National Association of Evangelicals doesn't listen to Dobson

[dewdrop_world]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/10/AR2007031001175.html

Rebuffing Christian radio commentator James C. Dobson, the board of directors of the National Association of Evangelicals reaffirmed its position that environmental protection, which it calls "creation care," is an important moral issue.

Dobson, the founder of Focus on the Family, and two dozen other conservative Christian leaders, including Gary L. Bauer, Tony Perkins and Paul M. Weyrich, sent the board a letter this month denouncing the association's vice president, the Rev. Richard Cizik, for urging attention to global warming.

The letter argued that evangelicals are divided on whether climate change is a real problem, and it said that "Cizik and others are using the global warming controversy to shift the emphasis away from the great moral issues of our time," such as abortion and same-sex marriage.

(emphasis mine)

Or, more accurately, perhaps the NAE simply doesn't share Dobson's psychologically unbalanced obsession with sexual morality and recognizes that the survival of life as we know it is in itself a great moral issue.

That's some measure of progress, if they are starting to see Dobson for the shrill power-player that he's been for some time.

James

[Steven E. Webster]

James,

Notice this press release from the neoconservative "religious" front group and Washington think tank, the Institute on Religion and Democracy.

http://www.ird-renew.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=390529&ct=3641171

These are the folks behind splitting up the Anglican Communion and attacking Methodists and Presbyterians. All of a sudden they're busy trying to keep the Evangelicals in line so they don't cause any trouble for big oil. What an evil bunch!

They obviously wanted the National Association of Evangelicals to punish Cizik for his pro-environmental stance.

And notice this--http://www.ird-renew.org/site/pp.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=278604 IRD seems to want to remind everyone that Haggard was head of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE). Notice how they compare the NAE with the National Council of Churches (NCC). The NCC was IRD's old foe--this is a not so subtle warning to NAE to look out--they're next!

Steven W.

[Diane Vera]

James,

Notice this press release from the neoconservative "religious" front group and Washington think tank, the Institute on Religion and Democracy.

http://www.ird-renew.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=390529&ct=3641171

These are the folks behind splitting up the Anglican Communion and attacking Methodists and Presbyterians. All of a sudden they're busy trying to keep the Evangelicals in line so they don't cause any trouble for big oil. What an evil bunch!.

Are they the folks behind splitting up the Anglican Communion worldwide, or just within the United States?

[Diane Vera]

Some pages about the IRD:

* Institute on Religion and Democracy, Inc. (http://www.mediatransparency.org/recipientprofile.php?recipientID=174) on the "Media Transparency" site
* Institute on Religion and Democracy (http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1496) on Right Web: "exposing the architecture of power that's changing our world"
* Links to articles about IRD (http://www.rightwingwatch.org/groups/institute_on_re/) on Right Wing Watch
* Rev. Chuck Currie: Institute on Religion on Democracy Report Written By Bush Campaign Worker (http://chuckcurrie.blogs.com/chuck_currie/2007/01/institute_on_re.html) and Update: The Institute on Religion and Democracy Funded By Far Right Political Groups (http://chuckcurrie.blogs.com/chuck_currie/2004/10/update_the_inst.html)
* Names and Money Trail of Right Wing Termites in Mainline Christian Denominations (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/13/221926/133)

While looking for info about the IRD I also came across the following:

* Avenging angel of the religious right (http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/01/06/ahmanson/index_np.html?pn=1) by Max Blumenthal -- about Howard Ahmanson Jr.
* Religious Right Determines Foreign Policy (http://zmagsite.zmag.org/May2005/monkerud0505.html) by Don Monkerud, Z Magazine

[WillySF]

Diane, et al.,

The Anglican Communion is a worldwide organization. The part in the USA is called the Episcopal Church in the USA (ECUSA). In Canada it is the Anglican Church of Canada. In Great Britain it is the Church of England. We're all offshoots of the Church of England.

[Diane Vera]

Diane, et al.,

The Anglican Communion is a worldwide organization. The part in the USA is called the Episcopal Church in the USA (ECUSA). In Canada it is the Anglican Church of Canada. In Great Britain it is the Church of England. We're all offshoots of the Church of England.

To re-phrase my question: Has the IRD played a major role in splitting up the Anglican Communion (worldwide) or just the Episcopal Church (here in the U.S.A.)? I was previously under the impression that the IRD was involved in splitting up the latter, but not the former.

[Diane Vera]

Anyhow, it seems to me that the greening of the NAE may be tied in with some other, larger trends that we need to be aware of. See my separate thread on Some noteworthy U.S. trends, both good and bad (http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=2382).

[Diane Vera]

The following two pages, mentioned by other people earlier in this thread, appear to contradict each other regarding the official position of the NAE:

* Evangelical Body Stays Course on Warming (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/10/AR2007031001175.html), by Alan Cooperman, Washington Post, Sunday, March 11, 2007; Page A05
* What Now? National Association of Evangelicals Board Meeting (http://www.ird-renew.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=390529&ct=3641171) -- IRD press release, 3/8/2007

The IRD press release doesn't give a date of the "previous meeting" at which the NAE Executive Committee is alleged to have passed the following motion

Recognizing the ongoing debate regarding the causes and origins of global warming, and understanding the lack of consensus among the evangelical community on this issue, the NAE Executive Committee, while affirming our love for the Creator and His creation, directs the NAE staff to stand by and not exceed in any fashion our approved and adopted statements concerning the environment contained within the Evangelical Call to Civic Responsibility.

On the other hand, the Washington Post article says:

The Rev. Leith Anderson, the association's president, said yesterday that the board did not respond to the letter during a two-day meeting that ended Friday in Minneapolis. But, he said, the board reaffirmed a 2004 position paper, "For the Health of the Nations," that outlined seven areas of civic responsibility for evangelicals, including creation care along with religious freedom, nurturing the family, sanctity of life, compassion for the poor, human rights and restraining violence.

On Friday, the association's board approved a 12-page statement on terrorism and torture. Anderson said that Cizik gave a report to the board on his work in Washington as vice president for governmental affairs and that there was no effort to reprimand him. "I think there was a lot of support from me, from the executive committee and from the board for Rich Cizik," Anderson said.

Of course the Board of Directors and the Executive Committee may hold different opinions. I assume that the Board of Directors has greater authority?

[Steven E. Webster]

To re-phrase my question: Has the IRD played a major role in splitting up the Anglican Communion (worldwide) or just the Episcopal Church (here in the U.S.A.)? I was previously under the impression that the IRD was involved in splitting up the latter, but not the former.

Although I am a Methodist, I've been following the Episcopal/Anglican news fairly closely through a friend. I've read that the IRD leadership has been very busy travelling to the big international Anglican meetings and engaging in a lot of closed-door meetings with Archbishop Akinola and other foreign bishops.

The IRD plays the same game with African United Methodists--using them to influence the American Church. They use the "gay issue" to manipulate church politics to achieve their larger aim of destroying the progressive political influence of the main-line denominations.

Now that the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) is taking stands against global warming and torture, we will see the IRD working to undermine the NAE in the same way. You mentioned the contradiction between the Washington Post news and the press release from IRD---IRD is expert at disinformation campaigns--don't trust anything that they report.

Steven Webster

[Diane Vera]

Although I am a Methodist, I've been following the Episcopal/Anglican news fairly closely through a friend. I've read that the IRD leadership has been very busy travelling to the big international Anglican meetings and engaging in a lot of closed-door meetings with Archbishop Akinola and other foreign bishops.

The IRD plays the same game with African United Methodists--using them to influence the American Church. They use the "gay issue" to manipulate church politics to achieve their larger aim of destroying the progressive political influence of the main-line denominations.

One would think that these African archbishops wouldn't be too terribly fond of the IRD's neo-conservative politics on economic and international matters. Are the African archbishops aware of the IRD's larger political agenda?

[nmwolfboy]

To re-phrase my question: Has the IRD played a major role in splitting up the Anglican Communion (worldwide) or just the Episcopal Church (here in the U.S.A.)? I was previously under the impression that the IRD was involved in splitting up the latter, but not the former.

You can find a report here (http://www.edow.org/follow/) that details IRD involvement in both the Episcopal Church (TEC) and in the Worldwide Anglican Communion (WWAC). The report is called "Following the Money."

Pax,

scott

[Steven E. Webster]

One would think that these African archbishops wouldn't be too terribly fond of the IRD's neo-conservative politics on economic and international matters. Are the African archbishops aware of the IRD's larger political agenda?

I don't know why IRD is so successful with the African Bishops. Perhaps progressives are not playing the politics of the situation as well. Perhaps IRD has convinced the Africans that they are really defending the faith against heretics. Perhaps homophobia is really effective in Africa. To some extent I believe the Africans may be corrupted by financial gifts and promises of power and influence. Akinola, for instance, seems to think he will displace the Archbishop of Canterbury as the leader of the "orthodox" Anglican Communion.

Steven Webster

[WillySF]

It really breaks my heart to see what has happened to my church. There was a time that the defining characteristic of an episcopalian was the Book of Common Prayer. There has always been a large tent within the Anglican Communion. Although we venerate holy scripture, we are not literalists. Our church has been hijacked. Now the only time I ever read about the ECUSA in the press it is about this solely divisive issue. It makes me quite ill to think that all of the social and economic issues we have tackled never get so much as a mention in the same press. We used to be a force for good in this country, and our influence was great. Now we're divided and shunned or ignored, or simply discounted. Even though I am rather agnostic and tend not to attend religious rites, I still identify with the ECUSA and call myself an episcopalian. I am proud to be an Anglican.

[Emproph]

Notice this press release from the neoconservative "religious" front group and Washington think tank, the Institute on Religion and Democracy.

http://www.ird-renew.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=390529&ct=3641171
And to think they're giving these quotes away free...
Jerald Walz, IRD Vice President and NAE Board Member, commented:

Richard Cizik continues to step outside the approved policy areas of the NAE.

Cizik has claimed that global warming is real.

Cizik has also used his NAE title in endorsing a petition against torture...

Similarly, Cizik has backed the Evangelicals for Darfur petition...

All of these controversial political judgments go well beyond any plain scriptural teaching.
What, no petition in support of global warming, torture and genocide?

I call discrimination!

[dewdrop_world]

I would have thought that the Good Samaritan might serve as plain scriptural support for caring about Darfur.

But I suppose, if you read the story literally, you would have to conclude that helping those in need is a moral imperative only if you are from Samaria! Obviously, since the story never mentions the Western hemisphere, it doesn't apply to us... :rolleyes: :confused: :mad:

James