Older and Wiser

Barry Hankins September/October 2000 Religious Right watchdogs may remember the flap in late 1996 and early 1997 over a symposium in Richard John Neuhaus's journal First Things. I argued in the pages of Liberty (September/October 1997) that two constituencies of what could be termed broadly the Religious Right were demonstrating very different loyalties. Neuhaus and his fellow Christian neo- or theo-conservatives were suggesting the time might be right for resistance to what they called "the regime," meaning the American government.[1] At the same time, the Christian Coalition and its former head Ralph Reed had become an integral part of the Republican Party. Just a few months after the First Things fiasco, Religious Right leader James Dobson proved to be the consummate insider in the Republican Party by threatening to bolt and take Christian conservatives with him if the party didn't straighten up and heed his and other Religious Right leaders' mandates for change.[2] In other words, while Neuhaus was sounding like some sort of resister in the tradition of Deitrich Bonhoeffer, Dobson, Reed, and the Christian Coalition showed clearly that they had become something akin to ward bosses for the Republican Party.[3]

Then, during the spring of 1999, the fracture in the Religious Right seemed to grow more serious when some major voices declared that the Religious Right had lost the "culture war" and should now withdraw from, or at least substantially scale back, its political activism. Three key Religious Right players called for a retreat from the type of political activity that had marked the Moral Majority of the 1980s and the Christian Coalition and other like groups in the 1990s.

While many interpret both the First Things controversy and this more recent debate as a sign that the Religious Right is coming apart and perhaps showing signs of demise, it is just as likely that what we are seeing is the maturing of a religiopolitical movement. No longer do all members of the Religious Right feel the need to speak with one voice lest their strength be diluted by internal disagreement. Comfortable with their secure place on the American political landscape, the Religious Right now appears to have at least three major wings--sophisticated thinkers of the First Things genre, conservative activists in the mold of Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, and those who are now advocating that conservative Christians build their own alternative institutions and to some degree separate from the mainline culture.

The 1999 controversy began with a letter written by Paul Weyrich, a conservative Catholic political activist who has been involved with Religious Right causes from the very beginning. In fact, he was present at the formation of the Moral Majority in 1979 and was the one who suggested to Jerry Falwell that the organization take that name. In February 1999 Weyrich wrote an open letter to like-minded Christian conservatives in which he repudiated the political approach to cultural transformation that the Religious Right had been taking for two decades. That approach, wrote Weyrich, was based on two premises: the assumption that there was a moral majority that agreed with the basic views of Christian conservatives, and the belief that if the Religious Right elected enough conservatives to political office, the agenda of the Religious Right would be enacted and the culture saved.[4]

Weyrich now rejects both of those premises. He sees Christian conservatives as a minority who must withdraw and live separately while the culture collapses all around them, much like "a band of hardy monks [in the early middle ages] who preserved the culture while the surrounding society disintegrated."[5] Moreover, while he continues to believe that politics is important, he now rejects the belief that cultural transformation can be the result. The withdrawal he advocates is already happening in some quarters. Specifically, he cites home schoolers who have dropped out of the educational system and others who have gotten rid of television sets. He also cites the Southern Baptist call for a boycott of Disney and urges that the success of such resistance be measured not by whether Disney itself is crippled financially, but in terms of the number of people who have decided to forgo "the kind of viciously anti-religious, and specifically anti-Christian, entertainment that Disney is spewing out these days."[6]

Weyrich's strategy is a three-part variation on the rallying cry of sixties radicals. Christian conservatives should "turn off" (the television sets), "tune out" ("create a little stillness"), and "drop out" (of the culture).[7] He concluded by calling for a roundtable meeting to discuss his new strategy.

Coming out at roughly the same time as Weyrich's letter was Blinded by Might: Can the Religious Right Save America? a book coauthored by syndicated columnist Cal Thomas and pastor Ed Dobson. The two authors argued a theme similar to Weyrich's and, therefore, quickly became linked with Weyrich against the Religious Right political activists. Television host Lesley Stahl even called the book "an obituary for the Christian Right."

Like Weyrich, both Thomas and Ed Dobson were associates with Jerry Falwell in the early days of the Moral Majority. Thomas was vice president for communications, then executive director of that organization in the 1980s. Dobson served as an associate pastor at Falwell's Thomas Road Baptist Church and was coauthor with Falwell of the The Fundamentalist Phenomenon: The Resurgence of Conservative Christianity.[8] For many years since leaving the Moral Majority, Thomas has been affiliated with the Los Angeles Times. Those who read his widely circulated columns should not have been surprised by the book Blinded by Might. Several years ago Thomas began to criticize what he called "trickle-down morality," the belief that culture could be changed through political activity geared toward electing Christians and passing the right kind of legislation. This was the underlying premise of the Moral Majority in the 1980s and exactly what Weyrich had criticized in his letter.

In Blinded by Might Thomas and Dobson wrote, "If the so-called Religious Right focuses mainly on politics to deliver us, we will never get that right because politics and government cannot reach into the soul."[9] Even more pointedly, the authors challenged, "Those conservatives who argue that liberals used government to undermine what the Founders began should not now seek to grab the reigns of government from liberal hands in order to use government solely to fix problems that are beyond its reach and power to solve."[10] Throughout the book Thomas and Dobson argue that the Religious Right, of which they were both part, was seduced by its proximity to power and thereby compromised in its ability to serve as a prophetic voice within American culture. As an alternative, they, like Weyrich, advocate that conservative Christians seek to be salt and light within the darkness that pervades American society, rather than the ones who control the reins of political power.

For more than a decade now, Dobson has consistently lived out this apolitical stance, admittedly to a fault. After being feted on the Phil Donohue show and many other television and radio programs of the 1980s, he became haunted by the belief that he was really called to preach and pastor, not to hobnob with political and media elites. Eleven years ago he left Falwell's church and the Moral Majority and became pastor of Calvary church in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Since then he has studiously avoided all political alliances and eschewed political activism. Instead he has led his church in a variety of ministries that combine evangelical evangelism with a serious concern for the poor and marginalized of the Grand Rapids community--all while maintaining conservative theology. Perhaps the degree to which Dobson has broken ranks with the Religious Right can best be seen in how he now deals with the issue of homosexuality. While much of the Religious Right pours its energy and resources into fighting the gay lobby, he and Calvary church have developed a ministry to victims of AIDS. Much like Jim Wallis's Sojourners Community in Washington, D.C., an organization that could be classified as part of the Evangelical Left, Dobson's Calvary church has several different programs that reach out to the inner-city, poverty-stricken community, including basketball leagues populated by players who are gang members and mentoring programs for recovering crack addicts and urban children.[11] These are the sort of salt and light activities that Dobson believes are biblically countercultural and more consistent with the message of Christ than attempts to take over the machinery of politics.

Weyrich's letter and the Thomas-Dobson book immediately became the topic of discussion in the Religious Right and even secular right, and both received blistering rebuttal from some of the Religious Right's heavy hitters. In the April issue of Focus on the Family's magazine Citizen, political activist and family counselor James Dobson (no relation to Ed) took issue with Weyrich's assessment of the culture. Dobson argued in a very measured tone that the situation was not nearly as dire as Weyrich had argued and that there still was a real chance that moral Americans could be stirred to political action that would make a difference in the culture. The same issue of Citizen also carried rebuttals by Chuck Colson, Charles Donovan of Gary Bauer's Family Research Council, and Religious Right activist Connie Marshner.[12]

Just a short time later James Dobson's tone was markedly different. In his own "Dear Friends" letter to supporters that appeared in his June newsletter, he characterized the call for cultural withdrawal this way: "Some have concluded that Americans no longer care about right and wrong, and that believers should throw up their hands and surrender."[13] This time the object of Dobson's wrath was not primarily Weyrich. Rather, Dobson was taking aim at Cal Thomas and Ed Dobson. Characterizing the Thomas-Dobson message as "this resurgence of isolationism," James Dobson said that while the authors are Christian men, "they are dead wrong in their perspectives about public policy." "Furthermore," Dobson wrote, "what they recommend for the Christian community would accelerate the decline of America if the ideas they espouse become widely accepted."[14] While agreeing with Thomas and Ed Dobson that the church should never be married to politics, Dobson lashed out at the two authors as if they were part of the liberal enemies he so often excoriates. In discussing a recent key vote in the Senate concerning abortion, he boasted, "I was there on that day, but I didn't see Cal or Ed. And I wonder if Pastor Dobson mourned the tragedy in his sermon the following Sunday." Then, after listing some recent Religious Right political successes, Dobson wrote, "And I have to tell you that I deeply regret Cal Thomas' and Ed Dobson's disparagement of these precious people who are steadily winning the battle for the hearts and minds of their fellow countrymen."[15]

As the letter progressed, Dobson became increasingly agitated. "Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Lutheran pastor and theologian, stood against the Nazi regime and its oppression of the Jews, for which he paid with his life," Dobson wrote. "Would Cal and Ed have suggested that he accommodate Hitler's henchmen just because he had no chance of winning?" Then, shifting to American history, Dobson wrote, "Who would dare criticize those courageous pastors today, who were undoubtedly maligned at the time, for speaking out against the Confederacy? No one did, and yet Cal and Ed now offer this ill-considered advice to today's churches, urging them to ignore the current moral issues in government and society." Dobson called the authors' title "a low blow" because "it implies that the sacrifices made to defend righteousness in the culture have been products of egotism and naivete." Linking authors Thomas and Ed Dobson with Weyrich, James Dobson closed his letter by asking, "Is the culture war really lost, as Paul Weyrich recently asserted?"[16] Clearly Dobson believes that conservative Christians can and must win the culture war.

A few months after Dobson's scathing critique of the Weyrich-Thomas Dobson thesis, Christianity Today brought together the views of seven conservative evangelical Christians in a series of short essays answering the question "Is the Religious Right Finished?"[17] Included among the seven were Thomas and Weyrich, along with former head of the Christian Coalition Ralph Reed, Jerry Falwell, former Reagan aide Don Eberly, James Dobson, and Charles Colson. Weyrich's piece was a slightly condensed version of his February letter, and Dobson's was his June letter of rebuttal. Reed defended Christian political activism from a historical perspective (he has a Ph.D. in history), arguing that much good has in fact come from such activities and that the culture would be in much worse shape than it is had Christians of the Religious Right not been active in recent years. In short, he refuted the Weyrich-Thomas-Dobson argument that the culture war was being lost. Rather, as with other sociopolitical movements such as abolition and women's rights, it will take decades of incrementalism to transform the culture.

Following the written exchange in Christianity Today several Religious Right leaders met at the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C., to discuss the Weyrich-Thomas-Dobson thesis. Participants in the discussion that was covered by C-SPAN included the three principals, along with Charles Donovan, Ralph Reed, Christian Coalition executive director Randy Tate, Republican representative from Pennsylvania Joseph Pitts, Don Eberly, and some others.

Weyrich passionately rebutted the suggestion that he had ever encouraged people to withdraw from politics. Rather, he argued, his message was that he wanted more honesty. "We better be honest about what we are saying," he urged his fellow Religious Right leaders. "Frankly, some of the organizations that put out information that suggests to the people who are coming across with the dollars, that in fact they're on the verge of a brand new era of winning in the political process and in the cultural era, they are not being honest. . . . There is a limit to what can be done in the political arena."[18] Likewise, Eberly, Thomas, and others supported the notion that conservative Christians must be involved in more than politics. They must also penetrate the other gatekeeping institutions of society such as law, journalism, the arts, and entertainment. While the individuals did not iron out all disagreements, there emerged a consensus that there is much to be done and that politics was only one part of the equation.

Taken together, the various voices represented in the mini-symposium in Christianity Today and in the C-SPAN roundtable discussion answer the question "Is the Religious Right finished?" with a resounding "No!" To be sure, the Religious Right is not finished. Rather, it is maturing. While this was not the acknowledged consensus in either forum, this is what the exchange in Christianity Today and on C-SPAN revealed. There are some who believe that infant movements cannot afford to give the impression that there is diversity in their ranks, let alone dissension. Under this interpretation of group dynamics it is only as they mature and become comfortable with their status in the larger scheme of things that they can begin to turn inward to reflect on what might be the best way to advance the cause. Moreover, it is only when movements mature that they can become self-critical. While in infancy or adolescence they go to great lengths to present a united front against the enemy. Their own sense of insecurity in the face of enemies, real and imagined, precludes them from facing realistically their weaknesses. All members must walk in lockstep in the early years of the revolution.

Thomas himself acknowledges this in Blinded by Might when he tells of his resistance to the negative mailouts that the Moral Majority used in the early 1980s. In fact, a good part of Thomas's criticism is that Religious Right political organizations use deceptive, and therefore un-Christian, methods to raise money. After reviewing a Moral Majority mailout that contained the standard litany of powerfully evil forces that were opposed to traditional morality, Thomas asked one of the direct-mail fund-raising gurus who advised the Moral Majority, "Why don't we ever send out a positive letter on what we've accomplished with people's money?" The fundraising expert responded, "You can't raise money on a positive."[19] Indeed, James Dobson's critique of Blinded by Might used this negative everyone-is-against us style, then asked, not for money per se, but whether or not Focus on the Family supporters were willing "to stand with us" against the Weyrich Thomas-Dobson wing of the Religious Right. "Are you there?" Dobson wrote. "Do you care? I really need to know. It would be helpful if you would write us a note or a letter to explain your position."[20] Clearly Dobson was seeking to intensify support, if not financial contributions, by portraying the enemies of the "pro-family" movement as now within the gates of the kingdom itself. Charles Donovan ended a similar letter to Family Research Council supporters with a standard postscript asking for contributions. "If you can make a gift to FRC to bolster our efforts, now would be a perfect time to do so," he wrote.[21]

Still, tempers, egos, and fund-raising letters aside, the fact that Weyrich, Thomas, and Ed Dobson are now engaged in a dialog with those who are responding to their critique of the Religious Right reveals a level of diversity in the movement that would have been considered dangerous to the Religious Right's health just a few years ago.

Make no mistake, neither the First Things flap of 1997 nor the Weyrich Thomas-Dobson thesis of 1999 mean that the Religious Right is cracking up or going away. Rather, as is the case with the feminist movement, which is nearly its contemporary, we will need now to start discussing various wings of the Religious Right. The one-size-fits-all era of uniformity is over. The Religious Right has matured into a movement that will grapple inwardly with how best to transform culture while at the same time continuing as a presence in electoral politics and cultural transformation. Moreover, anyone looking for evidence of the latter need only make a cursory overview of the early presidential race during this past autumn, in which George W. Bush and Al Gore were falling all over themselves to see who could connect best with evangelicals. Bush claimed that Jesus was his favorite political philosopher "because He changed my heart," while Gore trumpeted his own born-again status.

The leading candidates were clearly appealing to a Religious Right constituency that has been identified, organized, and mobilized during the past 20 years. As long as that voting block exists, there will be politicians appealing to it and Religious Right activist leaders organizing it. This will continue even as the First Things intellectuals contemplate resistance to the regime and the Weyrich-Thomas-Dobson wing of the Religious Right movement attempts to keep everyone sober about the limits of politics.

Barry Hankins is assistant professor of history and church State studies at the J. M. Dawson Institute of Church State Studies at Baylor University, Waco, Texas.

ENDNOTES

[1] "The End of Democracy? The Judicial Usurpation of Politics," First Things, November 1996, pp. 18-42.

[2] See Rob Boston, "Family Feud: Focus on the Family's James Dobson Dares to Discipline Wayward Members of the GOP--And Maybe America, Too," Church and State, May 1998, pp. 9-14. Ironically, while playing the role of GOP insider, Dobson also applauded the First Things consideration of resistance to "the regime." See "The End of Democracy? A Discussion Continued," First Things, January 1997, pp. 21-23.

[3] See, for example David Neff, "Outsiders No More: How Conservative Christians Scrapped, Wheedled, and Bargained for Their Place at the Table," Christianity Today, April 28, 1997, pp. 22-25. The article carries a photo of Pat Robertson and Bob Dole together. The most thorough and up-to-date history of the Religious Right also argues that the movement has become a staple of the American political scene. See William Martin, With God On Our Side: The Rise of the Religious Right in America (New York: Broadway Books, 1996).

[4].. Paul Weyrich to "Dear Friend," Feb. 16, 1999. As late as November 1999 Weyrich's letter could be accessed at the Web site www.rfcnet.org/archives/weyrich.htm. This is the Web site for the Religious Freedom Coalition. Weyrich's own organization is called Free Congress.

[5] Ibid., p. 2.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Jerry Falwell, Ed Dobson, and Ed Hindson, The Fundamentalist Phenomenon: The Resurgence of Conservative Christianity (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday-Galilee, 1981).

[9] Cal Thomas and Ed Dobson, Blinded by Might: Can the Religious Right Save America? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999), p, 9.

[10] Ibid., pp. 9, 10.

[11] Ibid., pp. 15-20; and Jim Wallis, "Hostage to an Illusion: An Interview with Cal Thomas and Ed Dobson," Sojourners, November-December 1999, pp. 18-21. For a full article on Dobson and Calvary church, see Dean Merrill, "The Education of Ed Dobson," Christianity Today, Aug. 11, 1997, pp. 26-30.

[12] James Dobson, "Our Faith Compels Us," Citizen, April 1999, p. 15. The other articles were on pages 15 through 19.

[13] James Dobson to "Dear Friends," June 1999, p. 1. As of November 1999 Dobson's letter could be accessed at the Focus on the Family Web site address www.family.org/docstudy/ newsletters/A0006398.html. A version of this letter also appeared in Jerry Falwell's journal. See Dr. James Dobson, "Christians Must Remain Involved," National Liberty Journal, July 1999. This version can be accessed at www.liberty.edu/chancellor/nlj/July1999/activism.htm.

[14] Dobson to "Dear Friends," pp. 1, 2.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid., pp. 3, 4.

[17] "Is the Religious Right Finished: An Insiders' Conversation," Christianity Today, Sept. 6, 1999, pp. 43-59.

[18] "Conservatism and Cultural Change," C-SPAN2 Today.

[19] Quoted in Thomas and Dobson, Blinded by Might, p. 54.

[20] Dobson to "Dear Friends," p. 5.

[21] Chuck Donovan to "Dear Friend," Monthly Letter, Apr. 2, 1999, p. 3 . This newsletter can be accessed at www.frc.org/letters/april.html.

---

Article Author: Barry Hankins