Naomi Schaefer Riley:"Overhyped." That's how the Rev. Rick Warren describes the notion that the evangelical vote is "up for grabs" in this election. But what about the significance of the evangelical left, I asked the pastor of Saddleback Church after his forum with the presidential candidates last weekend. "This big," he says, holding his thumb and forefinger about an inch apart.Sitting on a small stone patio outside the church's "green room," I question him further -- has he heard that the Democratic Party is changing its abortion platform? "Window dressing," he replies. "Too little, too late." But Rev. Jim Wallis, the self-described progressive evangelical, has been saying that the change is a big victory. "Jim Wallis is a spokesman for the Democratic Party," Mr. Warren responds dismissively. "His book reads like the party platform."
The media assume that when religious people express interest in the problems of poverty and disease, they must have taken a left turn politically. But one can be interested in solving such problems without believing that government is the solution. "Our government has spent trillions of dollars in Africa," says Mr. Warren, "and the standard of living is worse now than it was 50 years ago." He knows whereof he speaks, having launched a massive effort to help the country of Rwanda rebuild itself. "There is only one way to get people out of poverty and it's not charity. It's jobs."
While many pastors admonish their congregants to "teach a man to fish," Mr. Warren says that is "not good enough." He explains, "If all you do is teach a guy to fish, you create a village of fishermen and everybody does the same thing. They all catch the same fish. They all sit on the side of the road. They all sell the same fish. The same fish rots. They go home and they never get above subsistence level."
As if channeling Adam Smith, Mr. Warren continues, "You have to develop a complex economy, where one says I'll make the hooks, I'll catch the fish, I'll can the fish, I'll skin the fish, I'll fry the fish, I'll do the fish accounting, I'll build the boats. I'll franchise the fish markets. The answer to poverty is business development, not charity. . . . Trade, not aid."
(HT Michael Krahn)
2 comments:
Interesting interview.
No doubt Warren is a far better spokesperson for the Christian right than people like Falwell or Robertson.
I laughed though when I read that he considered McCain a "limited government kind of guy."
Maybe he should read the economic analysis of McCain's economic plans which show even larger budget deficits than the Obama proposals.
And one should ask Warren where the Iraq war fits into the idea of limited government. What about the idea of another "preemptive war" against Iran?
The fact is this: neither party is for limited government in the true sense of the word. Even under Reagan the govt grew immensely and as well as the budget deficit.
It's just a matter of where the money goes.
The fact is also that while churches certainly do have a constructive role to play, they cannot and do not fill the void for all social aid. Sadly, many churches don't give enough, and even if they did, I don't think they could match the enormity of some of the needs out there.
Warren talks about how govt aid has failed to lift standards in Africa, but one could also make that case for church related aid as well. Over the same period of time the churches have poured immense amounts of resources and we have not seen dramatic turnaround.
So govt is not the answer to every problem, but it has a role to play. And the churches need to do far better as well.
I should also add that Warren comes off as rather arrogant in this interview...somewhat "overhyped" himself.
It's interesting that he criticizes Rev. Wallis for being a spokesperson for the Democratic party, but the same could be said of Warren for the Republican party after reading this article.
And now that we know Warren's views on some of the issues, can we destroy the myth that the Saddleback Forum was somehow unbiased or nonpartisan?
I also love how the author interviews 15 attendees to Saddleback as some sort of gauge of evangelicals...not noting that Saddleback is located in one of the most conservative counties in California, thus likely to skew the results.
And why is it that the term "evangelical" is seemingly only applied to basically white conservative churches? I know many blacks who attend black churches who are about as evangelical as you can get, but who have very different politics. Why don't the black churches count in these articles?
I do agree that the answer to poverty is business development, but what about programs and aid to foster that? What about the idea that giving people a helping hand can help them become self sufficient?
I shudder a little bit when I read or hear any preacher actually dismiss the term "charity" as Warren does in that ending quote. I guess charity was something for Jesus to talk about but now Warren.
I think Warren does have some good ideas, definitely represents a far more constructive tone, and again, he beats people like Falwell by a mile, but in the end, like everyone, he has some good ideas and bad. He should not be made into some sort of Pope figure by "evangelicals" such as the term is used.
And yes, evangelicals have this tendency to make certain people into Papal figures whose authority seemingly cannot be questioned. Dobson is that for an older generation, along with a few others.
So the next time some Protestants criticize Catholics for having a Pope, they need to be reminded that many of them have the same thing.
I think the danger for Rick Warren is that he becomes this kind of definitive voice of the evangelical community.
Post a Comment