Political Pastor: “They said they were tired of hearing about abortion 52 weeks a year&#
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Mon, October 29, 2007
- Viewed 68
- (19) comments so far
Here’s more from the NY Times article:
Fox, who is 47, said he saw some impatient shuffling in the pews, but he was stunned that the church’s lay leaders had turned on him. “They said they were tired of hearing about abortion 52 weeks a year, hearing about all this political stuff!” he told me on a recent Sunday afternoon. “And these were deacons of the church!”
These days, Fox has taken his fire and brimstone in search of a new pulpit. He rented space at the Johnny Western Theater at the Wild West World amusement park until it folded. Now he preaches at a Best Western hotel. “I don’t mind telling you that I paid a price for the political stands I took,” Fox said. “The pendulum in the Christian world has swung back to the moderate point of view. The real battle now is among evangelicals.”
Fox is not the only conservative Christian to feel the heat of those battles, even in — of all places — Wichita. Within three months of his departure, the two other most influential conservative Christian pastors in the city had left their pulpits as well. And in the silence left by their voices, a new generation of pastors distinctly suspicious of the Republican Party — some as likely to lean left as right — is beginning to speak up.
Just three years ago, the leaders of the conservative Christian political movement could almost see the Promised Land. White evangelical Protestants looked like perhaps the most potent voting bloc in America. They turned out for President George W. Bush in record numbers, supporting him for re-election by a ratio of four to one. Republican strategists predicted that religious traditionalists would help bring about an era of dominance for their party. Spokesmen for the Christian conservative movement warned of the wrath of “values voters.” James C. Dobson, the founder of Focus on the Family, was poised to play kingmaker in 2008, at least in the Republican primary. And thanks to President Bush, the Supreme Court appeared just one vote away from answering the prayers of evangelical activists by overturning Roe v. Wade.
Today the movement shows signs of coming apart beneath its leaders. It is not merely that none of the 2008 Republican front-runners come close to measuring up to President Bush in the eyes of the evangelical faithful, although it would be hard to find a cast of characters more ill fit for those shoes: a lapsed-Catholic big-city mayor; a Massachusetts Mormon; a church-skipping Hollywood character actor; and a political renegade known for crossing swords with the Rev. Pat Robertson and the Rev. Jerry Falwell. Nor is the problem simply that the Democratic presidential front-runners — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Senator Barack Obama and former Senator John Edwards — sound like a bunch of tent-revival Bible thumpers compared with the Republicans.
The 2008 election is just the latest stress on a system of fault lines that go much deeper. The phenomenon of theologically conservative Christians plunging into political activism on the right is, historically speaking, something of an anomaly. Most evangelicals shrugged off abortion as a Catholic issue until after the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. But in the wake of the ban on public-school prayer, the sexual revolution and the exodus to the suburbs that filled the new megachurches, protecting the unborn became the rallying cry of a new movement to uphold the traditional family. Now another confluence of factors is threatening to tear the movement apart. The extraordinary evangelical love affair with Bush has ended, for many, in heartbreak over the Iraq war and what they see as his meager domestic accomplishments. That disappointment, in turn, has sharpened latent divisions within the evangelical world — over the evangelical alliance with the Republican Party, among approaches to ministry and theology, and between the generations.
The founding generation of leaders like Falwell and Dobson, who first guided evangelicals into Republican politics 30 years ago, is passing from the scene. Falwell died in the spring. Paul Weyrich, 65, the indefatigable organizer who helped build Falwell’s Moral Majority and much of the rest of the movement, is confined to a wheelchair after losing his legs because of complications from a fall. Dobson, who is 71 and still vigorous, is already planning for a succession at Focus on the Family; it is expected to tack toward the less political family advice that is its bread and butter.
The engineers of the momentous 1980s takeover that expunged political and theological moderates from the Southern Baptist Convention are retiring or dying off, too. And in September, when I called a spokesman for the ailing Presbyterian televangelist D. James Kennedy, another pillar of the Christian conservative movement, I learned that Kennedy had “gone home to the Lord” at 2 a.m. that morning.
Meanwhile, a younger generation of evangelical pastors — including the widely emulated preachers Rick Warren and Bill Hybels — are pushing the movement and its theology in new directions. There are many related ways to characterize the split: a push to better this world as well as save eternal souls; a focus on the spiritual growth that follows conversion rather than the yes-or-no moment of salvation; a renewed attention to Jesus’ teachings about social justice as well as about personal or sexual morality. However conceived, though, the result is a new interest in public policies that address problems of peace, health and poverty — problems, unlike abortion and same-sex marriage, where left and right compete to present the best answers.
So… what do you think?
A fascinating article in the New York Times over the weekend called "The Evangelical Crackup". It discusses how the discussion of politics and moral and political issues are changing in the church. One case in point... Pastor Terry Fox, pastor of Immanuel Baptist Church in Wichita. Fox was widely known for taking political stands; and he had quite a following with phrases like: "We are the religious right. One, we are religious. And two, we are right." Well, in August, Fox was pressured out of his pulpit. The quote above is his: "They [the deacon board] said they were tired of hearing about abortion 52 weeks a year... and these were deacons of the church!" The board of deacons, on their side, told him that his activism was 'getting in the way of the Gospel'.
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
Peter Hamm on Mon, October 29, 2007
The trouble is this. When abortion becomes the only issue (as it does for so many preachers and Christian leaders) then other issues become non-issues, and it appears (and in some cases it might be true) that these leaders and preachers might not care for any other issue, like the plight of the worlds extreme poor.
Abortion is a defining voting issue for me, I admit. But I would like to hear other things addressed besides it and gay marriage.
Wendi on Mon, October 29, 2007
What’s sad to me (but not surprising) is that for this NY Times writer, evangelicals (in his mind Christians) are characterized for their political views and positions. He sees evangelicalism as little more than a giant and powerful lobbying organization. Where does Jesus model or instruct His church to influence the world by influencing the government and legal systems?
Wendi
Brian on Mon, October 29, 2007
My heart is heavy over this whole “politics in the pulpit” thingy.
The problem comes when pastors and others discuss moral issues which are labeled as political issues simply because the politicians are talking about them and special interest groups are politicizing them.
Reading Dan Kimball’s, “They Like Jesus But Not The Church,” and he addresses this.
So my question is this: how do we address these moral issues without appearing to be political? I just don’t think that we should be silent and let the politicians and special interest groups do all thinking for us on this,
Not that I condone what this pastor seems to be accused of doing, BTW.
Brian
Wendi on Mon, October 29, 2007
Brian –
Off to a meeting, but I share your heavy heart, and agree with your question.
Here’s what I’m thinking. Rather than trying to impose biblical principles and values on those outside the faith, we concentrate on those inside our churches. We challenge our people about their life choices. When the text demands it, we teach about the sanctity of life or marriage. But in doing so, we also challenge our people that they should demonstrate their commitment to the sanctity of life (for example) by coming along side of the dying Aids victim, concerning themselves with issues of global poverty and hunger, etc. And in regard to abortion (also for example), we should speak with compassion to the women WITHIN our flock about decisions they could possibly be forced to make if their lifestyle choices result in an unwanted pregnancy.
Mainly, I think we could dispel the political label if we worried less about the moral behavior of those outside and more about the moral behavior of our own people.
Wendi
Deaubry on Mon, October 29, 2007
I think god has turned on his ionic breeze machine,
Melody on Mon, October 29, 2007
I’d tend to agree with your last post, Wendi. Didn’t Paul write to the church at Corinth that we are not to withdraw entirely from the world, to leave it to God to judge the world, but to judge those inside the church.
We’ve tended to do the opposite. I think that some of this is because we haven’t tended to examine the eschatology of the “Christian leaders” we listen to in the political realm. So called “kingdom now”, dominion theology and similar thinking has really crept in to some churches which don’t hold to those positions.
Very unfortunate because this lack of discernment has resulted in putting the cart before the horse relative to evangelism, i.e. forcing works which can’t save onto those in need of a knowledge of the person and work of Jesus Christ. I suspect that the church is the #1 stumbling block to evengelism in the U.S. today for this reason.
Leonard Lee on Mon, October 29, 2007
No pastor should be a one trick pony. Teach the word and when the issue arises whether it is political or not deal with it scripturally without apology. But keep in mind we are not Israel and we cannot apply God’s promises to Israel directly to America and we cannot see the same topic or issue on every page.
Dan Moore on Mon, October 29, 2007
I’m curious about the article. Something seems left out. Did the individual members approach the pastor about his activism? This is not a small church but a mega-church of 6,000. So, was he out of touch with his people? Why did most of those folks join that church in the first place? Did the deacons attempt to persuade him to tone down the rhetoric? Did he leave rather than seek reconciliation? Were members quietly leaving the church?
I suspect that the culture within the church this pastor was leading was changing. I also suspect he has a pride issue if he left without attempting reconciliation. The deacons were probably doing “their job” per the typical Baptist By-Laws - speaking for the people on the issue of preaching activism. That’s why “they’re the deacons” to use his vernacular.
smatha on Mon, October 29, 2007
There is far to much pressure in my conservative church to “be a Republican” conservative as opposed to being a religious conservative. So the situation becomes that most members assume that their prejudices are shared by everyone and that becomes something to “judge” others by. Conservative Christians do not hold their supposedly conservative leaders like Mr Bush to any standards of accountability. So he’s against abortion and gay marriage, but hasn’t he “maybe” bungled the war and is it really a Christian position to take that we should kill our enemies before they kill us? (I can’t remember when Jesus said that nor Paul, etc) Not to argue the war, that’s just an example. So if I voted for Gore, it has to remain a secret, similar to if I beat my wife except one’s a preference and one’s a sin. (I guess if you don’t know which, then maybe that’s part of the problem)
Dustin on Mon, October 29, 2007
Dan, yes something does seem left out of the article. When Fox left Immanuel the church released a statement saying that his use of church funds to support his radio program was a factor in his resignation. Having lived in central KS (where Immanuel is) anyone who knew of Immanuel knew the political views and activities of the pastor. He was extremely polarizing even in a conservative area. I think the whole issue was way more complex than this article states. Still, very interesting article. Important topic.
Wendi on Mon, October 29, 2007
I agree that circumstances like this (pastor leaving) are never as singular an issue as the media (especially the secular media) might paint. Surely there is quite a bit left out of the article. It is telling to me though, that the NY Times journalist zeros in on THE issue as the polarizing political use of the pulpit. I don’t fault the Times for their perception. If Fox was as polarizing as has been observed (and as many in the evangelical far right are), then even if there were other issues, the label is one he earned (and probably wore proudly).
Leonard, thank you for reminding us Americans that we are not the chosen people. I so tire of American Christians claiming for our nation, if we would head the prophetic warnings as Israel should have, the promises God made to Israel. I’ve lost track of the times I’ve heard the words of 2 Chron 7:14 (if My people . . .) in a challenge from a pulpit as if “the people” in the text were American.
There is a problem though (IMO), with teaching about “issues” scripturally, without apology. We might (probably do) agree that the scripture teaches us to value life as God’s creation, beginning at conception. We might disagree though, about how we should live into that shared core value. I, for example, do not believe I’m called to use my energies to overturn Roe v. Wade. In fact, I actually think that it’s poor stewardship to expend energy and resources on political and legal campaigning which could instead be used in relational ministry with real, live, hurting people who have been wounded by having an abortion or are considering it. Another Christian may sense from the same text a call to political activism.
I believe that Fox (and many others) use their pulpits not only to teach biblical truth, but go further to tell all their listeners what the “Christian” response is in relation to such truths (outside of their personal choices). This does not allow for the diverse leading of the Holy Spirit. It is (IMO) arrogant at best, and oppression at worst . . . and is why journalists like the one who wrote this NY Times article to label us as they do.
Wendi
dpastordan on Tue, October 30, 2007
This is not just a “conservative/Republican” issue folks. I know of some churches that are “liberal/progressive/democrat” in culture and the pastors do similar tactics - they just don’t make the news as much.
It is sad that some Christians believe that conservative equals Republican. I have taught my people to set aside the labels. Each issue we deal with, whether poverty or education or abortion, must be dealt with in the light of scripture. We are a community of faith living in a secular culture. We are not going to solve the all world’s problems. But we can deal with our own issues in our house and hopefuly, as we evangelize, we disciple new believers to make the decisions in light of scripture. Until Christ returns, we will always have to deal with the matter of sin…and even Jesus said we will always have the poor.
Leonard on Tue, October 30, 2007
Wendi,
I would never tell someone to or not to protest but I would tell them Abortion is not about a “right to choose” I write letters to congress and other officials but never have asked my people too. The Dem’s in my church think I am a dem and the repub’s in my church think I am a repub. what I am is sinner who is trying his best. to stay surrendered before my Heavenly Father.
Deaubry on Tue, October 30, 2007
i have a question i would like to ask the people, i knew a woman that went to a small church , she was the book keeper and wrote checks for the church, one day a man and his wife went to see her about the church helping them with their rent, they had most of the money but needed 78 dollars to finish out the rent payment, or their landlord was putting them out that very day, the lady from the church could not get in touch with her minister, so she decided on her own to help them from the church funds, that night she finally got in touch with her pastor and told him what happen, he went to her house and told her she was a thief, took the books and gave them to someone else in the church , and this lady he took the books from was one of the most honest woman i know of, he told the whole church what happen , tried to make her look like a thief. but she said nothing about what he did. but she put the money back out of her own pocket, my question is , how should have the pastor have handled it?
Bart on Tue, October 30, 2007
Deaubry,
I would have done the following:
1. Advised her that this was a decision beyond her authority and to please never do this again.
2. With her help devise a plan of action when she could not reach me, who else can she call to get a decision. (I have removed myself from this process at my church)
3. Explain the new procedure to the church and praise her for her compassion and at the same time explaining why it is not fair to put her in this awkward position.
This way she knows that she cannot do this and helps her to solve the problem, and lets the church know who and why the chnage is needed without blaming anyone.
Page 1 of 2 pages 1 2 >
Post a Comment