Moderate Evangelical Richard Cizik's Resignation May Not Stop Broadening of the Evangelical Agenda

December 12, 2008 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (17)

Richard Cizik, the longtime Washington lobbyist for the National Association of Evangelicals—the largest evangelical umbrella organization in the country, representing roughly 45,0000 churches—resigned Thursday after igniting a firestorm in the evangelical world by vowing support for gay civil unions in an interview with National Public Radio.

Cizik has faced years of criticism from the Christian right over his advocacy for combating global warming, with many conservative evangelical leaders questioning the validity of global-warming claims and mankind's role in the process. Many of those leaders saw Cizik's so-called "creation care" activism as a sign of him trying to liberalize a traditionally conservative agenda and distracting from such fights as stopping abortion and gay marriage.

Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, one of the Christian right's most powerful voices, tried to have Cizik fired in 2006 over his environmental work, but the National Association of Evangelicals' board of directors stood by him, according to a source close to the organization.

With Cizik's resignation, Dobson and his allies finally claimed victory. "This sends the message that you can't leave the reservations on basic issues of where your constituency lies," says Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. "A number of left-leaning evangelicals had started believing their own press, saying that evangelicals were not concerned with issues of marriage and family. The NAE found out this week that their members do care about those issues."

In an interview with National Public Radio host Terry Gross that aired on December 2, Cizik responded to question about gay marriage by saying, "I'm shifting, I have to admit. In other words, I would willingly say I believe in civil unions. I don't officially support redefining marriage from its traditional definition, I don't think."

Even evangelical figures who'd supported Cizik's environmental activism were troubled by the comments. "I don't know what was going on in his head," says Christianity Today Editor David Neff, an NAE board member and a Cizik ally on environmental issues. "When I heard that interview, I said to myself 'Good grief—what are you talking about?' That was not the Richard I knew."

According to a statement posted on the NAE's website Cizik acknowledged that he misspoke during the NPR interview. "Although he has subsequently expressed regret, apologized, and affirmed our values there is a loss of trust in his credibility as a spokesperson among leaders and constituents," NAE President Leith Anderson said in a letter to the organization's board of directors."

Cizik's arrival at the NAE 28 years ago coincided with the rise of the modern Christian right, which Jerry Falwell launched with his Moral Majority in 1979. "What Rich has had to do is maintain the bipartisan nature of the NAE at a time when evangelicals shifted very heavily toward the Republican Party," says Christianity Today's Neff. ".... It creates a precarious situation for anyone doing that kind of work, when you have two thirds of the evangelical movement voting with the Republican Party."

In the 1990s, when conservative evangelicals found themselves locked out of the White House after 12 years of Republican rule, Cizik was among a handful of Washington evangelical advocates who worked to forge common ground with Bill Clinton's administration on foreign policy issues like human trafficking and religious freedom. He was an important player in the effort to pass 1998's International Religious Freedom Act, which Clinton signed into law.

As he worked to establish ties with Republicans and Democrats, Cizik criticized the Christian right's more blunt-force tactics, alleging that they actually impeded the movement from advancing its agenda in Washington. "Not everyone feels western civilization is going to rise and fall on a marriage amendment," Cizik told U.S. News in 2005, pushing back against Christian right leaders who were focused on passing a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. "My fear is we're bringing on criticism that we're modern-day ayatollahs."

Since then, Christian right leaders have grown more vocal in alleging that Cizik has failed to represent the conservative agenda of most American evangelicals, who accounted for about a quarter of the electorate on Election Day last month.

But John Green, an expert on religion and politics at the University of Akron, expects the "branching out" work that Cizik helped spearhead for the evangelical movement to continue, even if Cizik leaves the political arena. "There are a lot of forces working at broadening the evangelical agenda, particularly evangelicals under 30, Green says. "In the long term, there will be people who become more prominent from this younger evangelical generation."

Tags:
Christianity,
LGBT rights,
religion,
lobbying

Reader Comments Read all comments (17)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

LOBBYING THE GOVERNMENT FOR MONEY..THE GOVT. HAS NO MONEY OTHER THAN WHAT IT STEALS FROM ITS CITIZENS..IF YOU WANT MONEY ASK THE PEOPLE FOR IT.DON'T ASK THE GOVT. TO STEAL IT FROM THE PEOPLE FOR YOU.

MR RIGHT of KY 3:39AM November 07, 2009

Related article on Edge -

Evangelicals force out moderate lobbyist

http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=84834

"gay activists say the loss of Cizik will further diminish the political influence of the NAE, believing the fundamentalist movement may be teetering on the brink of political irrelevance."

"Among the things the NAE board found most objectionable were comments Cizik made supporting civil unions - Cizik noted 52 percent of evangelical youth support civil unions or marriage equality - and his own consideration of marriage equality for same-sex couples.

"I’m shifting, I have to admit. In other words, I would willingly say I believe in civil unions. I don’t officially support redefining marriage from its traditional definition, I don’t think," he said during the interview."

simpleso of CA 1:30PM January 24, 2009

not whatever any ancient scripture might land on. I applaud Cizik's stand on the environment and his considering support for civil unions is a very large step for someone of this background.

However, those claiming that they want same-sex couples to have legal protections while opposing civil marriage are on the wrong side of history. In the US, marriage is not just a matter of church law; the word "marriage" is included in family and probate law; and since there are so many people in the US who are still determined that same-sex unions will get no recognition nor respect whatsoever, sooner or later same-sex couples who thought their civil union would be good enough will be told in a hospital, workplace or court: "yes, that protection applies to married couples but not to you." And sooner or later one of these couples will have the courage and the legal ammunition to file a lawsuit and the Supreme Court will end it.

And we'll get the predictable howls of outrage that "the people" don't get to vote on civil rights, just as we did in the racially-based civil rights movement of the 1960s. As usual, the churches will get on board at precisely the moment that their doctrines are sufficiently disconnected from the larger culture as to become unreal to a critical mass of the faithful.

It'll happen. After all, even the Vatican eventually admitted that Galileo was right.

"Mary Hays" of MO 11:22AM January 16, 2009

Photo Galleries

Women on Death Row

Only 12 women have been executed on death row in the U.S. since 1976.

advertisement

Latest Videos