There are so many different ways to look at this issue.
One way to view it is to focus on civility. Barack Obama is making a genuine effort to take the culture wars down a notch by standing up there on the inaugural dais with a guy who does not share his views on every political topic. On the evangelical continuum of hot, warm, cool and cold, Warren is no Unitarian- but neither is he Jerry Falwell. He leans towards stewardship rather than dominionism as regards the environment, yes, and that fits into Obama's world view. But obviously, Obama and Warren do not see eye to eye on, for example, abortion.
In a sense, this invitation to Warren has this flavor to it: "Let's agree to disagree on some things, but re-dedicate ourselves to the search for common ground. Let's respect each other as people carrying out a tough task- choosing between right and wrong in a complex world, a place that tempts you to run and hide in order to keep your hands clean- only running away takes you away from the side of the angels. Let's assume that we are men of goodwill, even if we understand at the same time, that the perfect human has never lived and never will."
There have been times that I have been resentful of Warren and his mega-church ways. But I think I am going to bury that for a bit, and let Warren and Obama be Warren and Obama. Is it the Christian thing to do? Well, probably, and nothing wrong with that. It is also the civil thing to do. We will need a measure of civility and tolerance to make it through the tough times in the next four years. On a personal level, I would probably rather have the Dalai Lama up there, but that would not be the choice to build reconciliation in our nation. So let it be done.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 22
It also may be a sign he'll not sign onto that abortion expansion Free Choice Act, that would be the same mistake Clinton made with the gays in the military--not worth the political heat nor attention when he says he has other priorities.
I don't like the choice very much, for reasons that are not the most-discussed.
The most-discussed reasons are Warren's anti-gay agenda, apparently issuing from a deeply-experienced personal homophobia, which is palpable and inexcusable for a thoughtful and educated adult--especially an ordained minster.
My difficulty is Warren's basic job performance--that welcomes people as Christians in an essentially commitment-free format. He follows the extraordinarily profitable mega-church formula of welcoming people into the church with spectacle coupled with low commitment, while shuttling off the difficult questions to weekday "small group" encounters. Don't worry about the presence of the Holy Spirit--worry about your eardrums being perforated by rock music.
Obama would have done better if he had chosen some no-name from Wheeling, West Virginia. There will be incidents at the inauguration if Warren appears, although perhaps they will be attenuated by the extraordinary security environment or the crush of the crowd.
I've been accused on Gather of being a major Obama suck-up. I keep posting comments that say this guy is more middle-of-the-road (and to the right of me) than many will accept. Here's another example.
Of course, ruling from the left is not a recipe for success.
Those are interesting criticisms that you have of Warren, and those issues do bother me. Civility is something we should all strive for. The megachurch format, nah. Warren seems more authentic than the huckster preachers such as the Bakkers and the Osteens. But he does not strike me as a rebel against materialism.
I think Obama thinks he can work with Warren on such issues as poverty, and lesson the abortions through that means.
but... hasn't he already gone WAAAAY too much to the right? Republicans elected? Kissing up to the conservatives? Don't we liberals ever get a voice?
For me this is heartening and disheartening at the same time. I just hope that he will compromise on the right things and hang tough on the right things. please please don't let him compromise the effort to combat global warming until it adds up to a wish and a prayer. that is not change, that is what we have had for 20 years.
But in the grand scheme of things - two wars (plus), a financial meltdown, climate change, damaged international reputation, etc., etc., etc., - is having some TV evangelist give a two minute invocation really important? If it wasn't him, it would be some other preacher who would likely have similar views.
I think you wrote a good article, but disagree with your comment about Osteen. I think he is no huckster and would not have jammed his foot all the way down his throat as Warren has. I think Warren is a good guy in many ways but see how gays are really pissed.
Also agree that a no name cleric would be fine as would the Dali Lama. This was a self -created problem by Obama and he should avoid those as should we all. I hope it does not cause problems.
So here, Chris: I'll say the Obama is using Warren to expand his base (as Warren is using Obama to become even more popular than he already is). I'm not sure this is different from what you're saying--I think I just left out the pretty words.