What Marianne Williamson Might Mean for us

Marianne Williamson is a recognizable voice and face in the modern New Thought spiritual community. She writes best-selling books and is part of Oprah’s cadre of spiritual masters.  I imagine Marianne Williamson’s teachings would be rolled into the future religion of “Oprahism” as prognosticated by the writers of the cartoon series “Futurama.”

Marianne Williamson has officially announced her candidacy for election to the U.S. House of Representatives from California’s Congressional District 33. Her campaign slogan is “Create Anew.”

We are used to religious figures running for political office; but not this kind of religion. From Williamson’s candidacy announcement on her webpage, we read this.

“While many seekers have turned away from politics, viewing spiritual and political pursuits as mutually exclusive, I agree with Mahatma Gandhi that “Anyone who thinks religion doesn’t have anything to do with politics doesn’t understand religion.” I don’t believe we can afford to be “selectively conscious,” applying more enlightened principles to only some aspects of human endeavor.”

Some people believe that the unprecedented current political divisions in our country are related to the entrance of right-wing born-again Christianity to the political forum. Arch-conservative Barry Goldwater warned us about this possibility in 1994 with these prophetic words.

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.”

Christian extremists worked together over decades to garner support and take control of the Republican Party. While many of their assertions are laughable (a raped woman can’t get pregnant, for instance) some of these religious politicians make their dangerously erroneous statements as duly elected members of Congress.

While the political left in our country has always had the backing of many socially conscious Christians, the United Church of Christ doesn’t have mega-churches or a prosperity doctrine. It would be impossible for a UCC or New Thought preacher to raise the kind of funds and fervor that the right-wing extremists do.

But what about a candidate like Marianne Williamson? She is using her spiritual message in her campaign, just as the Christian extremists do. She is well-funded, well-known, well-loved and well-connected. She might even appeal to the socially-conscious lefty Christians. If Unity Church and the Universalist Unitarians vote as a block she’s got a good chance at victory.

I am not naïve enough to think that one spiritually conscious person in the House of Representatives could make a lot of difference. But what if she is the first of a wave? What if the “spiritually conscious” could do what the Christian extremists have done? What would happen then?

I could see a number of possibilities, some of them as laughable as the right-wing-nuts forbidding schools to teach actual science. While I might personally believe that tarot cards could help create a balanced budget I can’t condone their actual use as part of our nation’s decision-making process.

I having a feeling, though, that the New Thought and New Age politicians might be a little more even-handed than the Christian extremists. I think the New Thought folks might even try to govern with love rather than with fear.

One question is, can the spiritual community mobilize voters the way the born-again Christians can? It will be interesting to see what happens. Will churches who need to constantly fundraise to keep their doors open be willing to encourage their congregation to hold fundraisers for Marianne?

If Marianne Williamson is successful, and if she is the first of a wave, it will be interesting to see if there is less hypocrisy and more honesty in one brand of spiritual politics than another.

Typically, those who rule with religion rule with cruelty. Will Williamson and those like her be any different? I hope we get a chance to find out.

Photo: Marianne Williamson Miami Book Fair International, 1993
Creative Commons License, MDCarchives

The Spiritual Imperative for Compromise

I was raised in a Christian home. My parents, a minister and a Sunday school teacher, taught me the value of compromise. They assured me that without the skill of diplomacy I would never go far in life.

When a radical eco group (some called them eco-terrorists) used the slogan "No compromise in Defense of Mother Earth" I saw their point, and had sympathy for their cause. But I knew that without the ability to compromise their efficacy would be sadly limited.

I came across an interesting quote from Barry Goldwater today. In my personal iconography, Barry Goldwater was the first really conservative American of whom I was aware. I was surprised to see that Goldwater said the following words.

"Mark my word; if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them." - Barry Goldwater

He said these words quite late in his life, as the Christian Right was already beginning to succeed in their plan for domination of the Republican Party - a plan that has been frighteningly successful.

We do see this attitude prevalent in today's political arena. Politicians who are good at reaching compromises were once called great statesmen. Now, they are ridiculed for being "weak."

We see this same sort of philosophy amongst extremist Muslims. We should know this philosophy rarely leads to good things.

The sad thing that happens is this. When one side refuses to compromise, the other side becomes indignant, and starts acting as immaturely as their opponents. Suddenly, the adults we elect to lead us start sounding like children squabbling in the sandbox. Their supporters, regular citizens like you and me, sound even worse.

I do not believe that any God would be pleased to see people refusing to compromise in God's name. We often see Higher Power in the form of a parent. We call God "Our Father." We call Goddess "The Great Mother." Don't parents want their children to get along? Who in their right mind sees refusal to compromise as a Christian value?

I think part of the problem is the tendency to mix religion with superstition. It's a fine line, but a line we should be careful not to cross. Many religious extremists, both Christian and Muslim, truly believe their God will punish their country if their country as a whole does not follow their narrow doctrine.

On the other hand, the reasoning goes, if we obey a random and senseless set of rules derived from an ancient poorly translated and politically manipulated text, God will "bless" our country.

To me, this is a very limited view of Higher Power, and a poor way to practice politics.

Hanging on to unreasonable beliefs isn't religion at all; it's fear-based superstition. I was so proud of Bill Nye when he suggested that if your belief conflicts with obvious reality, you need to change your belief.

Higher Power is about truth, not about fear. To see Higher Power as angry rather than loving is disempowering both to us and to Higher Power's ability to bring true enlightenment to us.

Of all the many verses in the Bible my favorite is First John 4:8 - "He who loveth not knoweth not God, for God is love."

It's that simple.

I believe God has already blessed our country, and our planet, by giving us resources and abilities. Whatever happens after that isn't up to God, it's up to us.

On a more personal level, this new doctrine of non-compromise is tearing apart families. Anyone who has ever been in a marriage knows that marriage relies on compromise. Many marriages that now end in divorce might have been savable if both partners were willing to compromise with each other.

I talk to many people who are ready to sacrifice decent marriages because they have been taught that compromise and apology are signs of weakness. In actuality, compromise and apology can be signs of strength.

From spiritual texts far and wide, from St. Paul to the tarot, we learn another important lesson. Love is the greatest strength.

And so God is love, and love is the greatest strength. Yeah, that sounds right. And it sounds nothing like the philosophies being taught as truth today.