Posted on 02/17/2007 6:23:04 AM PST by NYer
As I have traveled around the country, one line in my speeches always draws cheers: "The monologue of the Religious Right is over, and a new dialogue has now begun." We have now entered the post-Religious Right era. Though religion has had a negative image in the last few decades, the years ahead may be shaped by a dynamic and more progressive faith that will make needed social change more possible.
In the churches, a combination of deeper compassion and better theology has moved many pastors and congregations away from the partisan politics of the Religious Right. In politics, we are beginning to see a leveling of the playing field between the two parties on religion and "moral values," and the media are finally beginning to cover the many and diverse voices of faith. These are all big changes in American life, and the rest of the world is taking notice.
Evangelicals — especially the new generation of pastors and young people — are deserting the Religious Right in droves. The evangelical social agenda is now much broader and deeper, engaging issues like poverty and economic justice, global warming, HIV/AIDS, sex trafficking, genocide in Darfur and the ethics of the war in Iraq. Catholics are returning to their social teaching; mainline Protestants are asserting their faith more aggressively; a new generation of young black and Latino pastors are putting the focus on social justice; a Jewish renewal movement and more moderate Islam are also growing; and a whole new denomination has emerged, which might be called the "spiritual but not religious."
Even more amazing, the Left is starting to get it. Progressive politics is remembering its own religious history and recovering the language of faith. Democrats are learning to connect issues with values and are now engaging with the faith community. They are running more candidates who have been emboldened to come out of the closet as believers themselves. Meanwhile, many Republicans have had it with the Religious Right. Both sides are asking how to connect faith and values with politics. People know now that God is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, and we are all learning that religion should not be in the pocket of any political party; it calls all of us to moral accountability.
Most people I talk to think that politics isn't working in America and believe that the misuse of religion has been part of the problem. Politics is failing to resolve the big moral issues of our time, or even to seriously address them. And religion has too often been used as a wedge to divide people, rather than as a bridge to bring us together on those most critical questions. I believe (and many people I talk with agree) that politics could and should begin to really deal with the many crises we face. Whenever that happens, social movements often begin to emerge, usually focused on key moral issues. The best social movements always have spiritual foundations, because real change comes with the energy, commitment and hope that powerful faith and spirituality can bring.
It's time to remember the spiritual revivals that helped lead to the abolition of slavery in Britain and the United States; the black church's leadership during the American civil rights movement; the deeply Catholic roots of the Solidarity movement in Poland that led the overthrow of communism; the way liberation theology in Latin America helped pave the way for new democracies; how Desmond Tutu and the South African churches served to inspire victory over apartheid; how "People Power" joined with the priests and bishops to bring down down Philippine strongman Ferdinand Marcos; how the Dalai Lama keeps hope alive for millions of Tibetans; and, today, how the growing Evangelical and Pentecostal churches of the global South are mobilizing to addresse the injustices of globalization.
I believe we are seeing the beginning of movements like that again, right here in America, and that we are poised on the edge of what might become a revival that will bring about big changes in the world. Historically, social reform often requires spiritual revival. And that's what church historians always say about real revival — that it changes things in the society, not just in people's inner lives. I believe that what we are seeing now may be the beginning of a new revival — a revival for justice.
The era of the Religious Right is now past, and it's up to all of us to create a new day.
It is still my belief that the American people were showing their dissatisfaction with the progress of the Republican Congress. If the Republicans in the Senate and House had stood up to the Democrats and had done a better job they would still be in the majority. Not standing up to the Dims just invited more partisan attacks and let them set the agenda.
I'm not sure who you support for the Presidency but I can assure you that you won't gain any support for that candidate with this kind of rhetoric. I'm not sure who I will support just yet. There is a long ways to go. One thing for sure I won't vote third party or for Hillary. My advice would be for you to work to get your candidate nominated if you don't like Rudy. I might eventually help you get it done. Tearing down other's choice of candidates at this time will not help your candidate or prevent a President Hillary.
I looked up "blithely ignorant" in the dictionary, and there was a picture of Jim Wallis...
The Left can celebrate the "defeat" of the "Religious Right" all they want. Only one religion is playing by Highlander rules in this day and age (In the emd, there can be only one!).
Wallis and his ilk can recite their twaddle as much as they want - when that other religion comes for them, there's going to be a whole lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth - at least till the scimitar falls...
Pathetic idiots.
The Democrat party was dead. The Retarded Kid Party decided to cash in, rather than deliver the coup de grace.
That's all the opening that Hillary's Nazgûl captain Rahm Emanuel needed...
"the "spend taxpayers money for Jesus" crew is deserting"
Versus spending it agaimst Jesus? And legislating *IM*morality into taxpayer-supported schools with classes about condoms and tolerance? That isn't their money to spend.
How well do you know the writings of Patrick Henry, by the way?
How about spending is restricted PERIOD??
Patrick Henry's works? Have skimmed through a few here and there. But his words aren't holy writ. But our Constitution and our Bill of Rights are. Perhaps you should take this section to heart when it comes to "compassionate" spending:
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Agreed. I call that Amendment and raise you this: that even each individual state's powers are to be subject to the sovereignty of the Citizens.
I saw "Time" and "Jim Wallis", and my BS detector went off so loud I had to take the batteries out of it.
I am talking about very powerful people in my own church here in Memphis. If you want specifics you can go to a website that I will give you.
"social justice" and "economic justice" are codewords for Socialism.
Just what interest does Christianity have in promoting Socialism, hm?
I had this same feeling yesterday, while at Wally-World getting groceries.
Masses of people, working out their own lives, were passing by, and it seemed that THEY were not affecting my life, and it hit me - am I affecting theirs?
I was suddenly very insignificant, for I was not in politics, not a teacher, no longer going to work every day - doing nothing in the political realm. No kids at home to bug, the grandkids listening to who knows whom.
Yakking at you guys on FR is about the only thing that works, for I know that I sometimes I learn things from you folks, so I suppose that may work in reverse.
I can only hope the mass of us here are all pulling enough in the Right direction, we can influence others than CAN make a difference on the world scene.
Three times here you've mentioned these abilities - qualities that are properly applied to a Creature that is MORE than an 'animal' - a Creature that is God-like.
If we are more that 'animals', it is because we were created that way: by a God, for His OWN reason, wished to do so.
The 'religious' understand this fact - our forefathers did, for it is engraved in stone (oops - that flexible, living document, that has been so massaged to be almost unrecognizable now) reading...
WHEN, in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands, which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's GOD entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the Causes which impel them to the Separation.
We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their CREATOR, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.--
Without a 'religion', the non-religious cannot hold on the the Self-Evident Truth, so the foundation is very shaky.
This Nation does - see above.
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
This is NOT true.
What WE want is a LEADER who has a bit more 'morals and justness' than the AVERAGE Joe on the street.
We might even let YOU be that guy, if you indicate values that we like.
There are very few of us stupid even to think that only CHRIST in office is acceptable in this world.
Thanks for the full quote - it is not as wsihy-washy as I'd feared.
Too bad that "Seems to excuse" is confused with 'forgiveness'.
I'm open to the issue, for I really don't know, any more than does anyone else, pure faith notwithstanding.
I have read your posts with interest and do not disagree with some of your points, but the smugness with which you present them is difficult to get past. The impression you give is that same as that given by so many on the left. I would ask you, in all seriousness, to consider, at least, that you, like the rest of us fallen human beings, are not in possession of all the answers.
Of course I'm not in possession of all the answers. But don't just look at my posts. Look at those who posted to me. I took issue with those who believe that people are moral and just only because of Christianity, and therefore Christians should be in charge. Those posters made point after point about how great we are because our forefathers were Christians. I pointed out that what they created was a country where the ownership of other human beings was not only tolerated but justified by the Bible, and that the only really free people were white Christian male property owners. That's a far cry from smugness, at least on my part. I recognize our mistakes, and do not wish them to be repeated. Which is why I do not want those with radical or extremist views running my Country, whether they be from the left or right.
No Constitution we could ever write would be perfect, nor would any application of such Constitution. Can we make things better? Sure, but perfect, never.
And I agree with that. But I distinguish between the Constitution and society. Christians were primarily responsible for the society they created that was tremendously in conflict with the principles they wrote in both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. It sounds like you are not taking responsibility for that social order created and run by Christians. It should be a little more than "Christians aren't perfect".
One more small thing: perhaps slavery, which has been practiced all around the world for thousands of years, and is still being practiced in certain areas (with very little outcry on the part of the self-annointed world elites/media) is something that doesn't need to be flogged endlessly in relation to the U.S.
I use that piece of our history when I am told that without Christians starting our great Nation, we would have no moral or just values. So I do not flog for no reason. You cannot separate out the bad parts just to take credit for the good.
What would happen if you were as concerned with slavery as it is practiced today in Africa? Why not turn your attention to that problem that exists today, rather than cranking about any country's less-than-perfect past?
This thread is about the religious right and its influence in politics. I didn't raise the issue of the beginnings of our Country; others posted that history to me. But it's clear from that last comment that, with all due respect, I have no market cornered on smugness.
You guys seem to want the pricey real estate. If you leave us FReeRepublic, you can have the rest of it.
No, let the social lib /fiscal cons start their own party. We fixed the GOP so it could win.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.