# The fall of the Moral Majority/Religious Right



## MMasztal (Nov 26, 2008)

Hi:

It has become pretty clear that the tactic of the MM/RR to change culture through politics has been a failure and has served to further transform the word Christianity into a perjorative.

Has anyone written a book on this topic yet? 

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.


----------



## TimV (Nov 26, 2008)

> It has become pretty clear that the tactic of the MM/RR to change culture through politics has been a failure and has served to further transform the word Christianity into a perjorative.



I think from a distance it would be easy to think changing culture through politics was their mission, especially through the lens of a largely Christ hating media.

But to be fair, the way they would look at it was that they were trying to preserve national righteousness that was being eroded under constant attacks by a relative handful of anti-Christian activists. And in a significant way they were honest and fair about it.

The subject is hugely complicated, but to my way of thinking their dispensational mindset which is a strange mix of ingredients ended up pointing them in the wrong direction. Some of their goals were good; after all, who really wants more legalized abortions and gay marriages? But those good goals had their efforts diluted by chasing after other goals which alienated people that is wasn't wise to alienate. Take for example the idea that the Jews are the Chosen Race. Leadership of the CR pushed for military action in the Mideast and domestic funding for the State of Israel that to the mind of a traditional Conservative Christian, whether Reformed, Catholic or otherwise, was offensive. These are just small examples. Dobson claiming Sponge Bob is gay so people shouldn't watch it, personal scandals etc, a history of anti-intellectualism that came from the traumatic destruction of the South....all played their part.

This meant in effect that they attached themselves to the Republican Party, and are hence tainted by unpopular decisions that were made on their watch.

I for one still think these people have a part to play, but they will first have to rid themselves of dispensational thought. It's like a room that stinks. After a while you stop noticing the stink, but when you leave the room for a while and then come back in, the smell is easier to identify.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Nov 26, 2008)

Here's one that came to mind quickly, but not a "religious" book, per se:
[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Blinded-Might-Cal-Thomas/dp/0310226503]Amazon.com: Blinded by Might: Cal Thomas, Ed Dobson: Books[/ame]


----------



## PastorSBC (Nov 26, 2008)

Cal Thomas had a very good article on this right after the election. 

Cal Thomas : Religious Right R.I.P. - Townhall.com


----------



## Scott1 (Nov 26, 2008)

I take a more charitable view of this.

It seems these groups wanted civil governance to better reflect biblical principles so that the freedom, prosperity and peaceable existence that tend to flow from them allow us to live out a godly life, Coram Deo, even bringing benefit to others.

It seems to me more like these groups did make things better (secondary causes) when they were more-or-less a united front. Now that they have dissipated, and there is scattered impact- we are in moral free fall, reflected by our last election (I'd re-do the issues they brought to the forefront in 1980 again in a second, if we could)! 

I think reformed theology teaches the whole package- Christians are to be informed and involved in every aspect of God's world, including politics. It's not the focus of public worship or the visible church but it sure ought to be a conduit to produce individuals who do, and are involved, and are influential in civil affairs.

Actually, it seems like there was much success when they were united and were trying. Now that their unity and focus has waned, there is much less influence. I don't think that is a good thing.


----------



## PastorSBC (Nov 26, 2008)

The problem becomes that people become more involved, energized and consumed by social change and political activity rather than a Biblical focus on the gospel, church, etc. 

I have known folks that would go and stand in the rain for hours to picket the evils of abortion, but yet they would not walk across the street and tell their lost neighbor about Christ. Something is terribly wrong with that picture.


----------



## MMasztal (Nov 26, 2008)

TimV;499801
I think from a distance it would be easy to think changing culture through politics was their mission said:


> Thanks for the comments. I agree with you. Unfortunately, the MM/CR failed to prognosticate the unintended consequences which placed all of Chistianity under a spotlight. What secular society will remember is the things you've mentioned plus numerous iname ramblings by Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, the sexploits of Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart, and the money-grubbing schemes of Oral Roberts.


----------



## ChristianTrader (Nov 26, 2008)

Contra_Mundum said:


> Here's one that came to mind quickly, but not a "religious" book, per se:
> Amazon.com: Blinded by Might: Cal Thomas, Ed Dobson: Books



http://www.americanvision.org/bwarchive/Editorial_09-07.pdf


----------



## Scott1 (Nov 26, 2008)

Another thing we need to keep in mind is that these groups, by and large, consists of brothers and sisters in the Lord. We hold basic doctrines and evangelical doctrines in common. Many are passionate about the Gospel.

Granted, many do not share the Reformed distinctives, approach evangelism in a less biblical way, and engage in eschatological speculation. But what is wrong with a passion to see God's righteousness exalting a nation through national institutions?

These groups champion:

life issues
sexual morality
family values
prayer in schools
free speech
home schooling
Christian education 
support for Israel


Which of these do we oppose? 

(While I no longer have the dispensational view, I still consider myself pro-Israel because I think there are good practical and moral reasons for doing so).

Why would we feel any gladness of the fact the enemies of the Gospel have tried to discredit them and replaced the ethos of current political debate with an idolatrous focus of humanism? Without their influence, they were able to "buy the farm" in the last election and we'll all be seeing the effects of that shortly.

In the eyes of the world, they see no difference between "them" and "us." It seems to me we ought act like we understand that, and defend their good name because in the eyes of the enemies of the Gospel- "they" are "us."


----------

