Were Christians Courted for Their Votes or Beliefs?

One of the most watched marriages of the last decade has been the union between political conservatives and the Religious Right. That marriage, according to most observers, played a substantial role in the “Reagan revolution.”

But now that President Reagan has left office, there are questions as to how well the marriage is progressing. In fact, a few of those who helped arrange the marriage have said they are less than pleased with how it turned out.

Disenchantment

In his book, The Samaritan Strategy, former Religious Right activist Colonel Doner discusses “serious spiritual flaws” in the foundation of the Religious Right that led to its failure. Doner cofounded Christian Voice, the organization responsible for biblical “report cards” on political candidates (see sidebar on p. 39). In his book, he maintains that GOP strategists used Christians, never intending believers’ influence in the party to be significant.

Ed McAteer, who helped bring together religious and political conservatives in the early days of the Religious Right, disagrees with Doner that the movement failed; he cites as evidence George Bush’s unanimous victory in Bible Belt states in last year’s election. But McAteer said he generally agrees that Christians within the Religious Right have been used. He noted that during last year’s presidential primary season he was on Bush’s paid staff as a liaison to Christians and Jews. As soon as it became obvious that Bush would win the nomination, McAteer said, he received notice that his services would no longer be necessary.

McAteer, who serves as president of the Religious Roundtable, has been bothered lately by some aspects of a movement within the political Right known as cultural conservatism. The movement’s philosophy is laid out in the 1987 book Cultural Conservatism: Toward a New National Agenda, published by the Institute for Cultural Conservatism. Its main spokesman is Paul Weyrich, president of the Free Congress Foundation in Washington, D.C.

The thrust of cultural conservatism is to advance “traditional values,” as specified in the book. According to the movement’s philosophy, there is a “necessary, unbreakable, and causal relationship between traditional Western, Judeo-Christian values, definitions of right and wrong, ways of thinking and ways of living” and the “secular success of Western societies,” including prosperity and personal liberties.

The movement enjoys widespread acceptance among evangelicals. Robert Dugan, public affairs director for the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), said he has been a strong supporter ever since he discovered the movement. He said the movement’s importance is rooted in its efforts to build political coalitions rooted not in economics, but in moral values.

What disturbs McAteer is the role the movement ascribes to religion. Weyrich was quoted a few months ago in a Tennessee newspaper as saying belief in “God’s revealed truth” is not necessary in order to be a cultural conservative; the news report indicated that, on this point, the Religious Right and cultural conservatism part paths.

Weyrich called the report misleading and said cultural conservatism is committed to the restoration of Judeo-Christian values “in every aspect of society.” But McAteer maintains that the movement upholds the Judeo-Christian tradition merely because its values are functional, not because the Bible is true. He claims it is impossible to uphold the values without upholding the ethic that produced them.

Whereas Weyrich maintains that a conservative Christian is, virtually by definition, a cultural conservative, McAteer eschews the label: “Cultural conservatives say religion is important. I say belief in God is essential. It’s impossible for me to get behind a movement that says it doesn’t matter if you believe in God.”

The NAE’s Dugan maintains, however, that McAteer is “jousting with windmills.” Said Dugan, “Cultural conservatism is not asking the Christian political movement to stop being Christian. It’s just saying that cultural conservatism will be composed of far more than just evangelicals.”

He added, “Those of us who know the Bible understand that [the values upheld by cultural conservatism] came from the Scriptures. A person does not have to subscribe to our spiritual heritage to come to the same conclusions.”

Theoretical Impasse

The opposing views amount to contrasting theories of the conditions under which Christians ought to be a part of political alliances. It is not a new debate. McAteer maintains there is a “difference between coalition building and accommodating atheists.” He said he has always disagreed with the Moral Majority because of its inclusion of atheists and agnostics.

Dugan stresses that the purpose of the cultural conservatism movement is to enable those with shared values to win on election day. He said the movement has provided a comfortable political framework for many whose religious beliefs include strict separation of church and state: “We don’t go to Capitol Hill waving our Bibles around and saying, ‘You have to enforce this because it’s found in sacred Scriptures.’ ”

Weyrich said he welcomes “the help of all people who have reached the right moral conclusions, even if they have not reached them on the basis of the faith.” He cited professed agnostic Bernard Nathanson, who produced the antiabortion film The Silent Scream, as an example of such help. But McAteer said he was uncomfortable with casting a former abortionist (Nathanson) in the role of a hero until he repents of his sins.

A Common Cause

Except for the differing theories of political action, proponents of cultural conservatism and those in the Religious Right have little to disagree about. And both groups are concerned that their values find representation in the current presidential administration. This concern is not so much over economic and political issues, but over social and moral issues, such as abortion and gay rights.

McAteer expressed skepticism about the Bush administration’s ability to deliver on its promises to the prolife community; he said this skepticism was nurtured by the recent appointment of Lewis Sullivan as secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. McAteer is in the process of organizing a major effort to educate a prolife constituency about the role of Supreme Court justices in the event of a battle like the one in 1987 surrounding former nominee Robert Bork. He said he has received help in the project from Bork and former Attorney General Edwin Meese.

Dugan believes there is a struggle going on “for the soul of the Republican party.” He rejects the notion that the GOP has been insincere in courting evangelicals. “If I thought otherwise, I’d have blown the whistle long ago,” Dugan said, adding, “I can demonstrate that, on the abortion issue, we’ve gained a lot in the last eight years.”

Dugan expressed confidence in President Bush’s sincerity in wanting to uphold the values shared by cultural conservatives, but he added, “It may be hard for that to manifest itself because the basic strategists who surround him may not take to our kinds of issues.”

McAteer said the Republican party is fortunate that Democratic leadership is “so far to the Left,” it is not an option for the Religious Right. Dugan is less cynical. He said that although it is too early to tell if evangelicals will have access to the Bush administration, he fully expected such access.

By Randy Frame.

A Crusader’s Regrets

Since leaving Washington, D.C., in 1986, Colonel V. Doner (his given name is Colonel) has spent a lot of time pondering what went wrong with the Religious Right. The co-founder of Christian Voice has concluded, among other things, that he and his colleagues should have been more like Mother Teresa and less like strident political operators.

Christian Voice drew national attention during the 1980 election for its “report cards” on congressional Democrats and for its ambitious campaign ads, including a television spot linking then-President Jimmy Carter with the homosexual rights movement. The group’s tactics were dubbed among the Religious Right’s most controversial. Doner and his ideological cohorts claimed credit (rightly, according to many observers) for defeating Carter and 30 congressmen they deemed undesirable.

But Doner, 40, now says he regrets failing in those days to communicate care for those in need: the poor, the elderly, people with AIDS, the homeless. What’s more, he says, the antagonism he displayed on such television shows as “60 Minutes” and “Phil Donahue” may have alienated believers and kept hundreds of others from considering the validity of the Christian faith.

Doner, head of the Christian Action Council in Santa Rosa, California, says he now hopes to mix his conservative concerns with issues traditionally closer to the hearts of liberals. “Wouldn’t Jesus be concerned with both the poor and the aborted?” he asks. “Wouldn’t he have us be concerned with those exploited by landlords and by pornography?”

Along with a few conservative friends, Doner is seeking to meet with evangelical Christians of the political Left. His aim: to work together on common concerns—an idea he would have scoffed at a few years ago.

Doner has set forth his views on the failings of the Religious Right in his book The Samaritan Strategy (Wolgemuth & Hyatt). In it he also discusses his views on the future of Christian activism.

With no apologies, he acknowledges in his book making the controversial commercial on Carter—which showed men hugging and marching—in order to get free time on network news. He tells how Republican sources provided $1 million in 1984 to start the American Coalition for Traditional Values. And he says that by 1986, GOP leaders, wary of the increasing power of Christians, were halting the financial flow to Christian political operators.

Looking ahead, Doner predicts that the problems of the homeless, AIDS, drugs, and child abuse will overwhelm budget-squeezed governments in the next decade and challenge churches to engage in a more enduring activism: service. By caring for those in need, he says, Christians one day may earn the chance to help guide their communities. “You have credibility saying a hard thing if you have a reputation for caring for people.”

Many of those who remember the Doner of a decade ago are skeptical that he is truly changed. Some nonbelievers in Santa Rosa maintain that the emphasis on service is merely a strategy to replace the failed political strategies of the past.

Doner says he’s not surprised by such scrutiny, adding that time will prove that his interest in service programs is not merely a way to gain political power. “We must do it,” he said, “because we truly have compassion.”

By Robert Digitale.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.