Saddleback Showdown: What happened to religion being a private matter?
Posted by Elizabeth on Monday, August 18th, 2008Saturday Rick Warren hosted what has been called the Saddleback Showdown with presidential candidates taking the stage and answering questions about faith. I was unable to view the program live, so I started looking to see if it might be available to view online. The Fox website was a dead end (though video clips are available now), but YouTube offered many hits. While searching the YouTube videos on the subject I stumbled across a young mans posting of his concern over having the candidates in a faith forum saying he felt uncomfortable with faith talk because of his view of the separation of church and state. You can view the video entitled, “OBAMA & McCAIN TALK FAITH W/ PASTOR RICK WARREN - YIKES!!!” here:
In the video he says, “Why do the evangelicals have so much power? We shouldn’t give them this power.” The Born Again Church Tour asks, “What do they think about our involvement in politics?” Well, this young man thinks evangelicals have too much power. Others agree. What about you?
August 24th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
[...] And as they say in the marketplace of ideas - perception is reality. Check out our recent blog post Saddleback Showdown: What happened to religion being a private matter? for more on [...]
August 25th, 2008 at 12:51 am
It seems pretty disingenuous to question a star while hitching your wagon to it. For an organization to question the power of evangelicalism while at the same time creating a mini-industry characterized by cynicism of all things evangelical is uncola. That is, you don’t exist unless they exist, a back-eddy of the main stream, complete with competing conferences, sponsors, blog, books and merchandise. Puleease…
The YouTuber obviously didn’t understand the purpose or nature of the interviews that Warren conducted. This is a guy who sets up a straw man (or three) and then proceeds to tear them down. (Yawn) His rant has very little connection to the reality of the event. If he wants to interact with the substance of those interviews, and not sound bite superficialities, we might be more interested. As to “Why do the evangelicals have so much power?” I would have to say, “I don’t know. Maybe because they are adding meaning to millions of people’s lives. Book sales might be an indicator.” Here’s a better question, ” Why are young adults who have not made any significant contribution but post a YouTube video that is a litany of hackneyed mainstream cliches featured by Off The Map?”
As to the debate, there was a telling moment in which Rick Warren asked each of the candidates to define “poor.” When Obama suggested that someone earning more than $250K income would not be poor, Warren suggested that in his neck of the woods they might be (followed by audience applause). Here’s what was troubling to me about that….Not that people make that much, or that people who make that much might consider themselves poor. What concerned me was the reality that evangelical mega churches have been developed almost exclusively in wealthy suburbs of major US cities like Chicago, LA, Houston, Dallas, and Phoenix. Is it because the evangelical model of church growth requires the backing of people who “make $250K and feel poor” in order to fund the campuses, technology and personnel necessary? Hmmm. Where are the church planters who are heading to a town of less that a thousand people, or to a demographic of $25K?
August 25th, 2008 at 5:53 am
Because we care what young adults who ‘have not made any significant contribution’ think. We think Jesus cares about them too. Don’t you?
August 25th, 2008 at 6:49 am
As an evangelical or born again or whatever (actually, I see myself as a Christ-follower who, at the age of 70, is working every day at modeling Him)……I believe Rick Warren did a fantastic job at allowing McCain and Obama to express themselves in a “protected” environment where they did not have to respond directily to each other. I believe I now know far more about each man’s core beliefs than I did prior to the event. As a result, Pastor Warren did me a favor with his questions and with the approach used for the event.
I am far more comfortable now with McCain than I was prior to the event. For me, Obama’s beliefs are far too removed from my understanding of the truth as found in the Bible.
Bails-In-Minnesota
August 25th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
As a non-believer and an American, I would prefer that the people running for the job of setting policies in my country do so based on evidence and statistics rather than beliefs.
So I would prefer that the people asking questions of those candidates have a foundation in journalism rather than pastoring. Journalists–even those at Fox News and The Village Voice–have training in being objective. (Granted, I think Ted Koppel may be the only one who actively utilizes that training.)
And objectivity is key to understanding and hopefully fixing our shared problems: poverty, pollution, war, poor health (both care and habits), etc. Why? Because the problems facing this country and the world are problems of resources and logistics, not whether one believes in god x or god y.
Rick Warren can not be objective because, as a pastor and born again Christina, he will put his beliefs before his objectivity. A practice I think is always, always dangerous.
Regardless, the “interviews” were nothing more than marketing. Obama and McCain were simply courting the evangelical voting bloc. They–like every politician–will say what they think a voting bloc wants to hear, which is why we’ll never know what their beliefs are by listening to them in such a forum.
So watch what they do, and have done, closely… look at their voting records, as that will say far more about who they are than 60 minutes with a famous preacher on national TV.
August 25th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Religion may be a private matter, but faith can never be. Whatever we have faith in usually determines the starting point of how we think about things, what we read, who we talk to and who and what we allow to influence us. To believe that we are capable of being logical or objective based on training, statistics or just believing it doesn’t matter is naïve.
The matter at hand is not a matter of policy or problems of resources and logistics, but of people willing to be so narrow that they believe they know better than whomever “the others” are. Out of this narrowness comes an unwillingness to see that all sides have something to offer and that the moment we decide to stop seeing people and their problems as projects/programs we might just having a fighting chance to begin to use our resources in a way that will bring growth, healing and sustainability to most if not all people and the planet.
I was frustrated with the Saddleback interviews for the most part because I saw it as a forum designed for the Evangicals to see who might be the lesser of two evils in their mind. Most people I’ve talked with know very little about the candidates other than what is seen on television. When I’ve talked to people on why they like Obama or McCain it has little to do with their voting record and polcies. It’s about the image or hope that candidate might bring, hope for security or hope for change – either ways it’s all about the image. This is frustrating for me because I believe that we are at a turning point and to have people be excited about voting, but not understand the ramifications of who they elect and how their policies will affect us long term is disheartening.
August 25th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Matt,
A couple things….
Your logic misses me. Let me get this straight. If you are a person of faith you cannot be objective, but if you are a person who shuns faith you obviously must be? Everyone has a world view, even you. It’s just nice to know sometimes what a person’s is, particularly when they are running for president. I think it was G.K. Chesterton who said “Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas because it is the assertion of a universal negative.” Some of the most biased and close-minded people I’ve met have been irreligious.
Personally, I think Warren did such a good job in the interview because he is NOT a journalist, but a pastor. He set up an environment of civility and conversation (and had the moral authority to do so), and asked the candidates the same questions so that we got to see a real comparison. It was because he has relationships with men and has earned their friendship that he was in a position to do so. I’m not saying that a journalist couldn’t do it better, just that a journalist hasn’t yet. I personally don’t care what “professional” credentials a question-asker has. If they are good questions, they are good questions. Period. And sometimes the best questions come from the person in the room who hasn’t been “trained” to know what the “right” question is.
Second, as a person who is concerned about poverty, pollution, war, poor health (both care and habits), etc. I would have to say there are few individuals who have made a more practical, personal and profound contribution to these problems than one Rick Warren (have you heard of the PEACE plan?), and there are no groups who have made a greater contribution to solving these issues than Christians, precisely BECAUSE they are followers of Christ. In fact, I would challenge you to name me one group/philosophy/belief system/whatever that has done more for these issues through the building of hospitals, adoption agencies, homeless shelters, food banks, etc. Where are the atheist relief agencies? Where are the muslim hospitals? Where are the buddhist nursing homes? It seems if you were objective, you would say, “I have to hand it to these evangelicals…no one is putting more time and money up than they are to solve the world’s problems. I just wish they wouldn’t interview the presidential candidates and let the people who are talking about the problems but not doing much to solve them ask the questions around here.”
Helen,
If your criteria for video clips is a) the contributors are young, and b) the contributors are people that Jesus cares about, then I would have to say there are a lot more clips where that one came from. Oh, and to answer your question, “Yes, I do.” That is not the same as saying I admire or adopt his point of view, or think it is worthy of four minutes and thirty-six seconds of my life. Funny, how when I challenge the validity of the content you rejoin, not with a defense of the content, but with a vapid call to love. Sorry, I thought this was a blog where ideas could be exchanged, not a pep rally for those who are anti-.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Dave: I think looking at things through any filter (such as religious faith) stops a person from being objective. And I also think that being objective is one of the hardest things a person in our day and age can do.
Your argument about Christians doing more to solve the world’s problems is not new to me. However, for every hospital built with Christian dollars, I can just as easily point to thousands of people killed by Christan dollars, too (crusades, anyone? How about the Iraq war?).
Also, Rick Warren’s work in Africa–as admirable as it is–would have an even more profound impact were it free from his religious requirements. (Stopping AIDs requires far more than teaching abstinence; it requires condoms, and lots of them.)
IMO, if Rick Warren were a true follower of Jesus, would he really be making jokes about people who earn $150K a year being poor? Didn’t Jesus say “sell all you have and follow me”?
Thing is, this isn’t about Rick Warren, really. It’s about the proper forum for a presidential debate/discussion, and a church is not it. I wonder how America’s millions of Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Mormons, and Scientologists felt about the forum? I doubt they were happy about it.
One piece of advice, Dave: beware empowering people with “moral authority.” Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Jones, and even Adolph Hitler were once claimed to have moral authority, too. Also, beware putting down people’s calls to love. That was basically all Jesus ever did, and I doubt you think of him as vapid. Every call to love is a good one, in my opinion.
August 26th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
Matt,
I agree about filters. I just disagree about who has them. You say I do. I say we do. And, really, the person who says “I don’t have a filter” is the person who would concern me the most when it comes to their objectivity.
I would never say that Christians are perfect, or that they have not failed throughout history. We have. I would just say that guilt by association should not disqualify a person from public discussion, particularly when the Christian in question has lived up to his ideals, and particularly in the US of A where free speech in protected in any case. And there are certain persons (I would say it’s a short list, but that Rick Warren is on it) who have actually earned the right to ask some questions. I personally don’t mind if Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. want to do the same. The more the merrier. I guess I’m not nearly as concerned about who is asking the questions, and am evidently more concerned about who is giving the answers.
Finally, I think your example of “thousands of people being killed by Christian dollars” is inequitable. Since the crusades, when was the last time a patently Christian organization (not a country or a political leader, but a Christian organization, church, missionary society, etc.) killed thousands? If you can’t come up with at least three examples not more than a thousand years old then I would say it is becoming quite clear who is wearing the filter, and it’s not Rick Warren.
On a very sobering note - and this is reality not rhetoric - it was just TODAY that I received a text message from one of my colleagues in India (I lead a multi-location church with locations in 35 countries)….
Dear Bro DAVE,
RSS (rashtriya svayan sevak sangh) and VHP (vishwa hindu parishath), caught rasmita family along with 50 to 60 church members (12 churches n 1 orphanage) n locked dem inside a building n threatened dem n burnt dem ALIVE in orissa (india). PLZ….uphold in ur prayer and spread dis msg…C. YEDIDYA PARKER
Matt, this follows last month when I received word that four of our pastors were burned to death by radical Hindus. If it’s true that Christians have been (in the last thousand years or so) killing thousands, I would want you to be upset, and I will be the first to join you in that. That would be indefensible. Can I count on you to be just as upset about the Christians being killed? Can you join me in that?
Here’s my bottom line, Matt: Christian people have a right to ask some questions, not because they are Christians, but because they are people.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Absolutely I am upset about what you’re telling me is happening in India. My take on it is this: if there were there no conflicting views about which god to worship, these kinds of things would not happen as regularly.
So far my inequitable claim, we can include the inquisition, the witch trials, the acts of the KKK, and the Iraq war (were GW not a born again with a false sense of moral authority, we would not have invaded a sovereign, predominantly Muslim country).
When people feel god is on their side, they become capable of horrific things. And to me, it’s pure madness as there is no real proof of there even being any god. It’s simply what people believe inside their heads.
I am concerned about who asks the questions as well. Remember GW’s “town hall” meetings where guests and their questions were pre-screened? And in an evangelical setting, you’ll get evangelical questions, and IMO, that has nothing to do with setting public policy.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Matt, I appreciate how you say,
I think Christians have focused for too long on what people believe to the neglect of how they behave and agree that when voting for governing officials we should be more concerned with what the candidates do over what they believe.
Sonja said she saw the Saddleback event
I wonder how many people would agree with Sonja here.
I find Matt and Dave’s discussion quite interesting and am thankful for this blog forum. I’m sad that Dave does not think the video clip chosen for this discussion is “worthy of four minutes and thirty-six seconds of my life”, as it is highlighting one of the aims of this year’s Off the Map Tour - asking “What do they think about our involvement with politics?”
August 29th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Matt,
I appreciate the conversation. I cannot deny that some bad things have happened along the way by people who have claimed relationship to Christ (whether or not Christ would say he has relationship to them is another matter). The good news is, and I take this from your answer to my last question, that in the last thousand years there actually aren’t thousands of deaths that you can point to as the result of patently Christian organizations, because you weren’t able to cite any examples, only redefine the question.
Hope you have a good conference and am praying that you will keep some perspective on the positive contributions that some/many/most Christians are making in some/many/most places around the world. Can we be more like Jesus? Yes, I think we can. Can we do more? Absolutely! Will we? History will tell.
Over and out. Have to quit talking now and get back to doing the work that needs to get done.