Category Archives: religion

By John W. Whitehead

By its very nature, politics is inclined towards corruption, deception and the accumulation of power. Organized religion, in many regards, is no better. So I am particularly leery of those who strive to merge politics with religion and, in the process, turn presidential elections into a test of one’s religiosity, for good or ill.

I became even more apprehensive about this merger between religion and politics in the wake of George W. Bush’s reign, given the extent to which his administration cozied up to the Christian Right and vice versa. That uneasiness was not lessened one iota by Barack Obama’s ascension to the Oval Office, which was met with ecstasy by the Christian Left.

Since then, however, I have begun to notice a growing tendency on both the Left and the Right to demonize those with whom they disagree, either because they subscribe to politically incorrect beliefs or associate with individuals who might be the slightest bit controversial, no matter how fleeting the association. And when you add religion to the mix—Christianity, in particular—people who may otherwise be perfectly rational beings turn into highly intolerant conspiracy theorists.

Most recently, these McCarthyist scare tactics have been trotted out in an attempt to paint presidential candidates Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry as brainwashed puppets for a Christian Right bent on establishing a theocracy, a government in which God’s laws are supreme. While less hysterical in tone than many of his counterparts, Ryan Lizza’s recent piece for the New Yorker is no less prejudiced in its view of those with Christian leanings, hopscotching over Bachmann’s life story while dwelling on her Christian influences in such a way as to present her as a cautionary tale to prospective voters.

And this is where it all falls apart for Lizza, who is so bent on portraying Bachmann as a product of Dominionist dogma that he paints every Christian he encounters with the same extremist brush. In the process, he wrongly ascribes the Dominionist teachings of R. J. Rushdoony to Francis Schaeffer, a leading Christian theologian of the 20th century who called for Christians to be active in the world, including in politics and government, and whose impact on evangelical Christians like Bachmann was far-reaching and not necessarily a bad thing.

This distinction between Rushdoony and Schaeffer may seem like a minor point, but there is a world of difference between those who subscribe to Rushdoony’s Christian Reconstructionist views and those who fall more into Schaeffer’s camp. To his credit, professor Barry Hankins in the American Spectator delineates exactly where Schaeffer and Rushdoony differed and where all of these conspiracy-laden articles go wrong in their “macro-indictment of all things evangelical”:

Schaeffer had a brief flirtation with Rushdoony’s thought in the Sixties, but not with the Reconstructionist/Dominionist vision of Old Testament civil law. Rather, like some other evangelical figures, Schaeffer was enamored with Rushdoony’s analysis of where, when, and how western civilization allegedly abandoned the moral standards of the Judeo-Christian tradition. The link between Schaeffer and Rushdoony was John Whitehead—who was friends with both figures and who practically wrote Schaeffer’s immensely influential book A Christian Manifesto. Lizza cites Manifesto as arguing for the overthrow of the U.S. government if Roe v. Wade is not overturned. Schaeffer actually said that once Christians had worked through legal channels then practiced civil disobedience, he wasn’t sure what they should do next. He did not advocate violence… As for Lizza’s alleged link between Schaeffer and Rushdoony, Schaeffer insisted publicly and privately that there should never be a theocracy in America…

As Professor Hankins noted, I was present when the Christian Right in America was metastasizing into the political behemoth it is today. By the mid-1980s, because of the hypocrisy I had seen in the evangelical leadership, I recoiled from the movement. But I also witnessed first-hand how the teachings and writings of Schaeffer and Rushdoony were co-opted by leaders of the Christian socio-political movement.

By the early 1980s, the Christian Right had formed a voting bloc that burgeoned into a powerful movement. It effectively ushered Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush into the presidency. As the media empires of evangelical leaders and televangelists grew to encompass print, radio and television, so too did the reach and power of the Religious Right. It now boasts of representing some 30 million Christian voters, as its leaders are fond of reminding elected officials.

However, Christian involvement in politics has produced little in terms of definable positive results spiritually. And Christians who place their hope in a political answer to the world’s ills often become nothing more than another tool in the politician’s toolbox.

Francis Schaeffer understood this. As he advised in A Christian Manifesto, Christians must avoid joining forces with the government and arguing a theocratic position. “To say it another way,” notes Schaeffer, “‘We should not wrap Christianity in our national flag.’” As history makes clear, fusing Christianity with politics cheapens it, robs it of its spiritual vitality and thus destroys true Christianity. If Christians really want to follow Jesus, this will necessarily mean that they will often be forced to stand against the governmental and political establishment in speaking truth to power, as well.

This brings me back to the current hysteria over the possibility that the Christian Right is mobilizing to take over the country under the guise of electing Michele Bachmann or Rick Perry to office. No matter what the talking heads might say about Bachmann’s so-called Dominionist philosophies or Rick Perry’s right-wing leanings, we would all do well to remember that at the end of the day, they, like their opponents, are first and foremost politicians—answering to a higher call that ends at the ballot box. And as we have learned to our detriment, no matter which party takes the White House, the American people will be the ones to pay the price.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Information about the Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

By John W. Whitehead

The Christian Right, apparently having learned nothing from George W. Bush’s disastrous reign, seems determined to appoint yet another political savior, this time in the form of Rick Perry, the Republican governor from Texas. Perry recently made headlines after he hosted a prayer rally endorsed and attended by such notable members of the Christian Right as the American Family Association (which financed the event); James Dobson of Focus on the Family; David Barton of Wallbuilders; megachurch pastor John Hagee; and Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. The rally was viewed by many as Perry’s attempt to test the presidential waters with conservative evangelicals, who represent a sizeable voting bloc.

At Perry’s urging, more than 33,000 individuals gathered on Saturday, August 6, in Houston’s Reliant stadium to fast and pray for the nation. The event, described as “part prayer service, part Christian rock concert, and part marathon pep rally for Jesus Christ,” was also broadcast live in 1,000 churches across the country. Despite the fact that Perry insisted the event was not political but rather aimed at rallying the nation to a Christian unity during difficult times, the event, as the Associated Press points out, “gave him an important platform as he weighs whether to run for president.”

This is particularly important when you consider that evangelical conservatives make up a critical part of the voting bloc for Republican contenders. More than 28.8 million Christian conservatives—32 percent of all voters (the highest recorded percentage of any election)—turned out for the 2010 elections, with 77% voting for Republicans. Truly, the electoral might of the Christian Right cannot be underestimated.

Thus, determined to use politics to advance their agendas, the leaders of the Christian Right have had no qualms about turning churches across the country into political headquarters. And, indeed, between the Texas governor who wears his faith on his sleeve and his fawning Christian Right contingency, it’s starting to feel like 1999 all over again.

There is, of course, nothing wrong with people gathering to pray for the nation. Nor is there anything wrong with the fact that Rick Perry, who is expected to throw his hat into the presidential race, is a Christian. The danger arises when Christians wrap their religion in the flag, so to speak. For the Christian, country and faith are never synonymous, and they are not two equal loyalties. As Christians in past regimes have found, identifying with the political establishment, as much of modern evangelicalism is doing, can present a grave danger—not only can the church become a useful tool for politicians, but the establishment can and often has become the church’s enemy.

Not only is identifying with the established powers perilous, but it also negates what it really means to be a Christian. Christians are not to identify with power but to speak truth to power—even at great costs. Martyrs, past and present, testify to this. Yet like moths flickering about a hot flame, the leaders of the Christian Right are eager to get close to political power. Unfortunately, as we saw during George W. Bush’s disastrous tenure, there is always a price to be paid for power and prestige. In the process of seeking policy outcomes and funding for faith-based initiatives, the Christian leadership was seduced by political power to such an extent that the true message of Jesus was being held hostage to a political agenda. Whereas Jesus was a homeless, itinerant preacher who taught charity, compassion, and love for one’s neighbor, today’s Christianity is more often equated with partisan politics, anti-homosexual rhetoric, materialism, affluent megachurches, and moralistic finger-pointing.

One person who understands all too well the danger of fusing religion and politics is David Kuo, who served as Special Assistant to President Bush from 2001-2003. In his book Tempting Faith, Kuo describes the way in which the Bush Administration manipulated Christians. According to Kuo, it wasn’t difficult to convince Christians that President Bush was on the right side of virtually any tactic. Thus, we get to the heart of the problem. Genuine religion never attempts to merge with politics. If it attempts to influence politics at all, it’s by speaking truth to power and acting as a moral compass for society. In fact, the Christian Right does Christianity a disservice by greatly misrepresenting its founder, Jesus, who rejected politics as the solution for what ails us. To Jesus, religion was all about helping the poor, showing mercy (even to your enemies) and being a peacemaker—not a warmaker. He did not bless the powerful. Rather, Jesus said, “Blessed are the meek.”

Neither did Jesus seek political favors or power. He was apolitical and anti-politics. In fact, Jesus had a tendency to attack and undermine political power. Jesus understood that the legitimate use of power does not include using it to impose one’s will upon others. From the Christian standpoint, the proper use of power is to seek justice for all.

Time and again, the Christian Right leaders have sacrificed their principles to the false idol of politics. In the process, they have sold their souls for a bowl of political porridge. Unlike many Christians today, Christ did not engage in politics, identify with the government, or attempt to push an agenda through government channels. In fact, for Christians to be stridently aligned with conservative politics is to miss the point of their religion. As Martin Luther King Jr. warned, “If today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century.”

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Information about the Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.