Posted on 02/04/2005 7:52:26 PM PST by Mr. Silverback
“Does Bush Owe the Religious Right?” According to Time magazine’s cover story this week, the answer is, emphatically, yes. “Conservative churches mobilized as never before and helped re-elect a president they see as one of their own,” Time said. “Now they expect him to deliver for them,” leading the way Christians want him to on issues like abortion, gay “marriage,” and appointing conservative Supreme Court justices.
The article—and the thinking behind it—may please many Christians, who delight in knowing they are powerful enough to elect “one of their own” to the most powerful office on earth. And having done so, they now look forward to flexing their political muscles and getting their political payback.
But beware: Almost every time the Church has achieved earthly power, it has managed to shoot itself in the foot.
So before we plunge into power politics, the first question we should ask ourselves is, can we handle success and increased influence with grace and prudence?
We haven’t always done so. Take the pro-life movement, for instance, in the early days. Some of its leaders favored an “all-or-nothing” approach, while others—more far-sighted, in my opinion—fought for incremental gains. But the result was a movement that was paralyzed by political infighting; in effect, we were taking part in a circular firing squad.
And remember, Christians are just as susceptible to the seduction of worldly power as anyone else. The editors of Time may think religious voters ought to be lining up for our share of the spoils, but Christians know we should instead be falling on our knees, asking God to keep us humble. We ought to remember that the job of the Church is to bring biblical truth to bear in society, to win people to Christ, and to promote righteousness and justice. We should remember, as well, that throughout history, Christians have made the greatest inroads in society when we traveled, not among the politically powerful, but among the poor and the powerless. Think of the Wesleyan revivals or of Wilberforce and his reformation of morals in England.
In the modern era, it is Christian missionaries in Africa and Asia whose work is leading to an explosion of conversions. And as Time notes, these missionaries get a first-hand look at problems like international sex trafficking and civil war in Sudan. They have sounded the alarm back home, where many of us have been working to pass needed legislation.
We should also beware of allowing the world to define the Church. To the world, power is the name of the game. But Christians know that we are called to humbleness, obedience, and a loving attitude even toward our political enemies.
So is Time magazine right? Does President Bush “owe us” for helping put him in office?
As one of the twenty-five leaders profiled in the magazine, let me answer: No. Instead of focusing on what we are owed, we need to remember what we owe to God and to our neighbor: to be steadfast witnesses to the truth, and always willing to serve. Let’s follow the example of Christ—not demanding to be served, but serving others.
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
I would think that seeing GW elected over scum like Kerry would be payback enough (it is in my book). And so is seeing depressed liberals going into therapy because Kerry lost.
Bears repeating. Interesting post...thanks.
Great post. Thanks.
This bears a resemblence to the warning liberals give Republicans, "just because you won, don't push your agenda". Pap. We should demand payback and hold D.C.'s feet to the fire.
It's too bad Colson never held any elected office, and he certainly won't now. He's a brilliant man.
BTTT
The press does these "religious right" myth articles every time a Republican President is elected, folks. This is no big deal. All of this "moral values" business in the news is meant for one thing...to give the usual suspects a chance to take a swipe at religious people.
I don't see anyone demanding anything from Bush, other than perhaps trying to get some Judges that can read on the bench. That isn't confined to the religious people, either.
Bush is paying back all those who voted him by being a terrific president.
Amen, bears repeating indeed.
I don't think of it in terms of "owing" anyone.
But if Bush follows through and appoints pro-life supreme court justices and federal judges, to take first things first, it will certainly be a reasonable return for their votes.
But if he reneges on court appointments, or allows Specter to obstruct and delay them, he will certainly lose a lot of votes for the party in 2006 and 2008.
The difficulties are illustrated by the Christian Coalition, which under Ralph Reed reached an apex of power in 1992, but fell apart after it helped nominate Bob Dole. That was a lose/lose arrangement. Dole repudiated his Christian backers, the Christian Coalition lost momentum and credibility, and the Republicans lost to bill clinton a second time running.
I agree that churches need to be careful of involvement in politics. But Christians have a definite obligation to be involved in politics. As St. Augustine pointed out, their first allegiance is to the City of God. But they are also inhabitants of the City of Man, and they should do what they can to improve that city for love of their neighbors and their children.
I agree .. and I don't believe the President owes me anything other than doing the best job he possibly can. That's why I voted for him .. not because I expected to GET something out of it.
It's too bad Colson never held any elected office, and he certainly won't now. He's a brilliant man.
Colson has been close enough to "the" power to know what it does to a man.
Now he is close enough to "The" power to know what it does to a man.
I think President Bush "owes" me because he claims to be a conservative, not because I happen to be a Christian.
For instance, I'm not sure what Colson believes on the issue of government welfare versus true charity, but it is not compassionate, not conservative, and definitely not Christian to forcibly take money from some people in order to give it to others.
bump.
NO. Bush is a religious man. Everyone knows that. If religious people want a payback immediately with accompanying orgasms, forget it. In time, with patience, observe things are changing. The blatent homosexuals are going to be defeated. The blatent abortionists are going to be defeated by ultrasound images of little babies required to be shown to their mothers.
Just take your shoes off while someone playing chess squares off against old ideas that are playing old checkers enthusiasts. Bush and Cheney mean business.
BUMP to your comment.
This line of thinking sounds illogical to me. Don't we elect people so they will produce the results we want to see in our government. I want some return for my vote! I didn't elect him so he could do nothing and not follow through on his campaign promises and fix some of the problems with this country. I want him to nominate judges that don't legislate from the bench, I want him to prevent homosexual marriage from becoming a part of this country, I want an end to liberals pushing abortion on our kids, I want our public schools to stop dumbing down our kids and indoctrinating them into liberalism. These are all results I expect. That's why I voted for the guy. It sounds dumb to me to say Christians shouldn't expect to get what they were promised when they voted for him. Why shouldn't our votes influence the direction of this country. That's what representative government is all about.
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.