[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Opinions/Editorials Title: Why People Don't Take Right-Wing Evangelicals So Seriously Anymore Back before 9/11 indelibly linked Islam with terrorism, back before the top association to Catholic priest was pedophile, most Americanseven nonreligious Americansthought of religion as benign. Im not religious myself, people would say, but whats the harm if it gives someone else a little comfort or pleasure. Back then, people associated Christianity with kindness and said things like, Thats not very Christian of him, when a person acted stingy or mean; and nobody except Evangelical Christians knew the difference between Evangelicalism and more open, inquiring forms of Christianity. Those days are over. Islam will be forever tainted by Islamist brutalities, by images of bombings, beheadings and burkas. The collar and cassock will forever evoke the image of bishops turning their backs while priests rub themselves on altar boys. And thanks to the fact that American Evangelical leaders sold their congregations to the Republican Party in exchange for political power, Evangelical Christianity is now distinctiveand widely despised. Another way to put this is that the Evangelical brand has gone from being an asset to a liability, and it is helpful to understand the transition in precisely those terms. How Brand Assets Get Depleted In the business world, a corporation sometimes buys or licenses a premium brand in order to either upgrade their own brand desirability or to sell a lower quality product. Coca-Cola acquired Odwalla. Dean Foods acquired Silk soy milk. Target and Walmart license various designer labels for their made-in-China housewares and clothes. Donald Trump sells his name to real estate developers who use it to set an expectation of quality. Once a premium brand or label is acquired, the parent company often uses the premium label to sell an inferior product. Alternately, if they acquired the whole company rather than just the name, they may gradually change the product, ratcheting down input costs (and quality) to the point that the premium brand becomes just another commodity. The profit advantage comes from the fact that it takes people a while to notice and change their brand perceptions. Also, being creatures of habit, a person may stick with a familiar brand even though the quality of the product itself has changed. In this way, a corporation can draw down the value of a brand the way that a person might draw down a bank account. Republican Acquisition of the Evangelical Brand A generation ago, the Republican Party realized that Evangelical Christianity could be a valuable acquisition. Evangelical had righteous, family values brand associations, the unassailable name of Jesus, the authority of the Bible, and the organizing infrastructure and social capital of Evangelical churches. Republican operatives courted Evangelical leaders and promised them power and moneythe power to turn back the clock on equal rights for women and queers, and the glitter of government subsidies for church enterprises including religious education, real estate speculation, and marketing campaigns that pair social services with evangelism. As in any story about selling your soul, Evangelical leaders largely got what they bargained for, but at a price that only the devil fully understood in advance. Internally, Evangelical communities can be wonderfully kind, generous and mutually supportive. But today, few people other than Evangelical Christians themselves associate the term Evangelical with words like generous and kind. In fact, a secular person is likely to see a kind, generous Evangelical neighbor as a decent person in spite oftheir Christian beliefs, not because of them. The Evangelical brand is so depleted and tainted at this point that Russell Moore, a prominent leader of the Southern Baptist Convention recently said that he will no longer call himself an Evangelical Christian, thankshe impliedto association between Evangelicals and Trump. Instead he is using the term Gospel Christianat least till the 2016 election is over. While Trump has received endorsements from Evangelical icons including Jerry Falwell, Jr. and Pat Robertson, other Evangelical leaders (e.g. here, here) have joined Moore in lamenting the deep and wide Evangelical attraction to Trump, which they say is antithetical to their values. But how much, really, is the Trump brand antithetical to the Evangelical brand? Humanist commentator James Croft argues that Trump iswhat Evangelicalism, in the hands of the Religious Right, has become: The religious right in America has always been a political philosophy based on bullying, pandering, projecting strength to hide fear and weakness, and proud, aggressive ignorance. Thats what its been about from the beginning. Trump has merely distilled those elements into a decoction so deadly that even some evangelicals are starting to recognize the venom they have injected into American culture. Croft says that Pastors like Joel Osteen and Rick Warren use Jesus as a fig leaf to drape over social views that would otherwise be revealed as nakedly evil. As a former Evangelical, I have to side with Croft: the Evangelical brand problem is much bigger than Trump and his candidacy or the morally-bankrupt priorities and theocratic aspirations of fellow Republican candidates Cruz and Rubio. Evangelicals may use the name of Jesus for cover, but even Jesus is too small a fig leaf to hide the fact outsiders looking at Evangelical Christianity see more prick than heart. Here is what the Evangelical brand looks like from the outside: Evangelical means obsessed with sex. Evangelical means arrogant. Evangelical means fearful and bigoted. Evangelical means indifferent to truth. Evangelical means gullible and greedy. Evangelical means ignorant. Evangelical means predatory. Evangelical means mean. Laid out like thissex-obsessed, arrogant, bigoted, lying, greedy, ignorant, predatory and meanone understands why a commentator like Croft might say that Trump isEvangelicalism. But reading closer, it becomes clear that Trump and Cruz and Rubio are not the problem. The Evangelical brand is toxic because of the stagnant priorities and behaviors of Evangelicals themselves. Desperate to safeguard an archaic set of social and theological agreements, Evangelical leaders bet that if they could secure political power they could force a halt to moral and spiritual evolution. They themselves wouldnt have to grow and change. They also believed that they could get something for nothing, that they could sell their brand and keep it too. They couldnt have been more wrong. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
#2. To: Willie Green, Hillary State Worship (#0)
Hillary's Cult of the "Social Gospel", worship of the State. Under the Social Gospel, Christs message is so immanantized through political achievement that Christ Himself and His message of redemption, not to mention His Church, become sideline if not almost unnecessary. Instead, government becomes the primary mediator of justice and grace, and even of transcendant authority, with few firm restraints on its ultimate power. The Social Gospel has lofty aspirations inspired by Christs desire to feed, clothe, house, heal and uplift. But the Social Gospel and its adherants in their zeal for building Gods Kingdom on earth forget the eternal Kingdom and its standards of righteousness possible only through the King.
There are no replies to Comment # 2. End Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest |
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|