Dual Citizens
eBook - ePub

Dual Citizens

Politics and American Evangelicalism

Timothy Padgett

Share book
  1. 424 pages
  2. English
  3. ePUB (mobile friendly)
  4. Available on iOS & Android
eBook - ePub

Dual Citizens

Politics and American Evangelicalism

Timothy Padgett

Book details
Book preview
Table of contents
Citations

About This Book

A window into sixty years of evangelical political engagement American evangelicals are often assumed to be a monolithic political force absolutely unified in their priorities. This collection of articles from Christianity Today originally published between 1956 and 2016 tells a different story. Evangelical engagement with politics has been more complex than is often remembered. Dual Citizens reveals a variety of evangelical thought towards political developments over the past few decades.In Dual Citizens, Timothy D. Padgett has collected a number of articles that traces a variety of perspectives in evangelical political thought, giving a more nuanced understanding of how American evangelicals have acted politically over the past decades. These essential articles provide insight into our current situation and preserve the wrestling and wisdom of the past for the benefit of the future.

Frequently asked questions

How do I cancel my subscription?
Simply head over to the account section in settings and click on “Cancel Subscription” - it’s as simple as that. After you cancel, your membership will stay active for the remainder of the time you’ve paid for. Learn more here.
Can/how do I download books?
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
What is the difference between the pricing plans?
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlego’s features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan you’ll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
What is Perlego?
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, we’ve got you covered! Learn more here.
Do you support text-to-speech?
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Is Dual Citizens an online PDF/ePUB?
Yes, you can access Dual Citizens by Timothy Padgett in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in Théologie et religion & Religion, politique et État. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.

Information

Chapter 1
U.S. PRESIDENTS
CT’s treatment of presidents in the years 1956–2016 varied greatly, and not always in the ways that we might expect. Eisenhower was the sort of figure whose military career had already earned him a place in the history books even before he ascended to the presidency. He was also the first chief executive to associate himself with the emerging neo-evangelicalism of Billy Graham and Carl F. H. Henry. Some have suggested that this was nothing but a ploy, but evangelicals at the time tended to take him at his word.
Kennedy presented evangelical commentators with something of a conundrum. Before he came to power, they were less concerned with his policies than his faith. Writers at CT were genuinely concerned that he would use the powers of his office to impose Roman rule on America’s churches. Johnson, on the other hand, was treated in largely sympathetic terms, with some articles verging on pity. His place at the heart of the 1960s, with its assassinations, civil unrest, and an increasingly unpopular war, allowed for few easy roads to glory.
Nixon’s time in office was complicated, to put it mildly. He was staunchly anti-Communist, was able to talk with China and bring North Vietnam to the negotiating table, and was on famously good terms with Billy Graham. And yet his role in Watergate could not be, and was not, ignored. Because of the unique challenges of squaring the president’s professed Christianity with this scandal, the section on Nixon in this chapter is longer than the others. Ford’s administration was so brief that, aside from some interest in his faith and life, his treatment was closer to a study of an interregnum than a stand-alone presidency.
Contrary to what we might expect, the first American president to capture the hearts of evangelical writers was not Reagan but Carter. There were clear statements of regret in CT articles over his support of abortion, but there were also rosy portrayals of his evangelical faith and active church life.
Reagan’s role in these articles evolved over the years. There was a great sense of opportunity at his election, but there were also concerns about seeking political solutions in all things. More than anything else, it was the way he brought the abortion debate to center stage that earned him plaudits. In contrast, with the exception of his wartime leadership, of which CT writers largely approved, George H. W. Bush earned little praise, but this was less for what he did than for the ways he failed their expectations.
George W. Bush came the closest to the popular opinion of an evangelical president. He was not bashful about his faith, nor were CT’s writers shy about showering him with praise. Certainly, he was not a perfect man or leader, but his steadfastness during 9/11 and willingness to pursue a broad pro-life agenda gave him grace enough to last through his presidency.
Clinton and Obama, though separated by eight years, were alike in the way they came across in CT articles. In many very clear ways, their policies were a genuine threat to several dearly held beliefs of evangelicalism—around such things as abortion, homosexuality, and freedom of religion in particular—and many wrote accordingly. And yet, other editorials and articles attempted to build bridges and calm fears in their readers’ hearts.
While Trump had not yet taken office at the close of 2016, it was clear he presented a unique challenge to evangelicals. His planned policies aligned well with many of the hopes and frustrations highlighted in CT over the years, but other things like his statements on immigration and his often uncouth persona led many to wonder how voting for him comported with their evangelical faith. His then-future administration made incarnate the tensions implicit in the Christian’s dual citizenship.
DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER
November 12, 1956
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?
THE EDITORS
Protestant ministers of all denominations throughout the United States responded with candor and directness to Christianity Today’s inquiry: “What change for the better in American affairs do you desire for your candidate if elected?” More than 2,000 clergymen, participating in this representative sampling of personal conviction, mirrored their long-range concern for a brighter America.
Their answers hold a significant interest not simply for the victors at the polls, but for the large and influential Christian community in American life.
In its pre-election news section (Oct. 29 issue), Christianity Today reported that its random sampling of ministers from all states indicated favor for President Eisenhower over Governor Stevenson by eight-to-one. These percentages were more than confirmed by many hundreds of additional replies received after press time. Yet the manses, parsonages and rectories of America left no doubt that, whichever party would be triumphant at the polls, the national scene calls urgently for specific improvements during the next four years.
The wide disparity between the eight-to-one ministerial vote and the public vote generally sounds a warning against regarding ministerial conviction as an automatic index to the public mind. Less disparity exists between the Protestant clergy and Protestant church members, doubtless, than between the clergy and the citizenry as a whole. Yet the clergy are often motivated more intensely (dare we say, always more highly?) and their statistics provide a specialized index of opinion.
Ministers expressed deep conviction that the future of America depends more upon the application of spiritual concepts in national and international life and less upon a specific political party or candidate. The pulpit popularity of President Eisenhower in his re-election campaign sprang from his identification with an attitude of faith in God and in objective moral norms more than sheer party considerations, although policy issues bore conspicuous weight.
FACING THE RIGHT WAY
Ministerial anxiety for the enhancement of national life is not confined simply to one party or shade of political conviction. It included, however, an underlying confidence in the direction given to political life by the Eisenhower administration. This accounts, no doubt, for the relative absence of any radical indictment of prevailing American outlook. Almost one in eighteen of the ministers who voted for Eisenhower in both 1952 and 1956 in effect wrote: “No change; he is doing O.K.” Endorsement of policy ran considerably higher among pro-Eisenhower clergy who had no vote in 1952. Better than one in three in this category urged simply that he “keep up the good work.”
Although no sense of panic prevails about the temper of national life, the ministerial hope for the future nonetheless incorporated the hope of dramatic change. Appreciative of the fact that America in the last four years had been put somewhat more conspicuously “under God” than in recent decades, they shared no illusion that “God’s in the White House (or hovers very near),” as a writer in The Manchester Guardian recently opined. The significant proposals came from clergy of Republican and Democratic vision alike, as well as from those identified with neither party. They came from ministers who supported the same candidate both in 1952 and 1956 as insistently as from switch-voters.
FOREIGN POLICY A CONCERN
Christianity Today returns were tabulated as pro-Eisenhower, pro-Stevenson, and Others (Undecided), with special alertness to switch-voting. In almost every block of clergy votes, an improved foreign policy during the next four years was marked the greatest imperative. Ministers who switched from Stevenson in 1952 to Eisenhower in 1956 provided the lone exception, for they assigned greater urgency to the pursuit of an aggressive and realistic program of racial desegregation.
Dissatisfactions over foreign policy ran deeper than agreement on a satisfactory alternative. Many recommendations were vague and general, favoring a program more vigorous, stable and progressive. The goal of “continuing maturity” and of “less sporadic moves” in foreign policy was vigorously pressed.
Specific suggestions for implementing a program of strong world leadership were not lacking, however, and ministers sought to outline elements of “a more decidedly Christian foreign policy.”
Clergymen voting for Stevenson both in 1952 and 1956 suggested that a realistic grasp of international affairs would involve less reliance on military measures and more active support of international cooperation.
Clergymen twice supporting Eisenhower also worked their creative concern for continued progress and integrity in world affairs into specific suggestions for the easing of international tension. Only occasionally was there a protest against “many blunders” and a demand for “changes in the State Department,” for example, “get rid of Dulles.” Most expressions reflected a more moderate pursuit of “wise and planned foreign policy.”
Specific recommendations divided almost equally along four lines: world peace, the United Nations, foreign aid, and long-term moral perspective.
INTERNATIONAL MORALITY
An aggressive spiritual-moral international policy was a recurring plea. Ministers asked for “foreign relations from idealistic principles and not from opportunistic motivation,” for “world security built on a trusting spiritual level, and less on military spending,” for “more consistent emphasis on spiritual values,” for “continued stress on moral and spiritual uplift.” “Russia is ahead of us in propaganda,” wrote one minister, adding a plea for good will. Virtually all who touched the subject asked for a tougher policy with Russia: “less bending before Russian bluff,” “a firmer stand toward Russia … whose pledged word cannot be trusted. Oh, for a Teddy Roosevelt!”; “more drastic stand against Russia and the Communist party,” “no dealings with Russia, no recognition of Red China,” “firmer policy with regard to Red Countries, and passage of the Bricker amendment.” On the positive side were suggestions like: “stand up more firmly for freedom all over the world,” “help the colonial states obtain independence.”
The subject of future relations to the United Nations was as frequently raised. Some clergymen, without any reference to the U.N., urged greater appreciation of world responsibility: “internationally-minded government,” “improved relations with Far East and India as well as Near East,” “more interest in under-dog nations,” “less nationalism, more world vision.” But nationalistic emphasis was not lacking. Comment on U.N. participation was sharply divided, with a seven to five edge for those favoring greater activity. Opposition to U.N. participation was often strongly worded: “take U.S. out of the U.N. and U.N. out of the U.S.”
PURSUIT OF PEACE
Yet Protestant ministers reflected the need for greater determination in the pursuit of world peace. Only one minister, however, went so far as to urge “peace at any cost.” But others stressed the need for “creative world-peace pursuits.” One in five of the ministers who stipulated world peace as the major concern of the future called for a lessening of preparation for war: “cut spending for war efforts,” “less emphasis on bombs and materials of war,” “more effort on international disarmament.” On the positive side, ministers urged a stronger peace program “by a firmer stand on equity,” “work diligently for international friendships,” “work in the interests of world peace through the U.N.”
FOREIGN AID
The controversial subject of foreign aid drew wide suggestion of future overhauling. The conviction that foreign aid should be reduced outweighed that emphasis that it be increased three and one-half to one. For increased spending came such sentiment as: “more Point IV aid to backward foreign peoples,” “more liberal policy of aid to needy peoples or nations,” “use of U.S. power, food, natural resources for world-wide peaceful progress,” “more foreign aid—in the form of raising their standard of living.” On the negative side, ministers urged curtailment, but only one called for “cancellation of foreign aid.” The prevailing tenor was for “foreign aid—but less,” “re-evaluation of our foreign give away,” “a gradual weaning from federal giveaway.” Suggested principles of limitation were: “stop aid to Yugoslavia,” “support freedom and justice only in foreign policy,” “foreign aid reduced and the money used to improve America,” “quit trying to buy friendship from other nations,” “less military, more economical and technical assistance.”
CHANGES FROM EISENHOWER
Foreign policy aside, the main areas of hoped for improvement revealed in Christianity Today’s poll, by those who had supported the Eisenhower candidacy twice, were ranged in the following order of priority: readjustment of the economic outlook (10%); intensification of the spiritual-moral emphasis (10%); decentralization of government, with stress on state rights (7.5%); implementing of desegration (3.5%); anti-liquor legislation (2%); more vigorous policy of church-state separation (1.25%); more vigorous anti-communist program (1.25%); federal aid to schools (1%). The only conspicuous counter-trend was in the priority assigned by almost 4% to “care for the little man,” mostly in the interest of the farmer. The antisocialist sentiment (3%), included in the figures for decentralization of government, was frequently linked to a plea for curbing labor unions. The top priority was given foreign policy by just under 11% of the clergy twice supporting Eisenhower.
The issues just indicated accounted for half of the returns in this category. They do not reflect, however, vigorous pleas (although in lesser number) for curtailing military spending, special interest legislation, and for increasing old age benefits, strengthening social security laws, improved solution of the Palestine refugee problems, and scores of other problems assigned first importance by individual clergymen.
THE UNDECIDED VOTE
The “undecided” vote included almost twice as many ministers who had voted for Eisenhower in 1952 as for Stevenson, and as many who had not voted in 1952. Some reflected dissatisfaction with both major parties and candidates. “We need a new party, or a candidate who will dare to commit himself to constitutional government,” wrote a New York City pastor. One Indiana minister wrote that he would vote for “nobody,” and another, “either the third party or none at all.” A Florida minister said he is still looking for a candidate “who will ...

Table of contents