NPR Featured Ex-Bush Aide David Kuo Ripping Falwell For Damaging Jesus

Photo of Tim Graham.
  • Bookmark and Share

As Mark Finkelstein noted, (following the well-worn formula of "trash Bush, get a book deal, and be excerpted lovingly by Time magazine and interviewed on 60 Minutes") former Bush faith-initiative aide David Kuo is again milking the conservative-trashing formula after Jerry Falwell's death. On National Public Radio's evening newscast All Things Considered on Wednesday night, Kuo continued his attack line that Falwell harmed the cause of Jesus and social conservatism:

Yesterday, a friend from Los Angeles called. The person is successful, known, part of the entertainment industry. Jerry Falwell is, my friend said, the reason I can't call myself a Christian in Hollywood. He is what everyone thinks to that when they hear the word Christian. That may well be Jerry Falwell's most enduring and most troubling legacy. Jerry Falwell almost single-handedly blurred the line between Jesus and conservative politics to the detriment of both.

Though he was a largely marginalized political figure in the later years of his life, Falwell took great pride in the political giant he helped create. He knew that without Jerry Falwell, the religious right wouldn't be what it is today, and he liked that. It is the single most powerful force in American politics - a force unrivaled in raw political power since the unions at their height in post-World War II America.

But the man who once said that pastors should just preach Jesus from the pulpit and not bring the pulpit into politics also had to see that he had failed. The America Jerry Falwell said goodbye to yesterday is an America more politically divided and culturally coarse - more violent and less loving - than the one he tried to start saving through political action in the 1970s.

In the 30 years since he brought politics to his pulpit and his pulpit to politics, conservative commentator Bill Bennett documents that divorces are up, out-of-wedlock births are up, family formation is down, crime is up, drug use is up, teen sexual activity is up and church attendance is down. Falwell's great bet - that political power could create a more Christian America than the humble preaching of Christ could -- failed.

Then there is the matter of faith itself. Whether deserved or undeserved, whether it is stereotype or reality, Jerry Falwell became the face of American Christianity. His strident stance on abortion made people think that to be Christian meant having to adopt exactly his standards on abortion. There was no nuance. There was little public grace on such matters. His truly horrifying statements about AIDS being God's condemnation on homosexuals may have single- handedly turned more people away from Jesus than could fill all of today's mega-churches.

And then there were his statements about 9/11. His bizarre words blaming people who had abortions - people who were gay, people who didn't adopt his politics - were spiritually destructive beyond words. The nature of the Christian faith however is hope - hope in the unseen, hope in the goodness of God, hope in resurrection.

So here, now, with his passing, there is the chance to begin again the discussion of what it means to be a Christian - what it means to follow Jesus, what it means to sacrificially love others. If, out of that, more people come to know the Jesus of the Gospels rather than the Jesus of the GOP, Jerry Falwell's ultimate legacy may be that he helped lead people back to God. And that, I want to believe, is what he wanted in the first place.

Let's hope the defenders of the liberal elite at NPR don't try the sorry defense that putting Kuo on is actually having a conservative commentator on the taxpayer-funded airwaves. On his blog, Kuo also has a post about he and his bride were horrified at the prospect of being married by Jerry Falwell (who had graciously volunteered) because it would horrify his liberal and non-Christian friends:

What horrified us, however, was the impression it would send to those watching our ceremony. Many of those in attendance weren’t Christians. Kim and I had, however, spent a lot of time talking to them all about Jesus – talking to them about the Jesus of the Gospels and how different he was from the Jesus of the GOP. To have Jerry Falwell preside at our wedding would have destroyed that spiritual work we had done. Jerry Falwell’s Christianity was a Christianity that melded political conservatism with the Gospel. In Falwell’s world, it was virtually impossible to be a Christian and not be tithing to the GOP.

That is the spiritual wake that he leaves behind, and it is a wake that will leave the waters muddy and swirling for years to come. What theologically conservative Christians must now fight against isn’t merely the problems people have with faith in Jesus, but the problems they have with the political agenda so synonymous with Jerry Falwell.
Fortunately, there are at least five ways to reclaim Jesus from conservative politics.

He also wrote a sneering blog post on how he was excited to redefine Christianity as "something more than simply saying no to abortion, no to gay rights, no to alcohol, no to coed dorms, and yes to politics." That's funny. That's exactly how the liberal media defines conservative Christianity -- with almost no mention of Christ or his church. When Kuo rolls his eyes at "strident" rhetoric about abortion, someone should ask him precisely how much wiggle room we should add as we redefine Christianity -- is abortion not a sin now? Is homosexuality not a sin now? Isn't the rejection of sexual sin an important part of the faith? Or is this just the right words to use to unlock the door to more NPR commentaries and CNN interviews?

How dare this man pompously imply that everyone else is being political with Jesus as he plays politics to advance his own career and pocketbook and political influence.

—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

He's a hypocrit.

 He claims to be a follower of Christ, yet he disagrees with the very commandments that Christ said to follow. He claim's to love his friends yet will not tell them how to attain eternal life, but instead shields them from the one who can give it to them. He seems to have misunderstood the message of the Gosples, that it is through acceptance of the messiah and REPENTANCE for our sins that we are saved. Repentance means to stop doing what you now know to be wrong and being contrite and sorry for doing it at all. 

Christ scorned and chastised the Pharisees because they were more interested in appearances and the rules of man, then they were in teaching and following the rules of GOD. Kuo is doing exactly the same thing.

Falwell was certaintly not perfect and he certaintly didn't make his points the way others would have. But, in the end, when you boil it down, he told it like it is and didn't sugar-coat it. You may not always have liked the way he said something, but what he said was based in the bible and accurate. Abortion is murder, homosexuality is wrong and an abomination. After all the proponents of both tell us they are "choices". Abortion is a choice that the girl makes and homosexuality is a preference. Well, as with all choices, there is usually a correct choice and a wrong choice.

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic

On the criticism that Jerry F

On the criticism that Jerry Falwell brought the pulpit to politics and politics to the pulpit ...Too many people think that religious freedom means that we all have to keep religion to ourselves. A couple years ago, Thomas Friedman of the NY Times said that he took it for granted that on public affairs, we should all ignore religion – and it shocked him that other Americans don’t take that for granted also.

To be clear, we don’t leave our religious values at church. We do leave behind religious authority. Once religious leaders enter the public forum, they have no more authority than any other citizen. In the public forum, the Bible carries no more weight than any other book. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t follow our religious values when we vote. If your religion opposes electricity, vote that way. If your religion supports something, vote that way. There’s nothing wrong with bringing your religious values to public affairs, so long as you don’t use the authority of religion to force others to do the same.

A Tale of two Christians. . .

A Tale of two Christians. . .

#1. I don't agree with Kuo on alot of things.  Frankly, I think he's demonstrated himself as  a man-pleaser and would rather have the praise of his liberal friends and hide his (alleged) faith in Christ, rather than suffer becoming a social pariah.  

To be blunt, he's showing where his priorities lie, and it's not in proclaiming the gospel or bringing his friends to Christ. 

#2. Recently I emailed a well-known moralist on this board who also claims to be a Christian.  I asked her what she thought the most effective solution was for the social problem of homosexuality.  Her reply?

"The effective solution for this social problem would be outlawing homosexual behavior and casting out of our nation, anyone who continues to practice it."

To be blunt, she's showing where her priorities lie, and it's not in proclaiming the gospel or bringing her enemies to Christ. 

I'm surrounded by wolves in sheep's clothing on the right and the left. 

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

Trach, I so agree. And will

Trach, I so agree. And will add that I will be sad if we start throwing people in jail for practicing homosexual acts ( especially if we ignore other sexual deviant crimes that hurt families more like adultry...which ironically is mentioned in the ten commandments, and homosexuality, though mentioned in the Bible, is not in the ten commandments specifically. ) Our best hope for our country isn't more laws, its more law-abiding citizens, and the best way for that is if morality is taught and encouraged, and the best way for that is through Religion. ( Hopefully a Christian one, but I am satisfied if the religion has basic morals taught. )

It seems that the majority of

It seems that the majority of American Christians today tend to have more faith in laws, the enforcement of laws (with their flawed human interpreters), rather than the lawgiver Himself.

It is my conviction that if believers simply obeyed the Great Commission, we wouldn't get so wound up in the whole Falwellian moralism trap.

Moralism is indeed a popular, though erroneous, church doctrine.  In my opinion, practicing it only shows your opinion of God in a very disturbing manner.

http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/80-257.htm

-PJ  

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

TracHave you read 'Total Trut

Trac

Have you read 'Total Truth' by Nancy Pearcey?

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.   

Nope. Got a link?  I chase l

Nope. Got a link?  I chase links for a living.  Love learning about people I haven't heard of.  Also wanna know what you thought of the book personally.

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

The books covers and expounds

The books covers and expounds on the work of Francis Schaffer among other topics.  Nancy puts forth a well reasoned argument for obtaining a Christian worldview not just having a "Christian" compartment in your life.

http://www.gnpcb.org/sites/total.truth/

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.   

Reading the reviews now.  Th

Reading the reviews now.  Thanks.

I'm in my second go-around on How Should We Then Live, and I read Colson's follow up, which was somewhat disappointing.

My point is that we have a sinful tendency to get sucked into dwelling on the peripheral issues of sin (the symptoms), and procrastinate on Christ's doctrine and theology (the cure). 

The natural reaction to that statement is, "Doctrine schmoctrine, I get enuff of that in Sunday service." Which is patently untrue, because the American Christian's interest is in more emergent issues and more purpose-driven; pragmatic pursuits.  =)

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

Trac,try this alsoSupreme Cou

Trac,

try this also

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.   

Okay.  As I am reading this,

Okay.  As I am reading this,  I'm thinking to myself, "What was Botg's point to begin with again?"

Can you boil it all down for me?

-PJ 

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

Got a link?  I chase links f

Got a link?  I chase links for a living.  Love learning about people I haven't heard of.   Tracheostomy

and it applies to practical christianity

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.   

I was more in the mood to dis

I was more in the mood to discuss healthcare really, but. . .

In the beginning of the thread, I was originally discussing two "isms", both of which show huge contradictions with Biblically based Christianity.

You were proposing another sort of vague POV (which hasn't been explicitly spelled out on your side yet).  I had assumed that the links you provided would clarify your views more succinctly. However. . .

QUOTE: ". . .in other words, not only are they right for everyone, but at some level they are known to everyone.  We can recognize them to be true even apart from divine revelation; to put it another way, they are "revealed," at some level, to the whole human race, not just to the community of faith." 

This is a potentially dangerous proposition. It seems like he's. . .shadowing the main subject of Romans 1 & 2 without actually quoting it.  It's almost as if he thinks he came up with this concept all by himself apart from scripture. So then what conclusion is he going to come up with?

Regardless of how you slice it, the natural law still condemns us (Romans 2:12). 

One side is arguing to the effect that if we just make natural law (or the Mosaic law) the law of the land and enforce it strictly enough, then we'll be rid of social problems across the spectrum--from homosexuality to abortion.

This is the social gospel masquerading as true Christianity. This is moralism. Falwell was in fact grossly infected by this influence.

The opposing side has more of this Bill Moyers type of liberalism where like Kuo, you can be "ashamed" of your Christianity and hide it among your liberal friends. . .instead of showing the real contrasts between the religious right and the Bible.  Kuo is doctrinally anemic.  He knows something is wrong, but can't (or won't) deal with it according to his so-called faith.

Maybe Kuo is an antinomian like Bruce Bawer, who was recently featured on Bill Moyers.  Bawer was also a Falwell critic.  He is also both openly gay and claims to be a true believer in Jesus Christ.

Thus, the popular liberal stance against Falwell is simply antinomianism masquerading as true Christianity. 

All I'm saying is that all camps involved are ignoring scripture in one form or another.  Two genuine fakes are fighting for recognition and keeping the sheep scattered.

-PJ    

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

As Paul describes the body, t

As Paul describes the body, there are many parts not all with the same function.  Affecting the society at large can work hand-in-hand with scriptural evangelism.  Yes there is always the problem of majoring on the minors.  Then again Paul was able to use his cultural knowledge at Mars Hill.  My point in summary would be that all aspects need to be intergrated.  That the christian viewpoint informs all aspects of life from career to politics.

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.   

Okay, now we're getting somew

Okay, now we're getting somewhere!  I agree with your statement. My question is, "But in which order do we do this in?"

I work right around the corner from a Planned Parenthood.  They're getting picketed at least twice a week by activist groups, many who claim to be Christian.  They spend tons of money on huge blow-up photos of dead pre-term children and claim that it's their efforts that are effecting change.

I argue that it's Meredith Viera and her 3D ultrasounds.  These protesters are wasting their time. I think the information has grown beyond their little sidewalk gatherings, because no one gets on the news for it unless someone gets hurt.

But what's in the backseat? Well, only the ultimate vehicle for moral change.  Teaching the gospel.  It doesn't matter if it's taught formally in a church or on the street.  Be ready in season and out of season.  Be prepared to share the divine revelation of God in an expository way whenever you have free time to yourself.

Sorry to go off on a tangent there.  =)

My question is, where does the political activism fit within the Christian's agenda (if, at all), and how do we know when we have eclipsed the gospel with our own political activism?

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

My question is, where does th

My question is, where does the political activism fit within the Christian's agenda (if, at all), and how do we know when we have eclipsed the gospel with our own political activism?

And an excellent question it is.  The answer will differ with each person, though balance is differcult for all.  As to which order it's done i would say both at the same time.  How many people go to church on Sunday and how does that figure correspond with the political climate in the US?

aside: I personally believe that large photos of of living babies in the womb are much more attractive and would engender more goodwill.  The mutilated ones tend to be associated with pro-life in a Pavlovian way.  Its terrible PR. 

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.   

So would you conclude then, t

So would you conclude then, that while we share the same blocks, we just disagree on how they should be stacked together? ;)

I mean, in my mind. . .as Christians--our only hope of reward in heaven is in sharing "true truth" and the moral absolute, but only if it explicitly points toward the saving gospel of Christ and does not contradict His Word.

I don't believe the majority of TV preachers or Christian pundits believe this.  

If we're pushing moral truth in a vacuum, or without continual reference to the true solution to the truth of national sin, then our public platform is as incomplete as Falwell's and Kuo's.

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

Will the hand say to the foot

Will the hand say to the foot you are not part of the body because you are not a hand?

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.   

Okay, you're saying that ther

Okay, you're saying that there are ministries in play here I am not aware of.

No problem with that. 

Please give me an example of a ministry of the body of Christ that would preach moralism exclusive to the rest of the gospel? Specifically, what gifts of the Spirit are we talking here?

I don't believe this is a hand vs. foot issue at all.  I believe there are ministries that claim to be Christian that aren't Biblical or even valid.

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

I was expounding how we are a

I was expounding how we are agreed, that is we don't have to be in lock-step.  I further agree that there are many many 'ministries' in name only.  As christians we are called to exercise discernment and it is sad that non-christians seem better at distinguishing the fruit of many TV farces that are all about money. 

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.   

trach, I may be reading you w

trach, I may be reading you wrong, are you saying people shouldn't protest against things they deem as morally wrong? I know my Church rarely gets political, but has gotten involved a few times like opposing gay marriage. I think there are some things that should be illegal, and some things that should be enforced. For example in the Old Testiment God was pleased when the Government took out idol worhip. But as a general rule we shouldn't rely on the government to be the keepers of morality.

My entire playbook is based o

My entire playbook is based on the link I cited above on 5/18, 22:27.

QUOTE:  People who call themselves Christians today are getting vilified by the world for their political positions, and for their animosity and hostility toward the people who are the people we're supposed to reach.

But they're not being vilified for the gospel as they should be (1 Peter 4:14). And fuel is added to the fire when people on the right misinterpret all this as an attack from the left.   

There's a fine line between love the sinner; hate the sin.

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

My future prediction is that

My future prediction is that we'll all be thrown to the lions, not because Nero accused us of starting the fire, but because faux-xians will be the ones to actually start it up in this age. 

We have met the enemy and he (claims he) is us.

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

trach, I may be reading you w

double post

Good article, he sounds like

Good article, he sounds like a libertarian ;) Said another way, Man tries to change people by changing their environment, God changes the man, and the man will change his environment. I really liked the part in the article about Pharisees, and how just making and enforcing a bunch of laws is not good (nor is beating people over the heads with it in holier than thou good either). There is a principle I stand by...God teaches us what is right and wrong, then leaves it to us to govern ourselves.

I don't understand.  Quote:

I don't understand. 

Quote: "Said another way, Man tries to change people by changing their environment, God changes the man, and the man will change his environment."

Do you agree or disagree with that statement? Were you just quoting the premise of the thought?

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

Basically agreeing with you

Basically agreeing with you, we don't need to create more laws and try and force morality...let God change the man, and he'll change his environment because he will govern himself using correct principles.

Conservative Voice,Don't you

Conservative Voice,

Don't you know that the only person one can possibly change in this life is oneself?

I know I work on my own issues every day....it's too much work (and not successful at all) to try to change anyone else.

It's impossible to force morality, or individual change, unless that change is one's own change.

Just my two cents.

I can try to change someone else, or change my perception of that individual.  Which works better?

Blonde, just finished reading

Blonde, just finished reading "The Anatomy of Peace: Resolving the Heart of Conflict " ( http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1576753344/bookstorenow600-20 )

I think you would enjoy reading it.  The premise is exactly what you said, you can't change someone else, you can only invite change.  And they go through how you can invite peace, even in times of war. 

Thanks, CV.At work we're goin

Thanks, CV.

At work we're going through an attempt at organizational change, on a macro level, and a key point is effecting change through leadership and motivation.

I'll check it out.  "Inviting change" is exactly what my professional goals are for the next six-eight months.  Thanks again for the suggestion.

CV --God teaches us what is right and wrong-

"God teaches us what is right and wrong, then leaves it to us to govern ourselves."

Good stuff --sounds kinda like things our Founding Fathers were trying to tell the citizens with the Declaration and the Constitution.

Sounds like Jesus and Jerry h

Sounds like Jesus and Jerry have quite a bit in common:

"If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." -John 15:18,19

As for Kuo, he sounds alot like those about whom Christ said:  

"This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me." -Mark 7:6