To the Editor:

Beyond the crass pandering by supporters and presidential politicians looking for a bump in the polls; beyond the use of harsh and retributive laws and punishments devised by an ancient mid-eastern theocracy to keep its people in line; and beyond the use of religious law to violate the freedoms of citizens of a modern nation-state by forcing them to acquiesce to a belief system by which they cannot and should not be forced to abide — the issue at the heart of the tragedy foisted onto the people of Kentucky by one of its Clerks of Court is nothing less than who people of faith understand God to be.

Not all gods are the same. Some are nonviolent, just and forgiving; others are violent, unfair and demand retribution for the most minor of offences. Some are bloodthirsty, oppressive and condemn individuals and whole nations to eternal punishment; others value forbearance and liberation and work with peacemakers to make the world safe for children and other living things. The type of god a person or nation worships is important, because it influences what one does and how one relates to friends and enemies.

It is not always easy, however, to discern the type of God an individual, community or nation follows. But for all their differences, the sacred texts of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are united in the belief that the character of the god upon whom one relies may be discerned by carefully observing what one does rather than what one says. Actions speak louder than words. The actions of people who devote their lives to compassion and justice and freedom tell something about the nature of the gods they worship. Similarly, the behavior of greedy Wall Street investment bankers, war-mongering national leaders and persons who arrogantly relegate fellow human beings to second-class believers and citizens reveal the nature of the god they worship.

The God Christians claim to worship is overwhelming understood to be one of love and inclusion. Those who profess to follow the man after whom it is named are called to incarnate his values into actions, by doing what he did — standing in solidarity with the poor and outcast and defending those discriminated against. It is not only fair but incumbent, therefore, upon followers of Jesus’ God to ask of the nature of the God upon whom Kim Davis bases her actions. What does the stance she has taken reveal about the God she worships? Is Kim Davis’ God a force for justice and equality or prejudice and discrimination? A God of unlimited compassion and inclusion or one of violent retribution and prejudice?

How we answer those questions reveals as much about ourselves as it does about Mrs. Davis. If the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and Jesus is understood to be a god who values nonviolent resistance to injustice, oppression and discrimination, then that must be determinative for how American Jews and Christians imagine their God — and should also determine our economic, social and political actions and decisions as well.

 

Polk Culpepper

Washington