Connect with us on Facebook!
[Feeds & Readers]
Follow us on Twitter!

Make us your home page!
Authors, sign in!

« Bush's Political Allies Score Biodefense Research | Main | Snooty Is Never Pretty »

Luther: Rather be governed by a smart Turk than a dumb Christian

By John Petty
August 20, 2008

In appearing at the recent faith forum at Saddleback Baptist Church, Sen. Obama was trying to do two things. It was a way of countering the persistent rumor that he's a Muslim, and he was continuing in his bid for the evangelical vote. John Kerry got 22% of the evangelical vote in 2004. Bill Clinton had gotten up to a third of it in the 90's, and Obama figures he ought to be able to do as well as Clinton.

I didn't watch the event, but the reviews are in. Obama took the format to be one of conversation with Rick Warren, the pastor of the church, while McCain took it as a campaign event and made his appeal directly to the audience. McCain gave canned, stump speech style answers to almost everything, but probably came out on top because the audience seemed more in sync with him, and because Warren seemed to tilt to McCain.

One person made this observation: McCain talked about God, Obama talked about Jesus. She was right, but misses the point. McCain correctly recognizes that the evangelical movement is really about cultural traditionalism and civic piety. In fact, the new evangelical movement began out of opposition to the social revolution of the 1960's. Before that, evangelicalism was a backwater. After the 60's, cultural traditionalists needed a place to rally and they found it in the evangelical church.

So McCain understands that, for his purposes, civic piety only requires reference to God, not Jesus. American civil religion has always been that way. We couldn't agree on theological details, but golly, we all believed in God. It's why "God and Country" sounds natural, but "Christ and Country" doesn't. Having given the expected "nod to God," McCain can then shift to the real interest of evangelicals, which is the promotion of cultural traditionalism.

The whole episode is regrettable. For one thing, who appointed Rick Warren to be the arbiter of what matters to Christians? Even among Christians, evangelicals are a minority. Who gave them the right to call the shots?

The press has glommed on to Rick Warren because he appears to be a new generation of evangelical leader. In other words, he's a nice person, and not a jerk like the old-timers. I grant that Rick Warren is a nice person and has done some good things. The problem is that he's still a conservative baptist who believes that if you aren't a baptist, you're going to hell.

When asked, at an Aspen Institute event, if Jews who didn't believe in Jesus were going to hell, Warren thought for a moment, and then said, "Yes." You can give him credit for not pandering to the audience, but it also shows that Warren's theology is thoroughly in keeping with the baptist position, which is precisely that, unless you confess Jesus, you're going to hell. (See Romans 9-11 for St. Paul's counter-argument which culminates in his flat statement, "all Israel will be saved.") Saddleback Church is really a baptist church, by the way. The word "baptist" was left out of the church name because they thought it might hurt their market share.

Warren is good on the environment, and good on AIDS work, but is a cultural traditionalist on gays and abortion. In fact, Warren equates an evangelical Christian voting for a pro-choice politician with a Jew voting for a holocaust denier. (Sigh.) Everybody plays the Hitler card sooner or later, I guess.

Martin Luther once said, "I'd rather be governed by a smart Turk than a dumb Christian." It is not the civil government's role to promote the faith. The civil government is to run civil society, which is made up of all citizens, not just Christians. The government's job is to run well what the government is supposed to run. A smart Turk is more likely to do that than a dumb Christian.

These "faith forums" make me nervous for just that reason. It's too much like the mullahs of the middle east who back candidates based on the strictist possible adherence to a theological position. That kind of thing almost always leads to disaster.

All this is why I'm leery of Democrats getting religion. Sure, we might be able to peel off 5-10% of the evangelical vote, but that can be done without trying to flaunt how religious we are. Clinton did it. How? By talking about jobs and education, which are important issues for evangelicals too. Besides, when we do it, we talk about "people of faith," which sounds amorphous--who isn't a "person of faith"?--so that the Republicans still wind up looking like the "most Christian."

Plus, I've never understood how Christians could support these displays of public piety in the first place. Didn't Jesus rap the pharisees for the public flaunting of their religion? They like to say "long prayers" in public, and be seen praying in the marketplaces and on street corners, he said. When you pray, he said in Matthew 6, go home, go into the closet, and pray in secret. It sounds weird to say it, but we Christians ought to pay attention to what Jesus said.

Comments (2)

Janet Author Profile Page:

Interesting post. I really like your distinction between the candidates' reference to God vs. Jesus. So very true. I'm going to have to use that when talking to people. Thanks for provoking the thinking.

bringmehomekathleen Author Profile Page:

Right on, John. I have just now finished hearing Joe Biden's acceptance speech for Vice-President, and my biggest fear is that US Catholic bishops, or some segment of them, will now try to systematically destroy his candidacy. Some did this to John Kerry the last time around, and some did this to Kathleen Sibelius as soon as rumors started circulating earlier this year that she might be Obama's VP pick. I am holding my breath and praying that this time bishops with Republican leanings will not try to destroy another Democratic Catholic candidate.

Post your own comment

(To create links here or for style, you may wish to use HTML tags in your comments)

Our sponsors help us stay online to serve you. Thank you for doing your part! By using the specific links below to start any of your online shopping, you are making a tremendous difference. By using the links below, you are directly helping to support this community website:

Want to browse more blogs? Try our table of contents to find articles under specific topics or headings. Or you might find interesting entries by looking through the complete archives too. Stay around awhile. We're glad you're here.

Browse the Blogs!

You are here!

This page contains only one entry posted to Everyday Citizen on August 20, 2008 2:06 PM.

The blog post previous to it is titled "Bush's Political Allies Score Biodefense Research"

The post that follows this one is titled "Snooty Is Never Pretty"

Want to explore this site more?

Many more blog posts can be found on our Front Page or within our complete Archives.

Does a particular subject interest you?

You can easily search for blog posts under a specific topic by using our List of Categories.

Visit our friends!

Books You Might Like!

Notices & Policies

All of the Everyday Citizen authors are delighted you are here. We all hope that you come back often, leave us comments, and become an active part of our community. Welcome!

All of our contributing authors are credentialed by invitation only from the editor/publisher of If you are visiting and are interested in writing here, please feel free to let us know.

For complete site policies, including privacy, see our Frequently Asked Questions. This site is designed, maintained, and owned by its publisher, Everyday Citizen Media., The Everyday Citizen,, and Everyday Citizen are trademarked names.

Each of the authors here retain their own copyrights for their original written works, original photographs and art works. Our authors also welcome and encourage readers to copy, reference or quote from the content of their blog postings, provided that the content reprints include obvious author or website attribution and/or links to their original postings, in accordance with this website's Creative Commons License.

© Copyright, 2007-2011, All rights reserved, unless otherwise specified, first by each the respective authors of each of their own individual blogs and works, and then by the editor and publisher for any otherwise unreserved and all other content. Our editor primarily reviews blogs for spelling, grammar, punctuation and formatting and is not liable or responsible for the opinions expressed by individual authors. The opinions and accuracy of information in the individual blog posts on this site are the sole responsibility of each of the individual authors.