Talk About Network



Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Religion > Evangelical Christian > Today's Evangel...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 1 of 1 Topic 22687 of 22826
Post > Topic >>

Today's Evangelicals are concerned with ecology

by **Rowland Croucher** <rccroucher@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > May 9, 2008 at 11:29 AM

A new Evangelism for the US

Today's Evangelicals are as concerned with ecology and human rights as 
with personal morality

Bernice Martin

As the second Iraq War turned from a quick liberation into a bloodily 
contested occupation, long-standing liberal fears about the supposed 
theocratic ambitions of a reactionary American Evangelicalism were 
supplemented by suspicions of an apocalyptic fanaticism infecting the 
White House. The fears were always exaggerated and sometimes hysterical, 
particularly over foreign policy where actions attributed to the malign 
influence of Zionism, Jewish and Christian alike, are as easily 
recognized as the standard expression of realpolitik in America’s 
strategic interest, alongside a long tradition of liberal imperialism. 
Two developments are crucial in relegating all this to historical rather 
than current concern. The first is that whoever wins this year’s 
Presidential election will not be a hostage to the Religious Right, as 
George W. Bush has half-plausibly been seen as being. The second is a 
seismic shift in the nature of American Evangelicalism, particularly 
among the younger generation.

The terms of engagement in America’s “culture wars” have been subtly 
changing since the 1990s with the economic, intellectual, social and 
political coming of age of many Evangelicals in the Bible Belt. This has 
been brought about by the rise of the oil and real-estate industries, 
and the occupational and geographical mobility of a considerable part of 
the younger generation of Evangelicals. They have flocked not only to 
Evangelical private colleges but also to the Ivy League universities 
(partly through radical access initiatives after the 1960s) and on to 
New York, Silicon Valley and even Hollywood as lawyers, bankers, IT 
professionals, academics and filmmakers.

They constitute a new cosmopolitan Evangelical stratum, as concerned 
with ecology, AIDS (and not with policies exclusively dependent on 
abstention) and with human rights worldwide as with traditional 
questions of personal morality. They are also less solidly Republican. 
They bring their Christian principles into the boardroom and the caucus 
in exactly the same way their secular and liberal peers advance their 
own interests and values. And they are as embarrassed by some of the 
opinions of the Evangelical masses, and the polarizing media celebrities 
who mobilize them, as are secular liberals. There is a new Evangelical 
intelligentsia and it is a power to be reckoned with: Books and Culture, 
the Evangelical answer to the New York Review of Books, is its public 
face. Very similar developments have occurred in the Pietist regional 
peripheries of Europe, particularly in Scandinavia. The American case 
has been well documented by D. Michael Lindsay in Faith in the Halls of 
Power: How Evangelicals joined the American elite (2007): his 
Evangelical movers and shakers include the Dean of the Julliard School 
of Music and the Director of the National Human Genome Research 
Institute. The post-1960s Religious Right looks more and more like a 
defensive transitional moment in the development of the wider movement. 
Journalistic commentary, and much academic analysis, have yet to catch 
up with this change among American Evangelicals, particularly the rising 
leadership. Barack Obama, devout, black and decidedly not of the 
Religious Right, may be one of its beneficiaries.

God’s Own Country: Tales from the Bible Belt by Stephen Bates is one of 
the more substantial examples of the exposé of the Religious Right. Like 
many authors in this genre Bates nods and winks at the reader to share 
his view of these folk as queer fish at best and dangerous loonies at 
worst. (Imagine the response to a book on British Muslim hardliners 
written that way.) Bates, a former Religious Affairs correspondent of 
the Guardian, records his travels around the Bible Belt, attending a 
Baptist Convention here, a megachurch there, a Christian broadcasting 
channel elsewhere, gathering interviews with most of the standard 
Evangelical celebrities from the late Jerry Falwell to Tim LaHaye, 
co-creator of the apocalyptic fantasies of the Left Behind series. Bates 
places highly spiced portraits against a historical backdrop. He tells a 
good story, and the history, taken from some of the best Evangelical 
historians, is generally accurate, though skewed towards the 
journalistic vignette. Bates revisits the main battlegrounds of the 
“culture wars” from the Scopes trial to the Iraq war, abortion to Bush’s 
“faith initiatives”, but tells the story from the liberal narrator’s 
perspective (Bates is a progressive Catholic), convicting the 
Evangelical warriors of crassness and reaction out of their own mouths. 
He never analyses the social forces and constitutional ambiguities that 
underlie the battle narrative, or recognizes that he has taken a number 
of disparate patches out of the patchwork quilt of American 
Protestantism and presented them as if they were all of a piece. You 
would not guess that most Evangelicalism lies on the soft end of the 
spectrum with a stress on “heartwork”, personal moral conversion and 
sincerity, as in Methodism and many of the megachurches, which is where 
George W. Bush and the Billy Graham ministries fit. It is rigorous 
moralism, strict biblical inerrancy, messianic nationalism and 
apocalyptic fervour that are mainly represented by Bates: he sums it up 
as “hardline reactionary Protestantism”.

Nor would you guess that even those with official beliefs in the 
Apocalypse don’t usually let it affect their day-to-day lives – they pay 
their mortgage and insurance even if they read violent fantasises about 
the cosmic war after the Rapture, or pore over prophecies of the End 
Times a-coming. Few groups hold equally strongly all the extreme 
positions Bates illustrates, and some of the contradictions ought to 
have sounded a warning: for instance, he recounts one anti-Semitic 
incident as a piece of representative chauvinism but does not square it 
with the “dangerous” Christian Zionism and uncritical support of Israel 
that have been his theme elsewhere. The maddening thing is that if he 
had not had a commission to write a popular exposé with the expected 
alarmist subtext, this might have become a serious analysis. He admits 
the apocalyptic fears over the Iraq war were groundless, he notices that 
not all Evangelicals are on the religious and political Right, he cites 
evidence of the changes among the younger generation. He even interviews 
Rich Cizik, who has put ecological degradation, climate change and world 
hunger on the Evangelical agenda. Yet Bates still gives no weight to any 
of this, and ends on the theme of Evangelical paranoia. He also deplores 
the growth of worldwide Pentecostalism as the export of toxic American 
Protestantism, in terms that the findings of field research shamed 
liberal academics into dropping some fifteen years ago. This lazy 
distortion, like the book God’s Own Country, perhaps missed its popular 
moment.

Charles Marsh is no more concerned than Bates to analyse the social 
processes that might account for the culture wars, because his is a call 
to Christian repentance. Wayward Christian Soldiers: Freeing the Gospel 
from political captivity is a theological denunciation from within 
Evangelicalism of the way some Evangelical leaders betrayed the faith to 
support the Bush Presidency and its Iraq adventure. Marsh, currently 
Professor of Religion at the University of Virginia, grew up in the 
South in the 1960s, and his experiences led him to criticize the 
small-town Evangelical certainties of his background. He places himself 
in the tradition of progressive Evangelical Christianity represented by 
Jim Wallis, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer is his model of Christian witness to 
the political sphere. Christianity’s task is to embody the message of 
divine redemption and reconciliation rather than to become an apologist 
for political power of whatever stripe. Marsh begins from a critique of 
Evangelical sermons preached at the outset of the war in Iraq which 
blasphemously equated national ambitions, middle-class values and 
justification of the war with “the will of God”. He rehearses the 
history of the emergence of Evangelicals into the political sphere in 
the 1960s to defend “Christian values” against the incursions of 
secularism, and, like Bates, he sees the influence of Francis Schaeffer 
as problematic. Where Bates exaggerates, attributing theocratic 
ambitions to Schaeffer and his followers, Marsh concentrates on the 
theological distortions built into the Evangelical political programmes 
of that time and since. They fetishized the family, though Jesus called 
his disciples to leave their families and become the new community of 
faith acting as the leaven in the lump. They demonized their opponents 
when they should have been preaching God’s unconditional love for all. 
They formed inturned, self-satisfied ghettos, consumed by battles for 
status, recognition and affluence, disguised under a veneer of 
sickeningly theatrical piety. Worst of all, they confused ruthless 
American nationalism with the will of God. Marsh calls for repentance, 
patient waiting for grace, and a period of serious reflection in 
American Evangelicalism. He exemplifies a growing strand in the 
Evangelical weave.

The other two books under review are historical overviews. Hugh Heclo, 
Professor of Public Affairs at George Mason University, offers an 
elegant and thoughtful essay in Christianity and American Democracy, 
together with responses by two political scientists and a historian from 
a 2006 seminar at Harvard; while Patrice Higonnet’s Attendant Cruelties: 
Nation and nationalism in American history is a long, reckless essay by 
a French historian who has taught at Harvard University since 1964 and 
believes he sees with unique clarity the mote in America’s eye.

Heclo argues that not only does American democracy have a Christianity 
problem, but Christianity has a democracy problem. There is an inherent 
tension between religious commitment and political allegiance – Marsh’s 
point, of course – and reconciling them is always a fudge of some kind. 
Heclo rehearses, lucidly and economically, the history of America’s 
different modes of fudging the issue. He documents the input of 
Christian ideas into the development of the democratic concept of the 
individual.

The pervasive moralization of politics that the different waves of 
Protestant revival brought into play affected models of politics in 
contradictory ways, with Calvinistic emphases on original sin dampening 
democratic optimism, while the adage that “everyone is his own priest” 
encouraged democratic involvement in regulating society. Heclo traces a 
process of coming together between Christianity and democracy up to the 
1950s, followed by a process of separation. We are back to the culture 
wars: “It is unrealistic to think that full-throated religious talk and 
political action can be kept at bay on policy issues dealing with 
essential articles of faith”. He has in mind Catholic as well as 
Evangelical no-go areas here, particularly over the constitution of the 
human person. But equally, “even if it is sometimes difficult for 
Christians to treat their religious identity as subordinate to the 
secular democratic process, most of the time accommodation just about 
works if a public conversation can be kept going”. In the supplementary 
commentaries Mary Jo Bane gives a nuanced account of the changes in the 
Catholic role in the story; Michael Kazin argues that “pluralism is hard 
work” and emphasizes the differences between Christians as the source of 
difficulties; and Alan Wolfe gives a more optimistic gloss than Heclo on 
the current situation, emphasizing the extent to which the this-worldly 
individualism of the 1960s has affected all sides in the culture wars, 
though he warns that this brings its own dangers for democracy by 
weakening authority and the sense of collective responsibility. Hugh 
Heclo’s book shows clearly that America’s culture wars are just a 
specific case of the general problem of religion in democratic pluralist 
polities.

Patrice Higonnet’s volume is the jeu d’esprit of a historian nostalgic 
for unapologetic Marxist writing and the excitements of the 1960s. He 
begins from the premiss that patriotism is the good, inclusive, 
benevolent form of national identity, while nationalism is its evil, 
exclusive, aggressive (and capitalist) other side. The US Constitution 
is ambiguously poised between the two, and America has lurched from one 
to the other in the course of its history. It has incorporated countless 
immigrant communities and given them access to the American dream, but 
it also extirpated the native Americans, on the model of Israel in 
Canaan, embedded slavery and only lately and reluctantly ended racial 
segregation, and has indulged in imperialist adventures starting with 
the annexation of the American continent itself.

The title of Higonnet’s book is taken from a speech by Theodore 
Roosevelt, justifying what the military today calls “collateral damage” 
in the pursuit of America’s imperial aims. The narrative is fluent and 
the rhetorical flourishes provocative and sophisticated, but one senses 
a naively utopian underlying vision of the innocent society animating 
the righteous animus of the author. Attendant Cruelties is punctuated by 
little italicized passages referring to titbits of French history that 
have some parallel to or analogy with the events being recounted, though 
these illuminate little except the writer’s erudition because they are 
not part of any systematic comparison of the two great Enlightened 
powers. The ghost of Alexis de Tocqueville hovers, but Higonnet has 
little of his feel for the distinctiveness of American Protestantism, 
for good as well as bad, as a constitutive element of the American 
nation, and anyway, Patrice Higonnet’s focus is on presidents as the 
fulcrum of power politics. His automatic contempt for the Religious 
Right makes the last section little more than an anti-Bush diatribe and, 
unlike Christianity and American Democracy, Attendant Cruelties is 
unlikely to clarify the complex relation of religion, politics and 
national identity in today’s global pluralism.


Stephen Bates
GOD’S OWN COUNTRY
Tales from the Bible Belt
388pp. Hodder & Stoughton. Paperback, £12.99.
978 0 340 90926 3

Charles Marsh
WAYWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS
Freeing the Gospel from political captivity
243pp. Oxford University Press. US $25.
978 0 10 530720 7

Hugh Heclo
CHRISTIANITY AND AMERICAN DEMOCRACY
299pp. Harvard University Press. £16.95.
978 0 674 02514 1

Patrice Higonnet
ATTENDANT CRUELTIES
Nation and nationalism in American history
384pp. New York: The Other Press. US $25.95.
978 1 59051 235 7

Bernice Martin is Emeritus Reader in Sociology at the University of 
London. She is completing a book on Pentecostalism with David Martin.

May 2008

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/the_tls/article3757543.ece

-- 


Shalom/Salaam/Pax!                         Rowland Croucher

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/
  (20,000 articles 4000 humor)

Blogs - http://rowlandsblogs.blogspot.com/

Justice for Dawn Rowan - http://dawnrowansaga.blogspot.com/

Funny Jokes and Pics - http://funnyjokesnpics.blogspot.com/




 1 Posts in Topic:
Today's Evangelicals are concerned with ecology
**Rowland Croucher** <  2008-05-09 11:29:43 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan13V112 Fri May 16 19:32:53 CDT 2008.