The 2008 election is prominent in the news, and the impact that evangelical Christians will have is, as usual, a factor being observed. It is unfortunate that at the same time, the politics of the Church are being ignored. The decisions made at the conventions of two major Lutheran denominations this year indicate the degree to which religion continues to fall.

At the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America’s (ELCA) convention on August 11th, delegates approved a resolution by a vote of 583 to 431 that “prays, urges, and encourages synods, synodical bishops, and the presiding bishop to refrain from or demonstrate restraint in disciplining those rostered leaders in a mutual, chaste, and faithful committed same-gender relationship who have been called and rostered in this church.”

The assembly represented a denomination of 4.8 million members.

Earlier in the year, delegates representing the 2.8 million member Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) re-elected President Gerald Kieschnick to a third term with 644 votes, with the second-closest competitor receiving 514. Kieschnick may not openly support homosexuality, but in his eyes, a “flexible” church has vanquished the need to distinguish between Christianity, and, say, Islam.

Shortly after the attacks of September 11th, David Benke, president of the LCMS Atlantic District, participated in an interfaith prayer ceremony that included, among others, Muslim and Hindu religious leaders. He justified himself, “The bottom line of this thing revolved around who God is, and how people know God, whether indeed we’re talking about the same thing at all. Yes, we are. It may not be from my perspective complete… but when we’re speaking about the creator of the universe, we are speaking about God.”

Benke was suspended for a short period by the Second Vice-Chair of the Synod, but Kieschnick reinstated him a year later. Benke was then re-elected district president, and attributed the debacle to “a hardening of the arteries in a lot of Protestant denominations” which “produces difficulties with being flexible in the world,”

On one hand, we have a church that accepts homosexuality; on another one, we have a church that seems to approve of being “flexible in the world” by proclaiming Christ to be the same as Allah.

I would grant that a majority of the members of these churches probably don’t subscribe to these absurd beliefs. It is frequently the case that delegates do not share the outlook of those they elect; they are simply too ignorant and too slothful to understand or to care about the differences between the candidates. In any case, the road to ruin is apparent, and the mindset of the governing body is irrelevant.

The Lutheran churches are following steadfastly in the footsteps of the Presbyterians and the Episcopalians before them.

It’s easy to banter over who would make the best religious political leaders. Debate consists of whether the best Christian would be a Mormon, someone who is thrice-divorced, or someone whose wife is simply three decades younger than himself. The lines of distinction are clear; it’s trendy to stop labeling it as “pedophilia” after the age of 16 (18 in some states), so we can all quietly shift our support to the lattermost candidate and thank the others for trying, suggesting that they come back next time in hopes that someday everyone else will be more sacrilegious than they are.

A Pew Poll released this August suggested a correlation between the frequency with which people attend church and the candidates for whom they vote. According to the poll, Bush received 82 percent of the vote from evangelical Protestants who attended service at least once a week, compared to 72 percent of those who did not attend at least once a week.

Twenty-eight percent of less-observant evangelicals voted for Kerry, compared to 18 percent of those classified as more observant. Among black evangelicals, Kerry received 92 percent of the vote from less frequent attendees, compared to 83 percent of those who attended weekly.

The most devout people, those presumably electing or even serving as delegates to the religious conventions that time and time again vote to disregard the literalism of the Bible, are those voting for Republican candidates. It is a disturbing paradox.

Beliefnet’s David Kuo recently noted that “Christians increasingly see [Huckabee] as a ‘real’ Christian — not just one made to sound like one for the political season.” Perhaps that is a good thing. But given that the “Christians” powering today’s political campaigns are the same people leading their own house to ruin, I have my doubts.