Written by an evangelical who is angry about the decidedly un-
Christlike actions of those who are currently in power in their
community:
<http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i42/42b00601.htm>
( -or- http://tinyurl.com/sx6p6 )
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
One of the benefits of being reared within evangelicalism, I suppose,
is that you understand the workings of the evangelical subculture. I
know, for example, that when my new book on evangelicals appears, the
minions of the religious right will seek to discredit me rather than
engage the substance of my arguments. The initial wave of criticism,
as an old friend who has endured similar attacks reminded me, will be
to deny that I am, in fact, really an evangelical Christian. When
that fails — and I'll put up my credentials as an evangelical against
anyone's! — the next approach will be some gratuitous personal
attack: that I am a member of the academic elite, spokesman for the
Northeastern establishment, misguided liberal, prodigal son, traitor
to the faith, or some such. Another evangelical friend with political
convictions similar to mine actually endured a heresy trial.
The evangelical subculture, which prizes conformity above all else,
doesn't suffer rebels gladly, and it is especially intolerant of
anyone with the temerity to challenge the shibboleths of the
religious right. I understand that. Despite their putative claims to
the faith, the leaders of the religious right are vicious toward
anyone who refuses to kowtow to their version of orthodoxy, and their
machinery of vilification strikes with ruthless, dispassionate
efficiency. Longtime friends (and not a few family members) will
shuffle uneasily around me and studiously avoid any sort of
substantive conversation about the issues I raise — and then quietly
strike my name from their Christmas-card lists. Circle the wagons.
Brook no dissent.
[snip]
And what about abortion, the issue that the religious right decided
in the early 1980s was its signature concern? Since January 2003, the
Republican and religious-right coalition has controlled the
presidency and both houses of Congress — yet, curiously, it has not
tried to outlaw abortion. Why? Could it be that its members are less
interested in actually reducing the incidence of abortion itself (in
which case they should seek to alter public opinion on the matter)
than in continuing to use abortion as a potent political weapon?
[snip]
Equally striking is the rhetoric that leaders of the religious right
use to motivate their followers. In the course of traveling around
the country, I have been impressed anew by the pervasiveness of the
language of militarism among leaders of the religious right. Patrick
Henry College, according to its founding president, Michael Farris,
"is training an army of young people who will lead the nation and
shape the culture with biblical values." Rod Parsley, pastor of World
Harvest Church, in Ohio, issues swords to those who join his
organization, the Center for Moral Clarity, and calls on his
followers to "lock and load" for a "Holy Ghost invasion." The
Traditional Values Coalition advertises its "Battle Plan" to take
over the federal judiciary. "I want to be invisible. I do guerrilla
warfare," Ralph Reed, former director of the Christian Coalition,
famously declared about his political tactics in 1997. I wonder how
that sounds in the ears of the Prince of Peace.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
