A Follow-Up on Christian Influence in Kansas (Democratic Edition)
[An expansion upon my latest Insight Kansas column, with the help of an image from The Active Age]
Two months ago, I wrote a column (which I later expanded upon) which addressed, among other things, on how Kansas Christians (which over two-thirds of the population of the Sunflower State identify as) have changed how they make use of their influence as citizens. Obviously the historical develop I was addressing had many causes—technological, socio-economic, and more—but still, it struck me just how many Christians, when they thought about the public-facing aspects of their faith, once regularly aimed to lift up Kansas society to the moral level they held to be scripturally mandated, whether in the form of prohibitions upon alcohol or Sunday closing laws or the abolition of slavery or women’s suffrage or so much more. Today, with a few notable exceptions—mostly pertaining to abortion, LGBTQ issues, and other matters involving personal sexual identity and behavior—the focus is more about providing financial support or legal protection to individuals, families, or businesses that affirm particular Christian standards, and less about presenting their moral message as relevant to social life itself.
One problem with that essay, though, was that as it moved from Kansas’s Carrie Nation past into the present, it came to focus entirely upon Kansas Christians organizing on behalf of and arguing for or against issues and policies that map almost solely onto the interests of the Republican party. In some ways, that’s predictable; for decades, the public language of Christianity (particularly Protestant Christianity, which for a variety of reasons has long been the dominant religious faction here in Kansas) has been owned by the Republican party. But nonetheless, there are still plenty of religious believers in Kansas—especially if you look at Black congregations, or other multi-ethnic Christian churches and groups who aren’t part of the powerful and mostly White evangelical subgroup—who approach the question of how to engage in public life with a focus on collective causes that are more typically associated with Democrats. Some attention needs to be paid to them as well, so this month, for reasons I explain below, I wanted to do so.
Over the past five years, multiple church-based organizations have sprouted up throughout Kansas, sometimes standing on their own and sometimes joining with others that have had a long history within their local communities. Together, these groups could be seen as Kansas instantiations of a national revival of the religious left (which there is evidence for, but which has also been falsely predicted much too often in the past), giving new voice to groups of believers who feel a need to, first, drill down on specific public policy problems, and second, pressure city and county officials to recognize the problems that have been identified and respond to the solutions which these groups recommend. In this, they’ve been making a real, unglamourous difference in many communities across the state.
Some of groups—all of which are multi-faith, but within which Protestant Christian congregations (Methodists in particular) invariably provide the largest number of supporters—include Topeka JUMP (Justice Unity and Ministry Project) in Shawnee County, MORE2 (Metro Organization for Racial and Economic Equity) in KCK and KCMO, Churches United for Justice in Wyandotte County, the Good Faith Network in Johnson County, and the organization I know best, Justice Together in Sedgwick County. I’ve written on the latter organization multiple times before, and I’m proud to be a supporter of their work. But all of these organizations, representing tens of thousands of believers in the Bible’s messages about inclusion, charity, compassion, and justice, have pushed for the creation of municipal IDs (which help homeless individuals begin to rebuild their lives by applying for jobs and aid), for setting up affordable housing funds (which helps bring downward pressure on home costs in genera), for holding corrupt city officials accountable for their crimes (which helps increase trust in government and thus makes more legitimate collective efforts to aid those suffering from abuse and poverty), for creating additional services for those struggling with mental health or facing gun violence, and much more.
Have they been successful in all their work? Not remotely. For example Justice
Together, after much internal discussion, elected to throw their weight behind
an ill-conceived (but
still, in my opinion, defensible) sales tax proposal in Wichita, entirely
because of the funding it would have guaranteed to anti-homelessness and
affordable housing programs, a decision that ended with egg on their (and my,
and many others’) faces. But
that hasn’t dissuaded them. Here in Wichita, at a recent town hall on the
city’s 2027 budget, Justice Together brought out over 130 people to press their
case for the importance of trying
once again to secure through the ballot a stable, enduring source of funding
for affordable housing and homelessness support, as well as other issues. As
Justice Together co-president (and old friend of mine) Rabbi Andrew Pepperstone
said at the start of the meeting: “We will not avoid this crisis; we will not
stop; we will not be silent.” The turnout was so large the meeting had
to be moved to the main city council chambers, and the power of their voice
(and vote) was acknowledged throughout the evening.
To some, of course, the efforts of these organizations, and the numbers of faithful Christians supporting these progressive causes, is easily dismissed. In their mind, Christian engagement in politics remains the natural property of conservatives, and they point to how some progressives across Kansas have reacted with hostility to the entrance of Methodist minister Adam Hamilton into the race to be the Democratic challenger to Senator Roger Marshall as evidence for their presumptions. That hostility is mostly online and isn’t terribly loud, in my judgment, but it would be foolish to pretend that it isn’t real. In a low-turnout primary election, it might even be enough to sink Hamilton’s chances with the Democratic electorate (despite some of those same voters supporting churches engaged in the social justice work mentioned above).
At an event where Hamilton met with local voters in Wichita last night,
I was impressed with how forthright he was regarding this particular challenge.
For decades, Biblical language has been publicly owned (at least among White
voters and those soliciting their support) by folks on the conservative side of
the aisle; Democrats have spent decades articulating secular self-justifications,
and sometimes some outright defiance, in response. Given all that, there is
bound to be some members of the Democratic primary electorate who will insist
that no minister, and certainly no person who—as is obviously appropriate when
one works in a pastoral context, as Hamilton has for more than 30 years—approaches
some of those same “matters involving personal sexual identity and behavior”
with a recognition of and respect for the “tensions” which surround them (he
shared a story about his own family history which, in another context, would
have sounded like a set-up for an anti-abortion rights argument, except he
turned it around into a case for supporting reproductive rights) will ever win
their vote. How can someone like Hamilton reach them? Certainly not by
downplaying his Christian approach to political questions; he knows that would
be impossible, in the same way that organizations like Justice Together understand
that eschewing Biblical arguments when they make their case simply undermines
the whole point of their existence. The ways in which those inspired by the
progressive or egalitarian aspects of the Christian message express themselves
publicly have to reckon with pluralism in a way that wasn’t the case decades
ago. That’s a complication, to be sure, but also one that aligns the character
of the society we live in today—and that, perhaps, is an advantage, however
small.
In any case, the history of Kansas shows us that Christian priorities were once as likely to be expressed by Democrats as by Republicans in this state. While that, obviously, has changed a lot over the years, it’s not like the language of faith as an important motivator for collective change ever entirely disappeared from the small liberal corners of Kansas. Expressing it today can’t be something done in same manner as decades past, but this election season, it’s heartening to see a variety of individuals and organizations looking for new ways to keep that expressive process going. I hope they succeed.
