 |
 |
|
"Sometime between April 16 and 23, 1957, Armageddon will sweep the world! Millions of persons will perish in its flames and the land will be scorched." -- The Watchtower magazine |
|
 |  |
News: Faith Without a Home
Posted on Saturday, March 01 @ 07:43:16 PST by Virgil |
|
by Michael Gerson
I have seen the future of evangelical Christianity, and it is pierced. And sometimes tattooed. And often has one of those annoying, wispy chin beards. Those who think of evangelical youths as the training cadre of the religious right would have been shocked at Jubilee 2008, a recent conference of 2,000 college students in Pittsburgh sponsored by the Coalition for Christian Outreach. I was struck by the students' aggressive idealism -- there were booths promoting causes from women's rights to the fight against modern slavery to environmental protection. Judging from the questions I was pounded with, the students are generally pro-life -- but also concerned about poverty and deeply opposed to capital punishment and torture. More than a few came up to me between sessions in anguished uncertainty, unable to consider themselves Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative -- homeless in the stark partisanship of American politics.
Many observers have detected a shift -- a broadening or maturation -- of evangelical social concerns beyond the traditional agenda of the religious right. But does this have political implications?
Perhaps. Recent Zogby polls in Missouri and Tennessee found that about a third of white evangelicals who showed up on primary day voted Democratic. The sample sizes were small. Yet John Green, a senior fellow with the Pew Forum, finds the results interesting. "These results are higher than usual. Typically these numbers would be about a quarter."
At the same time, this primary season has demonstrated that evangelicalism is hardly a spent force in the Republican coalition.
Early in this political cycle, some in the media described an "evangelical crackup" among activists who were divided, dispirited and disillusioned. Pat Robertson abandoned the evangelical social agenda entirely to endorse pro-choice Rudy Giuliani, arguing that the war on terror trumped all else.
But 60 percent of caucus-goers in Iowa were evangelicals who gave one of their own, Mike Huckabee, a solid victory -- a trend that has continued in states such as Georgia, Tennessee and Kansas, where religious conservatives are concentrated. Evangelicals are still turning out, still supporting Republicans and still care about social issues.
Even the rise of Huckabee, however, seems to confirm a broadening of evangelical priorities. While the traditional movement conservative in the race, Fred Thompson, focused narrowly on federalism and limited government, Huckabee has consistently talked about the struggles of low-income workers with stagnant wages. This led Thompson to dismiss Huckabee as "a pro-life liberal." In the revised Huckabee version, social conservatism has a touch of the social gospel.
Republicans should take note, because they have growing problems among the post-religious-right generation of evangelicals. An analysis by the Pew Research Center found that 55 percent of white evangelicals ages 18 to 29 identified themselves as Republican in 2001. By 2007, that figure had dropped to 40 percent. This generation is not turning into liberal Democrats -- it is more pro-life, for example, than an older generation of evangelicals -- but it has become more loosely moored to the GOP.
These trends highlight a simple fact: Many evangelicals are center-right voters who respond to a message of social justice and community values, not only to a message of rugged individualism and unrestricted markets. Over the years, religious conservatives have made common cause with movement conservatives within the Republican Party -- but they are not identical to movement conservatives.
Sometimes religious conservatives are understandably more sympathetic to one party than to another. For Northern abolitionist evangelicals in the 1850s, the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln was a more natural home. For my Nazarene preacher grandfather in Kentucky, the Democratic Party of Franklin Roosevelt stood for God and the common man. Since the 1980s, evangelicals have returned to the Republican fold, largely because Democrats embraced abortion on demand, moral relativism and intrusive, bureaucratic government.
But there is something essentially countercultural about Christianity that should make evangelicals restless in any political coalition. Christianity indicts oppressive government -- but also the soul-destroying excesses that sometimes come in free markets and consumerism. It teaches enduring moral rules -- and an emphasis on justice for the least and the lost. It is often hard where liberalism is soft, and soft where conservatism is hard.
If evangelical Christianity were identical to any political movement, something would be badly wrong. It is supposed to look toward a kingdom not of this world, one without borders, flags or end. And by this standard, homelessness is a natural state.
From: http://www.washingtonpost.com
|
| |
 |
^^Go to Top - E-mail to Friend - Print - View PDF - Subscribe - Comments RSS
Re: Faith Without a Home (Score: 1)
by Islamaphobe on Saturday, March 01 @ 08:42:16 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | In assessing the current relationship between evangelical Christianity and the political scene, we have to keep in mind that younger voters have not had the experience of living through the economic "malaise" that followed the oil price increases of 1973-74, the consequences of the "We are all Keynesians now"--quoting Richard Nixon--attitude of economic policymakers, and the complete ineptitude of the administration of Jimmy Carter. We were told in those days that the "natural rate of unemployment" could not be gotten below 5 percent of the labor force and that we could not expect the average annual economic growth rate to exceed 3 percent. We briefly experienced both double-digit inflation and an unemployment rate of around 10 percent.
Although I think there is a very good chance that John McCain will win the upcoming presidential election, I fear that the political trend is toward the left and that the only way to reverse it is to allow people to see the real-world consequences of turning political power over to liberals, of whom McCain is not one. I just hope they don't stay in power long!
Gerson is absolutely correct IMO in writing that "Christianity indicts oppressive government--but also the soul-destroying excesses that sometimes come in [with] free markets and consumerism." Unfortunately, many conservative spokemen--and here I am thinking of people like Rush Limbaugh--have glossed almost completely over those "soul-destroying excesses." Rush can live his live as he pleases, but spare me the bluster about his sumptuous lifestyle and the lectures on how we don't need fundamental changes in our health-care system. I have always been a vigorous critic of conspicuous consumption and will be until the day I die. I am strongly of the belief that the lifestyles of the rich and famous often merit moral comdenation from the pulpit even from people who strongly believe in the operation of free markets, as I emphatically do.
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Saturday, March 01 @ 13:16:09 PST
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, March 03 @ 15:23:20 PST
Capitalism: the hope of the poor (Score: 1)
by Parker on Saturday, March 01 @ 15:20:42 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | Capitalism with charity/philanthropy is, without question, the hope of the poor. This needs to be the message of today's Christians. And yet somehow young Christians are so dumb as to think that communism is the way to "show you care."
The social agenda of today's young members of the Kingdom should be along the following lines:
*Pro-capitalism and pro-corporate philanthropy
*Pro-justice for victims of crime and pro-reform of criminals
*Pro-development and pro-conservation
*Pro-life
*Pro-christian education and culture
*Pro-defense and pro-inernational peace development
There, that's enough to keep the young generation busy for a while. It's great to see that so many young Christians want to put their faith into action. Sadly, these same people are without a positive agenda in the evangelical world and thus end up being suckers for radical socialism.
But if we create a social movement/agenda for young Chrisitans, they can difference.
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Parker on Saturday, March 01 @ 15:23:48 PST
- by Virgil on Sunday, March 02 @ 07:14:37 PST
- by Parker on Sunday, March 02 @ 08:24:43 PST
- by tom-g on Sunday, March 02 @ 16:57:05 PST
Re: Faith Without a Home (Score: 1)
by Islamaphobe on Sunday, March 02 @ 07:55:10 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | For those who find the issues raised by Gerson to be interesting, I highly recommend the latest issue (March 2008) of the American Spectator, which is largely devoted to the defense of private property and an analysis of its role in preserving free societies. I particularly recommend the article by Roger Scruton ("Transferring the Cost"). As Scruton reminds us, "the market is the benign mechanism that Hayek and Friedman describe only when it is constrained by an impartial rule of law, and only when all participants bear the costs of their actions as well as reaping the benefits." Scruton argues that the larger corporations owe much of their success to their ability to externalize their costs by transferring them to others. His analysis helps explain why the growth of big corporations tends to promote the growh of big government.
John S. Evans |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
The Close Relationship between Churchianity and Politics (Score: 1)
by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, March 03 @ 15:14:38 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | I'm always amazed at the powerful links between the democratic system (such as it is, in its very limited form) in the States, and the religious affiliations of the voting public. Clearly, the "church" is manipulated by electoral candidates in order to influence the thinking and decision-making of the masses.
By contrast, here in Canada there is no such obvious, direct link. The candidates for electoral office make no such obvious appeals to evangelicalism, Catholicism or any other "ism" identified with institutionalized Christianity. In fact, they usually keep their religious/spiritual leanings quite private, and focus on their personal ideological platforms, views on a variety of issues and ideas in relation to future policy-making and track record at lower levels of government.
This is one of the biggest differences between Americans and Canadians, and it actually runs quite deep. When an American proudly reveals his personal, denominational affiliation he/she is actually declaring which political party he supports, as well as the ideological and philosophical perspectives and overall worldview he/she generally accepts as valid.
In our province of BC right now, we have a Conservative government masquerading as a Liberal one. It's quite amusing in many ways, and we generally have a very skeptical, cynical attitude towards our government leaders. It's difficult to say which version of "democracy" is "better" - but the contrasts certainly are interesting!
JM |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by tom-g on Tuesday, March 04 @ 07:03:12 PST
|
|