2 of 7

If one reads or views some media accounts of the squabbles among evangelicals over global climate change, one might think that the evangelical Left is concerned about it while the evangelical Right wants to stick doggedly to what some have called its restricted agenda of beginning- and end-of-life issues, with (restricted) sex in between.

These books, however, share a remarkably similar, and broad, agenda. Harry Jackson Jr. of the High Impact Leadership Coalition and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council conclude their list of this year's top seven political issues with "the environment and global warming," and they devote two chapters to "poverty and justice." Kennedy also writes a chapter about the environment. For his part, Sider devotes a chapter to "the sanctity of human life." Immigration policy is on everyone's list, and war is not far from anyone's mind as the conflict in Iraq grinds on.

Indeed, this emerging commonality of tone and agenda between Left and Right is confirmed, if also complicated, by voices claiming the "evangelical center." Ethicist David Gushee's book The Future of Faith in American Politics is subtitled, The Public Witness of the Evangelical Center. Among the issues he selects as key are torture and human rights, marriage and the law, creation care and climate change, and war. Political scientist Steve Monsma addresses the same subjects from his centrist viewpoint, adding to his list "life issues," poverty, and rampant disease in Africa.

How much Gushee and Monsma represent a distinctly different position, however, is not clear, given the broadening and coalescing agendas of Left and Right. Indeed, Gushee's book is dedicated to Ron Sider and Sider is acknowledged also in Monsma's book.

Furthermore, several authors explicitly uncouple evangelicalism from the Republican Party, most strikingly authors on the Right. The cover of Richard Land's book lampoons both parties, while Jackson (himself a registered Democrat) and Perkins advocate "salting" both parties with gospel concerns. It's one thing for Jim Wallis to declare that not all evangelicals are members of the GOP. It's another when the head of the Family Research Council says so, too.

Lest one gather the impression, however, that politically concerned evangelicals have miraculously come together in unity of spirit and uniformity of opinion, important differences do linger.

Sider maintains a pacifist stance and an opposition to capital punishment. Those on the Right maintain a "just war" position and a defense of capital punishment. And Gushee offers a carefully nuanced intermediate view on war, torture, and terrorism.

Authors on the Right believe we must care for creation and that we do so best through market initiatives and education with only limited legislation, scorning particularly the Kyoto Accord as ineffective and wasteful. Monsma insists that some international agreements, if not Kyoto, are essential. And Sider urges that rich countries actually try to slow down economic growth in order to provide a sustainable environment for our grandchildren.

Taxation, welfare, foreign aid, and immigration rules—all of these are in play, and these authors offer quite different (and largely predictable) opinions about them.

next page... |  2 of 7

share this page

November 2008, Vol. 52, No. 11