Related articles and links |  1 of 3

The publication of Cal Thomas's and Ed Dobson's Blinded by Might: Can the Religious Right Save America? (Zondervan, 1999) caused a stir in both national and evangelical circles. CHRISTIANITY TODAY devoted a number of pages to the book's theses (Sept. 6, 1999). And pundits ever since have been announcing the withdrawal of evangelicals from active public life. Richard Cizik, the National Association of Evangelicals' liaison in Washington, D.C., begs to differ.

"Presidential candidates may be more open, even boastful, about their faith, but Christian activists are retreating from national politics," National Journal concluded recently.

Admittedly, some activists have become disillusioned with politics as usual and have dropped out. But does this a trend make? Maybe. And maybe not.

Perhaps the real role of evangelicals in national politics is more complex. Four realities not only suggest this but also might encourage us to persevere in our political efforts:

1. Real evangelical influence inside the beltway is not tied to the success of the "religious right."
The role of religion in turning out the vote is scrutinized every election year. Success, or failure, of the Christian Coalition (and other religious-right groups) to elect politicians (mostly Republicans) is the lens through which our movement's influence is evaluated. This is misguided. The Christian Coalition was never the Goliath opponents made it out to be.

"The decline of the Christian Coalition and some similar religious-right organizations does not necessarily indicate a fall in either the participation or influence of evangelicals in national politics," said James Reichley of the Public Policy Institute at Georgetown University during a recent conference. In fact, he added, "The role of the less partisan and more moderate National Association of Evangelicals seems actually to have increased."

Reichley, a Presbyterian layman, further believes that as evangelicals become more pragmatic, "they increase the possibility that a broad Republican coalition, in which they play a significant part, may win enduring political success. "

It's also more than "being willing to compromise with others to advance common interests," as he put it. We see our work as a civil endeavor in which we work with all Americans of good faith, whatever their religion, to achieve proper civic goals (religious freedom, restraint of violence, protection of life, justice for all).

Can this civil, pragmatic approach be politically effective? Even the leaders of the Christian right, in private if not in public, admit as much. One of the most significant political accomplishments on Capitol Hill in decades& amp;mdash;passage of the International Religious Freedom Act& amp;mdash;did not depend upon electing or defeating anyone. But it did take enormous work to convince the political and diplomatic establishment that our arguments were sound.

Working for 20 years inside Washington has taught me at least one thing: evangelical success in this town does not depend on the outcome of any election.

2. Evangelical leaders oppose political withdrawal.
A poll of 475 leaders of evangelical denominations, churches, and ministries (conducted by John Green at the University of Akron on behalf of the National Association of Evangelicals) revealed the current state of mind: Only 9 percent said the movement should withdraw from politics. The remaining 91 percent recommended either "staying focused on politics" or "combining politics with other efforts at changing society." Half of the leaders said such involvement since 1980 has been "productive"; 41 percent gave it a "mixed result" rating (see graph).

next page... |  1 of 3

share this page

June 12 2000, Vol. 44, No. 7