DAN K. THOMASSON Perilous mix: politics, religion

WASHINGTON -- In a world increasingly disrupted by the often-lethal poison created by mixing religion with politics, the vote by America's Roman Catholic bishops to permit the denial of communion to politicians of their faith who don't strictly adhere to church doctrine is not only disturbing, it is unwarranted interference in the election process.
In fact, the sudden appearance of religious influence of all colors in the process is a dangerous trend that leads to the kind of theocratic dynamite handed out daily by radical clergy to young men and women who translate those teachings into the real thing.
What makes the bishop's action more startling is its insensitivity to the history of the church's political problems in this country. Many of us are old enough to remember when a Catholic could not be elected president of the United States largely because of a fear of just such pressure from Rome. Huge numbers of Protestants were convinced of a giant Vatican conspiracy to control the White House. John F. Kennedy dispelled that myth after winning the presidency by a razor-thin margin in an election that was hugely influenced by lingering concern over papist control.
Now, with another Catholic seeking the office 44 years later, his church's hierarchy seems to be justifying that concern by threatening not only to deny him the sacrament but also curtailing his ability to address audiences at Catholic colleges and universities. The reason, of course, is abortion, an issue on which Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., has taken a stance that is contrary to the church's.
Murky reasoning
While the bishops' vote was seen as a compromise that stopped short of stating that Catholic politicians should be banned from taking communion, it branded those who support abortion rights as "cooperating in evil." The result was to leave it up to individual bishops to decide whether to deny the administration of the sacrament. If this approach were really as conciliatory as some scholars painted it, it was not apparent from the language that reminded Catholics that communion was a privilege that should be granted only after they had examined their fidelity to "the moral teachings of the church in personal and public life."
Furthermore, the bishops said that Catholic institutions and communities should abstain from giving "awards, honors and platforms" to those politicians who "act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles." This ban, of course, would also pertain to non-Catholics who support positions such as freedom of choice for women.
The church, any church for that matter, has every right to its stances, and its officials can make those positions known from the pulpit and at the ballot box, as can all Americans. But carrying that a step further to intimidate politically active members by threatening them with official sanctions and retributions is another matter altogether, particularly in a nation whose doctrine of separation of church and state has been an example for the rest of the world.
In reality, the way Americans vote always have been influenced by their religious beliefs, ranging from the so-called Moral Majority or similar groups to the most doctrinaire of the mainline churches. But acting directly to sway the voting patterns through official church policy has been cautiously avoided until now, and most politicians -- especially presidents and presidential candidates, with rare exception -- have kept their religious beliefs mainly personal.
History
Those carrying religious banners into a savage wilderness or who were both escaping religious persecution and seeking religious freedom settled this country. At times they were as repressive as those they were fleeing. To prevent the theocracy that results in just such repression and strife as the kind we have seen throughout much of the world of late, the drafters of the Constitution made certain the government could not establish any official religion and that all faiths were to be honored.
Churches derive their governmental benefits through exclusion from taxes. And, in some cases, their holdings are quite extensive. In other words, all taxpayers help support all churches and, therefore, should not have their representatives intimidated into supporting positions with which they disagree. Elected officials must represent all of their constituents, not just those who are Protestant or Catholic or Jewish or Muslim or Buddhist or whatever.
XDan K. Thomasson is former editor of the Scripps Howard News.