Lennart : Missing in all such discussions is the crucial question of both how and whether Christians can work with non-Christians to achieve public ends. America still has a 70 % Christian population, maybe even in the 80s, but a large part of that is nominal, as you are well aware. And among Protestants, a good 40 % is so-called "mainstream," a misnomer but you get the idea. Jews are crucial to political success, and increasingly so are Asians, essentially Buddhists ( Hawaii, California ) and Hindus --New Jersey, but including such unlikely states as Texas. Then there is a large population of unaffiliated Christians who are at best only lukewarm to the kinds of appeals that are dear to Evangelicals. Plus, a major part of the mix, Catholics, with their own priorities. Not to count local strongholds, like Mormons in Utah and Idaho ( and they also matter in Arizona ). Essentially, Evangelicals as such, if they want to discuss things exclusively in Evangelical terms can only reach about 25 % or 30 % of the citizenry. You can try with the other 70% or so, but we both know what the political reality is. And how serious are Evangelicals, really ? For sure, some are. I'd put the figure --as a guess-- at about a fourth of Evangelicals, maybe as a maximum, 10 % of the total US population. But that's about it. For me the crux is simply "what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul ?" Most Evangelicals don't seem to want to risk the things of the world even if their hearts are in the right place. Which isn't easy under any circumstances and is especially difficult in a time like now, amidst economic problems everywhere. And I cannot absolve myself, this is written in sympathy with Evangelicals who really want to do what is best but must also deal with reality. At least the model Left-Right-Christ offers a new way to think about political issues and a way to possibly work with others who do not agree with you in any number of areas. What is the true mission of the Church ? THAT question is vital. But I'd like to break it into parts, with one part being : In the realm of political action, what is the true mission ? Billy ================================================= 10/7/2011 [email protected] writes:
Hi Billy, This book would be interesting to read, no doubt. However, it's seems it's mostly about "left vs. right" and who is the most "biblical". Interesting, to be sure but hardly as helpful David Fitch's recent book "The End of Evangelicalism?" _http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/cr/1606086847/ref=aw_d_cr_books_ (http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/cr/1606086847/ref=aw_d_cr_books) Fitch uses 'the work of noted Slovenian philosopher and critic Slavoj Zizek to critique three essential evangelical ideals: "the inerrant Bible," "the decision for Christ" and "the Christian nation."' (to quote a reviewer). Fitch critics both the "left vs. Right" approach to "Christian politics" and the use of "master signifiers" within each camp to illustrate the inherent "emptiness" of both". Neither left nor right is particularly helpful if the goal is to understand politics from a truly "Christian" perspective. First, the context should not be "who's the most Biblical" but rather what is the true mission of the Church and how that understanding is expressed in and through the Church (I.e. those that join God in his mission to the world). Both the left and the right misses the mark. I think Fitch nails it perfectly using Zizek's theories analyzing the problem. Of course, Zizek is less helpful in providing answers but Fitch understanding and explanation of "missional church" provides a blueprint for true "Christian" political and cultural engagement. I am not sure how you feel about his answers but for me, personally, coming from more of a "right" perspective his has been very helpful in understanding how I, and I venture to say, (too) many others have gone wrong. A Google search for book title "The End of Evangelicalism?", Fitch and review should bring up enough links to more information. // Lennart Sent from my iPhone using the pinkie on my left hand On Oct 7, 2011, at 13:04, [email protected] wrote: Christian Post _How Would Jesus Vote? New Book Looks at Evangelical Faith and Politics_ (http://www.christianpost.com/news/how-would-jesus-vote-new-book-looks-at-evan gelical-faith-and-politics-57573/) Fri, Oct. 07, 2011 Posted: 01:00 PM EDT ____________________________________ Two evangelical Christians, one a Republican and the other a Democrat, roll out their ideas on how the Bible applies to culture and politics in a new book, titled Left, Right & Christ. Can a Democrat be a Christian? Should the government care for the sick? Do legalized abortions increase the number of abortions? These are just some of the issues Lisa Sharon Harper and D.C. Innes undertake in this new book from Russell Media. Harper, director of Mobilizing at Sojourners, and Innes, associate professor of Politics at The King's College, offer mostly different responses, but do agree that these are the type of conversations Christians should be having if they already are not. Their conversation, stemming from different world views, opens a field for Christians to discuss political issues and their relevance to Scripture openly. Left, Right & Christ also gives a good idea of how one Christian denomination can contain people with vastly differing views on the world and politics. To compare those views, and to present them to the public in their full range is important, according to Harper and Innes. Often times, a book like Left, Right & Christ, which involves two authors presenting their respective arguments, gives readers the opportunity to consider the arguments on both sides, Harper told The Christian Post. Harper's and Innes' differing views often stem from different ways of interpreting Scripture. "I hope my argument [in the book] is compelling," Innes told CP. "Obviously more biblically faithful [than Harper's]. Lisa tries to be biblically faithful. I think her hermeneutic is off. But we have a conversation that will help people take the Bible more seriously; take its application more seriously, and not be afraid to talk to one another about the fundamental political issues. Explore why are they different." "[Innes] approached Scripture very theoretically," Harper told CP separately. He looks at the Scripture, interprets it, and then applies it, she added. But Harper often does the opposite, she said. She takes questions from life to Scripture. If she then manages to find a story in the Bible that corresponds to the issue in question, she will draw conclusions from the text. But the authors seem to agree on at least one issue – that it is important, especially in public life, not only to profess your religion, but to put their faith into practice. "I think how [religion] is being used in politics is really the question," Harper said. "It's not enough for candidates or legislators to profess faith. What really matters is the policies that they propose and push." Most importantly, she added, it is important that the policies they push are actually about the values that their religion supports. "Professing faith is very easy to do, and that's really using religion; that's using religion for other means and to gain political points," Harper said. "We're in very confused times, and very polarized times. So it would be easy for evangelicals to put down their Bibles, and pick up ideologies; their party's politics. But I think that's lazy, and I also think that's not faithful." She added that Left, Right & Christ was written in order to give evangelicals an opportunity to wrestle with important contemporary questions together with the authors. "We may not know how Jesus would vote, but Harper and Innes help us solidify what we actually believe and where we are in terms of our faith and politics," the book's press release adds. Both authors gave a short lecture in New York on Thursday, followed by a book signing and a panel discussion featuring prominent Christian speakers Jim Wallis, CEO of Sojourners, and Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. Both Wallis and Land were happy to chime in on the conversation since they are also both evangelicals, yet have differing political views. Land supports small government and little regulation. Wallis was a spiritual adviser to President Barack Obama. His work focuses on social justice. They join the idea enclosed in the title, with the Left (Wallis) and the Right (Land) trying to find common ground on the issue of Bible and politics. Or to at least clearly state their arguments. Luiza Oleszczuk Christian Post Contributor -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
