Baptist Leader Schools Andrew Sullivan: Evangelical Tie to GOP 'Pales in Comparison' to 'Black Church' and Democrats
Newsweek's Andrew Sullivan got a much-needed education about religion and politics from not one but two evangelical leaders Sunday.
The first came from Dr. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention who in the midst of a heated debate on CBS's Face the Nation told Sullivan, "Any fusion between evangelicalism and Republicanism pales in comparison to the point of anemia compared to the black church and the Democratic Party" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
BOB SCHIEFFER, HOST: Andrew Sullivan, you wrote this piece in Newsweek, an extraordinary piece, called crisis in Christianity. What did you take away from what you just heard the cardinal say?
ANDREW SULLIVAN, THE DAILY BEAST: Well, I -- my view is very similar to what Rabbi Wolpe said, which is I think our ability to be reasonable in politics and faithful in religion and to keep those two things separate have atrophied to the great disadvantage of religion. And what has happened since 1960 is that organized groups like Southern Baptist Council and other religious groups have, in fact, become selfconsciously political, they have become fused with one political party, the Republican Party, a party who is now having the majority and defined by a particular religious faith, evangelicalism or far right Catholic hierarchy, and that is making many people feel, faith in Jesus is about politics and power and partisanship, in ways of turning offer an entire generation.
The biggest growth in any belief sector in this country in the last ten years has been atheism. And the younger generation can see these religious people wielding political power, endorsing essentially political candidates and fusing themselves with one political party, and picking fights.
Deliberately, the cardinal prepared for this fight with Obama on a political grounds.
They see, and I think they are muddying the real radical truth of Jesus, which is that we will gain power by giving it up, that we do not seek in the public sphere to have any power, but to be powerless. And Jesus was absolutely apolitical, anti-political. Given the chance to be political, he is only on the cross, because he refused politics.
SCHIEFFER: I am going let Dr. Land respond to that in a minute. But I want to get around the table first.
After Schieffer went around the table to get opinions from his other guests, Land finally had a chance to respond leading to the first round of fireworks:
SCHIEFFER: Andrew Sullivan said a couple of things you may want to respond to.
DR. RICHARD LAND, SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION: Yes. First of all, I don`t think we are a Christian nation. To me the idea of a Christian nation is odd, as an evangelical Christian because a country can`t be redeemed. I think we are a country that was founded on Judeo Christian values in an attempt to meld those with enlightenment ideas of self-government. And we have a nation that is based upon Judeo Christian values, but it`s not a Christian nation, and it shouldn`t be a Christian nation.
And concerning what Andrew said, you know, most of the involvement of evangelicals in the public realm has been defensive, it wasn`t offensive. We didn`t make abortion on demand legal in every state in the country and strike down the laws against abortion in all 50 states. We didn`t seek to erode the expression of the public square by people of faith, and the Republican Party is not the only party that tries to claim God for themselves. I was at the National Prayer Breakfast when President Obama said that god was for universal healthcare, and was for his program, and Nancy Pelosi said Jesus supported her program in the House.
And Bill Clinton mentions god and Jesus Christ more every year he was president than George W. Bush did any year he was president. And his references to god and Jesus went up three times during election years.
So, please, let`s stop the hypocrisy of one party being welded to one -- the religious left is the Democratic Party at prayer.
SULLIVAN: Oh, please.
First of all, my piece criticizes President Obama for precisely that thing. I am as opposed to the religious left using Jesus to advance their politics as I am opposed.
LAND: Criticized the program. You criticized the religious right.
(CROSSTALK)
SULLIVAN: Well, because, in fact, the religious right is infinitely more powerful and controls the Republican Party in a way the religious left has nothing like the power. And as you know, religious churches are key parts of political campaigns. You can`t win the South Carolina primary without churches actually running the Republican candidate. The fusion of evangelical religion...
LAND: There`s no -- there`s no...
SULLIVAN: ... with Republicanism is real.
LAND: The -- any fusion between evangelicalism and Republicanism pales in comparison to the point of anemia compared to the black church and the Democratic Party.
A few minutes later, Reverend Luis Cortes Jr., the CEO of the largest Hispanic faith-based community-development corporation in the country, also took on Sullivan leading to even more fireworks:
REVEREND LUIS CORTES JR, PRESIDENT AND CEO ESPERANZA USA: And one of the conversations that we are having is, Andrew stated that the right -- the religious evangelicals are part of only one denomination, of one of the Republican Party. And that is not true, not totally true, because we have folks, Hispanic people, who will probably not vote for Republican leadership this year over the issue of immigration.
If Romney gets 40 percent or 30 percent of the Hispanic evangelical vote, I`d be shocked, given what he has been doing and what he`s been saying on the issue of immigration.
Hispanic people are starting to look at the issue of the environment in a different way, Hispanic evangelicals.
So -- so what Andrew is doing is he`s focusing on a 20 or 30 or 40- year period and saying this is what religion in the public sphere is and what it should not be.
But I think you really need to look at the broader range and look at the entire history of this country. Were black ministers wrong to lead the civil rights? Were black ministers wrong, or African- American ministers wrong to get on their pulpits and say don`t vote for this individual because they`re opposed to us? I don`t think so. I think they had that right.
SULLIVAN: They didn`t say that. They did what Jesus did, which is they put Christianity in the public square by their personal example, just by living the life of Jesus. They marshaled a moral movement. They sought not to seek power. They wanted to show their powerlessness when they were attacked; they stayed nonviolent. And that is how Jesus transforms the world, not by getting involved in political parties.
(CROSSTALK)
LAND: ... emphasis on getting registered to vote, on the right to vote. The right to vote empowered them so that now the majority of sheriffs in Alabama and Mississippi are African-American.
SULLIVAN: But that was Lyndon Johnson`s role, to legislate, not the churches`. LAND: No, Martin Luther King was marching for the right to register to vote. The march was a right -- the Selma march was to vote. It was the right to register to vote because they had been disenfranchised...
SULLIVAN: But that is not associating with one political party. It is...
(CROSSTALK)
LAND: But it`s about power. And Jesus commanded us to be salt and light. And one of the ways you`re salt and light is to seek to influence government. The abolitionists...
SULLIVAN: Jesus never sought to control anyone and said to leave to Caesar what is Caesar`s.
LAND: And to render to God that which is God`s...
SULLIVAN: Yes.
LAND: ... which...
(CROSSTALK)
SULLIVAN: Which is not what the religious right is doing.
LAND: Romans 13 says God is supposed -- that the government is supposed to...
(CROSSTALK)
LAND: ... that which is right.
You get the feeling Sullivan should stick to MSNBC and programs like The Chris Matthews Show where he's surrounded by people of like minds and will never be challenged on anything he says?
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
God awful ....................
Submitted by Tomorama on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 8:26pm.
Strangely enough, I NEVER watch this show at all but was parsing through and YET again more BS about Faith and Mormonisn and Sullivan being a conservative..................
The Demonrats can say "it isn't about faith" but it IS going to be about Romney's faith.
DEAL, lets ALSO talk about Black Theology, 20 years in the church, hate and bitter clingers.
Evangelical churches bedded
Submitted by redfish on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 9:23pm.
Evangelical churches bedded themselves with the Republican party, only after the Democrats bedded themselves with labor unions, the entertainment industry, academia, minority rights groups, and so on, and so on. They took up causes like abortion and same-sex marriage in the 70s and 80s because the way that Democrats were tied-to-the-hip with all of these other social institutions (including yes black and hispanic churches) meant that the liberal political agenda would have run roughshod over the country if there was no place to stand up for it. The church filled that vacuum.
So yes, it would be nicer if churches could be less political, but whining about churches only, while ignoring the bulwark of other institutions that have been politicized for the left, is silliness.
Its the same kind of thing left-wing commentators do when they complain about the influence of corporate money but not union money, or complain about Fox News while ignoring the rest of the mainstream media.
And its not a crisis within the church, its a crisis with everything in society being politicized, something that owes a lot to the left and accelerated after the 60s.
Okay, having watched the
Submitted by redfish on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 9:45pm.
Okay, having watched the whole video now, two more comments:
1. Sullivan is leaving out important aspects of the story of the passion of Christ. He wasn't just killed because he refused to get involved in politics, he was killed because in calling himself the Son of God he was challenging the secular authorities who gave themselves God's authority on Earth. Caesar, who wanted to be seen as a deity, and the Jewish priests, who had given themselves too much power.
2. He's laboring under the notion that churches want to use politics to force their religion on other people, rather than fight for moral causes. People can believe abortion is wrong and disagree with pro-life policies, but from the Church's perspective, Sullivan has yet to explain why this is different from people who believed slavery was wrong but wanted to preserve the right to own slaves, or people who believed Jim Crow laws were wrong but wanted to preserve them.
Ultimately, on the second part, I think you need to put that in the context of the left using journalism, entertainment, academia, etc. for their political agenda. I don't think that churches would demand uniformity in views on policies if they didn't feel that traditional, religious values were under siege by the political left (anyone who is against same-sex marriage is a homophobe, anyone who doesn't want contraception paid for is anti-woman, anyone who doesn't support Roe v Wade is anti-woman, etc), and they didn't need to be a bulwark against that.
Andrew Sullivan got his butt kicked
Submitted by woburn828 on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 8:45pm.
Wow, never thought I would see AS getted whipped like this. Beautiful to watch. I agree with the last sentence, he may now only want to go on MSNBC with other libs to "win" an argument.
Andrew Sullivan got his butt kicked
Submitted by woburn828 on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 8:45pm.
Wow, never thought I would see AS getted whipped like this. Beautiful to watch. I agree with the last sentence, he may now only want to go on MSNBC with other libs to "win" an argument.
I think ol' Tweedle-Dee ought
Submitted by killa37 on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 8:48pm.
I think ol' Tweedle-Dee ought to stick to issues he knows best, like gay bathouses and HIV cocktails............because everytime he tries to bring up any other subject - like women's contraception or religion - he get's his fat rear end whupped - and not the way he usually likes it.
I want to understand
Submitted by wingnut55 on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 8:57pm.
Let's see it is not ok for a Republican candidate to speak from a pulpit, but it is ok for President Clinton, Congressman Conyers, Mayor of Detroit Young, Congresswoman Walters and I could go on and on speak from a pulpit. I really love it when someone who does not accept Jesus or even acknowledges Him as the Son of God tells me what Jesus believes. Jesus is God, therefore we need to believe in Him not Him believing in the things of this world (which, by the way, He created). Jesus is God, He doesn't take sides. We need to be on His side.
Liberal Biblical Illiteracy
Submitted by metaphorsbwithu on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 9:13pm.
It's easy for liberals to quote the Bible.
All they have to remember is "Render to Caesar... " and the parts of "The Sermon on the Mount" liberals love ... the part about "redistributing wealth".
Just leave all that "sinning and repentance" stuff and that Jesus is literally God in the Flesh and you've got it.
They talk about him forgiving
Submitted by redfish on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 11:00pm.
They talk about him forgiving a prostitute, but forget that he said "go and sin no more".
Its the "Jesus was a hippie" thing. Maybe, minus the sex, drugs, and rock and roll.
Looking for loopholes ... the liberal way
Submitted by metaphorsbwithu on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 2:22am.
Actually redfish, what they emphasize is that Jesus showed the hypocrisy of those who would have stoned her, and, after shaming them away, there was no one left to judge her ... which is an important part of the story.
But you are absolutely correct in that the "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" statement is neither license to sin nor a mandate to ignore it.
True Christians, despite being stereotyped as holier-than-thou hypocrites, know that we all sin ... hate the sin while loving the sinner. That's why we need God's grace and is what Christianity is basically all about ... and Christain-bashers miss that whole point.
But back to your point.
It's like the old joke about the guy defending himself in court, requesting the judge lend him his law book, and then asking where the loopholes are.
That was a start ...
Submitted by metaphorsbwithu on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 9:08pm.
But it would really be encouraging if someone would just bring up all the socio/political activity that has pressed on unrelentingly from the likes of the social justice and anti-war activists and movements from left-wing elements of the Cathoic Church, and that of the Black Liberation Theology movement, which also shares some of the same social justice activists like Fr. Pfleger, and of course not to forget Pres. Obama's own church of almost 20 years which has been strongly anti-Republican and anti-conservative (Jeremiah Wright described conservatives, including Pres. Bush, as terrorists), very left-wing, and very pro Louis Farrakhan to boot.
As it is, those on the right are still too timid (or unaware) of the responses that could really put the arguments of the left in proper context. Instead, they play defense, and even when they play it well, they are playing with one hand tied behind their backs.
Here's my contribution, meta....
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 10:08pm.
Is this a white Republican preaching in a white evangelical church?
Who was this man who did absolutely NOTHING...spoke NOT ONE WORD to refute masses who treated him as the messiah.
And who went to the National Prayer Breakfast and used the gospel to promote economic policy and the resdistribution of wealth.....was that Republican and born-again Christian George W. Bush?
Nope.
And Obama's most egregious use of religion in his campaign....after 3 years of not attending church, all of a sudden in election year, he starts going to Church in DC! Talk about shameless pandering!
But it's Republicans who bring politics into the churches and vice versa?
You sound so angry,
Submitted by metaphorsbwithu on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 10:57pm.
You sound so angry, motherbelt.
First of all, is there a law against people of faith expressing their opinion about anything?
Is there something wrong with talking about faith at a prayer breakfast?
Is there something wrong about Catholics, even priests, advocating resistribution of wealth or pacifisism?
Is ther something wrong about black pastors encouraging their parishioners to vote Democrat?
Is there something wrong about President Obama arguing Jesus would support higher taxes, or having his campaign organize black churches for get out the vote drives and organized prayer vigils.
Virtually everything involving "religion" from the left is activist and involves "getting something".
Virtually everything involving "religion" from the right is a reaction to the imposition of secular mandates and intrusion and usually is a request to leave them alone.
If evangelicals have so much influence, given the degradation of society and th institutions of government around us, it's a mystery how.
Of course that's my humble opinion based on what I've seen living in the real world.
Sorry, I misunderstood.
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 8:47am.
I'm going back and forth here, trying to decide whether you're serious or doing this tongue-in-cheek.
I thought it was tongue-in-cheek, but then I thought "serious" when you described the difference between religion from the left and the right.
Yeah, I'm angry. I'm angry that so many Americans fell for Obama's "religious" performances, and don't see the hypocrisy of attending Church only in election years. Do people really fall for this sham?
I guess whoever said "Once you can fake sincerity, the rest is easy" was right.
Regarding your previous remarks concerning Fr. Pfleger, he can go around preaching for wealth redistribution until the cows come home, but he has ZERO power to actually do anything about it. That's in the realm of the politicians and legislators. That's why the conflation of gospel and government is worrisome.
Imagine if George W. Bush proposed operating ANY segment of government and legislation according to "Christian" or "gospel" principles.
Oh, please!
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 9:38pm.
They might not be organized into a "council" but the black churches in this country have been part and parcel of Democrat campaigning for as long as I can remember.
Democrat candidates go into black churches and actually preach from the pulpit, and yet the Catholic Church gets smacked if priests say "vote for pro-life candidates" because that "mixes" politics and religion.
21st. Century Fear, the loss of the 501(c)(3) tax exempt status.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 12:46pm.
Has been the most effective weapon, to shut up the Churches....
Amazing; the places that the 1st. Amendment can be filtered so effectively.
You Didn't Build That.
delete
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 9:57pm.
delete
Sullivan would do well to
Submitted by ant on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 10:13pm.
Sullivan would do well to remember too, that none of us, even Obama, is Jesus. We all have a right to make our lives and our Country better and to stand up for what we think is right. If Sullivan sees that as power seeking, perhaps that's something he needs to work on himself. Sure, if we were Jesus we could transform the world and get it right and for the right reason, but we are not. Even the apostles, those closest to Him than anybody, frequently came up with the wrong answers during their travels with Christ's ministry.
Andrew Sullivan is an expert on Christianity HOW?
Submitted by drsamherman on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 10:22pm.
He might self-identify as Catholic, but he certainly never displays ANY Christian values, and he shows an appalling ignorance of Christ's principles.
That he would argue theology and Christianity with two pastors of the faith is disgusting. When did he graduate from a seminary? When did he ever preach anything but liberal diatribe? When has he EVER been honest about his political beliefs, lying about being a conservative?
It doesn't get much more disgusting than Andrew Sullivan, with the possible exception of Dan Savage.
Sullivan and the Democratic Party line
Submitted by Galvanic on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 11:00am.
I haven't read Sullivan's article, nor will I after listening to his 'analysis.'
SULLIVAN: They (black church leaders in civil rights movement) didn`t say that. They did what Jesus did, which is they put Christianity in the public square by their personal example, just by living the life of Jesus. They marshaled a moral movement. . . ."
Yet when conservative evangelical marshal a moral movement, Sullivan and friends condemn them as being 'political.'
Besides, when any organization rallies thousands of people for a public demonstration, it's beyond a stretch of imagination to label it "living the life of Jesus." A demonstration is by definition a political activity.
SULLIVAN: . . . They sought not to seek power. . .
All these groups seek influence, which one could argue is a sense of empowerment. The conservative evangelicals are trying to protect what they feel is coming under political attack by the Democrats. Their natural ally in a two-party system is the GOP.
SULLIVAN: . . . They wanted to show their powerlessness when they were attacked; they stayed nonviolent. . . .
Can he give us an example of violent evangelicals? Where are they? I am not aware of any.
SULLIVAN: . . . And that is how Jesus transforms the world, not by getting involved in political parties.
So, then should all the black churches declare their separation from the Democratic Party? Should ordained black clergy like Rep. Cleaver resign their political offices? Shall they end voter registration drives, and endorsing candidates from the pulpit?
We could fill volumes with examples of Sullivan's hypocrisy.
What a Bozo...
Submitted by jdripper on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 10:38pm.
Jesus was a very astute politician. Read his answers when questioned by the priests at the age of 12. He answered each and every question put to him but none directly. This was his pattern all of his life. He knew full well one slip up of his words and he would be executed.
Look at his words when in front of Pilate. Look how he turned the questions of Herrod's interrogators on them. He was much more then just political. His words and the use of them are masterpieces of a God answering petty and jealous inquiries from those more bent on their own glory here and now then the future.
Jack
Sunday Christianity
Submitted by LaVallette on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 6:05am.
Sully old boy, Christianity is a WAY OF LIFE and not simply what you do for a couple of hours on Sunday mornings and in the privacy of your church or chapel. yu are expected to witness to and evidence your Christian truths and principle and bring its good news to all the world in very aspect of your life and more then ever in the public participation in economic/ political order. If a free association of like minded people bound together by religious principles is to be deprived of its voice in the public arena when the Constitution guarantees Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Association, than what hope for other other free assciations including the political parties themselves? All such associations are not dictating terms to the government but competing freely for the support of the public and for the election of a government that supports their principles. They are demanding no less and nor more then those associations campaigning to persuade the public to support abortion, gay marriage, public health guarantees, economic reform. Surely Sully would not seek to deprive these people of their voice in the public arena, especially those on support of gay marriage which is "the Big principle" which dicates his politcal agenda.
BTW What is so threatening to the American sociopolitical system and freedom for an organization to politically oppose a presidential DIKTAT that imposes an obligation to pay for someone else's contraception and/or abortion, much more so if you also oppose it on moral and relgious grounds. It is the DIKTAT itself that is the bigger threat.
Well said
Submitted by ant on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 7:09am.
And what I think the Hispanic preacher would have expanded on if given the chance, as he brought up the example of voting rights. Sully's claim of 'power' is ridiculous really. Sure, it's about power. The power of the People. To have their voices heard, for government to act in a way reflective of the People that they actually work FOR. For Sully, like you said, it's not okay for those who disagree with the liberal agenda to have a voice, so that must be framed as dangerous 'power-grabbing'. What isn't about power in some way or another. I work to have purchasing power. Doesn't the Bible tell us about having the power of the Holy Spirit, the power of being on the side of God, power over the devil, the power of the Word? I guess Sully would be happier to speak on the politeness and courtesy of God and that, maybe, He should just sit back down in the corner and not be so 'out-spoken'?
Excitable Andy 's Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day
Submitted by locomotivebreath1901 on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 9:35am.
It was almost palpable: Excitable Andy Sullivan's desperate wish to stick his fingers into his ears and mutter repeatedly, "Must preserve the narrative; must preserve the narrative; must preserve...."
Excitable Andy truly was having a Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day!
Andrew, you're a putz!
Submitted by johnnyatlanta on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 10:16am.
Take it from a non-Christian, Andrew is a putz! He's simply laying the ground work for Obama's attack on Romeny, the Tea Party and Republicans. They think most American's are turned off by Christianity and they see this as just another wedge issue. Strife and division is Obama's MO.
Black churches have been
Submitted by hardrock01 on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 10:32am.
Black churches have been preaching from the pulpit for over a 100 years, telling there congregations who to vote for and how bad whitey is. There is no separation of church and state in a black church. They don't fear any reprisals from the IRS. In fact they threaten the IRS to come after them. It's only non-black churches that are threatened by the IRS and Democrats.
I Like It!
Submitted by HardRightTurn on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 12:57pm.
More and more conservative voices talking back all the time. When you hear Leftist BS, call out the Leftist BS. Don't let them get away with it anymore. Enough is enough.
To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html
Newsweek??
Submitted by trahantg on Mon, 04/09/2012 - 1:52pm.
They still open??