He concluded, "For the last 40 years we've talked more about what's going on in our culture ... than we have preaching Christ and him crucified."

Billy Graham's grandson: 'Evangelicals hurt by their association with religious right' | Christian News on Christian Today

"Closely associating the core message of the Christian faith with a political ideology has always been a huge mistake."

 

The Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church also urged pastors not to discuss politics in their churches.

"I have lots of opinions ... on just about anything," he said. "I basically almost refuse to make any kind of public commentary on anything other than the gospel [from the pulpit]."

For the record, I think he is on target.

 

But what he's "preaching against" plays well among many groups and in many places, so it ain't going away.

He makes a lot of sense.

He concluded, "For the last 40 years we've talked more about what's going on in our culture ... than we have preaching Christ and him crucified."

Billy Graham's grandson: 'Evangelicals hurt by their association with religious right' | Christian News on Christian Today

There are other high-profile evangelical preachers who espouse similar, but not many. As a voting bloc, evangelicals are to the right of Catholics, and if the movement is to grow, especially in non-Southern states, it has to be more inclusive and less judgmental. Of course, another factor is that the political right is getting goofier every day.

"Closely associating the core message of the Christian faith with a political ideology has always been a huge mistake."

 

The Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church also urged pastors not to discuss politics in their churches.

"I have lots of opinions ... on just about anything," he said. "I basically almost refuse to make any kind of public commentary on anything other than the gospel [from the pulpit]."

 

That is rather an ironic statement from that church. Their former pastor was Dr. D. James Kennedy, a man who began preaching politics from the pulpit in the 80's and saw his viewership rise. They must have decided that was not the direction they wanted to go after his death.

As a voting bloc, evangelicals are to the right of Catholics, and if the movement is to grow, especially in non-Southern states, it has to be more inclusive and less judgmental.

 

I would argue you should preach/teach what you feel is right and the truth and if that means your numbers dip, so be it.

 

The Catholic Church made this mistake after Vatican Council II. Vatican II was a great council, the REACTION to Vatican II is where things went hay wire. To try to be all inclusive the Church watered down its teachings and it backfired. Numbers actually went down compared to growth in population. If you look at Southeast Christian Church, it is LOADED with former Catholics who left around this time frame. The joke around town is that Southeast is the largest Catholic Church in the archdiocese. Saint John Paul II was the one who taught us that while Vatican II refined church teachings, it didn't replace them and in the process he was able to plug the leak so to speak.

 

So back to the original comment, in many cases, trying to be inclusive can sometime back fire on you.

Hatz, before the 70's/80's, didn't Evangelicals actually try to stay out of politics from the pulpit?

 

I sometimes wonder if Evangelicals saw how effective black churches were at helping bringing about Civil Rights and if they decided to become politically active in areas they were interested in.

Hatz, before the 70's/80's, didn't Evangelicals actually try to stay out of politics from the pulpit?

 

I sometimes wonder if Evangelicals saw how effective black churches were at helping bringing about Civil Rights and if they decided to become politically active in areas they were interested in.

 

Most did. But what's ironic is that Billy Graham became friends with Nixon when he was VP and openly supported him in '60. He later did so when Dick was President but was horrified when the tapes/transcipts came out and Graham saw a different side of Nixon. To his credit, Graham apologized and said his great regret in his ministry was supporting Nixon or any politician. Falwell and company changed the game in the late 70's and 80's and it's kind of rode that way since among Evangelicals.

Most did. But what's ironic is that Billy Graham became friends with Nixon when he was VP and openly supported him in '60. He later did so when Dick was President but was horrified when the tapes/transcipts came out and Graham saw a different side of Nixon. To his credit, Graham apologized and said his great regret in his ministry was supporting Nixon or any politician. Falwell and company changed the game in the late 70's and 80's and it's kind of rode that way since among Evangelicals.

 

Interesting. Catholics have been political as far as I can remember, both conservative and liberal. Conservative issues like abortion, gay marriage, school choice and issues of freedom of conscience but liberal in areas like death penalty, immigration, social programs for the poor, etc..

 

Catholics were also political in uniting the Catholic vote in Louisville. The Whalens back decades ago knew a Catholic could not win state wide in KY but they also knew they could get a politician's ear since they could sway the large Catholic vote towards that candidate. They were sort of like a small, less corrupt version of Tammany Hall.

Interesting. Catholics have been political as far as I can remember, both conservative and liberal. Conservative issues like abortion, gay marriage, school choice and issues of freedom of conscience but liberal in areas like death penalty, immigration, social programs for the poor, etc..

 

Catholics were also political in uniting the Catholic vote in Louisville. The Whalens back decades ago knew a Catholic could not win state wide in KY but they also knew they could get a politician's ear since they could sway the large Catholic vote towards that candidate. They were sort of like a small, less corrupt version of Tammany Hall.

 

I've always found this to be confusing. Not just among Catholics, but anyone who believes thusly. And I know a bunch of them.

I've always found this to be confusing. Not just among Catholics, but anyone who believes thusly. And I know a bunch of them.

 

You don't understand being both Pro Life and anti Death Penalty? To me that is being Pro Life to the furthest extent. You feel that life is precious regardless to whether it deals with a lima bean sized embryo or someone who has committed a heinous crime.

 

I have always thought being against the death penalty but for abortion rights was a little odd. You value a killer's life but not a person in its earliest formation?

Interesting. Catholics have been political as far as I can remember, both conservative and liberal.

 

The Catholic definition of what "conservatism" might look like is a little much for most Americans to bear. :lol2:

I would argue you should preach/teach what you feel is right and the truth and if that means your numbers dip, so be it.

 

The Catholic Church made this mistake after Vatican Council II. Vatican II was a great council, the REACTION to Vatican II is where things went hay wire. To try to be all inclusive the Church watered down its teachings and it backfired. Numbers actually went down compared to growth in population. If you look at Southeast Christian Church, it is LOADED with former Catholics who left around this time frame. The joke around town is that Southeast is the largest Catholic Church in the archdiocese. Saint John Paul II was the one who taught us that while Vatican II refined church teachings, it didn't replace them and in the process he was able to plug the leak so to speak.

 

So back to the original comment, in many cases, trying to be inclusive can sometime back fire on you.

On the Sunday before big elections, aren't parish priests instructed to read prepared sermons? I believe that's the case in the Covington diocese. I've been told some of these sermons might as well have been written by the local GOP chapter.

 

I understand your point of view in the above post. I probably should have said "political" instead of "judgmental."

On the Sunday before big elections, aren't parish priests instructed to read prepared sermons? I believe that's the case in the Covington diocese. I've been told some of these sermons might as well been have written by the local GOP chapter.

 

Pretty rare, but certainly the Church's interests and the GOP's have intersected recently. The Church was none to happy about being compelled into certain things against its own moral teachings by the ACA.