It’s refreshing to see a journalist take the time to respond to posts at blogs about an article they’ve written – Disowning Conservative Politics, Evangelical Pastor Rattles Flock and the International Herald Tribune title: Pastor rejects the ‘bully pulpit’. We don’t always get the opportunity to thank a journalist for outstanding reporting and a willingness to engage readers openly.
That is the case at GetReligion (which is the second time I’ve read the term heretic used for Boyd)
The GetReligion post is here. Goodstein mentions her article on Boyd is the second most popular download at the NYT site, even though ( or perhaps because) the the parishioner exodus happened in 2004, an election year.Â
I think there may be larger reasons this article is so popular.  Other than religious curiosity, the piece seems to have touched something important in the American people. And even those of us outside the US that follow religious news occasionally down south have had a response to it. I don’t how to articulate why this has captured readers in such a hopeful way.
 I’ve seen hundreds of positive comments about Boyd’s decision not to preach partisan politics from the pulpit, under all kinds of blog posts, especially on none faith blogs; negative posts tend to come from those that felt theology wasn’t sufficiently featured. The complaints are the same old same old - Boyd is liberal (he isn’t) or as said in the first BDBO post, Boyd is a heretic.Â
Culture war Republicans such as  Chuck Colsen says in a scathing critique says it conservative evangelical bashing, Boyd’s position is propaganda.
“ …we ought to abandon moral issues and adopt Boyd’s position. Particularly some younger evangelicals are suggesting that we stay away from divisive issues like abortion and homosexuality altogether and just go back and be like the first-century Church—stay out of politics, tend to our spiritual knitting.”
Some of these concerns are raised at the GetReligion post.
Laurie Goodstein’s response to GetRelgion:
Related: Pastors not playing the God card
Evangelical pastors address the proper roles of politics and religion
- In the piece I do mention Boyd’s “Open Theism†position and the uproar that caused, but only in passing. As “Tope†said in the posting above, that wasn’t the point of this article. Imagine the space it would have taken to explain THAT controversy to unattuned readers. Also, Open Theism was not a factor in the loss of members at Woodland Hills. Boyd’s church actually gained members during the years he came out with his open theism stance. And though one Get Religion writer thought Boyd’s position on politics stems from his Open Theism, there is no such link in either his sermons or his book where he lays out his case.
- The way Boyd interprets the “two kingdom†approach is to say that THE CHURCH should stay out of politics when it speaks as the church and the voice of Christianity – not that individual Christians should. (Though I guess the comeback would be : well WHO then is the church, and do you expect them to deny their identity in the public sphere? But this story raised far more questions than it answered.)
- Mollie is right that there could have been more space given over to those who think otherwise. However, we have heard plenty from that position in the past- no?
- Mollie’s hunch that I have somehow made up or doctored a quote is quite WRONG, however. How do I know? One, I don’t do that. Two, that particular interview was done by phone before I went to St. Paul, and I type notes verbatim into the computer.
- Thank you, but the “soothing voice†on the video piece is not mine, unfortunately. The piece and the voice both belong to its producer, Shayla Harris, who deserves the credit for both.