"The religious right is dead, long live the...?" (A conversation about my past and the things that didn't work. )

Cal Thomas' November 5th opinion piece, entitled "Religious Right R.I.P" makes certain key observations that only a "founding father of the movement" could make. I've pasted the "obit" below for your reading pleasure (especially you libs...tee hee).

Here's a conversation I've just had with my adult daughter (24 years old), now married and with her first child, who was an eyewitness to the religious right happenings of the 1990s (the period that I helped lead the religious right movement in Idaho). As only a kid who lived through it can recall, she makes some very valuable points, now as an adult:

Den: Is the religious right dead in Idaho?

Meg: What do you mean by that?

D: Is Cal Thomas' story accurate for Idaho?

M: Obviously, what we've been doing isn't working. He talks a lot about preachers being involved in politics. It seems as though the people who are involved in politics (and are also Christians) are either bulldogs and therefore can't change other people's minds...or they are, themselves persuaded into the politics of it all, not really knowing what they believe...wish washy.

D: Preachers on TV, too?

M: I don't think they impact many people, except the older people in their own sub-culture. They are not reaching young people my age.

D: What about Jim Dobson and Focus on the Family? You grew up with that as an influence on you, how's it working today in your life?

M: I think that the children's programs are awesome for kids (Odessy, and the books on CD) however the reach and influence of Dr. Dobson obviously isn't far, since much of his own community voted for President-elect Obama.

D: Doesn't that strike you as odd?

M: Well, I was an eyewitness to his own son, (Ryan) eleven years ago coming to Idaho and impacting my brother and others and experiencing a belligerent and rebellious attitude from him, at the time. It seems as though Dr. Dobson's influence and his ideas didn't work in his own family back then, so why should I think they'd work for me now (both in his family ideals and on public policy issues)?

D: You watched me write the bills that dealt with pro-life legislation and stopping special rights for gays...

M: It didn't do anything positive, did it?

D: I think that's a good question. Did it?

M: I feel it made the "sides" even clearer - people who were for abortion really embraced it. People against it almost made those who were "for it" seem evil....rather than focusing on educating and loving unwed mothers, we made it us vs. them. Same with the gay rights stuff...

D: I agree. How much do you think my actions contributed to this?

M: You did what you thought was best at the time. I don't think you saw some of the repercussions that were going to appear. Your whole comment about the "blood on the elbow", etc and Governor Batt gave you bad name-ID...and that stopped you from getting into Congress back in 2000.

D: I was too tough with Governor Batt, I agree. He is a good man and we had a difference of opinion...I was just too vocal, wasn't I?

M: You can't do "what if's" and "if only's". Did it work? Well, it got the subject out there...and people became educated, whether they wanted to or not.

D: So is the religious right dead in Idaho?

M: No, not dead...maybe on life-support (laughs)...there are still those who are lobbying and writing bills, holding press conferences, etc. Are they really doing anything? Hmmm....

D: Here's a better question: Should the remnant of the religious right in Idaho wake up soon and see its obituary in the Idaho Statesman?

M:  I found in my own life that being compassionate, loving and mellow creates an environment that I want. If the focus of the religious right remnant in Idaho changed to loving and embracing even those who are different than themselves, then they might have greater success.

D: Any questions for me?

M: Do I get a coffee out of this?

D: Nah.

M: You suck.

D: Ok, I'll get an instant coffee out of our Boy Scout camping gear...(laughs)..

M: Gee thanks....Ok, here's a real question: You've changed a lot, why is that?

D: I suppose it started over these last 8 years, when I realized that I just don't know as much as I thought I did. We left Bryan Fischer's church before it imploded and began attending the Boise Vineyard; I saw that there were many, many people in need, many of whom I had never even noticed before. Somehow, Christ's love for the "unlovable" overcame me. Also, having our family member get caught up in drugs took me down a tough pathway I had never known, as well; that none of us had known...

As you DO know, I also went through the Focus Seminar Training in Boise and that helped me more clearly capture my own heart...and to live my faith though my hands and feet, rather than via my mouth. The work with New Hope and the ex-addicts really brought it home for me - people need the Lord, they don't need Dennis Mansfield.

D: Thanks, Meg, for taking time to talk.

M: You are welcome. Now let's let the readers read Cal Thomas' piece:

RELIGIOUS RIGHT R.I.P.

on November 05, 2008 4:15:09 | 4667 times read

RELIGIOUS RIGHT R.I.P.

By Cal Thomas

Tribune Media Services

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, contributing more millions to radio and TV preachers and activists, or would they be wise to try something else?

I opt for trying something else.

Too many conservative Evangelicals have put too much faith in the power of government to transform culture. The futility inherent in such misplaced faith can be demonstrated by asking these activists a simple question: Does the secular left, when it holds power, persuade conservatives to live by their standards? Of course they do not. Why, then, would conservative Evangelicals expect people who do not share their worldview and view of God to accept their beliefs when they control government?

Too many conservative Evangelicals mistake political power for influence. Politicians who struggle with imposing a moral code on themselves are unlikely to succeed in their attempts to impose it on others. What is the answer, then, for conservative Evangelicals who are rightly concerned about the corrosion of culture, the indifference to the value of human life and the living arrangements of same- and opposite-sex couples?

The answer depends on the response to another question: do conservative Evangelicals want to feel good, or do they want to adopt a strategy that actually produces results? Clearly partisan politics have not achieved their objectives. Do they think they can succeed by committing themselves to 30 more years of the same?

If results are what conservative Evangelicals want, they already have a model. It is contained in the life and commands of Jesus of Nazareth. Suppose millions of conservative Evangelicals engaged in an old and proven type of radical behavior. Suppose they followed the admonition of Jesus to “love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit those in prison and care for widows and orphans,” not as ends, as so many liberals do by using government, but as a means of demonstrating God’s love for the whole person in order that people might seek Him?

Such a strategy could be more “transformational” than electing a new president, even the first president of color. But in order to succeed, such a strategy would not be led by charismatic figures, who would raise lots of money, be interviewed on Sunday talk shows, author books and make gobs of money.

Scripture teaches that God’s power (if that is what conservative Evangelicals want and not their puny attempts at grabbing earthly power) is made perfect in weakness. He speaks of the tiny mustard seed, the seemingly worthless widow’s mite, of taking the last place at the table and the humbling of one’s self, the washing of feet and similar acts and attitudes; the still, small voice. How did conservative Evangelicals miss this and instead settle for a lesser power, which in reality is no power at all? When did they settle for an inferior “kingdom”?

Evangelicals are at a junction. They can take the path that will lead them to more futility and ineffective attempts to reform culture through government, or they can embrace the far more powerful methods outlined by the One they claim to follow. By following His example, they will decrease, but He will increase. They will get no credit, but they will see results. If conservative Evangelicals choose obscurity and seek to glorify God, they will get much of what they hope for, but can never achieve, in and through politics.

(Direct all MAIL for Cal Thomas to: Tribune Media Services, 2225 Kenmore Ave., Suite 114, Buffalo, N.Y. 14207. Readers may also e-mail Cal Thomas at tmseditors@tribune.com.

(c) 2008 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.

Comments

[Dennis Mansfield]

Thanks, Ron.

God is at work on many levels. I'm thankful for His unyeilding patience with me. That I may have same type of patience with others, is my desire.

The conversation with my daughter was insightful on many levels. She's an amazing young lady, wife, mother and contributor to our culture. Thanks for taking time to read it.
Den

[Ron Bengtson]

Thank you. I appreciate hearing the honest exchange between you and your daughter. You asked her if the Religious Right is dead in Idaho. I think Cal Thomas was implying that the Religious [political] Right needs to die, so that true Christian Evangelism can live and reach the younger generation. It needs to be OK to tell a new born again Christian that he or she doesn’t have to become a Republican, or vote Republican in order to be a good/real Christian.

I hope you will have an opportunity to talk with Cousin Bill about Cal Thomas’ article and this exchange with our daughter.

[Michele Shepherd]

Dennis-
This was a fascinating exchange with your daughter. Being "in-between" you two in age, I watched and participated in this movement in my 20's. I have to say that in recent years, there has been a level of feeling somewhat "disenfranchised" if you will, by the "religious right". Let me explain-

We that were in our 20-somethings that really bought into this movement in some fashion or another (Promise Keepers, Focus on the Family...church even) have watched the moral compass in this country decline in the last 15+ years to an unbelievable low, all despite honest efforts to volunteer, march, stay faithful...

Only in the last election have we witnessed how far short the religious right fell in communicating God's grace and His mercy in the realm of "humanity". There is not only a lost and dying WORLD to contend with in these latter days, but we now have a large sect within the "Christian Community" falling under radar and slipping between the cracks!

Instead of accurately communicating this hope for the lost and dying world in terms of eternal salvation and where our self-worth and who we really are lies [in Jesus Christ, alone] the religious right made it seem that the "ticket" to changing lives was through this bull-dog attitude that Megan describes, rather than simpling loving people where they were at, reflecting Jesus and then trusting Jesus to do the "heart work".

As a consequence, the failure in communicating this Love, Grace & Mercy available to all who should seek it in Christ, not only turned the lost world more against those of us specifically sent as disciples and commissioners of the gospel, but it also caused a chasm within the church body itself with disastrous results such as divorce, substance abuse... and some even walking away from the body of Christ all together.

After the pain of disillusionment had settled and subsided after this last election, I realized that He is still in control. Realizing for a number of years now that "Love covers a multitude of sin", I think that Megan's generation is a force to be reckoned with as well as a cause worth buying in to... Love them, touch them, feed them, bring them. We can't tell them Jesus loves them until we are ready to love them ourselves.

Thanks for the great read and thought provoking ideas...

P.S. as per psalm 127... you should be very encouraged by the remarks of your daughter... she is "as [an] arrow(s) in the hand of a mighty man; she IS speaking with the enemies at the gate! I know that it gives me courage as my "littles" grow up!

[Mike Kennedy]

Dennis,

This is an interesting read. I've never met your daughter, but from this interview she seems to have been raised to think independently and critically. I hope my kids have that trait when they get older. Best wishes to you in your ongoing efforts.

Mike Kennedy
Coeur d'Alene