The power of sacred texts has always been alluring to politicians and policymakers. But in times of social strife, the stakes go beyond interpretative accuracy. Human dignity, the common good, and democratic governance may be on the line. Exploring the moral responsibility of biblical teacher-scholars in the classroom, a biblical theology of public land advocacy, and the (mis)use of Christian and Confucian values in American and South Korean administrations, this session offers three papers that address the promise and peril of public hermeneutics.
The paper emerges from my experience teaching biblical texts to undergraduate students across 2025. First, I report on a Gospels class, in which students analyze politicians’ use of the Gospels to support their political convictions and policy positions. Second, I share how my students in a Gender and Family in Genesis class wrestle with Genesis 1-3 in conversation with President Trump’s Executive Order declaring that the United States recognizes only two sexes, male and female, thereby “restoring biological truth.” Finally, we will explore the ethical concerns that accompany my own sense of urgency that students develop skills to read the Bible responsibly in this moment of a politics of certainty and throwing off all restraints.
This paper will overview the conceptional and volitional resources the biblical ideal of commonwealth has to offer those pursuing public lands advocacy within Christian communities. It will also argue that the acknowledgment of conquest in both ancient Israel and colonial America, the misguided theology which legitimated it, and the tragic consequences surrounding it, must be engaged in order for a biblical theology of public lands to have integrity and to reach its potential as resource for Christian communities.
With South Korean President Yoon, Suk Yeol’s unsuccessful “emergency” martial law decree in December, coupled with the beginning of the Second Trump Administration in January we have witnessed deepening troubling trends towards global authoritarianism. The Yoon and Trump Administrations defended their policies are “creative” reinterpretations of established political “sacred texts” in each culture, namely the Confucian Five Relationships (五倫), especially the responsibility of the Ruler with his Ministers (君臣) to guide the nation and hold it safe from threats internal and external. Meanwhile President Trump has brought into his orbit a number of supportive religious leaders, and his Vice-President, J.D. Vance has lectured his Catholic bishops and fellow citizens on the “proper” and restrictive interpretation of ordo amoris (Order[ing] of Love) concept traced back to Augustine and Aquinas. A closer examination of each of these “sacred texts” and traditions reveals their usages to be quite misleading and woefully deficient.