Listener Reflections

This is your place to publicly comment on the topics and issues addressed in Speaking of Faith programs. React in a personal way, and put into words what this program meant to you.

Submit Your Reflection about "The Evolution of American Evangelicalism."

Finally, an Evangelical I Can Talk To (April 20, 2007)
It is refreshing to hear an Evangelical who seems willing to talk. Most seem to be of the opinion that one must either take the whole bait, hook, line, and sinker, or you're at best a heretic who doesn't deserve to live.

I have a real problem with folks like James Dobson who seems to me to use the Gospel to promote hate and fear. I do like and have great respect for folks like Billy Graham who said that in allying ourselves with any particular political party, we have much more to lose than we do to gain.

In my own study of church history, I have yet to find a time when the church was able to ennoble political systems. To the contrary, political systems seem to have invariably corrupted the church. When the church has been able to make a positive difference, it wasn't any kind of mainline effort, but a minority group standing up for the Gospel.

George Thomas
Saluda, SC (Listens to SOF Podcast)

Finally, an Evangelical I Can Talk To (April 20, 2007)
It is refreshing to hear an Evangelical who seems willing to talk. Most seem to be of the opinion that one must either take the whole bait, hook, line, and sinker, or you're at best a heretic who doesn't deserve to live.

I have a real problem with folks like James Dobson who seems to me to use the Gospel to promote hate and fear. I do like and have great respect for folks like Billy Graham who said that in allying ourselves with any particular political party, we have much more to lose than we do to gain.

In my own study of church history, I have yet to find a time when the church was able to ennoble political systems. To the contrary, political systems seem to have invariably corrupted the church. When the church has been able to make a positive difference, it wasn't any kind of mainline effort, but a minority group standing up for the Gospel.

George Thomas
Saluda, SC (Listens to SOF Podcast)

People I Can Talk To (April 19, 2007)
After reading God's Politics by Jim Wallis, and hearing him speak at the University of Montana, I'm delighted to hear your interview with Richard Cizik. With tongue in cheek, I call myself a "pantheist Christian Buddhist monk." While I'm basically non-theistic, I have always respected and revered the person and message of Jesus. These new Evangelicals are people I can talk to and work with, respect, learn from, and delight in their company. I can see Jesus in them easily, and that warms my heart. I get the feeling of acceptance, support, and love that I would expect from Jesus. I have always been repelled by the messages of judgment and condemnation from any group. Thank you, Krista et al for this program.

James River
Missoula, MT (Listens to SOF Podcast)

I Didn't Turn Off the Radio! (April 16, 2007)
Usually any interview of an Evangelical personality of note warrants an immediate move to turn off the radio. Fortunately, in the time that it took me to get across the room to do so, I realized that Mr. Cizik has something worthwhile to say. I have often noted that the Evangelicals' compassion for the easy-to-deal-with unborn quickly dissipates when faced with the hard realities of life outside of the womb. Mr. Cizik's type of Evangelical Christianity, that includes love and concern for the whole unruly world, could be the salvation of the whole movement. It should certainly put to shame those in the Evangelical community who would use their faith as a way to feel good about themselves without offering any solutions.

Colleen Winchester
Loveland, CO (KUNC, 91.5 FM)

Glad to Hear the Diversity; Worried about the Travesty of the Iraq War (May 20, 2006)
I have much ambivalence about associating myself with "evangelical Christianity," because of the understandable strong link that the general public has made between right wing politics and evangelicalism (e.g. specifically links between the Bush administration and its policies and actions), as well as links between stereotyped positions on key social issues and evangelicalism, and stereotyping of evangelicals and various aspects of "the culture wars." Despite that ambivalence, I cannot deny my strong connections to evangelical Christianity: (1) by heritage (my parents were evangelical Christian missionaries who ran an orphanage in Korea for 10 years, and I was born in Korea and lived there my first eight years of life), (2) by education (I completed my undergraduate degree at a Christian liberal arts college, and I completed graduate level studies in theology and psychology at an evangelical seminary, Fuller Theological Seminary), and (3) by the way I define my Christian faith (I hold to a strong view of the authority of scripture, I believe that God became a man in the person of Jesus, to show us love and to grant us forgiveness for our sin — as evidenced by the resurrection of Jesus from the dead — which impels us to live out a new life of individual and corporate holiness, etc.).

I feel so heartened that NPR (and specifically your excellent program, Speaking of Faith), is offering programming that is giving a voice to the greater diversity of views that are held within evangelical Christianity both by official representatives of evangelical institutions (like guests you've had in the recent months from Fuller Theological Seminary, Calvin College, and most recently from Richard Cizik of the the National Association of Evangelicals), as well as giving a voice, in this forum, to ordinary folk, like me, who have strong ties to evangelical Christianity, but who do not align themselves with many of the stereotypes of evangelicals.

Having stated my appreciation for this programming, I feel compelled to join in with some other listeners who regretted how easily Krista Tippett allowed Richard Cizik off the hook regarding his comments about President Bush and the Iraq war. I am one of many millions of evangelical Christians who opposed the invasion of Iraq from the very beginnings of any hints that the U.S. was considering an attack, and I have considered the Iraq war to be an immoral, unjust, and shameful act on the part of the U.S. government. My specific grievance with Cizik was/is that he was willing to say that the Iraq war is a failure, and that the Bush administration instigated the war on "misguided" information (that is, that there was "evidence" — now proven to be false — that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction), but I believe that Cizik was too afraid to admit and confront the Bush administration on the fact that there is evidence that Bush planned to attack Iraq at least eight months prior to the actual attack (as revealed in the "Downing St. Memo" — that was thankfully leaked to the public). That memo revealed that the Bush administration (with the cooperation of the UK government) tried to come up with reasons to justify an immoral and unjust war (reasons that could be spun in such a way to be convincing enough to the U.S. congress and to the U.S. public — so that an invasion would be supported). If those of us who call ourselves evangelicals, such as Cizik, and I suppose, myself, do not stand up and condemn the lies that President Bush and his administration pushed on the Congress and on the public that thrust the U.S. military into an action that has cost the lives of over a hundred thousand people (many of those being innocent civilians) — then when will we stand up and proclaim such immorality?

Philip Classen
Toronto, Canada (Listens via SOF Podcast)

What About Wallis? (May 19, 2006)
I have been a faithful listener to SOF for several years. I dare say that it is the finest religious program anywhere. You deserve full credit and unbridled salute for the superb job you do every Sunday. Occasionally, I am not able to listen to the entirety of the program but I have your summary to rely on. I am a life-long evangelical but one who feels more at home with Jim Wallis than Richard Cizik. I tried my best to be accommodating in listening to your interview with Richard Cizik. Frankly, I did not find him convincing, if at all. He, and his superior, Ted Haggard, have now gained some respect but in many ways, it confuses the picture all the more.

You were gracious, as always, to volley to Richard Cizik some excellent serves, and he was certainly smart and articulate to take advantage of every opportunity to portray a socially conscious evangelical. Somehow he gave me more of a "jump on bandwagon" flavor than anything else. My question to you is why did you not invite Jim Wallis as "representative" of evangelicals? Or better yet, you did not pose the all-important question of "what do you think of Jim Wallis?" I have known Jim Wallis since he was a young evangelical radical in the '60s in Chicago. He is truly the John the Baptist of the evangelical but unfortunately, he does not get 10 percent of the exposure that Richard Cizik seemed to receive.

The brief note of "regret" that Richard Cizik expressed regarding his earlier stance on Iraq invasion was hardly convincing. The proper prophetic posture would have been to side with those evangelicals who since day one has taken a very critical position regarding the invasion. All I came away with was the idea that the new evangelicals, i.e. NAE, has not a very smooth talker, with credentials that endears himself to media people like you. Do you, or Richard Cizik, believe that Jesus would have identified with NAE if He were here personally today?

John McCain speaks at Jerry Falwell's university, Richard Cizik got to be interviewed by Krista Tippett, but our world continues to be dark and dying for lack of true and total understanding and expression of the Gospel faith. Please keep up your outstanding job, your contribution to sanity in religion is so needed today.

Ka Tong Gaw
Upland, CA (KPCC, 90.1 FM)

Representing Good Theology (May 17, 2006)
I listen to your program pretty much every Wednesday night. Never have I been disappointed. Yesterday's program with a vice president of the evangelicals in the U.S. was truly awesome! It was like a fresh breath of air amid gloomy prospects of the future. I so hope he was speaking for a broad section of American evangelicals, because up until now what I've heard was essentially: all is in God's hands, we can't do anything to change the course of events. As he said, there's good and bad theology. It was clear what theology he represents. Thanks for your excellent interviews!

Jurgen Ahlers
Atlanta, GA (WABE, 90.1 FM)

Why Let Cizik Off the Hook So Easy? (May 17, 2006)
I am listening to your interview with Richard Cizik and am shocked at your dance around the issue of "intelligent design." This man claims to represent the evangelical movement, while also being a believer in science. You let him off with a quick pass over the issue of a six-day creation without surfacing the issue that is in the forefront of the news today. Shame on you. "Intelligent design" is not science yet it is being forced on American children by the likes of Mr. Cizik and his fellows. You failed to even ask a question and moved on to Bono. Your interviews are normally the type that ask the hard questions without the slap in the face. Unfortunately you blew it on this one. Please do a follow up and ask the hard question in your especially skillful way.

John Brooke
Tucker, GA (WABE, 90.1 FM)

A Little More of the Real Story (May 15, 2006)
I'm listening to Krista's interview with Richard Cizik, and it's a terrific interview. But I can't help but think, over and over, that the question, "Are you the real story?" as she asked him, still needs to be answered. Mr. Cizik's right, of course, that he's a reflection of something larger happening within the evangelical fold. And a good and important part of that something goes beyond Jim Wallis and Richard Sider (Evangelicals for Social Action).

I'm referring to a phenomenon called the Emerging Church. I don't know if SoF has covered the Emerging movement yet, but it would be a terrific dovetail with this show, as the people involved in the Emerging Church would cross many of the political lines that the "old guard" evangelicals have laid out for us. That area is ripe for not only insights into how a lot of evangelicals, especially the younger ones, are thinking, but also the kind of reaction it's getting from the old guard. First-rate program. Thank you.

Jason Burgett
Burlington, VT (WVPS, 107.9 FM)

Find It Hard to Believe (May 15, 2006)
I enjoy your show. While it was refreshing to hear Mr. Cizik speak in public with a moderation not often associated with the Christian "right" and to show concern for the practical things religious groups should be focusing on like poverty, suffering, in Africa, etc., I find it a little too easy and, to be honest, sickening for him to be able to, in the comfort of his easy comfortable life here in America, admit he was "wrong" to trust President Bush on Iraq.

There were plenty of us who knew he was wrong before the first wave of "shock and awe" pummeled Iraq. We protested in huge numbers and we were just ignored by the media and the government and called traitors and worse. When I see and hear representatives of the Christian "right" like Mr. Falwell say we should bomb them "In the Name of the Lord" or Mr. Robertson talk about "taking out" Hugo Chavez, I wonder just what kind of Christianity these people represent. I certainly do not remember any teachings like that in my Catholic upbringing. My main point is that I hope his God forgives him for all the suffering the support he and others like him caused to our brave soldiers and their families as well as the tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi women and children that have died or been left orphaned by this horrible, immoral, unjust, and illegal war.

I find the actions of these people to be incredibly hypocritical and offensive. They are so concerned about the unborn yet this horrible war has caused an incredible amount of death and suffering. It's so easy to send young men and women off to die for lies and so much harder to work for the freedom and well-being of all beings and for all peoples to be tolerant and accepting of others beliefs. Thank you.

Peter Calandra
New York, NY (WNYC, 93.9 FM)

Questioning My Own Assumptions and Prejudices (May 14, 2006)
It is 7:10 a.m., just a few minutes after listening, as I usually do, to your program. Last week upon hearing the preview of this week's topic, I decided that was the last way I wanted to begin my Sunday morning, but my habit of the last year died hard and I set my alarm to lay in bed and listen without remembering what it was I would wake up to. I'm so glad I did.

Richard Cizik's words were like balm for me. Labels that describe me are liberal, feminist, and lesbian. I have a life-long love/hate relationship with God/religion/spirituality. I also have a weird knack of drawing to me and forming great friendships with Christians — and not just any Christians — daughters of pastors, wives of priests, and yes, evangelicals. But we never talk about religion and although they are church-goers, I have tended to think of them as oddballs within their own groups because in my mind evangelical Christians and hypocrisy were hand-in-glove: "sanctity of life" for restricting women's rights to an abortion politically instead of looking at ways to aggressively stop unwanted pregnancies, then focus on faith-based abstinence; "sanctity of life" while being in bed (ha-ha!) with politicians who uphold the death penalty, military aggression, and the marginalization of a looming environmental threat, etc. Aside from how "these people" usually characterize me, the hypocrisy with how their political might has been exercised is what really has aggravated me.

Mr. Cizik's admission that evangelicals should be consistent in the gospel regardless of whether or not they are politically consistent was an ah-ha moment for me. What kind of power and clout are we talking about here if a huge chunk of the vote couldn't be counted on by either party, so that both had to do not what is expedient, but what is best and right? It's tremendous. I commend Mr. Cizik's passion for love and loving and not politicking. Evangelicals: I think you've been hoodwinked by the majority of your leaders and that perhaps my friends are not the oddballs, they are just too quiet. Thanks for opening my eyes as usual and giving me a healthy dose of awareness into some of my own assumptions and prejudices.

Sushanah Boston
Chicago, IL (WBEZ, 91.5 FM)

Respect (May 14, 2006)
The show isn't even over yet, but I have to say I'm very impressed with Richard Cizik and how he represents himself, the faith, and politics. I only wish and pray that more of our leaders (on both sides) can conduct themselves as he is doing. I say this even though I tend to disagree with some of his points and swing more towards the liberal side, however I have no problem giving respect to anyone, and he has my respect.

Andrew Evans
Minneapolis, MN (KNOW, 91.1 FM)

A Short Distance (May 14, 2006)
As a non-Christian I always wondered why evangelicals seem cold, mean-spirited, uncaring, and distant — it's obviously not the message of Jesus and it just makes no sense. Why would Christians, for example, not support health coverage, and why would they support war, any war? I just know that our [silent] Christian brothers and sisters are not represented by the current "politico-Christians."

This week we heard from the other side. It was inspirational for those of us who are non-believers to learn that, aside from the issue of faith, the distance between me and the evangelical ideal is not very far. Thanks for another great program.

Michael Spencer
Naples, FL (Listens to SOF OnDemand)

Concerned about Defeat (May 14, 2006)
Mr. Cizik mentions that if you reduce poverty by 10 percent, you will reduce abortions by 30 percent. Unfortunately, the most noticeable figures on both sides of this issue are more interested in defeating an opponent than they are in achieving a goal.

John Elmquist
Chicago, IL (WBEZ, 91.5 FM)

Thank you, Mr. Cizik (May 14, 2006)
I am heartened by the views expressed by you in the interview aired this morning. I grew up believing that man is steward of the Earth, appointed so by God. I matured to understand that the teachings of Christ have much more to do with love, forgiveness, forbearance, and humility than they do with moralistic revenge, superiority, and spiritual coercion. I work to live my faith by demonstration instead of proclamation, and it is not always easy, fun, or pleasant. I'm only a tiny candle, but I do what I can to keep my light from disappearing a bushel. I can't thank you enough!

Steve Kemmerer
Malvern, PA (WHYY, 91.0 FM)

I Want Fact, Not Fear (May 14, 2006)
I find it very troubling that the NAE and the handful of leaders and lobbyists push their religion into my government and governmental policy. They use fear, ghost stories, myth, legend, and folklore to obscure the facts and affect our future. I want fact and science to shape my future, not myth and ghost stories. I'm a 51-year-old middle school science teacher.

Gary Wilson
North East, MD (WHYY, 91.0 FM)

Trickled Down (May 13, 2006)
As an evangelical, I am glad to hear a more biblical and robust spirituality from a leader within the Right Wing. It seems to me that Cizik is evidence, not merely that evangelicalism is changing (that's certainly true), but that it has changed in significant measure already — despite the horrible accounts of Christian bigotry mentioned in the program.

I think Cizik is evidence of Krista's question concerning the internal conversations circulating within evangelicalism today. Considering that Cizik isn't a leading Christian thinker or a formative Christian theologian, what is remarkable is that even someone long-steeped within the Religious Right is undergoing the same sorts of changes that have been underway (for some time now) among more central evangelical thinkers and theologians. Once something is being expounded by politicians from the Christian Right, you can count on it having trickled down.

Thanks again Speaking of Faith for a program well done.

Mike Winkler
Orlando, FL (Listens to SOF OnDemand)

A Different Choice of Words (May 13, 2006)
I am not a Christian, and it was amazing to hear such a conversation as the one that's taken place on this show. First I must say, I am 26 years old and I must say thank you for showing me what the world is really about. However, I have one gripe with your production. I believe to call it an evolution is in bad faith. The person is obviously holding different views from us, however, if someone is coming to converse with you and basically (negotiate) between the groups of people, don't throw something they fight against in their face. It just seems like a wrong thing to do to a guest who is coming to talk about this. I would understand if it was a crooked politician or something like that (and I'm not sure that this person is not either), but still, for the people listening, it sends a wrong tone. Thank you so much. The world is not lost yet.

Roman Revzin
Brooklyn, NY (WNYC, 93.9 FM)

Mr. Cizik's Principles (May 13, 2006)
I was pleased to hear Richard Cizik's remarks about environmentalism, global poverty, and interfaith dialogue. Clearly he's a man of principle; but it struck me while listening to your conversation with him that he does not apply his principles to all issues. I refer specifically to the issue of civil marriage between same-sex people, or "protecting the traditional family," as he called it.

He says that he believes in science; yet sociology is a science too, and so is economics. There's no evidence that same-sex marriage causes any kind of social harm, and considerable evidence that it would benefit society; The Economist, which is far from liberal on economic matters, has endorsed it on the ground that it promotes social stability. And the perennial question I have: in what way does the existence of non-traditional families threaten the "traditional family"?

Science, too, confirms that homosexuality is not a choice made in adulthood, but determined at least in early childhood and perhaps in the womb. It's not as if the possibility of same-sex marriage will reduce the number of opposite-sex marriages; in fact, it will increase the total number of marriages, as it has in Massachusetts.

He says he believes that Christians have to learn to live in a pluralistic society. Why doesn't that apply to forms of marriage? Even if pluralism is confined to religion, I (for example) am a Wiccan, and my religion teaches that "All acts of love and pleasure are [the Goddess'] rituals." No church should be compelled to perform same-sex marriages if they object, but all should have the right, and our government cannot select one religion's view over another's.

He says he believes in "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Would he like to be denied access to his wife in the hospital? If his spouse has children by a previous marriage, would he like to have no way to have a legal relationship with them?

He says he believes in compassion, but it seems he's willing to turn his back on the pain that the lack of this basic right inflicts on gay and lesbian people. He should come to the hospital, and talk to a man who has just been told "sorry, family only" when he tried to visit his lover — spouse! — of 25 years in his final hours. He should come to the apartment they shared two weeks later, and watch as the deceased man's relatives take all the furniture, acquired jointly over the decades of their relationship, leaving the survivor without even a bed to sleep in. Civil marriage will help prevent these and other grotesque injustices.

I'm glad that Mr. Cizik's principles have led him to a new (or perhaps old!) view of protecting the environment, of interfaith dialogue, and of poverty. I just wish that, on this issue as well, he would follow them where they obviously lead.

Christopher Hatton
Hoboken, NJ (WNYC, 93.9 FM)

Evangelicalism Working Outside the Box (May 11, 2006)
I think you would be surprised to learn that there are a lot of evangelicals out there who feel outraged and violated because of the betrayal of our faith by the religious right and its capture by the Republican party. I am pleased to learn about Cizik's awakening, even though I regard it as a rather timid one. Who knows, he may even come to realize that the evangelical establishment has been preaching a political gospel, one that betrays the real message of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, those of us who are critical are dismissed by the establishment and the media as nobodies with nothing to say, but we are not going to go away.

Richard Pierard
Beverly, MA (Listens to SOF OnDemand)