Agree. And history shows that when church and state are united, the church always loses its independence and integrity, while the state doesn’t change at all.
"And it’s tempting to resolve that tension by choosing a side to blame. It feels cleaner. More decisive. More actionable. But it comes at a cost.
The cost is truth.
Discernment does something more difficult. It refuses to collapse the complexity. It applies the same standard everywhere, even when it disrupts our own assumptions."
What if an assumption to be disrupted by discernment is that one side doesn't deserve most of the blame?
This atheist finds much wisdom in what is discussed here.
Appreciate that.
My parents were strictly adamant about separation of church and state and from politics.
The real question isn’t whether faith shows up in public life, it’s how it shows up and whether it’s being used with integrity or as a tool.
Agree. And history shows that when church and state are united, the church always loses its independence and integrity, while the state doesn’t change at all.
"And it’s tempting to resolve that tension by choosing a side to blame. It feels cleaner. More decisive. More actionable. But it comes at a cost.
The cost is truth.
Discernment does something more difficult. It refuses to collapse the complexity. It applies the same standard everywhere, even when it disrupts our own assumptions."
What if an assumption to be disrupted by discernment is that one side doesn't deserve most of the blame?
https://agnosticfundamentalism.substack.com/p/the-referee-test