Posted on 11/10/2008 10:08:48 PM PST by AnalogReigns
When Barack Obama takes the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, he will do so in the 30th anniversary year of the founding of the so-called Religious Right. Born in 1979 and midwifed by the late Rev. Jerry Falwell, the Religious Right was a reincarnation of previous religious-social movements that sought moral improvement through legislation and court rulings. Those earlier movements — from abolition (successful) to Prohibition (unsuccessful) — had mixed results.
Social movements that relied mainly on political power to enforce a conservative moral code weren't anywhere near as successful as those that focused on changing hearts. The four religious revivals, from the First Great Awakening in the 1730s and 1740s to the Fourth Great Awakening in the late 1960s and early '70s, which touched America and instantly transformed millions of Americans (and American culture as a result), are testimony to that.
Thirty years of trying to use government to stop abortion, preserve opposite-sex marriage, improve television and movie content and transform culture into the conservative Evangelical image has failed. The question now becomes: should conservative Christians redouble their efforts...
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
The republican party must alway deeply acknowledge this part of them; but I will say this CAN’T be the only part of the republican party. We can’t win on this alone.
An angel of light?
bookmark
Just one close election is a little too soon to claim the death of the religious right.
FROM AN EMAIL RECEIVED TODAY IN REBUTTAL:
Cal Thomas calls Christians to unilaterally disarm
It is disappointing when Christian conservatives who are engaged in the battle for the soul of the nation are subjected to misguided ideas of influential Christians like syndicated columnist Cal Thomas. In his latest column, Thomas pronounces a requiem for the religious right.
According to Thomas, the last election is proof that Christians’ attempt to influence the future of the nation for the past thirty years was in vain. Thomas advocates a retreat from the public square and limits Christians’ duty to preaching the gospel and doing good works.
Letting the culture disintegrate without a peep from Christians while we wait for a revival is, according to Thomas, the righteous thing to do. But this is contrary to our biblical duties and historical precedence.
A Lesson From History
The Great Awakening in America starting in the 1730’s did bring about social transformation. But the Awakening was preceded by efforts on the part of faithful Christians to reform public policy.
James Oglethorpe sought to reform England’s prisons. Due to the “gin craze,” Queen Caroline passed prohibition legislation against the sale of gin. Queen Anne established free schools for indigent children. The Society for the Reformation of Manners helped to convict nearly one hundred thousand people for debauchery and profaneness.
Raising the issue of public sins like drunkenness, brought conviction of sin and helped to break up the spiritually fallow ground in England and the colonies. The revival harvest came forth from seeds planted in the spiritual soil tilled by social reformers. So God used both means; first the preaching of social righteousness and then the gospel.
Thomas minimizes the efforts of Christians who are not willing to surrender their spiritual and constitutional birthrights. He offers a false choice and a limited view of the gospel that is not worthy of the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
What’s a Christian to Do?
Jesus commanded Christians to be the salt and light of the world. As salt, Christians are commanded to act as a preservative, mitigating the effects of sin decay. As salty advocates for biblical righteousness and justice, the Christian’s duty is not limited to the personal, familial, or spiritual realms. Being the salt of the world extends to all of life, including the realm of public policy.
Imagine what kind of world it would be if Christians did not resist the most egregious sinful impulses of radical secularists. Why they might try to take their second grade public school students on field trips to homosexual marriages. They might take their minor daughters to get risky, surgical abortions without notifying the parents. But Thomas tells Christians they should be silent and just feed the poor.
Christians are also to shine as lights, reflecting God’s character and truth. While Christians ought to reflect love and service, they must also stand boldly for biblical truth and morality. God is not just perfect love. God is also perfect truth, righteousness and justice. Christians must reflect all of the character of God, not just the parts we prefer or the world accepts.
This is not necessarily going to win friends. Jesus warned us that the world hates the light because it will expose man’s evil deeds. Being the light means standing for the truth out of a loving concern for the consequences, eternal and temporal, to individuals and society. Often the only thanks you get for doing this are insults.
No one other than Jesus Christ has ever been perfect salt and light, having come from the Father in perfect grace and truth. He was reviled, slandered and killed because he bore witness to the truth.
Being salt and light is the duty of every Christian. If we refuse to be the stinging salt and blinding light we make ourselves worthless. If we lose our effect as salt, Jesus said we deserve to be trampled on. Thomas would have us abandon our duty, but for what?
Thomas thinks that if Christians will just stick to loving people in his very narrowly defined way, and lay down our duties and rights to preserve and illuminate the culture, we will have real transformational influence, not empty political influence. This is a false choice.
Being salt and light does mean preaching the gospel and seeing God change the individual. It includes doing good to the widows and orphans, the sick and the poor. Studies have shown if you want to find voluntary works of compassion and charity, religious conservatives do much more than any other group. From hurricane and tsunami relief, to pregnancy care centers, homeless shelters, and hospices, it is religious conservatives that are generally the first on the scene and the last ones to leave.
It is not a choice between preaching the gospel or doing works of mercy or standing for biblical values. We can and must do it all.
Being “salty lights” consists of displaying obedience to Jesus Christ in every aspect of life. That includes the political debate about the future of our nation. Christians believe that God really cares about matters of killing unborn babies, the institution of marriage, religious liberty, just judges, parental rights in education, etc. These concerns are based on biblical values.
Cal Thomas suggests that Christians ought to serve in obscurity and a diminution. Ironically, he uses his nationally syndicated column to advance this idea. If he were serious, he would quit writing and go work in a homeless shelter.
Thomas is unable to follow his own advice because it is fundamentally flawed. He writes because he wants to impact the market place of ideas and influence public life. Why does he object when others want to do the same? Thomas ought to applaud Christians who are attempting to do the same thing he is doing only by other means.
I must of missed something here. Didn’t 0 try to hide his abortion record? Didn’t he go after the “values” voters? This “Religious Rights RIP” is hogwash. If we let one setback make us fold, then yes. But last I checked, the Religious Right isn’t filled with moderates. Most of them are bandwagon Christians.
The rat scum think we’ll scatter, but they are wrong. We’ll come back stronger than before, and with less moderate baggage to weigh us down. Let the moderates stay with the weak churches, like the unitarians, (lib) presbytarians, etc. Our churches are growing, and they will continue to grow, because our is the message of the Lord. And I won’t surrender for anything.
above email from:
Christian Anti-Defamation Commission
www.christianadc.org
Did I miss the pandering to the religious right this election? Because honestly, I thought there was much less of that this election than previous elections. Palin mentioned abortion a few times and that was pretty much just in regards to Obama’s support of infanticide and McCain mentioned it like twice, and neither time did he bring it up on his own (it was at the debate once).
Bye bye to both!!!!
No one so far, has elected either to any office, that I know of and they do not have the veto power to kick loyal conservatives out of the power structure especially when we weren't at the table picking our Republican candidate for President. We were handed a candidate selected by the media and Democrats in the early primaries, left with others who either had no name visibility or only recently (like when they decided to run for office) found their conservative principles.
Conservatism didn't lose, it was never tried!!!!!
Obama’S preacher man had the reason wrong.
Nov 4th was the chickens coming home to ROOOOOST!!!
The damness is staring!!!
I’m glad William Wilberforce did not have Cal’s attitude!
Something in the very first paragraph caught my attention, and a theory occurred to me. Could it be that the reason abolition ultimately succeeded and Prohibition did not is that the former concerned not only morality but human rights, while the latter - regardless of the true motives behind it - purportedly was enacted to protect the people from their own reckless behavior? When government places restrictions on the people “for their own good” - whether the true intention is to improve their character or to line Al Capone’s pockets - they will ultimately become resentful. Slavery was different in that it involved subjugation of an entire class of individuals, whose humanity couldn’t be denied forever.
I agree with Cal’s argument that moral “vices” should generally be addressed through social pressure and not force of law. However, when unwilling victims are involved, it becomes a matter of justice and not simply morality. As I see it, the proper role of government is to protect each individual not from his or her own destructive behavior, but from that of others. I’d be curious to know what y’all think out there.
AMEN to that!!!!!!!!!! :-(
Someone sent me a email photo today of a tombstone in a cemetery that read...
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BORN JULY 4 1776
DIED NOV 4 2004
Death by suicide
And I can tell you who drove the last nail into the coffin: Dr. Dobson, when he got all Keith Olbermann on Fred Thompson’s a$$. It split the party just when we needed to get behind the best of the contenders and stay focused. By the time this practical political concept finally dawned on Dobson, he backed McCain, probably because of Sarah; but the damage for 2008 was already done.
Exactly. What the writer of this article does not take into account is that the religious right worship a God who knows his way out of the tomb.
When things don’t go well everyone jumps off the bandwagon.
When conservatives get back in power they will all come running saying we were with you all the time.
It will be amazing to see.
Ping to an awesome graphic!
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.