Posted on 02/11/2011 7:39:16 AM PST by greyfoxx39
But on January 23, it was different. Instead of inspiring, I was inspired. Rather than exhorting others to greater levels of engagement, I was admonished for my own compromises. The contrast between that day and most of my days—the difference between that audience and most of my audiences—could not have been more profound. And this audience was largely Catholic, and the Catholic Church for almost forty years has been the beating heart of the American pro-life movement.
On November 4, 2008, defenders of traditional marriage won perhaps their greatest—and to the secular liberal establishment, most shocking—victory in the almost decade-long struggle against the redefinition of marriage. Proposition 8, a state constitutional amendment establishing marriage as the union of one man and one woman, won a clear majority in California. Although outspent and vilified by the mainstream media, religious Californians opened their checkbooks, donated their time, and endured the scorn of the secular elite to overturn California's judicially-imposed same-sex marriage regime. And where did a wildly disproportionate number of dollars and volunteers come from? The LDS church.
As devout Catholics and faithful Mormons step forward boldly, evangelical Protestants appear in cultural disarray. The most popular of the new generation of evangelical pastors—Rick Warren and Joel Osteen—stay out of the cultural fray. Evangelical youth may have orthodox opinions on marriage or life, but they're increasingly reluctant to voice those opinions, lest they appear "divisive" or "intolerant." In fact, at times it appears as if much of the evangelical world has retreated into a defensive crouch, eager to promote its universally-loved work for the poor while abjectly apologizing for the cultural battles of years past.
Why are Catholics and Mormons increasingly bold when so many evangelicals are increasingly timid? Why are Catholics so often leading on life and Mormons so often leading on marriage? The answer, I think, is theological and cultural, two words that expose profound weaknesses in American evangelicalism.
First, theology. One cannot spend five minutes with thoughtful Catholics without understanding how the defense of life is a fundamental and integral part of the DNA of the church. Since the defense of life is theologically-grounded, it is functionally and practically independent of any secular ideology. Nuns who one day attend a sit-in for immigrant rights may the next day do sidewalk counseling outside of Planned Parenthood. Bishops, "progressive" or conservative, defend life in Catholic hospitals. Catholics who study church doctrine, who immerse themselves in the teachings of the church, understand that to defend life is to imitate Christ. Life is not just an "issue," for a Catholic; it is at the core of the Gospel.
Next, culture. The Mormon church knows what it is like to live outside the mainstream. Born in an atmosphere of violent persecution, with a cultural heritage buttressed by their own perilous trek across the wilderness to the haven of Utah, and with strong emphases on family and church bonds, the Mormon culture is inherently resilient in the face of cultural headwinds. Two-year missions teach Mormon children about selfless service but also how to face rejection and even scorn. Evangelicals, by contrast, are often shocked when co-workers turn on them, or when the country drifts from its heritage. Mormons aren't so easily shaken. After all, the country wasn't theirs to begin with.
For all our many virtues (and there are many: American evangelicals are among the most generous and loving people in the world), we generally have no conception of—or particular loyalty to—"church teaching" and tend to see marriage and life as "issues" rather than integral parts of our core theology. Since we're busy being spiritual entrepreneurs, revolutionizing the whole concept of church every 90 seconds, we don't have the kind of (relative) theological stability that has marked almost 2,000 years of Catholic history, and we can't come close to matching the (again, relative) uniformity of teaching that marks the Mormon experience.
We also lack the shared Catholic and Mormon culture and the solidarity that comes with it. We're more unified than we've been in the past, but we're a collection of subcultures that comprise a shaky, larger whole. And we are often desperate for acceptance. We view the transient scorn of popular culture as a virtual cataclysm, and our distressingly common health and wealth gospels wrongly teach us that Christian faith carries with it measurable earthly pleasures. We lack a theology of suffering. We lack a unity of purpose. And our convictions all too often collapse in the face of strong cultural opposition.
Simply put, we evangelicals are blown and tossed by the cultural winds. Right now, the winds are blowing against us, and our young people are reluctant to engage. But God is sovereign, and the fate of the nation is in His hands, not ours. And if we fail, there are others—some from an ancient tradition, some from a new one—who may very well carry out His work with more faith and courage than we ever could.
David French is co-founder for Evangelicals for Mitt http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/dfrench.php David is a regular contributor to National Review Online
He is married to Nancy French. From "Evangelicals for Mitt", In the summer of 2007, Nancy became involved in a book project with Ann Romney. Nancy was also hired as a consultant for the campaign from October until December of 2007, working to get Governor Romney on the primary ballot in her home state of Tennessee.
Can you spell insidious? I found the National Review Online link interesting also.
Ping
Matthew 24:24 comes to mind:
“4For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.”
Hoss
People are so thin-skinned. An truthful observation should not be considered a hit-piece.
A guy with “Evangelicals for Mitt” a group with a whopping 608 followers on Facebook, which I am sure is 100% of all Evangelicals in the nations (who support Romney that is) is trying to take an authoritative stance on Social Conservatism, or Conservatism of any kind?
ROTFLMBO X 2000...
This guy would not know conservatism if it bit him in the buttocks.
Here is Mitt Romney the flipper...
“People are so thin-skinned. An truthful observation should not be considered a hit-piece.”
No matter who it is aimed at.
It’s starting...take a look at this article.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2672003/posts
I have a feeling you will react differently when truthful observations are made about your post...
There are lots of evangelicals on FR who share their very strong opinions and differences with fellow "safe" conservatives, but are they doing this with liberals?
Evangelicals I knew were always afraid of becoming "rabbit hole" Christians whereby they would surround themselves with fellow evangelicals and live holy lives, but separated from the agnostics and atheists and thus having little impact on the larger society.
This is something we should all be concerned about.
Nah, I’m a big boy now.
“The most popular of the new generation of evangelical pastors—Rick Warren and Joel Osteen—stay out of the cultural fray.”
I’m not at all sure Joel Osteen is a Christian, let alone an evangelical. Rick Warren is politically liberal in some ways, but I suspect his focus in on conversions, not politics - and that is consistent with being an evangelical. The Good News is about Jesus Christ, not American politics.
I strongly oppose gay rights, but that opposition is just a part of my beliefs. Homosexuality is a sin, as is adultery and lying. It is NOT “The Sin” or “The Only Sin”.
Abortion is also evil, but I haven’t noticed a lack of evangelicals condemning it, OR a lack in reaching out to those who have sinned.
The key right now is to dramatically reduce the deficits and in so doing devolve power and responsibility to the states.
Most social issues will improve remarkably once the federal funds which feed the problems are removed and people have to handle these problems at a more localized level.
Congrats. Happy for ya.
Glad you could find the truth in this self-loathing self-declared evangelical who is pulling for Mitt.
I will let you two share that ground.
Kind of sounds like he’s more concerned about political correctness in evangelicals than anything else. PC is evil no matter who you are, though. No matter the ecclesial community, that stuff must be stamped out.
... can’t speak for ALL evangelicals, but our church just passed 10,000 members and the largest churches in our area are all evangelical. Mormons are, thankfully, small in number - about equal to the other cult, Jehovah’s Witnesses. Catholics seem to be stable in number.
MY take is that the author is plowing the ground for Mitt in 2012, slamming Evangelicals because of their resistance to voting for a mormon, puffing up the mormon cause and throwing in a sop to the catholics.
I frankly don't see what this article gains for Mitt...the mormons will vote for either mormon, the evangelicals are certainly not going to appreciate it, and the catholics will most likely ignore it.
Maybe he gets paid by Mitt for each article that's published? His claim to be an evangelical is patently questionable. He's about a believing evangelical as I am a believing mormon.
Maybe you should try evaluating his thesis instead of trying to figure his “angle.”
What a coincidence.
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.