There has been considerable criticism of white evangelicals—and I have posted critical remarks myself (such as in my 2/4 blog post). But putting labels on people and saying everyone with that label is the same is a problem—and I wrote about “evangeliphobia” in my 1/30/16 blog post.
In this article, I am thinking particularly of two white
evangelical politicians: Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) and Sen. Ben Sasse
(R-Neb.). I am referring to them as “good” because of their taking politically unpopular
stances partly or largely because of their Christian faith.
Applauding Rep. Kinzinger
Adam Daniel Kinzinger
(b. 1978) has served as a U.S. Congressman from Illinois since 2011. Recently,
he has been in the news largely because he was one of the ten Republicans in
the House to vote for the impeachment of President Trump.
A Jan. 29 piece posted on Christianity Today’s website is entitled “Meet the Republican Congressman Who Says His Faith Led Him to Vote for Impeachment.”
According to this
Jan. 28 article in The Atlantic, Kinzinger was a kid who grew up in
a Baptist Church, and now, they write,
As someone who identifies as a born-again Christian, he believes he has to tell the truth. What has been painful, though, is seeing how many people who share his faith have chosen to support Trump at all costs, fervently declaring that the election was stolen.
“The
courage of Adam Kinzinger,” an article in the Feb. 6 issue of The Economist,
reports on the “angry pushback” Kinzinger is getting and even how a “fellow
evangelical Christian accused him of being possessed by the devil.”
Surely, though, many evangelical Christians—and most of those
who are not—have to be impressed with not only the courage but also the integrity
of Rep. Kinzinger.
Applauding Sen. Sasse
Benjamin Eric Sasse (b. 1972) is the junior U.S. Senator for Nebraska, having won his second term in the Nov. 2020 election.
Born in Nebraska as the son of a high school teacher and football coach, Sasse graduated from Harvard in 1994 and went on to earn a Ph.D. degree (in history) from Yale University. Currently, he is the only Republican Senator with a Ph.D. (There are three Democrats with that degree.)
Sasse was baptized in the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod. As a college student in the 1990s, he began to embrace the "reformed faith" (Calvinism). And during his college years, Sasse was active in Campus Crusade for Christ (now Cru). Later he became an elder in the United Reformed Churches.
Sen. Sasse has long
been a critic of the 45th POTUS, and on Tuesday (Feb. 8), Sasse was
one of only six Republicans (out of 50) who voted that the second impeachment
trial of Trump is constitutional. And (perhaps today) he is likely to vote for
Trump’s conviction.
His opposition to
the Republican President has led to him being censured by Republicans in Nebraska,
but he has persisted in doing and saying what he thinks is right.
Like Rep.
Kinzinger, Sasse’s faith has led him also to be a man of courage and integrity.
Criticizing Rep. Kinzinger and Sen. Sasse
Applauding the evangelical
Christian faith which has led Rep. Kinzinger and Sen. Sasse to be men of
courage and integrity—and, as such, outspoken in their opposition to DJT—does
not mean general agreement with their political ideas.
It is possible to
respect and to admire people of integrity who embody and express goodwill while
still disagreeing with their ideas and their political position on important
issues.
And it is unfair to
allow dislike for some white conservative evangelical politicians, such as Sen.
Josh Hawley and Sen. Ted Cruz, to lump all conservative evangelical politicians
together and to castigate them all.
Thankfully, there are “good” white evangelical politicians, and even
though I am critical of some or many of their political positions, I am thankful
for Rep. Kinzinger and Sen. Sasse.
About 30 minutes ago I received the first comments regarding this new blog post. As is often the case, those comment were sent by email by Thinking Friend Eric Dollard in Chicago. Here is what he wrote:
ReplyDelete"Rep. Kinzinger represents the 16th Congressional in Illinois, which includes part of Rockford and areas to the east. He was originally a 'Tea Party' partisan, but now he has courageously challenged the former president and many of his Republican colleagues. He will probably face a primary challenge in 2022, but if he survives the primary, there is a good chance he will be reelected. On the other hand, he may join a new party of conservatives opposed to Trump and his supporters.
"Senator Sasse is thoughtful and intelligent, based on articles he has written and which I have read. Although I am politically more liberal than either man, I would prefer a Republican party, or a new conservative party, made up of men such as these two. As Sasse said recently, the Republican party can be the party of conservatism or the party of madness."
Thanks for your comments, Eric. Since you live in Illinois, you may hear more about Rep. Kinzinger than I do, but from what I have read, he is not interested in forming a new party. He is, though, interested in reforming the current Republican Party. As you probably know, last month he formed a new PAC, called America First. The Washington Post's 1/31 article about the new PAC was titled "GOP Rep. Kinzinger starts PAC to challenge party’s embrace of Trump."
DeleteHowever, from what I have read, such as in this 2/11 post by Reuters, "Two of the most prominent anti-Trump Republicans in Congress - Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois - rejected the idea of a breakaway party in statements to Reuters on Thursday."
I was active as a born-again Christian in Southern Baptist churches from 1964 until about 1971. I had my born-again experience and started on my journey in a very fundamentalist Baptist church in 1964. Since I went to a seminary of neo-reformed and liberal traditions, I learned how others saw fundamentalists, and by implication evangelicals. Since I knew better, I even wrote a paper titled, "Please do not fold, staple, or mutilate the fundamentalist." I don't remember when I learned of the move by many conservative Protestants to distinguish themselves from fundamentalists by calling themselves "evangelical." I don't think the distinction has been successful since evangelicals have held tightly to the doctrines and the biblical inerrancy that were core for the founding of fundamentalism. In fact, it appears that historically "evangelicalism" has won out as a label for both fundamentalists and evangelicals and especially since white evangelicals have moved en masse to the white reactionary right of trumpism and delusion. I doubt that the word "evangelical" can be redeemed at this point from its association with that cultural and political reaction. The word, like the title of my paper based on computer punch cards, is . . . well . . . history. Now history probably will forever talk about men like Kinzinger and Sasse as "exceptions."
ReplyDeleteThanks, Anton, for sharing these important comments/reflections.
DeleteWhile you and I share a number of similar background experiences, as I am several years older there are some important differences also. I was an active born-again Southern Baptist Christian from 1946, when I was baptized, until 1992, when I taught for the second and last year at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary--although from 1966 until 1991 my main denominational affiliation was with the Japan Baptist Convention, which was increasingly more moderate than the SBC after 1980.
But during all those years, I don't remember much emphasis being made in the Baptist circles/churches I was a part of upon Baptists being fundamentalist or evangelical. We were just Baptists trying to share the Gospel. In seminary (at SBTS in Louisville), I often heard criticism of fundamentalism, and I learned about Carl Henry and the evangelical movement that began after WWII. But, again, I don't have any memory of SBC leadership then identifying with either fundamentalism or evangelicalism.
But, certainly, more broadly in conservative Christianity there was a definite move to use the term "evangelical" rather than "fundamentalist"--and there was a fairly broad range of "evangelical" Christian pastors and theologians. But gradually the right wing became the more predominant so there was little difference between their views and the fundamentalists of the past. That is why in recent years, in spite of having written a book titled "Fed Up with Fundamentalism," I have most often referred to fundamentalists as "conservative evangelicals," which I see as basically the same.
So, yes, that makes it hard for many of us left wing evangelicals to hold on to the evangelical label--and many, for good reasons, have given it up altogether. But it is hard to give up old labels and identifications.
Just think about what it means to be a Republican today. For many Americans who are not Republicans, that label has an odious ring it didn't used to have. Now for so many, "Republican" conjures up images of Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham--and, yes, Donald J. Trump. But those who remember a different Republican Party of the past are loathe to give up that name--or their beloved Party. A couple of nights ago I heard an hour interview with John Danforth, the former U.S. Senator from Missouri. He was strongly opposed to what the Republican Party is at present, but he was also unwilling to give up being a Republican in the way he has been all of his life. This is similar, I think, to the bind many progressive "evangelicals" find themselves in.
I want to read David Gushee's new (8/20) book "After Evangelicalism: The Path to a New Christianity." Perhaps it will help to point the way forward for those of us who can no longer identify as evangelicals in spite of having made no significant doctrinal changes in our thinking or beliefs.
According to this new post by Newsweek, "Illinois Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger on Friday [yesterday] said he is willing to 'give his career' away by pushing back against the 'brainwashing' of the GOP led by former President Donald Trump." (See https://www.newsweek.com/gop-rep-adam-kinzinger-says-republicans-get-elected-steady-diet-fear-1569101 .)
ReplyDeleteI was happy to receive the following comments from Thinking Friend Michael Olmsted in Springfield, Mo.:
ReplyDelete"As a Christian pastor since 1963 I have encountered other ministers of my denomination who strongly disagreed with my politics and my willingness to work with pastors of other denominations for the good of my community. I learned early in life to respect others in spite of religious differences ... to remember we are all imperfect and redeemed by the grace of God ... to
hear and respect others of differing faith backgrounds. This never changed my bedrock belief that Jesus is God's incomparable gift of salvation.
"I am weary of the strident voices, of both ministers and politicians that display disrespect for others and their political ideas. Morality, whether you are a professing Christian, politician, or simply a citizen, is defined by your values, words and actions. In this prolonged period with Trump we have seen the ugly side of humanity and are reaping the division and destruction of politics ... and organized religion ... that has driven our nation apart. I dream of that day when we can debate with integrity (even some compassion) and function as a nation where freedom is shaped by compassion and where ideas can be honestly tested and debated without ugly words and hatred. Democracy is a fragile and sometimes dangerous dimension of the real word. May those of us who profess to love God guard our words and actions. May we be instruments of grace and healing. Is that not our calling as children of God?"
Thanks, so much, Michael, for your good words. May we all, indeed, be instruments of grace and healing.
DeleteMichael Olmsted's comments are right on and have stimulated me to think a little again about the history behind all this. Probably most thoughtful Christians view Christianity's historical identification with political nations as its downfall in many ways. The Anabaptists saw it fairly clearly, so it seems to me, and distanced themselves from governments and national cultures. It was, in my view, political genius when the U.S. set up a separation between church and state. It freed both the state and the church to be who they are. Unfortunately, it worked only partially because white conservative Protestantism tended to have cultural hegemony in spite of that separation until the 20th century, particularly the middle of the century when Supreme Court cases began to go against any governmental involvement in religion. But the sentiment of nationalism has been too strong for American conservative Protestant Christianity and has left a large portion of them vulnerable to the likes of "America first" campaigns and thus demagogues like trump. I think race has to be considered here, too, as another huge factor in all this. Now there's a kind of organic inability to distinguish between right-wing patriotism and Christianity among much of America. Maybe American Christianity can heal itself. Liberal Protestantism, many Catholics, black evangelical Christians, a minority of evangelical Christians, and other religious traditions (such as Islam, Judaism, and others) are working hard at shaping a culture in which we Christians can be the "instruments of grace and healing" Michael correctly sees as essential to our calling. But, friends, I can see among the young people I teach, our own children, and our grandchildren a widespread, nearly universal, disdain for Christianity, given what it has done and is doing in these realms. The future of Christianity in the USA and maybe all religion does not look good.
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting thought-provoking comment again, Anton.
DeleteI agree, Anton, that there is a widespread, and growing, disdain for Christianity in this country. I think that much of that is because of what the fundamentalists and/or conservative evangelicals have said and done over the past 50 years. That is one reason I wrote my book "Fed Up with Fundamentalism": I thought, and still think, fundamentalism has done much damage to Christianity as a whole. And now white conservative evangelicalism is doing much of the same sort of damage. The 80% support of Trump in the last two elections is off-putting to a great majority of the younger generation--and they tend to show disdain for Christianity in general because of the political position taken by so many vocal conservative evangelicals. That is one reason I wanted to point out that there are some "good" white conservative evangelicals, that is, some who are devout Christians but aware of the moral deficiencies of DJT.
Another excellent Blog Leroy and shows how balanced a Christian you are.
ReplyDeleteThere are both Good&bad Politicians in both partiies.
If All voters would judge candidates on their'Fruit'and Not what they say, we woud have a Better Government.
Blessings from,
John Tim Carr
Thanks for your kind comments, John Tim.
DeleteI agree that there are good and bad people in both parties, and I wish there were more men (and women) of courage and integrity such as Rep. Kinzinger and Sen. Sasse.
But when it comes to voting, I think we must consider the political positions of the candidates and not just their personal characteristics. "Good" people/politicians may well have bad ideas, and if I were in Rep. Kinzinger's district in Illinois, I would likely not vote for his re-election in 2022, and if I lived in Nebraska it is also unlikely I would vote for Sen. Sasse's re-election in 2026. I am fond of both of those politicians as Christian men, but I do not agree with many of their political ideas and many core positions of their political party.
Here is a statement about the impeachment trial that Sen. Sasse made today:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.sasse.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/2/sasse-statement-on-impeachment-trial
By the time I am posting this, the trial is over, and the tribulation has begun. One Republican who voted for conviction, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, has already been censured by the Louisiana GOP. Apparently, truth has little or no place in today's GOP. In fact, the fact checkers are already all over Trump's lawyers. You can read more about Cassidy's censure here: https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/13/politics/bill-cassidy-louisiana-republican-party-censure/index.html
ReplyDeleteThanks, Craig, for this link to Cassidy's censure, which I had not seen. In one way or another, it seems that perhaps all of the Reps. who voted for impeachment and the Senators who voted to convict were censured by Republicans in their home states. That sort of opposition makes their votes even more impressive.
DeleteI just now saw that the second Illinois county has voted to censure Rep. Kinzinger:
Deletehttps://www.rrstar.com/story/news/politics/elections/2021/02/15/second-illinois-county-votes-against-kinzinger-over-impeachment-vote/6758346002/
And then there is this: even Rep. Kinzinger's family have publicly condemned him.
Deletehttps://thewayofimprovement.com/2021/02/15/rep-adam-kinzingers-evangelical-family-chide-him-for-losing-the-support-of-lou-dobbs-tucker-carlson-sean-hannity-laura-ingraham-and-most-importantly-mark-levin-and-rush-limbaugh-also-god/
This afternoon I received these comments from Thinking Friend Truett Baker in Arizona:
ReplyDelete"Thanks for the information about Rep. Kinzinger and Sen. Sasse. It is encouraging to know there are people of integrity in Congress. Wish there were more. Not many of us have to pay a price for practicing our faith and values and I so admire those who have the courage to do so. It will be interesting to see how many of those Republicans will pay the ultimate price at their next election. God bless them!"
The following comments were received yesterday from a Sharon, a Thinking Friend in Arizona:
ReplyDelete"I think it is unfortunate that Leroy Seat used the words 'white' and 'good.' Blanket statements are rarely accurate. I too was pleased at Kinzinger’s and Sasse’s positions. Yes, they will probably have to pay for their stand but I doubt they will be sorry…and shouldn’t be."
Thanks for your comments, Sharon. But I used the words "white" and "good" intentionally. I used "white" because of the vast difference between White evangelicals and Black evangelicals. For example, the former were overwhelmingly supporters of Trump and the latter are largely Democrats who strongly opposed Trump.
ReplyDeleteAnd then I used the word "good," with the quotation marks, in the context of the widespread criticism of white conservative evangelicals. In light of that criticism, the positions of Rep. Kinzinger and Sen. Sasse should, I think, should be considered commendable (good).