Get to know your theocrats

The Boston Globe has just run a three-installment series about leading figures among American evangelicals. Although all three of them appear to be fundamentalists, I would count only two of them among the Christian Right. The third is taking a more cautious public posture.

First they profiled the Dick Cheney of the Christian Right, James Dobson: Dobson spiritual empire wields political clout by Brian MacQuarrie Boston Globe 10/09/05.

"Two starkly contrasting worldviews predominate today's moral and cultural debate," Dobson said in an e-mail response to questions from The Boston Globe. "One side defends the traditional values that have made this nation great for more than 225 years; the other works to chisel away at that foundation."

Dobson stands in the vanguard of a crusade by evangelical Christians to place their agenda at the forefront of public debate over presidential and congressional elections, judicial appointments, gay marriage, and the "life issues" of abortion, euthanasia, and embryonic stem-cell research. Dobson, 69, is arguably the dominant ideologist of the movement.

His influence is so considerable among conservatives that, before President Bush nominated Harriet E. Miers for the Supreme Court, White House adviser Karl Rove reportedly called Dobson with private assurances about Miers's judicial philosophy.

Dobson makes, uh, liberal use of emotional imagery to demonize those he criticizes:

In his view, Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, has caused the "biggest holocaust in world history"; the Supreme Court is guilty of "judicial tyranny" that threatens religious liberties; wide approval for gay marriage would send the nation "hurtling toward Gomorrah"; and the federal judiciary is a despotic oligarchy that represents "the last playground of the liberal left." ...

In one lightning-rod example, Dobson used a radio broadcast in August to compare the ethics of embryonic stem-cell research to Nazi medical experiments on prisoners.

"There is no question that the beliefs of conservative Christians are under attack,"
Dobson told the Globe. "Any conviction founded on religious faith is vilified; any stand on absolute truth is denigrated as old-fashioned at best, or reminiscent of the Taliban at worst; any view out of lockstep with the left's agenda is met with anything but tolerance and acceptance."

This notion of white fundamentalist Christians being religiously persecuted is an important theme for the Christian Right. The posture of the embattled underdog is an important part of their approach. And they never seem to get tired of repeating it:

"Do conservative Christians have less of a right to participate in the democratic process than do secularists?" Dobson asked. "I might remind my liberal critics that we enjoy a representative form of government. Each of us, even those who hold traditional values, is entitled by constitutional decree to participate in policy formation."

Of course, no one questions the right of fundis to participate in the political process. That posturing is just plain silly. It's the political positions of the Christian Right with which their political critics disagree, and the harsh and authoritarian religious positions they take with which other Christians disagree.

Their second subject is also one of the honchos of the Christian Right, Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC): Baptist lobbyist walks a fine line: Influential conservative distances self from the far right by Nina Easton Boston Globe 10/10/05.

I suppose "far right" is a relative term. But Land is definitely an important figure of the Christian Right. It's always advisable to be wary of Republican Christian fundamentalists advertising their moderation. For instance, here are a couple of examples of Land's supposed moderation:

Land's positions can take surprising turns. During last year's elections, he castigated the Republican Party for asking people to help secure church directories for get-out-the-vote efforts. "I said that's just beyond the pale. It's a violation of fellow church members," he says.

More recently, while Land encouraged the White House and Congress to step into
the Schiavo case, he distanced himself from far-right voices calling for extra-legal action to keep her alive.

Let's see, as an official of the SBC, he worries about partisan activities that may endanger his denomination's churches' tax-exempt status. And he didn't endorse the militia nuts who talked about using violence in the Shiavo situation. The photo with the article makes it appears he shaves his face clean in the morning, too. But these are pretty thin claims for moderation.

Actually, all of this seems to come down to the fact that, as a long-time lobbyist, he's a bit more slick than some of his Christian Right allies:

For 18 years, Land has walked this fine line as the Southern Baptist Convention's influential point-man in Washington, where he uses his close ties to the White House and congressional leadership to promote a deeply conservative social agenda on behalf of the nation's largest non-Catholic denomination. But he carefully distances himself from the far right, whether he's arguing that Christians should minister to gays and lesbians rather than condemn them or openly criticizing fellow evangelicals who refuse to follow court orders from "liberal activist" judges.

And at a time when the political right is fracturing over Supreme Court nominee Harriet E. Miers, Land is emerging as an avid Bush loyalist. Land, 58, has personally known the president since they both lived in Texas in the 1980s, and still meets with him three to four times a year. Unlike others on the right, Land didn't require convincing when Bush nominated John G. Roberts Jr. as chief justice - despite an unclear record on abortion and other social issues - and now stands apart from critics of the Miers's nomination. Yesterday, Land appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press" to defend Miers, predicting she will disagree with Roberts "only one percent of the time."

I think his conventional style may have distracted the reporter's attention from analyzing some of his more substantive positions. A closer look at his type of "ministry" to gays and lesbians, for instance, might not have produced such a benign account.

And does this part of her article really square with claims of "moderation" that he apparently encourages?

But his critics know him as an unyielding proponent of banning abortion rights, gay marriage, and embryonic stem cell research. His public statements on social issues, says J. Brent Walker, executive director of the centrist Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, "can be very acerbic. He's more likely to take a very hard-edged position." ...

Land, whose official title is president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, was instrumental in the Southern Baptist Convention's sharp swing to the right more than a decade ago, including the adoption of a resolution encouraging wives to obey their husbands. Last spring, he urged President Bush - a friend since 1988 - to step into the Terri Schiavo case and sign unprecedented legislation throwing Congress and the White House into the center of a family's dispute over an end-of-life decision.

Gay leaders are particularly alarmed about Land's promotion of "reparative therapy" to transform sexual orientation. At the Southern Baptist Convention's annual meeting in June, Land unveiled a video in which former gays and lesbians attribute their life paths to childhood sexual and physical abuse. (The men and women also condemned the intolerance of many religious figures they encountered.) More than 300 copies were distributed to churches as instruction on how to minister to gays and lesbians. (my emphasis)

Finally, there is Rick Warren, author of the The Purpose-Driven Life. Warren heads a Southern Baptist mega-church: Pastor rivets many without politics: Warren cultivates spiritual ground by Brian MacQuarrie Boston Globe 10/11/05. His theology sounds like it leans heavily toward the conservative/fundamentalist side:

Although Warren is not an overtly political figure, his message is a conservative one on issues such as abortion, and his followers voted in lopsided numbers for President Bush. In this sense, Warren and similar evangelical ministers are a key aspect of the religious-conservative political ascendancy. While activist leaders such as James C. Dobson of Focus on the Family and Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention work more directly on political causes, Warren helps expand and prepare the spiritual ground that is the bedrock of the movement. ...

Warren's persona is that of an affable, laid-back surfer, but his delivery is as emphatically pointed as the strict Southern Baptist denomination to which he belongs. His is a ministry with a goatee and a wisecrack, but one that asks much of the faithful. And although his roots are deeply and unmistakably Californian, Warren is often dubbed ''America's pastor" by observers of the religious scene, many of whom rank him second only to the Rev. Billy Graham in the popular hierarchy of evangelical leaders. ...

True to his conservative religious background, Warren is opposed to what he has called non-negotiable issues: abortion, gay marriage, embryonic stem cell research, cloning, and euthanasia.

But he is at least striking a public posture that, for the moment, looks more enlightened than the Christian Right:

Warren's call for massive, immediate attention to the AIDS crisis in Africa helps set him apart on the American religious stage, especially among the conservative evangelical wing, which regards homosexuality as a sin. Warren said he was inspired to act by his wife, Kay, who became horrified when she read about the millions of orphans and widowed spouses created by the disease in sub-Saharan Africa.

"We're going to do this because it's the right thing to do," Warren said, comparing inaction on AIDS to the indifference to slavery among many American churches in the 19th century. "There's something more important than nationality. It's the family of God."

I'm glad to see the Globe running this series. The mainstream press needs to do much better work on contemporary religious movements and the Christian Right in particular.

And while these articles are very informative, I would like to see reporters start digging much deeper on these types of stories. Did Dobson really only commit to political activism in 2003, as the article seems to imply? Why is Dobson so reluctant to do live interviews? Is it because he has to be carefully scripted to avoid embarassing himself? What do mainstream, secular therapists have to say about the "reparative therapy" Land advocates for gays and lesbians? How credible is Warren's claim that he doesn't cooperate with Land on politics? Are the reported attendance numbers of his and other megachurches reliable? How do the finances of their operations look?

Let's hope for more press work along these lines. Or should I say, let's pray for it?