 |
Endangered Values
by Jimmy
Carter
Review by
Erin Hanafy, Associated Press
From
365Gay.com on the Web, December 31, 2005
|
| |
|
Jimmy Carter is the kind of Democrat
most people think no longer exists: an evangelical Christian, a white male from
a "red" state (Georgia), and a military man whose Annapolis days are among his
proudest.
The former president (1977-1981) seems to know that he is now considered an
unusual mix. His earnest manner -- overly so, his critics would say --
make him seem even more out of touch with today's divisive political
environment.
But he apparently only seems to be out of it, because his latest book captures
the zeitgeist perfectly. In Our Endangered Values: America's Moral
Crisis, Carter argues that fundamentalist ideology is becoming the dominant
thought for the most powerful politicians and religious leaders.
This "you're-with-us-or-against-us" philosophy leaves people like Carter -- a
gun owner who is also an avid environmentalist -- out in the cold because it's
difficult to pin them down to a single slate of positions.
But Carter's ideological mix didn't seem so unusual a generation ago. He
has not changed much, but the Democratic and Republican parties have. A
similar thing has happened in his religious life, as the devout Baptist finds
his church's governing body increasingly laying down church doctrine on
political issues.
Carter defines fundamentalists as those who "have managed to change the nuances
and subtleties of historic debate into black-and-white rigidities and the
personal derogation of those who dare to disagree."
Carter clearly sees Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell as Christians who need
religion, but with his extremely evenhanded style he never takes a cheap shot.
He merely uses their own words against them: citing Robertson's quote
likening Episcopalians, Presbyterians and Methodists to the Antichrist; and
reminding readers of Falwell's post-Sept. 11 comments pinning blame for the
attacks on "the pagans, the abortionists, the feminists and the gays and
lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle."
Carter sees fundamentalism at work politically in the Bush administration's
unilateral approach to foreign policy, its disenchantment with the United
Nations and other long-held international relationships, and its impatience with
diplomacy, exemplified by the "axis of evil" rhetoric and the invasion of Iraq.
Looking at the substance of his arguments, Carter is hopping mad about what he
sees as steps backward for the United States. But you'd never know it from
his workmanlike style, ticking off lists of reasons why rigid fundamentalism is
ruining our government and our churches. He keeps the outrage out of it,
plodding along with stark, simple prose that wouldn't be out of place in a high
school textbook.
The one topic that comes closest to making Carter's blood boil is the Southern
Baptist Convention, the ruling body for churches in the South.
Carter charts the rise of fundamentalism in both Christianity and politics by
describing his dealings with the group, whose political clout has increased
dramatically during the past 30 years.
During Carter's childhood, Baptists distrusted central authority -- it was a
little too much like Rome -- and individual churches were autonomous.
Carter was president when he first realized things were changing. The new
president of the Southern Baptist Convention came to the White House for a
meeting and told him he was praying for him to "abandon secular humanism as your
religion."
In 2000, the group removed a clause from its doctrine that assigned sole
authority for faith and practice to Jesus Christ, "whose will is revealed in the
Holy Scriptures." To Carter, this meant that the Southern Baptist
Convention was trying to come between Baptists and Christ by interpreting
biblical Scripture.
He withdrew from the group, but still considers himself a Baptist and continues
to teach Sunday school.
On the political side, Carter disagrees with almost every major policy of the
Bush administration. In the case of fiscal and environmental policy, he
calmly charts the potential ruin if the current course is not altered.
Carter clearly sees himself as an abandoned man, in both religion and politics.
If we are in a "crisis," as the book's subtitle states, where's the passion?
Why isn't he shouting this from the rooftops, as his ideological opponents often
do?
Maybe Carter is too conscious of his status as a man with one foot in each of
the "two Americas," as John Roberts characterized the country, and he is trying
to keep both sides at the table.
Or perhaps Carter's betting that the best way to be heard above the din is to
speak softly to force people to listen closely.
|
