In a world where the lines between personal belief and public life often blur, the role of faith in the community remains a topic of significant debate. On February 25, the Honors Program lecture series continued with Dr. Ward Holder’s lecture. He shared views surrounding the theme “Living Faith in the Public Square”, discussing where faith should have a role in society.
Dr. Holder began by addressing the fundamental question: Should faith have a role in politics, culture, and community? He argued that faith can play a significant role in shaping societal values and norms, but the extent and nature of this role are subject to change. The conversation stems from two opposing thoughts: faith should not be in the public square at all versus true faith should rule over the public square. From there, the debate transforms into what is true, people believing that their own beliefs fit into that over others.
There first has to be a definition of what constitutes a true faith. With several convictions as the embodiment of truth, it leads to a diverse and conflicting array of opinions on its public role. This raises important questions about how to navigate the complexities of faith in a pluralistic society.
Dr. Holder emphasized the importance of the First Amendment, which provides for the separation of church and state. This constitutional principle ensures that the government remains neutral in matters of religion, allowing individuals the freedom to practice their faith without interference. However, Dr. Holder also noted that the First Amendment does not preclude faith from influencing public discourse and policy. Rather, it sets the framework for how religious expression can coexist with secular governance.
Later in his lecture, Dr. Holder referenced the National Prayer Service in January that was given by an Episcopalian Reverend. Bishop Mariann Budde highlighted the importance of mercy and compassion in public engagement in her service which had President Trump in attendance.
At the end of her sermon, she made a final plea asking President Trump to grant mercy on the people, just as God does. On social media, Trump responded to her message saying, “The so-called Bishop who spoke at the National Prayer Service… was a Radical Left hard line Trump hater.”
Dr. Holder pointed out the undertone of this statement, suggesting that there is a power dynamic between church and state. It is, “claiming that he has the right to criticize a Christian denomination and that he has the power to take her ordination away,” said Dr. Holder.
This is a great example of faith being placed somewhere within the public square instead of staying separate. People from religious backgrounds can see this display and compare that to their own ones. The great diversity that the United States has indicates that there will always be different beliefs, but commonality is also needed.
Dr. Holder stressed the importance of pluralism in a liberal democracy and how one exists within the other. Within a pluralistic society, he argues that it is essential to find ways to engage with differing viewpoints while maintaining respect and tolerance. This approach is crucial for fostering a healthy and vibrant democracy.
He discussed the 7 Mountain Mandate which calls for Christians to exert influence over various sectors of society, aiming for complete dominion. He contrasted this with the opposing view that seeks to reject religion from the public square altogether.
Through exploring this, there is a hope to find a balance and consistency between the two. Deeper into the balance, there is a search for an overlapping consensus.
Dr. Holder makes the point that whether there is a realization or not, that there is some sort of common ground. Different religions still have sympathy for others, working together based on the inherent dignity of all humans. He introduced one Present Incomplete and Imperfect Solution to the discourse for the time being. It is based around being in the moment and knowing that there is always more to learn. The two steps to this solution are being firm in religion and being ready to be tolerant of others beliefs.
Dr. Holder provided some examples of this, starting with the bad: pro-life politicians who reduce aid to children. This contradicts their original belief, supporting the unborn, but not the living. On the other hand, a good example of this solution are Christians and Jewish people believing in divine image. They may have different views on God, but they are both invested with inherent dignity. The outcome of this solution stays constant, that being to listen where there is disagreement.
The Honors Program lecture series continues to provide a platform for meaningful discussions on pressing issues. Dr. Holder’s insights from “Living Faith in the Public Square” offered valuable perspectives that resonated with all who attended. As the community moves forward, the lessons learned from this lecture will undoubtedly inspire a more inclusive and compassionate approach to public life, grounded in a commitment to mutual respect.