In response to the controversial mandate from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, on March 27th some religious leaders in Missouri, along with many church members, held a Rally for Religious Liberty at the capitol building in Jefferson City. I am not going to devote this post to the issues of religious liberty and contraception; instead, I want to make a couple of observations about the rally that trouble me. First, the Saint Louis Review, which is my archdiocesan newspaper, posted tips for attending the rally–one of which was to wear red. Why? I could not find an explanation. You may see the pics from the rally here, depicting a lot of red shirts protesting President Obama’s policies. I hope I’m not reading too much into this, but it struck me as being dangerously close to a partisan (red = Republican) thing to do. Why not rather have Christians wear purple given that this was during the penitential season of Lent? Second, and this is where my Yoderian and Hauerwasian training is more apparent (even though I am also to an extent usually on board with John Courtney Murray, SJ), one of the photos shows children reciting the U.S. pledge of allegiance; I hope as much attention was devoted to our baptismal vows as Catholics, to which we owe our ultimate allegiance–even though, of course, the other major Christian (Baptists, Missouri Synod Lutherans, Assemblies of God) participants at this so-called “ecumenical” event may not recognize our baptismal practice as valid.
Contributors
-
Alessandro Rovati
-
Andrew Kim
-
Barrett Turner
-
Beth Haile
-
Book Reviews
-
Catherine Moon
-
Charles Camosy
-
Christopher Vogt
-
Conor Kelly
-
Dana Dillon
-
David Cloutier
-
Emily Reimer-Barry
-
Holly Taylor Coolman
-
Jana Bennett
-
Jason King
-
Jennifer Beste
-
Jessica Wrobleski
-
John Berkman
-
Julie Rubio
-
Kari-Shane Davis Zimmerman
-
Kathryn Getek Soltis
-
Kelly Johnson
-
Lorraine Cuddeback-Gedeon
-
Luis Vera
-
Maria Morrow
-
Matthew Shadle
-
Meghan Clark
-
Miguel J Romero
-
New Wine New Wineskins
-
Nichole Flores
-
Patrick Clark
-
Ramon Luzarraga
-
Shawnee
-
superchief1
-
Thomas Bushlack
-
Tobias Winright
I think you are reading too much into both of these things. Red (specifically, rose red) is the color of the pro-life movement. While this was not necessarily a pro-life rally, a lot of the groups that participated and sponsored the event are pro-life. While I do not know the reasoning for choosing red for this event, I am almost positive that this has no connection to the Republican party (especially since that is mostly an associate that is media-driven).
Why is it a big deal to recite the pledge of allegiance? A rally for religious freedom is primarily a political event, since it is advocating for preserving freedoms enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. Of course they can recite the Creed at the rally as a demonstration of their religious freedom, but I think the rally participants were primarily trying to appeal to a sense of civic justice to overturn the HHS policy (after all, they are seeking redress through their First Amendment right to peaceably assemble).
Sorry, the last line of the first paragraph should be: “(especially since the Republican association with red is mostly media-driven).”
Thanks for writing, “Yoobee,” and for the clarification. I did not know that red is the color representative of the pro-life movement. Still, it is too ambiguous, in my opinion, and this should have been made explicit. Others who are not “in the know” may interpret this symbolism otherwise.
As for the pledge, I believe that Christians should not swear oaths to finite entities (Matthew 5:34). In baptism, we pledge allegiance to God as revealed to us in Jesus Christ. We may have other loves and loyalties, but we should not pledge allegiance to any of them in the same way we pledge allegiance to God and God’s kingdom. As Catholics, we belong to a Church that transcends national boundaries. I worry about idolatrous practices to lesser “absolutes,” including the nation state, regardless of which nation state I happen to live in as a Catholic Christian. This is why we Catholics are supposed to have a U.S. (or any other nation’s) flag in our sanctuaries.
Amendment to last sentence: we are NOT supposed to have such flags in our sanctuaries. My eyes and typing fingers are not trustworthy!
Thank you for sharing this post.
In response to the coverage of this rally, I had a similar reaction. A few thoughts:
First, it is critical for events like the Rally for Religious Liberty to be more clearly organized to be effective. The concern you raise about the ambiguous selection of red clothing is quite significant. I was also not aware that rose red is the color associated with the pro-life movement. That said, I suspect other outside observers may have interpreted this choice as a partisan move. Also, I have to wonder how many of rally’s participants blindly accepted these instructions without bothering to raise questions or ask for clarification. I, too, agree that purple would have been a better selection given the intention of this rally.
Second, I was equally uneasy regarding the photos of children reciting the U.S. pledge of allegiance. To elaborate, I am often concerned about the aim of these types of demonstrations. Wouldn’t our time be better spent in prayer rather than protesting a government mandate? That is, if we really pledge ourselves and our allegiance to belonging to the Body of Christ, why are we so upset about decisions made by the United States government? That said, I feel events like the Rally for Religious Liberty paradoxically give the state more power and outside observers an unfortunate sense of confusion or set of false assumptions.
This is not really about the topic of the post, but isn’t it odd that today a bunch of people show up at a rally wearing red, and the immediate conclusion is that they are CONSERVATIVE? How times have changed.
I remember a few years ago reading about how prior to 2000, the coloring for the two parties on electoral maps was reversed, and that it was changed to avoid the association of socialism with the Democrats. However, it turns out that this is a myth. Prior to 2000 there was no consistent color code among major media outlets. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_and_blue_states
Matthew, I know, and that has occurred to me, also. Thanks for putting it out there, though. I remember when red was associated with, yikes, Communism!