Justice and the Young Evangelicals

Maybe some of you saw this video floating around in recent weeks, an apparent glimpse into that new bird, the "young" evangelical.

Many in the various networks I encounter "liked" the video, but I found it rather superficial and disappointing. Of course, each person working in a particular area finds that area to be the most important/compelling/relevant, and so on.

The depiction of the "religious Right" as essentially hypocrites who do nothing but vote once every four years was simply too banal. And just in case you got the impression from the segment that "young evangelicals" don't care about abortion, that litmus-test issue for the older set, see this from the latest Barna Update:

Young born again Christians retain similar abortion views to older Christians.

While there has been much discussion about the changing perspectives of young Christians, the research revealed that born again Christians under the age of 45 were not substantially different from older generations of Christians. Overall, 61% of 18- to 44-year-old born again Christians said they wanted to see abortion be illegal in all or most cases, which compares to 55% among born again believers ages 45 and older. (The six-point gap is within the range of sampling error for the two subgroups.) Interestingly, when compared to older born again Christians, the younger set are much more likely to express strong views about the subject (either keeping it legal or illegal in all cases) and less likely to say they are not sure.

Comments

[joe]

IRKSOME.

1. The phrase "Religious Right" is akin to "Fundamentalist" in that it is either now meaningless or pejorative.

2. Also, this conversation reminds me of one amongst Democrats about GWB. While there is a lot of truth here, the comments about the religious Right are plainly ignorant. Like or hate Pat Robertson, for example, to suggest he is not for social action and benevolent relief is borderline dishonesty. Operation Blessing directs millions of dollars into helping the poor on non-election days. Groups like the Salvation Army and Navigators, not to mention the Roman Catholic Church and even the LDS, do a stunning amount of work with the poor, and are also emphatically conservative on social issues.

3. The fact that a group of 20-somethings who dress hiply and are self-consciously globally aware are echoing Jim Wallis is not much of a story. Hey kids, ever hear of Amy Carmichael or Mother Teresa? Is a ministry like Exodus not also offering a much needed social service? Is Focus on the Family being reactionary by trying to diminish divorce even as the the Gores and Amy Grant inadvertently make it look non-objectionable? Should anhyone care about the mass approval of fornication if kids at the same time can't read? Of course there are umpteen worthy causes, but maybe Religious Righters at Liberty Baptist actually can multi-task!

4. I can't help but think that it is far too easy to downplay the uncomfortable moral questions that alienate people. But it seems like Jesus, if we want to play hat card, spoke to and about individuals versus bureaucracies. I don't think he cared too much what the Roman Empire was doing policy-wise.

5. Posing in front of stained glass. Talk about turning context on its head. Let's reject tradition while using it as our platform.

[Wolf Paul]

Joe,

they probably didn't choose the background, so let's not knock them for it.

Personally, I think that it's a wrong assumption that unless abortion shows up in the first three things that come to someone's mind, they don't care about it. As Jordan points out, people who work in specific areas will have the issues relevant to that area on their minds.

I also think that these folks, like many others, are concerned that evangelical Christianity does not get identified almost exclusively with opposition to abortion and are thus keen to downplay it in such an interview.

I do agree that their characterization of the religious right as once-every-four-years activists is unfair and inaccurate.

[Deacon Michael D. Harmon]

Indeed, evangelical Christianity should not be "almost exclusively" identified with opposition to abortion.

It should, however, be identified "semper, ubique et omnia" with it. Otherwise, it ceases to be completely Christian, does it not?

[joe]

WP:

I agree 100 percent. And I think these people came off fairly well. But in our age, it is IMHO really inexcusable to not realize how issues and responses will be framed. At this point, I think it almost obligatory for anyone being questioned by the media to clearly articulate Christian teaching on the hot button issues as well as the non-hot button issues. Be as green as you wanna be, but right now we need people explaining that sex is holy, gay sex is not, and life is sacred. Even as they feed the poor, save the oceans, etc. Say what you will about the Religious Right, they did raise a voice in defense of Truth. Or do people think otherwise. I often wonder. PTL for the quiet but to-date faithfulness of the Catholic Church on moral issues.