"Rick Warren gets plenty of attention through his books and media appearances. He doesn't need or deserve this position of honor. There is no shortage of religious leaders who reflect the values on which President-elect Obama campaigned and who are working to advance the common good.''

-- Kathryn Kolbert, president of People for the American Way, on the announcement that Pastor Rick Warren will give the inaugural invocation



by Ken

the Rev. Joseph Lowery

EVANGELICALISM, POLITICS

Obama taps evangelical for inauguration



Posted by Michael Paulson



President-elect Barack Obama (right) has tapped Rick Warren (left), the most prominent evangelical preacher of the post-Billy Graham generation, to deliver the invocation at his inauguration. The decision was announced today by the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies.



Warren pastors the Saddleback Church, a megachurch in Orange County, California, but he is best know as the author of the best-selling "Purpose Driven Life" and its many spinoffs. And Warren has been a forceful advocate for reordering evangelical priorities -- he does not support abortion or same-sex marriage, but his public priority has been combatting AIDS in Africa, and he has criticized the politicization of evangelical Protestantism.



Warren has hosted Obama several times; in 2006, he invited Obama to speak at his church on World AIDS Day (an invitation that drew some criticism of Warren from the right); in August of this year Obama and the GOP nominee, Sen. John McCain, were interviewed on live television by Warren in an election forum; and earlier this month, on World AIDS Day, Obama offered taped remarks praising President Bush's work on AIDS, which was being recognized by Warren at Saddleback.



The choice is winning praise by anti-abortion groups that have been concerned about the Obama administration. The Christian Broadcasting Network's David Brody blogs, "Pro-life pastor Rick Warren will give the invocation at President-Elect Barack Obama’s inauguration. It makes a whole lot of sense. Even though Warren and Obama disagree on the life issue, they do see eye to eye on many social justice issues. This move is also classic Obama because it is a signal to religious conservatives that he’s willing to bring in both sides to the faith discussion in this country. Obama has never shied away from that."



But advocates for abortion rights and same-sex marriage are furious. People For the American Way President Kathryn Kolbert called the choice "a grave disappointment,'' citing Warren's opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion, and writing, "Rick Warren gets plenty of attention through his books and media appearances. He doesn't need or deserve this position of honor. There is no shortage of religious leaders who reflect the values on which President-elect Obama campaigned and who are working to advance the common good.'' And blogger Andrew Sullivan, under the headline "Ugh" wrote: "Shrewd politics, but if anyone is under any illusion that Obama is interested in advancing gay equality, they should probably sober up now. He won't be as bad as the Clintons (who, among leading Democrats, could?), but pandering to Christianists at his inauguration is a depressing omen."



(Photo taken at Saddeback Aug. 16 by Mark Avery/Reuters.)

any

not

[Republicans] really do believe that bipartisanship is date rape -- they have done for the past 30 years. And there aren't any Republican political professionals who didn't come up in that school. To them, this is what politics are all about. Since they have paid no price for this beyond a fairly even ebb and flow of electoral politics there's been no reassessment of their methods. Dems don't play the blame game. Republicans do.



Dealing with a ruthless obstructionist opposition party that always operates in bad faith and never misses an opportunity to weaken the president was always going to be part of Obama's challenge. (And it doesn't matter if the public hates it -- the whole point is to wear them down until it's just too exhausting to resist.)

#



By now I imagine everyone has heard the news. Certainly from the time it oozed out this afternoon, it has spread like wildfire over the blogosphere, and in particular over the liberal blogosphere. Pastor Rick Warren of the Saddlebrook megachurch will give the invocation at the presidential inauguration. There's plenty of time, and plenty of reason, for fulminating, but first I think it's important to keep in mind that the announcement of the selection of the celebrated right-wing evangelical power broker and die-hard homophobe was bracketed with the announcement that the benediction will be given by, the hugely admired civil rights leader. (There will also be performances by Aretha Franklin, violinist Itzhak Perlman, and cellist Yo-Yo Ma, among others.)Here is Michael Paulson's post from early this evening on the Boston Globe website:There was apparently some effort to spin the news by fobbing it off on the inauguration committee, chaired by Senator Feinstein. But that's so silly as to be insulting. Does anyone believe that the committee would do anything, anything at all, against the wishes of the president-elect? I'll go further: Does anyone believe thatdecision by the committee has been or will be made without clearance from the president-elect's people? Not a chance.I'm going to assume that the objections to Pastor Rick are too obvious, and audible around us, to be worth enumerating here. If his selection for the invocation wasintended as a kick in the teeth for those who believe in women's reproductive choice and those who believe in equal rights for LGBT Americans, that was accomplished nevertheless.I don't think the thinking here is mysterious. It's not just a matter of "inclusiveness." It's surely an attempt to bring more people into President Obama's planned Really Big Tent -- to recruit and perhaps even coopt people who aren't already part of the Obama coalition.Since the president-elect truly doesn't seem to care what progressives think, I guess all we can do -- beyond making our share of nasty noise -- is to hope that he's right about the possibility of bringing people with such contrasting views together to find shared solutions. Me? I'm more persuaded by the argument Digby made for us the other day about Republicans. (I think she would agree that it's even more true of the Christian Right.)Clearly, President-elect Obama believes otherwise. I hope he's right. I hope we aren't looking at an administration whose policies are going to be tailored to acceptability by Pastor Rick.

Labels: inauguration, Joseph Lowery, Obama, Rick Warren