(Note: My computer is still not fixed. One of my deacons [we call them "Servants of the Church," translating the Greek diakonos, instead of just transliterating] hooked up the one hard drive in the building that is working and an antiquated monitor from the back room storage area. Thank you, Buddy Glass, for your ingenuity!)
As I’ve mentioned before, I have a “love-hate relationship” with politics. To make a long story short, I grew up in a politically-connected family in Mississippi. As a result, on the one hand, I have a major fascination with the political realm. However, on the other hand, I think that politics is, at least generally, a very dirty game, so to speak.
How do I hold those two extremes together, you might ask? Well, I think the former is explained fairly well by the fact that the political realm exercises a disproportionate power over our everyday lives. Thus, almost every election carries with it the potential for major skulduggery or significant positive change, depending on who is elected and decisions that person makes/votes he or she casts. The latter is no more complicated than the fact that every law that is enacted by a bad Congress or legislature or commissioners’ court or school board is about 10 times harder to get rid of after the fact than it is to pass in the first place. Relatedly, make no mistake, there are special interests–often diabolical–lurking in the shadows behind the scenes, attempting to manipulate, strong arm or buy (i.e., through bribery) every significant vote at every level of government.
I admit that my viewpoint on that last part may be somewhat jaded by my personal experience. After my senior year in high school, because I had a full scholarship to Mississippi College, I was “donated” by my parents to my cousin’s (successful) campaign for governor of Mississippi. As his “go-fer,” I saw more “smoke-filled room” deals than I care to remember. I have been quite cynical ever since. But, that is partly because whenever I have had the opportunity to compare notes on my experience with someone else who has done the same kind of job and, usually, they have seen almost exactly the same thing.
The worst part of this was that my cousin was not a particularly corrupt or ambitious politician, as politicians go. The problems (many would say “realities”) he encountered were: 1) the thoroughly ambitious professional types who ran his campaign; and 2) the compromises he had to make to get anything done (at least, in trying to work with those who play hardball).
Anyway, having admitted my cynicism with the political process (and where it came from), let’s move on to the election cycle in 2008. On that front, let me ask initially: “Have you thought about how incredibly different the situation is for evangelicals this year than even just four years ago?”
In 2004, almost all conservative evangelicals (yes, Dorothy, there are non-conservative evangelicals out there–even if you or I don’t see how they can have any consistency and believe that way!) were firmly in the Republican camp and thought we were the core of their political victory. That was especially true of Southern Baptists, who, with naive arrogance, thought of ourselves as a high percentage of the 16,000, 000 figure that was the public relations number the SBC blithely quoted back then (and still does on occasion). Even worse, we thought the Republican Party needed us and respected us and what we believe.
Skip forward to 2008–and the picture ain’t pretty! Not only is there good reason to understand that at least most of the Republican Party heirarchy never has done anything more than give lip service to cherished conservative and SBC positions on many issues. That is the embarrassment of being played for suckers. But, at least as hard to face–we were playing the Republicans, too. We significantly overestimated our numbers and, thus, our importance to them.
On that last point, it is humbling to admit that the SBC actually is about six million (vs. 16 million) and that other evangelical groups also have quite similar problems in keeping up with their actual active membership figures. A key question here is: As we try to face up to this kind of humbling reality in 2008, what do we need to learn from the immediate past and, from the Lord’s perspective, how should evangelicals view ourselves coming up on the 2008 elections?
Sadly, that is all I have time to develop today. So, I will continue on this subject on Tuesday.
Your thoughts?
Coming Saturday (I hope!): “Saturdays are for Newspaper Articles”
I think by admitting publicly that we were 6 million(and I think it’s even less than that once the truth in church rolls comes to light), how we didn’t look like the giant that we formally portrayed ourselves to be. I am personally hoping that our role in politics gets less and less, we are less in the limelight of the world waiting to see what we have to say, and we will concentrate more on what the SBC was originally formed to do. Cooperate and get deeper into missions. It’s amazing what a little humbling will do.
Now if we can get where most will see the need to corporately repent of inflating church rolls and other things we have done. We might see revival yet.
Debbie,
Touche! You are right on target. Sadly, though, that is easier said done. Humility is the very opposite of what has been modeled at the leadership level by many of the SBC moguls in the past couple of decades (with Frank Page being a notable exception).
Blessings, Boyd