You are correct, there is no NAE board response on newsires, the full board had not received the letter as of Friday.

Here are some of the NAE interm director and Rev. Richard’s public response to the letter:

***
Taylor could not be reached immediately for comment. Cizik said, “I have no intention of resigning.” The NAE’s interim president, Leith Anderson, said Friday he expects the board to stand by Cizik, who directs the NAE’s Washington office.

“I’m supportive of Rich Cizik,” Anderson said. “I think that he is highly respected in Washington and is a forthright spokesman for creation care and that’s good.”

When read a list of the signatories, Anderson said, “We would normally look to our own constituency … and not to those who have chosen not to be members of the NAE … for counsel.” – CT March 2, 2007

***
But the Rev. Leith Anderson, president of the association, said, “We’re talking about somebody here who’s been in Washington for 25 years, has an amazing track record and is highly respected.”

“I’m behind him,” said Mr. Anderson – NYT March 2, 2007

***
“I speak with a voice that is authentically evangelical on all the issues, from religious freedom around the world, to compassion for the poor, ending oppression in Darfur and yes, creation care is one of those issues,” Cizik said yesterday. – Short News March 4, 2007

***
(T) the Rev. Leith Anderson, defended Cizik as “a great asset.” He also said that the Dobson letter was released to the news media before it was received by the board. “I guess that says it all,” he said. – Washington Post March 3, 2007

***
You might like to read about Marc Gunther’s dinner with Cizik March 2nd. There are several quotes from Cizik as he and the NAE prepare for their board meeting next week in Minnesota. Green Opinions Blog, March 3, 2007

I’m sure more will be forthcoming from the NAE privately and publically.

No, the World Bank doesn’t make the transcripts of their forums available online. The quote was transcribed by Myron Ebell, Director of Energy and Global Warming Policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Cizik’s ‘organization’ has already responded Joe. They respecfully disagree.

Uh, no, you’re wrong about that. The NAE board has not responded yet. It will be surprising if they back him up considering that in January 2006 the NAE Executive Committee instructed 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.”

The Executive Committee took this action “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.”

Cizik’s ‘organization’ has already responded Joe. They respecfully disagree.

I appreciate you acknowledging the real agenda of the letter writers.

Why do you think that the issue is so “dividing and demoralizing?” This isn’t about the “environment” or “creation care”–an issue that evangelicals care deeply about–but about the political solutions that stem from the global warming controversy.

Cizik is speaking out in a way that is contrary to the view of his own organization. And when he supports “population control” he is speaking out in a way that is contrary to Christianity.

I realize that when it comes to Dobson you take the “enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend” approach. But Cizik isn’t a guy you want to be defending.