Rachel Zoll of the Associated Press raises an important question in her recent story on conservative Christians (USA Today picked it up as “Christian right at crossroads“). The question itself–where is the religious right headed?–has been asked frequently lately, and it’s clear that this powerful segment of the electorate is pondering its response:
The founders of the religious right, now in the twilight of their leadership, see even the suggestion of expanding the agenda as a dangerous distraction. In public, and sometimes in personal ways, they are trying to beat back the challenge. “It’s an ongoing debate within the house of evangelicals,” said Michael Cromartie, vice president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative Washington think-tank. “It’s about how evangelicals present themselves in the public arena.”
In November, some Christian conservatives condemned pastor and best-selling author Rick Warren for inviting Sen. Barack Obama to speak at an AIDS summit at his church. Obama, campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination, supports abortion rights.
Just this month, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson and 24 other top Christian conservatives pressured the National Association of Evangelicals to silence its Washington director, the Rev. Rich Cizik. The reason: Cizik tried to convince evangelicals that global warming is real. [NAE refused.]
Is this about power, or is it about influence? I’m pretty sure I know the answer, but I would argue that influence is far more important in the long run than power.
What is to be gained, other than power, by rebuking efforts to address severe poverty, AIDS relief and global warming? I do not see eye-to-eye with Dobson on issues such as gay rights or abortion, but I’m not expecting (or asking) him to abandon them. Why not take on severe poverty, at the very least, for which there is without question a Biblical mandate? Is there not room for compassion within the discussion?
“I think there is a little bit of an element of revolt against the tone of some political engagement of the religious right in the past, which seemed quite harsh,” says Gerson, who supports taking on a broader set of issues.
“I think conservative candidates for president are going to have to have a strong international agenda of compassion, whether it’s AIDS or malaria or girls’ education or other issues, in order to appeal to a significant portion of evangelical opinion.”
Hearing statements like these gives me hope that conservative Christians as a political force may consider taking a seat at the table to face the issues of the day along with people with divergent views. Sitting down beside philosophical opponents doesn’t indicate weakness or defeat: It should indicate humility, courage and a willingness to contribute where there is common ground.