The usual suspects of the US religious right came out with a manifesto today and on the face of it, the Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience looks like the usual screed against abortion and gays.
However, on careful reading, I don’t think it is just against the usual evangelical fundamentalist causes. In the tradition of the Institute of Religion and Democracy, it is a strong declaration against Christians who are not ‘them.’
This has been released by The DeMoss Group, the PR firm who manages the message for many US religious celebrities.
While this is an anti abortion/anti gay/religious freedom screed, and veiled threat, it comes across to me as more a declaration against mainline and moderate Christians.
We, as Orthodox, Catholic, and Evangelical Christians, have gathered, beginning in New York on September 28, 2009, to make the following declaration, which we sign as individuals, not on behalf of our organizations, but speaking to and from our communities. We act together in obedience to the one true God, the triune God of holiness and love, who has laid total claim on our lives and by that claim calls us with believers in all ages and all nations to seek and defend the good of all who bear his image. We set forth this declaration in light of the truth that is grounded in Holy Scripture, in natural human reason (which is itself, in our view, the gift of a beneficent God), and in the very nature of the human person. We call upon all people of goodwill, believers and non-believers alike, to consider carefully and reflect critically on the issues we here address as we, with St. Paul, commend this appeal to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.
Looking at who signed this, it is far less about commonalities of faith than it is about current political positions in the US. There are the usual evangelical dominionists, most of whom genuinely see themselves as culture warriors with world view. Where this differs is in who is permitted to sign into their ‘war’, nine US Roman Catholic archbishops and a patriarch of the Orthodox Church in the US, making this for all intense purposes a self proclaimed ecumenical document. Did the pope give his archbishops permission to climb into this political bed?
These men expect a million signatures, and I’ve no doubt they’ll get them.
Look who has not signed.
Cults of Christianity such as the Mormons, who as an organization share the same lobby groups, money pots and political views. The elders of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints are happy to pour money and resources into common political agendas, lies and all.
Far more glaring to me is who I believe this manifesto is speaking against. Most of us, mainline Christians from
Catholic to evangelical to moderate. Yes, women, gays, the uninsured are common targets, however the language is common us/them. Pick a denomination; United Church of Christ, Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), Quakers, Disciples of Christ, Mennonites, American Baptists, United Methodists, Wesleyans, Salvation Army…
The language of the manifesto is cloying and sanctimonious. Don’t look for theological doctrinal substance such as the deity of Jesus Christ, the cross, resurrection, redemption. Don’t look for clear historical truth, this is a group of men who decided a long time ago what kind of legal and political masters they will be. This is a group of politically social conservatives and neo-conservatives who talk about freedom with a clear goal of denying it to others. It’s a classic alliance of social conservatives taking their re-dedication walk down their inerrant manifest destiny version of their sawdust trail.
These are men who have not seen their own make it into the White House. (exception of one Catholic president and one Quaker and a couple of Baptists) For years through the Moral Majority and Christian Coalition and the Institute of Religion and Democracy, many of these men have worked to get ideological colleagues into the highest political positions in the US. They are not happy when they have wants, their organizations exist to demand. To accomplish what they want, they continue to need to marginalize mainline believers. There are also hopeful moderates who believe they share common goals, but will be marginalized if they don’t play as demanded.
I am deeply saddened to see a Canadian name on this manifesto.
J.I. Packer is a distinguished theologian (I do not use distinguish lightly) and he is not a fool. He knows the agenda of these would be leaders, and he knows the history of the US religious right, I believe he knows what he is signing politically.
Feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, give a cup of cold water...secondary to what is really being sought. This is about power, power which the American people have wisely to this point denied them. A manifesto is a public declaration of principles, policies, or intentions, especially of a political nature. I am genuinely grieved to see J.I. Packer’s signature on this document. I am sorry to see Ravi Zacharias, a thoughtful Canadian/US evangelical apologist put his name on this manifesto. Politics makes strange bedfellows, there is a cultural and political storm, an upheaval going on in North America and confusion is real. This manifesto is a reaction and while it gives lip service to the kingdom, this is about feeding on fear, the need to belong, the seeking of power and the finances to seek that power, trolling through biblical and historical ignorance and blending it into seeking or taking seats at the head of the tables in Washington. There are times when we who call Jesus Christ Lord have to stand and say you do not speak for me. You do not tell me how to be salt and light, you do not tell me who my brothers and sisters in faith are. You do not declare you will nationalize and politicize the good news, you will not crush and break those created in the image and likeness of God. You will not lie to take what is not yours. I reject marginalization maneuvers. We are called to think, and flowery words based on political slight of hand designed to distract His people from justice and mercy is not a call those of us who go to the cross are required to respond to. As Dan Gilgoff an expert of the religious right points out the desire of the aging baby-boomers is to draw in younger evangelicals: “We argue that there is a hierarchy of issues,” he told the New York Times. “A lot of younger evangelicals say they’re all alike. We’re hoping to educate them that these are the three most important issues.” It’s an interesting goal that says a lot about the fears of a graying generation of culture warriors, but the big question is how to instill the declaration’s principles in the new generation. Releasing a 4,700 word document at the National Press Club doesn’t seem like the straightest path to young people’s hearts. The other not US citizen who signed this manifesto is another schismatic Anglican who has not hidden his raw ambition, Peter Akinola of Nigeria. He is a dangerous man, and if you don’t know about him, then learn. I think in the coming days we’ll see moderate, liberal and progressive American Christians speak against what is another authoritarian verbal barrage by men who make their living seeking power. Younger evangelicals aren’t buying in. As is common with those of an authoritarian bent, it is what the boomers believe others should be against. For many who signed this document, by the way, make a very good living; far above the median wage of most they seek to draw into their web of fearful self-righteousness and belief they have a divine right to rule. Jesus warned us about distraction, we’ve been warned about vessels which are clean on the outside and dirty on the inside. He asks us to look at fruit and motivation, to weigh, to not seek power, motivate by fear, guilt and division. We are Christians who have joined together across historic lines of ecclesial differences to affirm our right – and, more importantly, to embrace our obligation - to speak and act in defense of these truths. We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence. It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season. May God help us not to fail in that duty. A few readers are having difficulty with the De Moss link. Here are a few other places you can read the manifesto. It is also posted at First Things.
We cannot serve God and mammon, nor be wearied and weighed down by their words.
Search
Subscribe 
You are currently browsing the Bene Diction Blogs On weblog archives.
Related Entries
For blog design, Wordpress themes or blog help, see cre8d design.
It is an interesting document on first scan and does have a who’s who of the theocon right signing on. However, the scope of the signees, including quite a number of Catholic bishops and largely apolitical evangelical leaders, makes this somewhat different from the usual suspects.
One guy who stood out like a sore thumb on the list was Ron Sider, who is normally in the Sojourners-Tony Campolo evangelical left. He’s a poverty fighter and social justice guy since before it was cool; I recall reading his books back in the 90s when running a church-camp bookstore.
However, you can be a economic liberal and a moral conservative; quite a few of the Catholics on the list would agree with Sider on economics, for Catholic teaching on economics is more Third Way center-left than the free-market mavens in the theocon crowd.
What you are seeing here is a subdued version of the old Moral Majority, focused on the life and marriage-centric issues that are at play in the early 21st century.
Full blog post coming after a trip to a library book sale and the Michigan-Ohio State football grudge match this afternoon.
Excellent Mark, I look forward to what you have to say.
There are a few moderates, I noticed that, which would not have been seen with the Moral Majority. There was very much a here we go again feel as I read it through a few times.
While Colsen made clear he is attempting to appeal to younger evangelicals, I don’t think they are going to put themselves in this box. I think it’s disingenuous for him to infer younger evangelicals and Catholics don’t know how to articulate the other positions they embrace and to pit religious freedom against equality.
If the ‘victimized’ signers of this manifesto chose civil disobedience, they aren’t saying what it’s going to be. They note they are prepared to sacrifice, I think I can be forgiven for my skepticism.
I must admit I don’t have a great deal of knowledge about American right wing fundamentalism or American politics.I apologise for my ignorance of this issue, but reading your blog is helping me to gain knowledge on issues such as this.
What came across to me as I was reading the manifesto though was that they seem to be focusing on marriage and abortion issues while paying lip service to issues that matter to many Christians such as helping the poor and justice. Why focus only on marriage?
Where does this leave the moderate Christians who may disagree with their point of view? I agree with what you that there is an us and them tone to the manifesto.
Veronica asked-
Possibly because there isn’t a clear consensus on economics with this grouping. You have a number of economic conservatives wanting smaller taxes and smaller government and economic liberals like Ron Sider who goes to bat for “helping the poor and justice” under the same roof.
The same disagreement can extend to climate change. One of the co-authors of the Declaration, Timothy George, was one of the signers of the Evangelical climate change initiative manifesto; I counted three others, including Sider, that were on board both documents. Quite a few of the more conservative signers of the MD were asking for the heads of a few of the climate-change signers when it came out.
So they agree on what they can agree on and politely ignore what that can’t agree on. That might lead to the lack of “theological doctrinal substance”; getting that big of swath of Christian thinkers to come to terms is near impossible, sadly.
Thank you for answering my question Mark.
Over at World Magazine, Colsen makes this statement:
“The timing of the release before the Senate vote on healthcare Saturday, according to Colson, was a “coincidence.” Members of the coalition said the document reflected an “urgency” the global church feels about certain issues.”
The global church – really?
Coincidence? Hardly.
The Acton Institute:
” Father Robert Sirico of the Acton Institute added that the declaration isn’t emerging from “a penchant for theocracy.”
Really?
Joel Beltz attempts a classic Q & A deflection. Uh huh.
The main signers would anticipate criticism, they are political pragmatists who make their living as essentially single issue lobbyists.
The global church? Well I can tell you they are not speaking on behalf of many British Christians.
“We act together in obedience to the one true God, the triune God of holiness and love, who has laid total claim on our lives and by that claim calls us with believers in all ages and all nations to seek and defend the good of all who bear his image.”
There’s more than one thing I disagree with in this statement, but I particularly dislike them saying that God has “laid claim” on our lives – didn’t Jesus say that “WHOSOEVER WILL, come follow me” and “IF ANY WOULD come after me, let him take up his cross…”? He does not lay claim, He INVITES us to deny our fallen flesh nature with all it’s crooked paths and follow him, YIELDING ourselves to Him bit by bit, step by step, as we are able, as different areas of our lives become crucified and lose their stranglehold over us, all the while covering us with His grace, with His blood, for those things not yet overcome. John the Baptist said, “Make straight the way for the Lord”. But why should we want to endure this uncomfortable and painful cross? For the joy that is set before us – the Lord promises that whatever we endure now is only “light and momentary afflictions” compared to eternity and the reward that awaits us there, not to mention how He rewards us in this life! But I don’t believe we get to choose our battles – we are appointed to overcome wherever and in whatever state we find ourselves in, however we got that way. Some are invited to fight more difficult battles than others to be sure, but that means the victory and the glory will be greater and the reward will be too. Jesus was tempted in every way it is possible for man to be tempted in – He overcame everything, yes, everything, to cut a path for us to follow in. He has gone before us. We overcome by His power, it’s impossible to do it ourselves, but as we draw near to Him in our afflictions, we draw on His very real power and strength. And as we endure the cross to the end for His sake, He rewards us with more of Him, more revelation, more transformation into His likeness, more victories and overcoming power. This life is so short, truly in light of eternity, to lay down our life in this manner is such a small offering in a way…..for the joy that is set before us – may the Lord give us eyes to behold and see that joy.
Listen to this encouragement in Hebrews 12:4-13, “In your struggle against sin, you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. And you have forgotten that word of encouragement that addresses you as sons: ‘My son, do not make light of the Lord’s discipline, and do not lose heart when he rebukes you, because the Lord disciplines those he loves, and he punishes everyone he ACCEPTS AS A SON.’ How wonderful to know, to really know, He accepts you as a son. This is what He invites us to, sonship, and He LEADS those who willingly follow, (albeit at times reluctantly, feet dragging, head down and complaining!), but He never drives His flock along from behind with a whip as the above statement seems to imply.
There is no right, left, or moderate to be found in the teachings of the Bible or of Jesus Christ, or any of the original apostles. There is simply the truth of God being manifest and shown to us and the world by the life, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus the Christ. Many church members like to quote Paul, and most especially his lines on love in 1 Corinthians 13. Many outside of the church also like to quote some of Paul and Jesus too. Again I say, there is no right, left, or middle way there is only the narrow way proclaimed by Jesus. If you haven’t seen this or heard it preached…Paul makes this final statement to the church of Corinth and it still applies to the entire church today: “If anyone does not love the Lord__a curse be on him. Come, O Lord.” (1 Corinthians 16.22) Keep in mind, according to the word of God, our love of Him is determined by who He is and according to His laws, words, commandments, and admonitions; and not our own understanding or Satan’s helpful suggestions and deceptions which have not changed since the Garden of Eden: “You will not surely die,” the serpent (Satan) said…” “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (Genesis 3.4-5) And as David said “…Surely the mind and heart of man are cunning.” (Psalm 64.6) So that is why there is to be no right, left, or moderate; for “All mankind (all of the church) will fear; they will PROCLAIM the WORKS of God and PONDER what HE HAS DONE…LET ALL the UPRIGHT in heart praise Him! (Psalm 64.9-10) and let it continue to be said “May God arise, may His enemies be scattered; may His foes flee before Him.” (Psalm 68.1) So I encourage all who will come before Him and His love to choose either His blessings or His curses; because in His great and awesome love He leaves the choice to you.
While many people are attempting to make some spiritual sense of this manifesto, that’s fine, but I don’t see much spiritual sense to find.
It is first and foremost a political document, because despite the reality many people see Colsen, Dobson etc., as spiritual celebrities, they are political leaders in a fundamentalist religious sub culture which worships celebrity, no matter how it is dressed.
Signing this may make some Christians feel patriotic or good about themselves, and that’s sad. It’s not a thoughtful document.
It’s a religious right political commercial by angry leaders digging their heels in and sending the us/them message. Again.
Using spiritual language doesn’t change intent.
Is anyone going to change their point of view?
Doubtful.
Who is this manifesto for?
What is it for?
What is accomplished?
These men want their p.o.v. made into law, that’s as apparent as it was 30 years ago, and they are prepared to stamp their feet, make their alliances, open their wallets and threaten their government, because, well, because they will continue to declare they are right and everyone else is just plain wrong.
I am saddened as I browse various sites to see cheerleaders lining up and bragging about signing.
I am wearied by these leaders and their agendas.
They cannot and will not tolerate pluralistism and democracy, giving mere lip service to liberty.
Veronica:
The closest I can think of for comparison in the UK is Steven Green of Christian Voice; minus the huge mailing lists, the 30 years of political activism and the money.
” Again I say, there is no right, left, or middle way there is only the narrow way proclaimed by Jesus.”
Absolutely right, and I have found the fear of the Lord an inestimable help in realizing how very worthwhile it is to stay on that narrow path! (I love the parable of the camel and the eye of the needle – just found out not long ago that the “eye of the needle” was a very small opening in the gates of ancient Middle Eastern cities. At times when the city gates were closed and secured the only way for a camel to fit through the eye of the needle and enter the city, was by first divesting itself of rider (self) and burdens (sins). It is simply necessary for us to do the same if we want to enter our heavenly city.)
Agendas and politics is what happens when believers are too preoccupied with making this world comfortable for ourselves, when in reality we are only pilgrims passing through here for a little while, on our way to our heavenly home for eternity, and helping others find the Way there. (Good thing for us too, since the world is appointed unto wrath!) I agree this Manifesto is unspiritual, unfortunately yet another example of believers meddling in “the affairs of this world” which we are instructed in the word not to do, and which Jesus gave us the example of eschewing. And anyhow, didn’t Jesus say to simply let your yes be yes and your nay be nay? They are signing and BINDING themselves to the unspiritual words of mere men.
Therese-
You might be on the “wrong” side of a Reformed-Arminian side battle with the MD folks. There’s a strong Reformed flavor to the signers (Al Mohler and Tim Keller are popular Reformed thinkers and I don’t see too many folks who would be in Arminian-leaning denominations listed) that would look at God calling us rather than us responding to God.
If you come at from the free-will Arminian side of the fence, you’ll take spiritual offense at that idea. If you’re also questioning the politics of the piece, it will look a notch extra authoritarian for your taste.
Mark: Take a look at the manifesto Facebook page – SBC, schismic Anglicans, classic reformers and basically fanboys jumping on the bandwagon.
Part of the PR seems to have some of the key signers explain why they jumped on board. Mohler weighed in. Over at the Biola blog (The Evangelical Outpost, which I think Joe handed over to them so his daughter could get into the school) there are some tweets, but not high excitement. Joe is handling First Things now and there is a lot of chatter there of course.
Arminians can believe we respond to God as well as God calling us.
Dr. John Stackhouse weighed in with grace, given he is now in J.I. Packer’s chair and also writes for CT (Neff signed) he looks at it a bit more theologically, but sees basically what we Canucks and UK’ers are seeing.
I see it as nationalistic as well as authoritarian, manifest destiny city on a hill, can do woo rah customary to our southern neighbours.
Continuing in the PR theme Land and Dobson and George weighed in.
Right Wing Watch:
“On today’s radio program, James Dobson hosted Chuck Colson and Robert George to discuss the manifesto during which Dobson explained that if their values are “not preserved at this moment of destiny, this nation and most others in the Western world will fold and freedom itself will go down with it.” Saying we are facing a “defining moment in America and the Christian Church,” Dobson declared that the statement “deserves our most careful attention, I just want to emphasize that in every way that I can,” before asking George just what precipitated this document, to which George explained that it was basically the election of Barack Obama and Democratic majorities in Congress who are out to destroy traditional marriage and basic Christian values. Finally, Dobson stated that with the passage of hate crimes legislation, “it could get very costly to follow this Christ,” meaning that pastors and Christians are about the come under direct attack from the government, to which George responded that Christian “martyrs have [always] been called on to pay the ultimate price rather than to deny the Lord or to do what is evil in his sight”:
Eventually, Dobson turned to the supposed “monthly abortion premium” that Rep. John Boehner has been claiming is included in health care reform legislation, which Dobson vowed he would never accept, saying he and his wife Shirley would pay ruinous fines, go to prison, or even “leave this beloved country and spend the rest of our lives in exile”:”
Fine, Dobson can takes his millions are go live on a island in the Caribbean sea area. He has been clear he intends to continue in politics when he leaves his radio show. I can’t see him giving up the
Council for National Policy or Mrs. Shirley Dobson giving up her National Prayer breakfast.
Christians, by and large, have been silent in the political and social arena except to bicker amongst themselves and rant from the sidelines. In a free society, Christians have the responsibility of being a part of the “grand conversation.”
What I like about this Manifesto is that it calls Christians to BE Christians. As a Christian Physician Assistant, I am being called to refuse to perform abortions, or refuse to counsel or refer for abortions. I am being called to refuse to participate in transgender surgery. In short, I am being called to stand firm on Christian principles, even when they go against the current law. To be honest, I have been wishy-washy about these and other issues in the past, trying to be in harmony with those around me. Christ calls us to be salt and light and this Manifesto echoes that call.
Mark, I don’t think i fit either Arminian or Reformed Arminian, and even if I did fit one of them, and assuming my thoughts are at least partially right, the truth belongs to Jesus alone, not Arminius or anyone else, and I would only want to identify myself with Him. There is only one Way, one word, one truth, one gospel, one cross, one Saviour! That’s one of the problems I see with things like this Manhattan Declaration or Arminian Society or any other group that gathers around a doctrine or set of beliefs/values/principles instead of around the Lord Jesus Himself. It’s just another bushel Christians want to hide their light under, and in so doing create a low spiritual ceiling they become trapped under, halting the development of real spirituality and shutting out the True Light that we are to reflect, since we have no light of ourselves.
Hope that addresses your comment properly – to be honest, I had to look up what Arminians believe – there are much brighter and better informed minds than mine around here, that’s an understatement, and you are stretching me beyond my limits!
I believe this Manhattan Declaration addresses both Christian assimilation & politics. As the erosion of Christendom continues, the challenge Christians face is to practically and realistically live in a pluralistic society. And if it sounds too political to some, one must at least consider the declaration to be an attempt to preserve what Constantine began. If the preservation succeeds, it most certainly will be viewed as a political victory. But if it fails, it won’t be the first time God’s people lived in Babylon.
I think you’re so right John Anthony, in some of what you say – except that I believe this Declaration is another symptom of eroded Christianity which was begun (historically) by Constantine, if I understand you correctly. Christians are fighting so hard against having to live in a pagan world once again – but they are using the wrong (worldly) weapons, law and politics, instead of the simple testifying of the good news, through the power of laying down our lives, which alone can change men’s hearts, and in freedom. We’ve been living in a pagan society for a long time already, even though God’s name is invoked a lot when it’s convenient, there are not many living the Way he calls us to, the way of the cross. (not that I consider I’m there yet, but praise the Lord at least I know the right direction now, after years of soaking up error in the apostate church – and it is the Holy Spirit alone who is teaching me from His word, not man, not any “church”!)
Saint Paul and Peter fellowshiped with all the people and displayed love in word and deed. He also spoke truth and the assurance of judgement and hell on those who rejected the message of the Christ, Jesus the Son of God. He also suffered and died a martyr and a sacrifice, becasue he would not compromise. Life and family and truth, in freedom, have often required sacrifice.That is what the Manhatten Declaration proclaims.
The Christians of Europe and America and elswhere will suffer but they will also overcome. There is a great move of prayer in Europe and the Judeo-Christian life style will be preserved untill the coming of the Lord, though many will pay a price. Our love for you is to share the joy of eternal life with you.
God bless
On one level I do agree with you Hugh, Jesus Christ is God’s Son, the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
The good news hasn’t changed.
Our yes is yes and our no is to be no.
Any follower of Jesus who feels pressured to sign this for whatever reason answers to Him, and I feel sorry for US signees who have to function in a coercive and corrosive political subculture.
This manifesto is a re-run of Evangelicals and Catholics Together, and Justice Sunday with the exception of implied civil disobedience.
The manifesto has an air of defiance and boastfulness to me – this is not the meekness that Jesus wants the church to manifest (and which I so often fall short of!). I believe the Lord gave us a mandate as Christians not to change people’s lifestyles, but to preach the gospel and testify of Him, so that their hearts are changed by the Spirit, not by might, and even then only the hearts of the willing.
“…the Judeo-Christian life style will be preserved untill the coming of the Lord,…”
This is not what I read in the word of God. In Matthew 24 it says, “..Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but he who stand firm to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all nations, and then the end will come.”
In 2 Timothy 3:2-5, it says “But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God – having a form of godliness but denying its power…”
Did Jesus commissioned the church to preserve a lifestyle, or to make disciples and save souls before His wrath is unleashed on this fallen world? According to my understanding of the word of God, it was the latter.
Also, there is a passage of scripture that was very helpful to me in my confusion: “What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside…” 1 Cor. 5:12-13 This really helped me to understand that how the lost want to live is not our business, they are living the same way we all would without Jesus, and we are simply to leave the judging up to the Lord and extend the olive branch of God’s forgiveness through Jesus Christ to all who would receive it, whatever kind of society we find ourselves living in.
There are those Christians who happen to be politicians and lawmakers, etc, and of course their faith will inform what kind of people they are how they do their jobs as individuals, but this is not to be confused with the church’s commission, and I believe the “church” should keep out of those spheres and not become “entangled with the affairs of this world”. Praise God, I think I’m getting it, and maybe this is something you might want to think about too, Hugh.