Upon his nomination for president of the United States, George H. W. Bush delivers an acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention on August 18, 1988. History.com

I recently was reminded of this phrase that was promoted by George Herbert Walker Bush during his administration. It was interpreted to mean that non-profits and religious organizations should take primary responsibility for charity and not depend upon government social justice programs. It was roundly criticized as merely a token effort and a failure to provide for the basic human needs of everyone.

While the passage of the proposed “social infrastructure” legislation is still in process, the impetus is clearly in that direction. My point is not to discuss whether private or public programs are more efficient in serving the needs of the poor. I hope that we might consider this as an opportunity to reach across the great divide that now separates our nation.

Haggling over how many billions of dollars may (or may not) be spent over the next decade may be part of the legislative process, but the compromises so far have been ugly. Media have bandied about the discussion in terms of a political game of who is winning or losing points. The actual funding is going to take years to trickle down through the bureaucracies of state government budgets anyway. We’re still processing the Pandemic payments, some of which may be too late to be of any help.

We might hope that we can grow beyond the extremes of “either/or” mentality so there is no room for civil debate in our society, much less in the Congress. When it comes to threatening to shoot each other, or doing it, we have crossed a bridge too far.

The gap between the so-called evangelical and progressive movements of Christianity has caused the public to condemn all organized religion. If we’re more interested in attacking each other rather than following the servant ministry of Jesus, then we’ve lost the meaning of the Gospels. That doesn’t even bring into the conversation the bias and hatred against Jews and Muslims.

The Founding Fathers were concerned about not perpetuating the religious wars of several centuries in Europe. That’s why they insisted on the separate of church and state. Some wish to bring back the policy that the church controls the state, and that only one religion is acceptable. The Supreme Court seems to be leaning in that direction. We are guaranteed in the Constitution to practice our religion as a right of individual beliefs. We are not allowed to use them to discriminate against each other, including rejecting the laws of the land.

We enjoyed a moment of an ecumenical religious movement during the 1970’s. That effort sought to broaden the reach of religious faith in this nation through more cooperation and less conflict. Is it too much to ask to try to bring back that spirit of community?

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.