
Monday October 29, 2007
Category: Faith, Politics"The Evangelical Crackup", pt. 2
Three thoughts on the NYT piece entitled "The Evangelical Crackup".
1. The evangelical political leadership we've known for the past 20 years is headed out.
The founding generation of leaders like Falwell and Dobson, who first guided evangelicals into Republican politics 30 years ago, is passing from the scene. Falwell died in the spring. Paul Weyrich, 65, the indefatigable organizer who helped build Falwell’s Moral Majority and much of the rest of the movement, is confined to a wheelchair after losing his legs because of complications from a fall. Dobson, who is 71 and still vigorous, is already planning for a succession at Focus on the Family; it is expected to tack toward the less political family advice that is its bread and butter.The engineers of the momentous 1980s takeover that expunged political and theological moderates from the Southern Baptist Convention are retiring or dying off, too. And in September, when I called a spokesman for the ailing Presbyterian televangelist D. James Kennedy, another pillar of the Christian conservative movement, I learned that Kennedy had “gone home to the Lord” at 2 a.m. that morning.
Meanwhile, a younger generation of evangelical pastors — including the widely emulated preachers Rick Warren and Bill Hybels — are pushing the movement and its theology in new directions. There are many related ways to characterize the split: a push to better this world as well as save eternal souls; a focus on the spiritual growth that follows conversion rather than the yes-or-no moment of salvation; a renewed attention to Jesus’ teachings about social justice as well as about personal or sexual morality. However conceived, though, the result is a new interest in public policies that address problems of peace, health and poverty — problems, unlike abortion and same-sex marriage, where left and right compete to present the best answers.
Yes, the existing leaders - Dobson, Land, Perkins in particular - still have the power to convene Christian conservatives but their power among the rank-and-file evangelicals is ebbing.
For under-25 evangelicals, men and women who have grown up on the Internet and IM and My Space and YouTube, these men hold little, if any, power. They are at best the people their parents listened to and they are at worst, those people their parents listened to.
And while Rick Warren is obviously the most powerful pastor in the country, it isn't actually clear who will fill the roles Dobson and co. once played. It may be that evangelicals turn toward more local influences defined by their spirituality and not their politics.
2. While evangelical identification with the Republican party is down that doesn't mean they will go to the Dems.
Today the president’s support among evangelicals, still among his most loyal constituents, has crumbled. Once close to 90 percent, the president’s approval rating among white evangelicals has fallen to a recent low below 45 percent, according to polls by the Pew Research Center. White evangelicals under 30 — the future of the church — were once Bush’s biggest fans; now they are less supportive than their elders. And the dissatisfaction extends beyond Bush. For the first time in many years, white evangelical identification with the Republican Party has dipped below 50 percent, with the sharpest falloff again among the young, according to John C. Green, a senior fellow at Pew and an expert on religion and politics. (The defectors by and large say they’ve become independents, not Democrats, according to the polls.)
I have been saying for the last year and see no reason to stop saying that the change that is occurring among evangelicals is most fundamentally a spiritual shift. Evangelicals have been part of the Great Sellout for the last eight years - worshipping at the altar of George W. Bush. They have seen what happens when Jesus is sold out for politics. I don't see them rushing back anytime soon.
3. The evangelical war is coming.
In the past, Hybels has scrupulously avoided criticizing conservative Christian political figures like Falwell or Dobson. But in my talk with him, he argued that the leaders of the conservative Christian political movement had lost touch with their base. “The Indians are saying to the chiefs, ‘We are interested in more than your two or three issues,’ ” Hybels said. “We are interested in the poor, in racial reconciliation, in global poverty and AIDS, in the plight of women in the developing world.”He brought up the Rev. Jim Wallis, the lonely voice of the tiny evangelical left. Wallis has long argued that secular progressives could make common cause with theologically conservative Christians. “What Jim has been talking about is coming to fruition,” Hybels said.
Conservative Christian leaders in Washington acknowledge a “leftward drift” among evangelicals, said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council and the movement’s chief advocate in Washington. He told me he believed that Hybels and many of his admirers had, in effect, fallen away from orthodox evangelical theology. Perkins compared the phenomenon to the century-old division in American Protestantism between the liberal mainline and the orthodox evangelical churches. “It is almost like another split coming within the evangelicals,” he said.
There are those on the right for whom a conservative political ideology represent the fifth Gospel of the New Testament. Over the next year expect them to make increasingly spiritual arguments to justify their politics - attempting to persuade those who have left the Republican party and conservative politics to come back into the camp because it is the "Jesus way." And expect many conservative and moderate pastors, theologians, and lay people to become ever more aggressive in countering that argument.
Filed Under: casting stones, George W. Bush, James Dobson, richard land, Rick Warren




Add to Newsvine
Comments
"A person has to be honest to preach honesty. I'm prepared for the arguments that the old line was holding up Jesus. I hope these people can explain themselves better to their maker than they have to me."
Posted by: Doug
Doug,
You only need to read and compare what Christ Jesus (The Gospels) and the Apostles presented "for" Christians to live by, to see that people like Falwell and Dobson preach the same thing as did Jesus, Peter, John, James, Jude and Paul. Leftists on the other hand, are teachers like Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche and Richard Dawkins.
I've listened to the arguments of both the Leftists and "the old line." I'm sticking with "The faith delivered ONLY once to the Saints."
You know, "the old line."
Another old line: "Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever."
So much for "progressive" theology.
Matter of fact . . . let's keep things in context. The following is from the New Testament:
Keep on loving each other as brothers. Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some people have entertained angels without knowing it. Remember those in prison as if you were their fellow prisoners, and those who are mistreated as if you yourselves were suffering.
Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral. Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have, because God has said,
"Never will I leave you;
never will I forsake you." So we say with confidence,
"The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid.
What can man do to me?"
Remember your leaders, who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
////
And continuing on the theme of good teachers and false (bad) teachers in the Church . . .:
"Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings."
(Even when it comes to mundane things like food.)
Posted by: Donny | October 29, 2007 8:09 AM
No Donny, you have to read the whole Gospel and the whole New Testament. Jesus and the Apostles, as far as is recorded didn't run around saying "Covet, fornicate, exert power over your neighbors and trouble strangers and hurl invective at your peers, get rich, eat pigs but for the love of He who sent me have nothing to do with homos and have all the babies you can." The first commandments are to love God with all your heart and all your soul and your might and your neighbor as yourself.
Second, if you are honest, "All Democrats are Evil" is false witness. Plain and simple. Once again, in Christian love and friendship I'd point out to you, to do with as you will that you are continually absolutist when talking about Democrats and morally relativist when talking about Republicans. I'm a hypocrite, sinner, and grouchy fat man so I don't judge you but if you really want to be honest with yourself and you are so concerned with biblical proof, try to find a bible passage that supports using different standards for people you don't like than you hold for those you do.
And I don't mean a random clutter of scripture, I mean something that speaks along the lines of "Your enemies test and find blemished at every turn, but with your allies find all their errors to be meaningless."
Posted by: Doug | October 29, 2007 8:33 AM
If divorce was disapproved of by Jesus, and God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral, does that suggest that the state ought to prevent divorce and punish adulterers?
This was a common view until pretty recently. In Ireland divorce only became legally possible in the 1990s.
Would a Biblically-based politics eliminate civil divorce and make adultery a crime?
Just wondering what the implications are. All that stuff about leftist hordes,glowing warning signs, abominations, great apostasy, ghettoizing Christians-- that's pretty scary stuff! But I'd kind of like to know what the nuts and bolts of the Biblical political program might be, before I sign on. The pure marriage bed bit sounds pretty good, but I'd like some concrete details.
Thanks!
Posted by: SkipChurch | October 29, 2007 8:52 AM
Skipchurch, it's been tried. It was the Puritan reign in Massachusetts. The end result was that it had to censor printers, burn books and pamphlets, ban public assembly, and ultimately resorted to hanging its most adamant critics- all Quakers. Thereby the Puritans become the false witnesses, authoritarians, and murderers it claimed to transcend. (Quakers were also expelled from Virginia by religious leaders and slaveholders, but put up less of a fight there.) The King of England heard of the abuses and ended up disempowering the Puritan government in the 1660s. The Puritans then ruined their remaining political standing with the Salem Witch trials around 1690.
The First Amendment ultimately resulted from the record of abuses committed against Quakers in Boston in the 1650s and 1660s. It's been the bane of theocrats and neopuritans ever since.
The most famous of the Quakers involved was a woman named Mary Dyer. There are several accounts of her struggle online, and ultimately her hanging (by which she defeated the Puritans, nonetheless). There is a statue of Mary Dyer at the state capitol building on Beacon Hill in Massachusetts. Massachusetts took quite a lesson away from the affair; it has been an anti-theocratic, anti-neopuritan state ever since. Even now it remains cheerfully at war with theocrats- legalizing gay marriage was in part a choice to take them on yet again.
Posted by: Jillian | October 30, 2007 8:19 AM
Jillian-- yep. Those Quakers just had to go! Of course with two of my kids in Quaker schools I'm more than a little leary of the new crop of "Biblically-based Christians."
The Puritan experiment is so interesting. My family was a part of that, arriving in 1630, and I'm glad to say both Massachusetts and my family survived on this continent.
It is very striking to me how little history, and indeed how little thought, has informed the views of the most rabid of the Biblically-based Christians of today. They much prefer a posture of pious outrage to devoting any effort to considering how the actual governance of our country might be improved for the benefit of the citizens.
"Intelligence, it might be said, has caused our troubles; but it is not unintelligence that will cure them. Only more and wiser intelligence can make a happier world" - Bertrand Russell
Posted by: SkipChurch | October 30, 2007 9:29 AM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?