It is certainly sobering to learn that Reverends Hagee and Parsley are "major figures" in the Religious Right. My impression was that they were both more like extremist fringe, aberations. The same with Robertson, Falwell and Dobson.

Surely the vast majority of Evangelical pastors out there cannot be like these men, cannot believe as they do. How disheartening that influencial religious "leaders" encourage their congregations to despise Americans who are not just like them. How scary that such pastors have enjoyed so much power within the Republican Party.

Maybe a falling out between the Republican Party and the Religious Right will air the room. Wouldn't it be refreshing if Americans of all religions were inspired to embrace the separation of church and hate?

It wasn't until this article that I knew they were considered such leaders, either. I always saw them as on the lunatic fringe.

I agree that religious conservatives won't be very enthusiastic about McCain, but are you sure that that many people fall in line behind these guys? I never heard either of their names before the media started attacking them in search of McCain's Wright.

Make no mistake, by the way. What these men have said is despicable, but the coverage it has gotten has been overblown in an attempt for Obama's In-the-Tank-Media to say, "Look! He's got a crazy pastor, too!"

Will it take?

I wouldn't either man "crazy." I/you may disagree with them but they are neither crazy nor idiots. I spent years 18-34 as a Southern Baptist, in Texas, New Jersey, and Georgia. I taught for nearly ten years at a Southern Baptist University, Mercer in Atlanta. Obviously I didn't agree with some things I heard so I became a Catholic. But I never lost my respect for their faith and their ministry. I remember an experience I had at Princeton Theological Seminary with a professor of Church history. I was having a meal with him at my home, and I had planned on asking him a few personal questions about my own beliefs. I was struggling with some questions about heaven, hell, and Satan. When I asked him my question, he first looked at me with surprise, and then he smiled and said, "The problem with the way you are asking about these things is that your thinking lacks something. Your questions arise from passages in Scripture, yes, but your confusion comes from not thinking them through theologically." Why didn't Rev. Hagee merely say in regard to Hitler and the Holocaust, "I believe God can bring good out of the worst evil." I asked him if that is what he meant to say, and he told me "yes." Instead, Hagee used a kind of Biblical literalism, which goes way beyond what can really, and should, be said about the issue.

Deal -- The Democrats are about to nominate a man who could not win the popular vote in the primaries and is not likely to win the electoral vote in the general elections. No surprise there: the Democrats continue to abandon the American worker as they have been doing for a few decades now.

On the other hand the Republican candidate bumped into two great opportunities to engage the party's religious conservative base and missed them. He could have accepted those endorsements (Hagee et al) by pointing at the obvious media manipulation of old statements. He could have praised the pro-life stance of those pastors. He could have dismissed the prickly personal points of view that every pastor has and remind us that all religious people must vote for him to nominate conservative judges, and to turn around abortion laws. He didn't. He seems to be abandoning the religious conservatives in the same way that Democrats have abandoned the working class.

By looking at the three standing candidates I get the impression that this is the first presidential election in which ideas are not going to count at all.

The only candidate with some ideological backbone was Ron Paul. See what happened to him! We the people have to find a way to recover the two party system and make it work again or learn to live with this bland alternative.

I agree with Deal. I live in Texas. Evangelicals speak a different language because of their literal interpretation of the Bible. Also, in the Old Testament, death/destruction was an occaisional punishment for wayward thinking.

Deal,
I appreciate that you have an amazing ability to listen; we cannot lose sight of who is truly undermining our society, and therefore is an Enemy to our Christian-based foundation as a NATION and who is not. I would say that both Hagee and Rod Parsely have enjoyed the growth in their ministries because many Americans and people who watch them throughout the world appreciate their consistent call to living a moral and just life... accountable to GOD. There are a lot of Americans who tune out politics because they see it as so corrupted at this point but they seek to be called to a higher standard of their Christian walk and these two men do that...... perhaps imperfectly.... but I do not see them as promoting a hatred of anything except that which will in fact destroy our country, our world. The tolerance that is taught in our schools and throughout our society has opened the doors to all kinds of things that will destroy us as a nation and it is not the tolerance of our Founding Fathers. I am dissappointed that McCain has chosen to distance himself verbally; I wish that he would not succumb to the Media... just stick with his values and HIS VISION for AMERICA. I can't wait to see who he choose for VP. I am praying that WISDOM be granted him and all that have access to his ear. GOD bless AMERICA. Thanks for daring to provide a place for these dialogues!

Moral conservatives tout the connection between Catholics and evangelicals. And some Republicans have been able to exploit those similarities to some advantage.

The problem with this alliance is when it inevitably rolls onto theological ground. Scratching the surface, you're likely to find two groups as inclined as anything else to excommunicate the other.

I don't blame evangelical Christians for being opportunists. But they hold mainstream Christianity in low regard. It goes beyond withholding the title of "church" to Catholics and others.

You have only to consider how many Catholics end up in the evangelical fold. Catholics and other believers are targeted from adolescence, and megachurches like Hagee make no apologies for it. While some may be at home with such as allies, I'd prefer to keep the wolves at a safe distance.

It would be a betrayal of Christ if all hate were to be excised from the Church.

Why? Let us recall St. Augustine's classic phrase:

"Hate the sin, love the sinner."

The moment we stop hating sin, we stop loving Christ and the sinners He came to save, including ourselves.

I see a lot of confusion here; perhaps I may be of assistance?

Evangelial Leaders? Or Fringe?

First, regarding whether Hagee and Parsley are "leaders" among Evangelicals:

Please understand that most evangelicals are unaware of the existence of either man. Many evangelical pastors have heard of them, perhaps, but the "flock" largely haven't.

And it's not like the Catholic hierarchy, in which the word "Cardinal" can be assumed to carry some weight of respect wherever he goes. If Evangelical Pastor X's church is large and growing, an individual churchgoer may be impressed, but he will certainly not assume, on that basis alone, that Pastor X's teachings are necessarily worth anything, or have any authority in his, the churchgoer's, life.

The evangelicals whose names the average churchgoer is likely to know are those with famous books, or whose ministries have released Bible-studies and devotionals: Rick Warren for example, or Max Lucado, Phillip Yancey, Chuck Colson, etc.

So, are Hagee and Parsley "leaders" among evangelical pastors? Well, yes...in the same sense that Steve Lukather was a "leader" amongst L.A. session guitarists in the late 80's. Industry insiders knew his name; those in the same industry might copy his techniques.

But did the average listener to Michael Jackson's "Beat It" know that Lukather played the rhythm guitar parts, but not the solo? Of course not! Would they care if they knew? Probably not.

Similarly, if a pastor in Atlanta hears of Hagee's success at growing his church, he may try to find out Hagee's technique and emulate it. If he hears a Hagee sermon with which he agrees, he may slip some of Hagee's exegesis into his own sermons.

In that way, Hagee's decisions might have a ripple effect through Evangelical Christianity. But these ripples will compete with others from other sources. One hopes that the waves made by opposing lunatics will be canceled out, and that the waves made by Spirit-led men of God will build upon one another. (It happens that way more often than not.)

But nobody outside Hagee's church says, "John McCain rejected Hagee? I'm not voting for him!" They might say, "John McCain rejected some evangelical pastor with a big church? Hmm. What'd the pastor say? Was it some lunatic, or a real Christian?"

Too Big For Their Britches

It often happens that Evangelicals start to ignore or roll their eyes at one of their own, just when that person is at the apex of their apparent power and influence.

Three examples: James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell. Each were well-liked by evangelicals until they started making arses of themselves in public. After that, Evangelicals start to look for signs that these men have abandoned humility and service in favor of grandstanding. If those signs are present, Evangelicals begin to qualify their support for these individuals: "Well, Dobson's books on marriage helped me and my husband, but seems to me he's been getting a bit above himself recently."

The sole famous evangelical personage in my memory who retained unqualified respect is Billy Graham. He may have made errors, but I don't get the sense that anyone thinks he "got above himself."

(More in my next...)

R.C.,

You make a lot of great points -- thank you for the Catholic/Evangelical translation. It certainly helps to understand the larger context here.

Hating sin? Maybe we can start with hating the violence that slavic skinheads commit in the name of Natural Law. Maybe we can start with the venom that certain pundits spew. Maybe we can start with the creeping racial supremacism. Seriously, what we really need is a divorce between the Gospel and social conservatism. We need a purification of the Culutre of Life.

For the sake of the McCain candidacy I hope R.C. is right that there will be minimal ripple effect. But, on the contrary, the evidence is mounting that a backlash is on the way. My conversations with grassroots leaders over the past few days led me to write this column -- it's not simply a hunch. But don't get me wrong, I HOPE it won't happen.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.

How are any of the things you condemn in any way socially conservative? How is spewing venom not something that some social progressives are at least as guilty of, if not more so, as some social conservatives? How is spewing venom not something you just were guilty of in this very post to which I am responding? How is the left not guilty of racial supremacism, in its own subtle and distinct ways? And since when did the fact that some skinheads might possibly have abused a noble concept to rationalize their crimes mean that the concept itself had to be discredited? And how could separating Christianity from social conservatism in any way solve any of these problems?

None of what you said in that post makes any sense to me. What are you trying to say?

R.C. might be wrong about the political implications of McCain's rejection of those endorsements, but he definitely did a good job of expressing the way Evangelicals generally view "leaders." In my experience as an Evangelical I knew of Dobson, and I liked some of his books, and I saw him a a positive political force. But most of those other "leaders" I didn't know anything about. And if I did know about them, I wouldn't have necessarily identified with them.

I think most Evangelicals (and most Protestants for that matter) don't identify FULLY with anyone beyond their local church (at least not the way Orthodox Catholics are able to identify with the Vatican). By contrast, many Catholics may identify with the Pope more than with their own Pastor.

I wonder if this might relate to why many people find more of a warm community at Protestant churches, but they have a greater sense of universality in the Catholic Church (Side note: I think Catholic parishes could strengthen the sense of community, and parishioner knowledge by having Sunday school for all ages like they have at Protestant churches).

Back to the original topic: As an Evangelical, I didn't particularly care what any leader said except for my own Pastor, and even with that, the final decision of what to believe fell on me.

Frankly, as a life-long Catholic I am both ashamed and embarrassed to be called a Conservative Christian, and I have no desire to be lumped with Evangelicals. I think the Religious Right has done irreparable damage to the Church and to politics. It's time for a resurgence of the separation of church and state.

I have always voted GOP since I was first able to vote (1988) for two main reasons: 1) pro-life support not just in the candidate but in the party platform and 2) strong national defense. This is the first election where I am seriously considering voting 3rd party. But not the Libertarians as Mr Hudson points out. Rather, I'm considering the Constitution Party. McCain is a good man due to his Vietnam War record, and he has many good policies (as well as some awful ones). Lord knows, he's infinitely better than Comrade Obama! But, McCain is doing everything he can to alienate me. I ask myself, is it worth voting for the "lesser of two evils" and just getting more and more disappointed in the lack of true results and the smug arrogance of the GOP party elite where they think we religious conservatives (Catholic and non-Catholic alike) have nowhere else to go.

In light of the article above, there is no doubt that it is past time (some of we have been sleeping...) that we conservatives look to alternatives. One alternative is, of course, the constitution party, which is the third-largest party in the country with registered voters. Why don't you hear about it? Because those who control the "Republicrats" also control the media - they don't want us to know about them. Check it out: www.constitutionparty.com. Blessings on all...

In light of the article above, there is no doubt that it is past time (some of we have been sleeping...) that we conservatives look to alternatives. One alternative is, of course, the constitution party, which is the third-largest party in the country with registered voters. Why don't you hear about it? Because those who control the "Republicrats" also control the media - they don't want us to know about them. Check it out: www.constitutionparty.com. Blessings on all...

Yeah, I took a look at them recently. Not sure whether I'll join, but I like a lot of what they have to say. Still, it seems to me that they need to more carefully examine certain issues raised by some of their stances:

1) Is it morally right to abandon an alliance once sealed, barring an attempt by the ally to draw one into moral turpitude? In other words, regardless of what the Constitution says, would it be morally wrong to withdraw from NATO?

2) Similarly, have the effects of NAFTA been examined in all their ramifications? Or is the Constitution Party's call to withdraw from it premature? If so, would it have unintended or unforseen consequences, if implemented?

That's all I can think of for now. I'd probably be able to come up with some other questions about them, if I tried.

And while we shouldn't be outright hostile or looking to pick theological scraps with them, I am fully aware of what their theology says, and what it says about us. My hostility to the so called "Religious Right" is an old record, and I hope that John McCain wins irregardless of their support or "holding back." His opposition to Abortion should come from his own beliefs, not to "court the Evangelical vote"...and I too would have told Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson to take a flying leap back in 2000, despite sharing the same views on Abortion or what have you. If McCain thinks Global Warming is a problem, then damn it campaign on that. I'm not saying we should purge religious conservatives like Night of the Long Knives style, but I am hostile to the way the Evangelical GOP does business, and have been for years, even before I became Catholic or even Christian (was a staunch Republican and McCain supporter in 2000).

I apologize. Once again I've come off poorly in attempting to ask difficult questions about conservatism as a philosophy.

Brian, have you read "Conservatives Without Conscience" by John Dean? If not, I highly recommend it.

Catholics have been persecuted by evangelicals and the fact that they agree with some aspects of Catholic theology (when they choose to do so) is largely irrelevant. Evangelicals ruined the Republican Party and if their influence is diminishing, I'm glad. Catholics should stay as far away from evangelicals as they can get.

McCain won't lose the evangelical vote. Many of my fundamentalist friends think Obama is the anti-Christ.

DR. RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT!!!!!


PRO-LIFE. AGAINST EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH AND ANTI-WAR! HE'S STILL IN THE RACE!!!

I'm a conservative Catholic, and I don't know even one other Catholic who cared even a little bit about Hagee. Not one. As far as "alienation" goes, the party is supposed to be a coalition. In a coalition, one group does not get to hold the others hostage, tantamount to "play by my rules or I'll go home and pout!" Over the last eight years, the religious conservatives have come to believe that they are entitled to run the party. Well, I have little use for children. If you feel you are entitled, then by all means, leave. The party will be better without you.

There is no such thing as separation of Church and State, that is a secular pipe dream, another attempt at playing God by the minions of the evil one.

Evangelicals are our allies in the Culture War, and make no mistake, social consevatism has at its heart and foundation, fidelity and obedience to God's moral laws and teachings, and that of course includes the Gospel.

It is socialism statism liberalism and secularism and permissiveness which should be purged from the culture of life.

Social conservatives should lead , for it is the social conservatives that will bring back obedience to God's moral teachings , back to the public square and public policy.

Tired of the "politics of fear"? My fellow Catholics, there are alternatives to the two main parties. Particularly I speak of the Constitution Party and their is always the write-in vote, especially for Ron Paul. If his ideas seem foreign, well so do the policies of the two major parties. Think about it folks. We have gone so far off of course as a nation (slowly) that we can't see the truth - mostly because it's not presented to us. Those who speak the truth are attacked (Ron Paul) or virtually ignored (Ron Paul). Do yourself a favor and check out the Constitution Party: www.constitutionparty.com. Blessings.

Please forgive my writing error..."their" s/b "there"...I'm writing at lunch and am in a hurry