Evangelicalism and American Politics

[CTBcin]

Presbyterians believe in covenant theology where baptism is a means of grace only for the elect. The non-elect receive only the outward sign.

Methodists do believe in a form of baptismal regeneration for infants, but John Wesley did not teach baptismal regeneration for adults. Historically, Methodists placed a strong emphasis on having a conscious conversion experience of faith and repentance as constituting regeneration. Essentially, baptism does not necessarily correspond to regeneration.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[huck]

The Atlantic is rather left leaning (though it does have some good articles), please try to look at some articles discussing this from a centrist, conservative, or libertarian perspective.

For several years I believed that Al Gore actually made the claim that he invented the internet. As it turned out this was a totally made up story promoted by the conservative media. Now the stuff the conservative media makes up like pizza gate is even worse. I get my news from the News hour and Washington Post.

 

[HollowMan]

I would consider myself conservative, but I don’t know how people can stand behind Trump’s comments anymore. And Evangelicals who cheer him on need to take a close look at what it is exactly they are cheering.

I didn’t vote for him, but plan to vote for him in 2020. Yes, I wish he would be a little more thoughtful in the way he speaks, but I can’t think of anything he’s said since being president I don’t agree with.

 

[Pattylt]

Peter Wehner, GOP adviser to both Bush’s and Regan has been very critical of President Trumps comments and feels he is hurting Evangelical Christianity. I do know many Evangelicals are quite disturbed by the tweets from the President. I don’t think it will change many of their votes but he needs to be more cautious that he is.

 

[Peeps]

Peter Wehner, GOP adviser to both Bush’s and Regan has been very critical of President Trumps comments and feels he is hurting Evangelical Christianity. I do know many Evangelicals are quite disturbed by the tweets from the President. I don’t think it will change many of their votes but he needs to be more cautious that he is.

My husband and I were Evangelical Protestant for the first 47 years of our life.

Evangelical Protestants won’t vote for any of the current Democratic candidates. Evangelical Protestants are whole-heartedly pro-life, and all the Democratic candidates are pro-abortion.

And Evangelical Protestants don’t have the attachment to the “working people” and the “poor” and the “immigrant and stranger” and all the other social issues that Catholics will often use as a reason to vote Democratic. Evangelical Protestants believe solidly that government is a CAUSE of poverty, crime, low wages, etc." and would like to see as little government involvement with our daily life as possible, as the U.S. Constitution describes.

I tend to agree with the Evangelical Protestants, in case anyone is wondering. NOTHING makes it illegal for us to help the poor and the strangers, feed the hungry, heal the sick, etc. But the law of the land makes it legal to kill unborn human beings, and the government has to be involved because a LAW needs to be changed.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Evangelical Protestants won’t vote for any of the current Democratic candidates. Evangelical Protestants are whole-heartedly pro-life, and all the Democratic candidates are pro-abortion.

And Evangelical Protestants don’t have the attachment to the “working people” and the “poor” and the “immigrant and stranger” and all the other social issues that Catholics will often use as a reason to vote Democratic. Evangelical Protestants believe solidly that government is a CAUSE of poverty, crime, low wages, etc." and would like to see as little government involvement with our daily life as possible, as the U.S. Constitution describes.

This post sums it all up.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I wish he would be a little more thoughtful in the way he speaks, but I can’t think of anything he’s said since being president I don’t agree with.

I think I probably can… But I absolutely love Donald Trump. I voted for him last time and I’ll gladly pull the lever again. I wish he were a better man, but lets face it, none of the GOP candidates would have been as good as he’s been with the judicial picks and unwinding Obama’s regulations. And he fights back. So refreshing. And as I tell all of my Dem friends: Whether you love him or hate him, you have to admit he makes great TV.

I think Falwell’s said it best: “We’re electing a commander in chief, not a pastor in chief.”

Pray for Donald Trump.

 

[CTBcin]

I think Falwell’s said it best: “We’re electing a commander in chief, not a pastor in chief.”

Pray for Donald Trump.

I’m not sure if Falwell is the best person to give credence to…

I agree that praying for presidents and other political leaders is good.

 

[Pattylt]

I think the problem with President Trumps comments…the controversial ones…is that not only Dems but young Evangelicals see the blatant fawning over him and refusal of their leaders to condemn these types of comments as hypocritical and against their faith. Of course he isn’t going to get any Dem votes anyway but the Christian youth are conflicted over it and some…certainly not all or even most…will wind up switching their vote or just sitting it out.

Even conservative news is reporting on how the Evangelical leaders are turning off their younger constituents. Just as you expect your Priests to defend the faith when someone says or contradicts a catholic view, young Evangelicals expect their leaders to defend their faith as well, not just give President Trump a pass because he’s conservative!

 

[Hobgoblin]

I’m not sure if Falwell is the best person to give credence to…

In this case he’s right.

young Evangelicals see the blatant fawning over him and refusal of their leaders to condemn these types of comments as hypocritical and against their faith.

Like any other adult topic, kids need to be engaged. Few elected to office will fail to disappoint in some way, but there are still good reasons to support them, even vigorously support them.

 

[huck]

But I absolutely love Donald Trump. I voted for him last time and I’ll gladly pull the lever again. I wish he were a better man, but lets face it, none of the GOP candidates would have been as good as he’s been with the judicial picks

While him and Mc Connell are providing the pro life faction with pro life judges, they aren’t convincing the US population into the pro-life camp. In return the pro-life movement deserves a great deal of credit for saddling us with Trump.

 

[RyanBlack]

While him and Mc Connell are providing the pro life faction with pro life judges, they aren’t convincing the US population into the pro-life camp. In return the pro-life movement deserves a great deal of credit for saddling us with Trump.

Indeed. Long term, they will do grave harm both to the pro-life movement and the GOP.

 

[twf]

As long as a Catholic you accept that it is a solemn commandment to care for the poor, the stranger, the oppressed etc. It’s not optional, and failing in this regard is the sin that Our Lord specifically calls out when describing the Last Judgement in Matthew 25. For the record, you’re describing the view of American Evangelicals who are also conservative Americans. Evangelicals in Canada, for example, have no issue with universal health care and other “socialist” policies that their American brethren take issue with.

 

[Hobgoblin]

While him and Mc Connell are providing the pro life faction with pro life judges, they aren’t convincing the US population into the pro-life camp. In return the pro-life movement deserves a great deal of credit for saddling us with Trump.

I agree a president is in prime position to provide leadership that might sway public opinion and that’s hard for Trump to do given how polarizing he is. Tragic. He’s still been more helpful to the prolife cause than any president in my lifetime and I’m in my 50’s. I’ll take a flawed man who actually does something over a finger in the air guy any day.

Indeed. Long term, they will do grave harm both to the pro-life movement and the GOP.

Why would you think that?

As long as a Catholic you accept that it is a solemn commandment to care for the poor, the stranger, the oppressed etc.

Yes, you are called to do this. You are not called to force your countrymen to do it, or do it to a level that you deem acceptable. That’s the difference between conservative and liberal thought. It doesn’t mean your not a Christian.

 

[RyanBlack]

Why would you think that?

Because they are alienating nearly every group other than white nationalists and white evangelicals.

 

[twf]

The Church teaches that the state has an obligation to care for its citizens. The details can be debated, but a state that is completely libertarian, completely indifferent to the welfare of individual citizens, is definitely at odds with Church teaching.

 

[Peeps]

As long as a Catholic you accept that it is a solemn commandment to care for the poor, the stranger, the oppressed etc. It’s not optional, and failing in this regard is the sin that Our Lord specifically calls out when describing the Last Judgement in Matthew 25. For the record, you’re describing the view of American Evangelicals who are also conservative Americans. Evangelicals in Canada, for example, have no issue with universal health care and other “socialist” policies that their American brethren take issue with.

I know what the Lord Jesus and the Church asks us to do, and I try to do it.

However, there is no command from the Lord or from His Church to agree with using the GOVERNMENT to care for the poor, the stranger, the oppressed, etc. The government in the United States wastes much of the tax monies it receives on bureaucracy and salaries for those administering the programs. And many of the programs are tied to other programs that are objectionable for Christians.

I personally believe that we citizens did a bad thing when we handed over the care of the poor, the sick, the immigrant, the minorities, the children, and the elderly to the United States government. We Christians and other interested people and groups should be doing this work, and the government should be involved only when there is a national disaster and large amounts of funds are needed quickly.

With private organizations, especially church organizations, a huge percentage of our donations actually goes to take care of the poor, the stranger, etc. There are also opportunities for the laypeople to volunteer and this gives us a chance to not only help, but meet those that we are helping and love them in person, not just with a check or a prayer.

Now there is constant squabbling and attempt to grab power and get re-elected by using “charity” as the tool. If we, the people, were administering the programs, we would be working alongside people who may not be like us, but who share our concern and want to help others. I think we would have a much more civil nation if we were all working side by side instead of glaring at each other across a ballot box.

I vote for candidates who support programs that give we, the people, the money and the authority to help those in need. I oppose candidates who want to “tax the rich” to get money to give to those in need. That plan has been proven over and over to be a myth or even an outright lie.

 

[huck]

However, there is no command from the Lord or from His Church to agree with using the GOVERNMENT to care for the poor, the stranger, the oppressed, etc. The government in the United States wastes much of the tax monies it receives on bureaucracy and salaries for those administering the programs. And many of the programs are tied to other programs that are objectionable for Christians.

Being ex Mormon I did a study of tithing as given in the old testament. Those who were land owners were to leave some of their crop in the fields for the poor. They were to provide for the levites and they would have a storehouse of food for the needy.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Like any other adult topic, kids need to be engaged. Few elected to office will fail to disappoint in some way, but there are still good reasons to support them, even vigorously support them.

There are also good reasons to acknowledge their flaws and to make it known that you don’t support certain faults they have.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Because they are alienating nearly every group other than white nationalists and white evangelicals.

Either policies are good or they aren’t. Hopefully, voters are intelligent enough to vote for good policies. If they aren’t then democracy is doomed.

btw: That was spoken like a true partisan.

The Church teaches that the state has an obligation to care for its citizens. The details can be debated, but a state that is completely libertarian, completely indifferent to the welfare of individual citizens, is definitely at odds with Church teaching.

I’m not familiar with the Church teaching you refer to. Has what you’re describing ever existed in world history though? Seems more like a caricature.

Being ex Mormon I did a study of tithing as given in the old testament. Those who were land owners were to leave some of their crop in the fields for the poor. They were to provide for the levites and they would have a storehouse of food for the needy.

The ancient Israeli tithe wasn’t a model for taxation. It was specifically an offering from the fruit of the land which God had blessed them with. There were whole segments of the population that didn’t pay it at all, and some of those might even be very wealthy.

There are also good reasons to acknowledge their flaws and to make it known that you don’t support certain faults they have.

Absolutely.