U.S. President-Elect Barack Obama promised throughout his presidential campaign that, if elected, he would unite Americans and affirm a role for religion in public life. He cemented that vow with an assurance that he would expand President Bush’s “faith-based initiatives.”
The decision today by congressional Democrats to have evangelist Rick Warren give the inaugural invocation is the latest signal that the Democratic Party is friendly to evangelical Christians — even if that means slapping American religious minorities in the face.
First, I want to be clear: I believe that evangelical Christians deserve the same opportunities and freedoms as anyone else. And yet the notion of equal time for conservative Christians does not entitle a celebrity to serve as the sole official prayer-giver for all Americans at a signature federal event.
As Steven Waldman details for BeliefNet:
- Warren is the type of Christian who calls socially responsible Christians closet Marxists.
- Warren is the type of Christian who asserts that Christians cannot be free so long as gay couples are free, and then he rallies throngs of followers to deny to gays the very freedoms that he falsely claims are threatened by the existence of married gay couples. His admission that divorce is a more serious threat to “traditional marriage” is unconvincing — he made no effort and rallied no souls to enact a constitutional ban upon divorce.
- Warren is the type of Christian who claims to oppose abortion — but calls efforts by liberals to help women avoid abortion a “charade.”
- Warren is the type of Christian who worships a god of war and assassination instead of the Prince of Peace.
- Warren is the type of Christian who points to antigay religious activists and ex-gay pundits Tim Wilkins and Chad Thompson as experts on HIV/AIDS
- And Warren is the type of Christian who revises the Bible when it seems convenient to oneself or damaging to one’s supposed enemies. (Worthy of note: Chad Thompson agrees that Warren is a Bible-verse cherry-picker.)
But Warren is not all bad.
Warren says he supports hospital visitation and private insurance-sharing for couples — provided these freedoms are not packaged as civil unions. He condemns torture (though he does little to stop it). And Warren doesn’t damn non-evangelicals to hell.
(Correction, Dec. 21: Warren damns Jews to hell.)
Warren is not as intemperate, sadistic, tyrannical, greedy, or emotionally disturbed as Donnie McClurkin or James Dobson, or a racist like Tony Perkins — but he claims to be different from Dobson only in tone, not substance.
I am troubled by his selection to give a presidential, inaugural invocation. Warren’s frequent use of strawman arguments against rival religious and atheist communities, his willingness to assassinate foreign leaders on the basis of religion, and his smug judgmentalism make him a poor choice to be granted such an honor.
Presentation of the inaugural invocation is a privilege, not a right.
If America has matured enough to elect an African-American as president, then surely it has matured enough to select a Reform rabbi, a Quaker, or a Unitarian to give the invocation:
Someone, in other words, who is:
- loyal to the central tenets of one’s own religion, and yet
- fully affirming of American families from other religious or secular backgrounds
Warren, unfortunately, seems to be neither.
Related posts
12 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
I think your assessment of Rick Warren is more than generous.
From what I’ve seen, he’s every bit as sinister as Dobson, and perhaps moreso, because look: reasonable people know Dobson is a freak. He wears it on his sleeve. Warren has the PR shtick down so cold that otherwise reasonable people shell out money for his dumbed-down Purpose Driven drivel. And yet he admits that he’s the same as Dobson. Of COURSE the difference is tone.
Comment by Evan — December 18, 2008 @ 12:32 am
[...] Family Research Council declared this afternoon that religious and political opponents of Rick Warren are seeking to “silence” all of Christianity by denying this one [...]
Pingback by Truth Wins Out - FRC Says Inaugural Invocation is an Evangelical Entitlement, Not A Privilege — December 18, 2008 @ 6:59 pm
[...] Mike Airhart revealed that Thompson, along with ex-gay activist Tim Wilkins were also invited to the 2006 Global Summit [...]
Pingback by Truth Wins Out - Rick Warren Supports ‘Ex-Gay’ Programs — December 19, 2008 @ 12:20 pm
Dobson, Warren and Stanley are not sinister. Of course if you embrace Bishop Chane’s hippie love message as being true biblical love, it is easy to see how, though misguided, liberal Christians underwrite social policy affirmative of homosexuality with the Gospel. I am disturbed by Christians so readily embracing the hippie love message of the degenerate baby boomer generation and vilifying if not outright slandering legitimate criticism of the gay agenda.
America has so accepted the lie of political correctness and multiculturalism that it can no longer see is own distortion of the gospel with respect to homosexuality and dissent. I am ashamed of the degenerate generation that has hippified Jesus’ message. Remember he said “I do not come in peace…”. The rest of the passage suggests that God’s love will require discrimination, pain and growth. Take another distortion “Turn the other cheek” used by PC Christians to justify hippie love. A close study of this phrase reveals that Jesus meant that by turning the other cheek, we are ready to accept a counter blow and asking for more, demanding equality. Its not pacifist love that translates today into hugging any societal thing that comes through the front door.
Society has pulled Christianity into the way of the world. Rick Warren knows this, and his holding the truth illicits outrage, which usually happens to someone who stands up to the powers of the world.
Comment by R. Gray — December 20, 2008 @ 9:07 pm
1. Not sure who Stanley is.
2. I’m post-baby-boomer, but my parents were both middle-America baby-boomers from opposing social backgrounds. Your overgeneralization of the “degenerate” baby-boom generation does not compute. That generation was a mix of liberals and conservatives who learned from atom-bomb test fallout, Vietnam, Watergate, stagflation, and Three Mile Island that neither Democrats nor Republicans could be trusted to govern in the interests of the people. In that generation, “conservatives” were often sexually conservative but financially and environmentally liberal (anti-regulation), while “liberals” were often the opposite: liberally opposed to the regulation of sexual freedom, but inclined to regulate activities that cause maldistribution of wealth, outright theft and graft, or damage to the air, water and food we breathe. In practice this conflict has resulted in a lot of shouting while each side’s vices (you decide what the vices are) continue unchecked.
You state: “America has so accepted the lie of political correctness and multiculturalism that it can no longer see is own distortion”
There may be some truth in this, but it also is a projection. You too have accepted some assumptions of political correctness and you seem not to see your distortions of gospel and/or reality. You cite cherry-picked warlike passages but you ignore the Beatitudes and Micah 6:8. Perhaps the Bible and the Christian God are more complicated or different than you realize.
Regarding turning the other cheek: That exact same point — that the act is one of resistance, not pacifism — has been used by Soulforce and countless liberal Christian groups involved in the civil rights movement.
I suspect you might benefit from familiarizing yourself with the REAL arguments of those whom you wrongly assume are hippies. You aren’t going to learn about real people from talk radio, activists’ sound bites, or partisan preachers’ sermons. You will have to engage fellow Christians directly.
Dobson and Warren do not stand up to the powers of the world; they ARE AMONG those powers and principalities. The religious right has corrupted itself with power and compromised its message with half-truths and hypocritical objections to opposing interests that are, at times, just like them.
Comment by Michael Airhart — December 20, 2008 @ 9:34 pm
1. Dr. Stanley, In-Touch ministries
2. Yes, but it wasn’t the conservative element that weakened society with respect to vulgarity, atheism, and pervasive moral relativism.
3.>>There may be some truth in this, but it also is a projection.
And how do you know that I am projecting? Then you go on to make assumptions based on that assessment. A house of cards.
4. How did I ignore the beatitudes? Just because I didn’t mention them means that that is all that I am? Another unfounded assumption slandering the me.
5.>>You aren’t going to learn about real people from talk radio, activists’ sound bites, or partisan preachers’ sermons. You will have to engage fellow Christians directly.
Now there you go: more slanderous assumptions. I love this tactic: characterizing your opponent’s repertoire as being programmed. And what evidence do you have of this? And again, how do you know that I don’t primarily engage other fellow Christians. You have again made erroneous assumptions and then followed through with a response formulated with the same amount of prejudice you say that I have.
Comment by R. Gray — December 20, 2008 @ 10:39 pm
>>Dobson and Warren do not stand up to the powers of the world; they ARE AMONG those powers and principalities. The religious right has corrupted itself with power and compromised its message with half-truths and hypocritical objections to opposing interests that are, at times, just like them.
I could ask you for documentation that supports your stereotype, but unlike you, I won’t do this. Some of the religious right has corrupted itself, but you go too far. But above all, lack of such societal restraint is not a quality that one would reasonably contribute to rightism. Its a social stabilizer. Liberalism, especially with liberal christian underwriting, pushes society to greater secularism and atheism, undoing much of what normally holds society together. And I come back to my point that this lack of restraint is a reflection of baby boomers themselves.
Comment by R. Gray — December 20, 2008 @ 10:54 pm
>>If America has matured enough to elect an African-American as president, then surely it has matured enough to select a Reform rabbi, a Quaker, or a Unitarian to give the invocation:
And certainly it has matured enough to give a white, heterosexual male with a patriarchal message of obedience to speak to our divided, sexualized, materialistic and now bankrupt country.
Micheal you have to do better than this: to simply announce that a mature vote is equivalent to voting for Obama is just not insightful. Actually, voting for someone out of fear of being labeled a racist is the gramscian folly once again and is actually less mature.
Comment by R. Gray — December 20, 2008 @ 11:00 pm
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I kinda wonder if Rick Warren is, himself, allegedly, GAY. He demonstrates some of the stereotypes, and perhaps his evangelical christian empire is just the right hiding place. Where’s the best place to hide? Right out in the open. Who’d look there? If so– brilliant on his part–though his light is still under a bushel. Kinda like marching with Anita Bryant to avoid not being found OUT.
Comment by ixnay — December 28, 2008 @ 3:45 am
R. Gray,
“And certainly it has matured enough to give a white, heterosexual male with a patriarchal message of obedience to speak to our divided, sexualized, materialistic and now bankrupt country”
I’d still like to know why in the hell people feel like they have to violate the government’s separation of church and state. Yes that is your belief, R. Gray, but that statement you just made shows that you want to push religious values onto the government.
Comment by James — December 28, 2008 @ 12:34 pm
And no, R. Gray, don’t get cute and start saying, “Well homosexuals are trying to force THEIR viewpoint on the government!”
No they’re not. There is a difference between forcing an issue that is based on an ancient book, and forcing an issue that is backed up by overwhelming evidence.
Comment by James — December 28, 2008 @ 12:35 pm
ixnay,
I’ve found the evangelical/southern baptist/”born again christian” tent is the perfect hiding ground for closet cases with venom for openly gay people.
The smalltown private southern baptist college I attended for 2 years was swarming with closet cases LOL! It was an “everybody knows everybody” atmosphere, and I watched several flaming queens marry clueless females.
Comment by Scott — December 28, 2008 @ 1:41 pm