Election 2008
A Christian Manifesto

A Christian Manifesto and a companion study guide are available at the internet site designed for its release on 07 May 1008, to wit, www.chrisitanmanifesto.com Os Guiness is one of the prime drafters and seems to be the spokesman during this early period after release. In a short interview reproduced at Justin Taylor’s http://theologica.blogspot.com Guiness the emphasis of the document is to promote understanding of who evangelicals are and to improve their performance in the public square, mainly by abandoning the demonizing of opponents.

This appears to be an odd time to release it. A Presidential election cycle year is one in which demonizing opponents in the public square ascends [or is that descends?] new heights. Although Guiness denies that the manifesto is a political statement, it does seem to be a not too veiled attempt to separate evangelicals, as defined by the drafters, from partisan political wrangling. Kind and charitable evangelicals should not ever be associated with politics.

Now, it is true that because of decades of trying to influence public policy through the political process, many non faith based persons identify evangelical as a political term. The manifesto does a good job of defining theological parameters of what an evangelical is. But, does that really have an affect on those who know no evangelicals to convince them that being an evangelical is about a Triune Creator, Redeemer and King? To the regular Joe Doaks, Pagan, theological beliefs are akin to belief in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. It is not a real, meaningful and purposeful pursuit. Nice but not very practical.

Yes, we must be more like Christ in the public arena. That will lead to our being ignored in the political process. Maybe that is the point of the manifesto drafters. But, there are times and issues that require squeaky wheels to get the media grease. Maybe that is the point of the drafters. We evangelicals cannot be single issue folk but look beyond homosexual marriage and abortion as hills upon which to die. Does that mean joining in with the trendy cultural and political issues of the day with secular folk?
Jesus did not come to overthrow the political order but neither did he come to address Israel’s hot button issues of the day. The manifesto correctly states that evangelicals should be “defined theologically and not politically, socially or culturally” [p.4]. But, that does not mean Christians should not be politically, socially or culturally active. To do so in the rough and tumble political arena means exposing unbiblical positions with boldness and forcefulness.

One other comment to make at this time. The manifesto promotes a “civil” public square in opposition to a “sacred” or “naked” public square. Does that not place the civil authorities over the faith authorities? Everyone, regardless of their faith or faithlessness has the right to speak out in the public square. Fair enough. But, who maintains the public square? Who says when the Muslim, Hindu or Christian goes too far? And, since the secular folk who now referee the discourse so not see themselves as biased, who watches the watchers? If an evangelical is truly a theological person, then he/she must always stand for the distinctiveness of Christian belief and practice everywhere at all times…in or out or the public square.
Read the manifesto yourself. There will be much more commentary in the weeks to come. Will this change the way the public in general looks at evangelicals? Probably not. Will is change the way evangelicals approach their involvement in society? Probably not. But, it does provide a vehicle in which to reassess who evangelicals are and what they must be doing in proclaiming the “good news” after which they claim their identity. And, that is a good thing…we must always be reforming.