‘Conservative’ Christian’s ‘Manifesto’ Has Few Conservatives Involved
By Warner Todd Huston Posted in Liberals — Comments (20) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
On May 2, the Associated Press uncritically reported that an effort to clarify where "evangelicals" stand in the culture/political war in America is soon to be released. It is to be called "An Evangelical Manifesto" and is touted by the AP as a statement by "evangelicals" that "faith is now too political." That isn't all. The AP is claiming that it isn't just Christian leaders in general that are saying this but that it is "conservative Christian leaders" who are standing up and denouncing politics in religion. But a little investigation proves that "conservative leaders" is not a very good description of those who have signed onto this "manifesto." In fact, many of the most well-known conservative Christian leaders in the country have decided not to sign onto the "manifesto" and many more weren't even consulted or included in the creation of this highly political document that pretends it stands against politics.
Sadly, this "manifesto" that is claiming to want to take religion back from its political involvement is itself a political statement, one that was created by people that refused to include Christian leaders from the right side of the political spectrum. This so-called "manifesto" seems to be just another attempt by the political left to undermine the devotion of Christians to the political right.
And the AP is more than happy to help them along...
Conservative Christian leaders who believe the word "evangelical" has lost its religious meaning plan to release a starkly self-critical document saying the movement has become too political and has diminished the Gospel through its approach to the culture wars.
The statement, called "An Evangelical Manifesto," condemns Christians on the right and left for "using faith" to express political views without regard to the truth of the Bible, according to a draft of the document obtained Friday by The Associated Press.
If we are to just swallow whole what the AP is selling, we'd imagine that Christian leaders on the conservative side are upset over what has happened to their faith. In fact, the AP flat out declares it to be so.
The document is the latest chapter in the debate among conservative Christians about their role in public life. Most veteran leaders believe the focus should remain on abortion and marriage, while other evangelicals—especially in the younger generation—are pushing for a broader agenda. The manifesto sides with those seeking a wide-range of concerns beyond "single-issue politics."
This so-called "manifesto" has not been released, so we do not have a full list of all those who have signed onto the letter. But many details about the contents and those who have signed onto the thing have been reported. And what we find is that a large number of those Christian leaders who are associated with powerful right leaning organizations were refused a place at the table of the creation of this document.
This raises a lot of questions. For instance, if known conservative leaders weren't involved or haven't signed onto this thing, how can it be claimed to be apolitical much less a product of "conservative Christian leaders"?
Warren Smith, the publisher of the Evangelical Press News Service, has reported that something seems amiss with this "conservative" project.
The list of people who have not been asked to sign it, or who have chosen not to, is as revealing as the list of those who have, or will. Former presidential candidate Gary Bauer and Family Research Council President Tony Perkins both told me they had not seen the "Manifesto." Tom Minnery, executive vice president of Focus on the Family and the organization's "point person" on public policy issues said neither he nor James Dobson has signed the document.
Other conservative evangelical leaders who often speak out on political issues have been kept out of the process. That list includes Rick Scarborough of Vision America, and former White House speechwriter and Beverly LaHaye Institute senior fellow Janice Crouse.
Also shunned, at least so far: the Southern Baptist Convention's Richard Land, Ohio-based Phil Burress of Citizens For Community Values, Faith2Action's Janet Folger, homeschool guru Michael Farris, and Concerned Women for America president Wendy Wright.
There is also a growing list of evangelical heavyweights who have been asked to sign but have (so far) refused -- due either to flaws in the document or, as one prominent evangelical leader told me, to the "exclusivity" of the list of signatories.
This project is beginning to look more like a group of Christians with ant-conservative views attempting to steal the mantle of leadership away from those who are now associated with Christianity in America. But to what end? We know that over the last year the political left has made major attempts to claim Christianity for themselves.
The left has made a concerted campaign to take over Christianity and use it for the purposes of the Democrat Party and the cultural left in America today. People like Dr. Tony Campolo, and Jim Wallis have been known to work closely with the Democrat Party. The failed presidential bid by John Edwards also made attempts to work with the Christian left. Various organizations have sprung up since the late 1990s to further the leftist agenda in politics.
Is this "Evangelical Manifesto" just another attempt by the far left in America to co-opt Christianity in America? It's a bit hard to believe otherwise since the people that put this project together studiously excluded so many prominent conservative Christians.
But one thing is for sure, the MSM will present them as "conservative Christian leaders" even as hardly any known and real conservative leaders are involved in this project.
(Photo credit: theramblings.org)
Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!
in the political sphere, nothing he did hurt Fred. Fred's demise was an act of willful suicide on his part. Same for Rudy.
Dobson didn't help Huckabee either, at least in anything other than a totally tangental way. His ultimate endorsement of Huck was a complete joke and came way too late to have ANY impact.
____

CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Dobson should have never questioned Fred's faith. It's simply not for him to do.
Fred's demise was due to many things, and that played a part in it.
"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson
solely to sitting on their butts when they should have been out kicking others butts. Dobson was a factor only in your mind and his.
If you want to see how much political weight he carries just watch the general. It will be absolutely zip.
____

CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
after Dobson questioned his Christianity, then you don't know how many of them react to such things.
I agree Fred's demise was ultimately his own fault for not doing more to get out there, as well as not getting out there sooner.
The general election is a different scenario. I will say though, that if enough guys like Dobson came out and pushed a third-party candidate, the dems would be assured a win.
"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson
If you think evangelicals didn't dismiss Fred after Dobson questioned his Christianity, then you don't know how many of them react to such things.
"you don't know how many of them react to such things"? Your not one of "Them" but you're gonna tell us what "They" think and what motivates "Them"?
As one of "Them" I can tell you I'd have been very happy to vote for Fred as would many of "Them" in my circle of friends/influence had Fred shown more than a passing interest in actually winning it.
Watching Fred campaign was like watching a cat playing with an injured bird...He'd pck at it a bit, swat it arounf but when it came down to it it seemed obvious to me he was never serious about it from the word go!

CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”
"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson

CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”
"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson
By saying them as opposed to us It leaves the question open doesn't it?

CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”
I'm an evangelical Christian.
"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson
We agree a lot...I should have known

CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”
Fred was his own worst enemy.
I was Fred's biggest booster, but he never seemed to have his head in the game.
----------
Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!
The article is actually, I think, wilfully puting a political spin on something that was meant to be decidedly unpolitical. Its drafters, Os Guinnes (an author for whom I hold the highest respect) and Richard Mouw seem have an interest in maintaining the purity of Christianity -- not of the political climate.
This is why it is called an "evangelical manifesto." The idea appears to be that Evangelical Christians have been trying to use politics to force a change in culture (true: think Dobson -- who DID NOT sign this, by the way). Guinnes and Mouw, if you look at the context of the article, appear to be suggesting that Christians stop browbeating people (which I agree with) and start "speaking the truth in love."
It further suggests that there is room for political involvement, based around protection of marriage, abortion, etc... but that over all, we cannot coerce the populace into becoming believers.
In short... until I read this manifesto, I have no problem with it whatsoever... and would suggest that our friend Mr. Huston simply misunderstood the intent of the document.

And I wholeheartedly agree with you about him.
"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson
From what I've heard, Os purposefully excluded Christians that he didn't like and those who haven't signed on but were offered advanced copies have said behind the scenes that they feel it is filled with bad theology.
But, none of us have the final so-called manifesto, so naturally the final determination cannot be made until it is out there officially.
On that last count, I never made any final judgments. I just said that there are serious questions to be raised over it.
----------
Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!
regarding Os excluding people and for what reasons?
I would also love to see a copy of this manifesto... but even in the news report, it doesn't appear to be political in nature.

saying Os' theology is bad, but I've read much of his work and he's right on as far as I'm concerned.
That's the problem with trying to package all evangelicals together. There's too many differences.
"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson
I smell Barry Lind in this...We'll see...but this smells of the Separation of Church and State gang trying to convince Christians they don't have a place in the Political process

CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”
But I'd say it's probably more about keeping politics out of religion than vice versa.

blog advertising is good for you
Human Events
Recent comments
My apologies on the mistake
by Linus BernI tended bar in South
by Han PritcherI'm surprised that we still don't hear the WJ story
by jonlesterKowalski addendum:
by jonlesterApparently,
by nilramLocal and regional distribution arrangements
by jonlesterEver put milk in a liquor bottle
by jonlesterLike a Keystone experience I had once.
by jonlesterI just don't understand how
by Han PritcherI've only had it once, and I
by Han PritcherPBR's my second choice for package
by jonlesterWell, I said that about Tsingtao
by jonlesterI just looked at Hillary's site...
by Moe LaneIt's funny. I enjoy a wide
by Han PritcherTake their votes, by all
by Han PritcherI like Hitchens too, and I
by FlagstaffBe that as it may,
by Linus BernTsingtao
by David Hinz
blog advertising is good for you

get your job site
at simplyhired.com



are only out for themselves. I'm sick and tired of self-proclaimed evangelical leaders. After what Dobson did to Fred I'd be just fine if we never heard from any of them again (in the political arena, anyway).
"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson