Mr. President, we need more than lip service
March 17th, 2009A USA Today article by Mercer professor David Gushee bemoans the fact that President Obama has not done more to reduce abortions.
Obama had one of the most radical pro-abortion voting records in Congress, and Gushee (and evangelicals who voted for him) thought he would do something to reduce abortions? What naivete.
Dr. Gushee seems like a man without a home in this article. As a former student, I was greatly disappointed in his movement away from traditional Christian beliefs and wondered how the man that passionately spoke for the sacredness of life (I had him speak at my church on the subject about 6 years ago) could follow the agenda of those with whom he is now aligning himself.
Now it seems that he is becoming disillusioned by the new group with which he has aligned himself (both the Obama administration and the Christian middle or left). While I do think he makes a good point about the Christian right tying itself too closely to a particular political party - I think he now sees that he has compromised his own beliefs to gain a platform that holds very little influence now.
Agreed, Lyle. Thanks for your thoughts. He has some good things to say in the article, but it’s so sad that he and others like him actually believed that Obama would do something to reduce abortions.
It’s too bad that Gushee didn’t have the time and courage to come back to Union last month for the “Making Men Moral” conference and hear the story of how Fr. Richard John Neuhaus made the bold stand against abortion and was summarily “dismissed” from the “enlightened intellectual” camp. Other formerly anti-abortion Dems, like Jesse Jackson and Edward Kennedy, found the glory of political favor too powerful.
It’ll be interesting to see where Gushee ends up politically and morally in a couple of years.
How can a man so smart and (as you have pointed out before, Tim) so aware of his mental capacities be so easily suckered?
Easy. Some of the most academically sharp minds are also some of the least socially adept. They don’t have the “street smarts” to see through the smoke screen. I probably wouldn’t score within 20 points of Gushee on an IQ test, but I KNEW (absolutely, positively, without a doubt) Obama was blowing smoke when he was casting himself as a centrist instead of an extreme lefty. He was SEEKING votes. Period.
Some of these “distinguished” professors are far from being masters of the obvious. You wrote well, Tim, when you used the word naivete.
How many times does it have to be said that you don’t listen to what a person is SAYING, you look at what they have been DOING. Obama has been about increasing opportunities for abortions his entire political career.
Might I suggest that Dr. Gushee’s moderate theology is what landed him in his political frustration?
What we need is a return to a biblical doctrine called the Depravity of Man. It does wonders in serving as a filter when listening to politicians.
Exactly, Brett. Well stated.
While I do not share my former colleague’s earlier enthusiasm for Obama, I think we need to be careful about how we characterize David Gushee’s theology (and his moral positions). In the interests of Christian charity, a critic should at least have a conversation with him on those issues before offering judgmental conclusions. Gushee has learned what we all should have learned from Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, and Bush 2–politicians may publicly speak a good “faith” line, but politics often gets in the way of meaningful application. Politicians consistently diasppoint us.
Jim, I’m not sure whose comments you are directing your comment toward, but as for me, but I do not think my assertions above warrant a personal conversation with Dr. Gushee because I am basing my opinion on what he has publicly stated through interviews or his own writings.
Correct me if I am wrong, but if a person puts his views out in a public manner than those views are open to public critique without first going to the source. David Gushee has clearly and unambiguously moved further to the left theologically and politically and aligned himself with those who are not exactly theologically conservative. I see no point in wasting his time or my time in seeking to affirm what is so patently evident.
If I thought a conversation with him would help him I would pursue it, but I would rather seek to try to put my opinion on a public blog like this in the interest that it my help others in the future think more biblically in regard to evaluating the promises of politicians.
I am not questioning his motives. I am saying that he was fooled, and I believe one of the reasons he was fooled is because he has too high a view of man.
As for politics getting in the way of meaningful application, I agree totally, but as far as I can tell, politics is not stopping Obama from seeking to apply the “promises” he made to moderates. Indeed other past Presidents, from both parties, have disappointed as well. But I am not sure any of the past six presidents you listed made quite the sweeping and broad promises as the current one.
Brett, I have not seen anything in public that would show Gushee drifting leftward theologicially, and a face-to-face conversation with him earlier this year confirmed in my mind that he still functions within the bounds of historic Christian orthodoxy. He is clearly to the right theologically of most of his colleagues at Mercer. Granted, his online articles on homosexuality have raised legitimate concerns, but I’m not convinced that he has completely worked through that issue–I am praying that he will clearly affirm biblical teaching in that regard. I am encouraged that he has had continuing dialogue with some former colleagues at Union. I simply want to guard against labeling him as a theological liberal. I certainly don’t agree with everything he writes, but he is my brother in Christ and was a valued colleague for several years.
Dr. Gushee’s expressed frustration over Obama’s policies keep me optimistic about his evangelicalism. His recent articles have given me great concern about his theological future, but I still retain a great deal of love and respect for him from my time at Union. Dr. Patterson’s words are a comfort to me, and I hope that Gushee will avoid the doctrinal pitfalls in his work at Mercer.
Jim,
I am glad to hear that through your personal relationship with Dr. Gushee, he seems to be a trustworthy and honorable friend of yours. That is great to hear.
The fact that I do not know him personally certainly makes it easier for me to be negative in my critique. I appreciate your personal testimony of friendship with him. I’m sure it will cause me to exercise more caution in the words I choose to use in critiquing strangers over the internet.
However, you say that you have not seen anything in public that would show Gushee drifting leftward theologically…yet you turn right around and say that you think (based upon personal conversations) that he STILL operates within the bounds of historic Christian orthodoxy. As if you acknowledge there has been some changes. Then you admit that his online (public) articles raise legitimate concerns. In what way? Which direction is that a drift? To the right? Hardly.
Which direction is a move from Union to Mercer? Right or left?
That he is clearly to the right theologically of most of his colleagues at Mercer is not saying much. That could still be way left of most of the faculty of Union.
As to his stance on homosexuality and you being “not convinced that he has worked through that issue” is just bizarre to me. What is to work through with that issue? Talk about plain reading of the text. Forgive me for sounding naive or simplistic but this is highly troublesome. Where did he stand 10 to 15 years ago regarding homosexuality? Do you think he has moved to the right or to the left on that issue?
As far as I can tell your concern for anyone labeling him a theological liberal has not come to pass in this blog post or in the comments. To me (conservative, evangelical, and reformed), Gushee is a theological moderate, as I said above. Is that an inaccurate statement for me to make? I’m using that term within the framework of the current SBC environment (which means I am being much more generous than many others would be, but hey, I’m a nice guy :-).