mind be changed by law.
Oh sure, they may worry about the law, but as is the case...they find a way to get what they want despite the law.

Sadly, many Christians feel that by changing the law, they change the mind of man...perhaps they should ask G-d how that Law stuff all worked out for him?

We're to make disciples of men throughout the world, and change comes one person at a time...but that takes patience and faith.

I can see it, but it frustrates me when others who should be able to see it as well just can not, or will not see it...but act on their own sense of how things should be done.
Then stare with disbelief when it never unfolds the way they thought it would.

What I have come to discover is that the world has a table full of kool-aid, with a variety of flavorful solutions, and it really doesn't care which one you choose, as long as you choose one off it's table.

And this is why I see the American church failing as a whole because it constantly chooses a cup from the worlds table, drinks heartily, and then is bitterly disappointed when the solution didn't work.
"Be more conservative!"
"Be more progressive!"

Neither extreme works because both come from the same source, the world, and not from G-d.
But, do we as a collective whole change?
Nope, instead, right back to the worlds table..."perhaps if we mix this cup, with that cup will get a different result!?!"

Somehow, in some circles, being conservative is more important than actually believing on Jesush Christ as your Lord and Savior. Most of the angry rhetoric on the right is very unBiblical. True, for example the Bible is not supportive of gay marriage. On the other hand, the Bible is also not supportive of bullying gay teens, yelling angry epithets at gay people. Very sad indeed what our Church has become. Abortion is wrong. True. It's killing a baby. Yet, somehow it is ok to support multinational chemical corporations that are giving asthma to inner city children (where chemicla plants are located), and dumping chemical wastes in our waterways, poisoning our fish and other plants/animals that our children will eat. Is it ok to kill children this way?

Meg,

As I hope my previous comment demonstrates, I, too disagree with anyone equating a political commitment to limited government with bigotry.

As Christians, we should be look deeper than being "Political Correct." To me, being PC means dressing up language to not offend, without regard for what is in the heart or without acknowledging uncomfortable truths. Our Lord, Jesus, says that cleaning the outside of the cup isn't sufficient. We should examine our hearts, not just our words.

If my language is offensive to others, however, I want to make sure the offense is grace and truth, not a slur I don't intend.

To the author: I hope you are still checking in to the comments on your post. I want to let you know that I agree with what you wrote, which is why it saddened me that the three examples you used to illustrate how we create division between ourselves were EACH about Republicans/conservatives. Is this really a problem only with Republicans or conservatives? Do Democrats and liberals not use divisive language?

Often I hear those who have legitimate differences with the President's policies labeled as racists. I hear the same accusation against those who have legitimate concerns on illegal immigration and border security. Is racism still a problem in America? OF COURSE!! I am a Mexican-American, so I have seen it first-hand. I don't have to imagine myself as an American of Mexican descent, because I am one. And you are right--that ad run by Sharon Angle and similar ones are insulting and divisive.

BUT, by limiting your examples to only ONE side of the political spectrum, the unintended message you send to those who are conservatives (and it is no more a sin to be conservative than it is to be a liberal!) is, "You are not one of us. You are not tolerant like us. Your ideas are bad for our country and you have no business being in charge." Thus your three examples end up undermining the true message that your post is intending to communicate!

I hope to hear a response. Thank you.

Thank you, Nate, for saying so well what many of us experience when we "dare" to say we don't agree with the sitting President on many issues or "try" to explain that we are not racists or against immigration, but think there is a legal and better way to handle all of this. You being Mexican American and my family being Japanese in background, gives more credence to this stand. We never hear the irony being addressed that Asians are a minority too but actually treated as if we have some type of silver spoon in our mouths! Those of us who are Asians and Christians believe in hard work and helping others as our forefathers did - but helping others under the umbrella of the church - in Jesus Name, not the name of the US government. Thank you.

@Bill Williams- You make a good point about my examples all being Republicans. I was aware of this as I wrote the article but had a hard time finding current examples of Democrats using similar code language. I don't think the Democratic Party is necessarily any more noble in this area, they just happened to be the party in power. My hunch is that if/when the Democrats are out of power they too could easily resort to similar fear-provoking language.

Regardless of who is in power and what type of divisive language is used, the challenge remains for the church to shun such ideology for a vision of God's kingdom that includes all who confess Jesus.

Thank you for your kind critique.

Mr Swanson, thank you very much for your response. I understand how it can seem that it is the party that is out of power that displays this kind of language more prominently, perhaps out of their frustration for being out of power. But those in power are not immune.

During the campagin, Alan Grayson, an incumbent Democrat Congressman from Florida, ran an ad accusing his Republican opponent Daniel Webster of wanting to "impose his radical [Christian] fundamentalism on us." The ad also took comments from Webster BLATANTLY out of context to make him sound like he's saying things which are the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he actually says, and even goes so far as to call him "Taliban Dan Webster."

The message is clear: Having certain Christian convictions makes you a fundamentalist, makes you "out of the mainstream," makes you an outsider, and worse--makes you dangerous.

The message of your post is true. There is a code language that has infiltrated our politics, and it is present on BOTH sides. We need to be very careful as Christians that we don't allow ourselves to be sucked into that "insider vs. outsider" worldview. Part of the power of the Gospel is to destroy that worldview--that's what Romans is all about! That's why I don't want that message to be undermined by focusing exclusively on one side of the political spectrum.

Mr. Swanson, once again, I appreciate your message as well as your response.

David I think you make a lot of valid points. On the opposite side of the political spectrum some code words might be republican or conservative. These words may be interpreted as old rich white males. It would be interesting to compare the overall make up the Congress and the governorships after this election to see if these characterizations fit. Is it possible that our leaders next year will be a more diverse group of people despite being more republican?

I just had a horrible revelation. You are not the David Swanson who wrote War is a Lie and at one time had ties and worked with ACORN are you? I assume you are not as CT would have better sense than that but please put my fears to rest. I know that David Acorn is what we call "far left of center."

I feel like the last point is something that "mainstream" Christianity has missed ever since I have remembered. A lot of atheist that I have talked to basically brake down Democrats and Republicans to non-believers and believers. As churches, we can stand to our own personal political thoughts but they should not represent who Christians are. We need to work together to make sure what we think the government should do does not come from the pulpit but from your own personal thoughts.