Michelle Cottle (thanks against to Michael Sean Winters) notices the effect that Pope Francis is having on political discussions in the U.S.:
In his first pastoral visit last July, the pope journeyed to Lampedusa, a tiny island off the coast of Sicily through which more than 200,000 migrants and refugees have entered Europe since 1999. Lamenting “global indifference” to the plight of migrants and refugees, Francis threw a wreath into the Mediterranean in remembrance of those who had lost their lives there.
Such acts send a powerful signal, says Kevin Appleby, head of migration policy for the USCCB. This, in turn, inspires like-minded advocates to “lead the charge” on the issue, as when a contingent of U.S. bishops traveled to Nogales on April 1 to celebrate Mass across the U.S.-Mexican border, conduct their own wreath-laying ceremony, and, while they were at it, call on Congress to quit dorking around and do something about our nation’s dysfunctional immigration system.
Five days later came Jeb Bush’s “act of love” moment, which Carr found “stunning,” and Appleby found encouraging. “When someone like Jeb Bush comes out and makes a comment that humanizes immigrants, I think it is in part inspired by the Holy Father,” says Appleby, who has been working on this issue with the USCCB for about 15 years. “In some ways, the Holy Father is providing some cover. Not intentionally. But for those who are sympathetic to his message, he provides cover to be more courageous and to speak about the issue from the human side.”
Conversely, the pope makes it awkward for political leaders of faith to ignore the human costs of poverty or the need for immigration reform, asserts Winters. “It’s really hard to justify, say, your opposition to immigration as coherent with your religious principles when you have the pope and the bishops out front saying otherwise.”
But how do we know that Rick Warren isn’t responsible in a much more direct way for the faith-based Republican’s opposition to Affordable Care Act than Pope Francis’ indirect influence on immigration reform? Here’s part of Warren’s social teaching looks like:
The administration argues that because Hobby Lobby is a for-profit corporation, the company has no religious rights under the First Amendment. In fact, the government says that exempting Hobby Lobby from paying for drugs and devices to which the Greens object would amount to an imposition of the Greens’ faith on their employees.
The first people who came to America from Europe were devout pilgrims seeking the freedom to practice their faith. That’s why the first phrase of the first sentence of the First Amendment is about freedom of religion — preceding freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of assembly. Why? Because if you don’t have the freedom to live and practice what you believe, the other freedoms are irrelevant. Religious liberty is America’s First Freedom.
In this case, the administration is insisting that those who form and operate a family business based on religious beliefs must disobey what they believe is God’s standard in order to obey the government’s program. The administration wants everyone to render unto Caesar not only what is Caesar’s but also what is God’s. If it wins, the first purpose on which the United States was founded would be severely damaged.
Maybe the takeaway is that the American people are receiving conflicting messages from pastors who have no more business weighing in on political and legal matters than Tim Robbins does.
Imagine how frustrating it must be when you are only a pastor in a small Scottish city and have no obvious celebrity:
I’m a vicar – or at least a clergyman – in an inner city charge. I accept that there are of course differences between being the vicar of a declining church of England in central London, and being a Presbyterian minister in a thriving church in the metropolis of Dundee! But there are also a great deal of similarities. Not least in how we as the church impact an increasingly secular society. So forgive me for pointing out a few lessons that we can learn from Rev.
So how do we judge the relative influence of pastors like Tim Keller, Rick Warren, Pope Francis, and David Robertson? Some mathematician out there has to have an equation for calculating a city’s size, antiquity, and media saturation along side a pastor’s ability to write books that ascend the New York Times’ bestseller list or how many times a pastor appears on the cover of Time. Then again, why does New York City’s newspaper carry more weight than Rome’s or Orange County’s? Does Keller have an unfair advantage?
Old Life 
Maybe. But who can we deny that the man saw an opportunity, and wisely moved on it?
Whatever anyone thinks of Keller’s theology, no one can deny that he is influential. After all, SOMEONE has to
provide oversightpreach in New York. Right?It’s easy for me to say all this. After all, Dr. Keller and I aren’t in the same church. But we are both Presbyterians.
Que sera sera.
LikeLike
DGH: “So how do we judge the relative influence of pastors like Tim Keller, Rick Warren, Pope Francis, and David Robertson?”
We simply shouldn’t try (if you mean eternally significant influence, anyway): “Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.” ~ I Cor. 4:5, taken in context of Chapter 3
The key is learning how to ignore those who ignore this verse, both in the church and in the media.
LikeLike
Warren is wrong about the First Amendment being the first amendment because it is so foundational. It was originally proposed as the Third Amendment, but the first two were not ratified. http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/usconstitution/a/The-Original-Bill-Of-Rights-Had-12-Amendments.htm
In fairness to Warren, all sorts of people say the same kind of thing.
LikeLike
AB, sorry, but Warren is more influential than Keller. Time magazine, moderating a presidential debate, praying at the president’s inauguration.
LikeLike
Chris,
I think we can do more than that. Let’s be biblical: “Woe to you when everyone speaks well of you, for that is how their ancestors treated the false prophets.” (Luke 6:26)
LikeLike
JP, Warren doesn’t have a Secretary of State.
LikeLike
Darryl, I’ll agree with that, just as Osteen and Bergoglio, trump Rick.
If the ability to influence was a Godly trait, I almost might respect these men, including Dr. Keller, for that ability to do so. Just like I would respect Oprah. Thankfully, the measure by which we are to be judged is not what men think of us. There are too many places that a google search would yield, in this regard.
Anyway, it’s a good post, and I too have problems with Keller, and I think we should rightly point out those places we feel his theology strays from standard Xtian orthodoxy. As you know, I am very appreciative of your work, and hesitate to drop bible verses. But what are friends for (emoticon)?
LikeLike
Oh, you beat me to the punchline, I now see. I’d somehow link to my golf article about how theology debate online does and does not matter, but your filters disallow. Just don’t become too influential, or they’ll be writing, Engaging Hart. I’ll be looking for golfers, yo.
LikeLike
Darryl,
I have read many of your posts and am interested in reading some of your books. I come as a person in my late twenties having grown up in the south in a fundamentalist ‘no-creed but the Bible’ church. Over five years ago I became a presbyterian after becoming convinced that the church needed a confession. I currently belong to an OPC church. I admit that early on Tim Keller books (‘Counterfeit God’s’ in particular) helped me learn about idolatry of the heart. But I recognize I idolize pastors (i.e. Tim Keller) as well. I have read your critique of Keller in ‘Engaging With Keller’, but I come as someone unfamiliar with the ‘Old School’ vs ‘New School’ debate. Where would you direct me to learn more about these differences? Also, how should presbyterian pastors (OP and PCA in particular) relate to the culture and other church denominations? I think the answer to these questions are largely a matter of ecclesiology.
Thanks,
Ryan
LikeLike
Old Side vs. New Side? I don’t like promoting free stuff, but hey – anything for a fellow OPC brother. Check out chapter 3. As for ecclesiology, the presbytery of Northern California and Nevada dealt with this in 2009, you can find the conference on our website, under the audio section.
Peace, Ryan.
LikeLike
RH, Self-serving alert. If you obtain a copy of Seeking a Better Country (by Hart/Muether), you should find instruction on Old School/New School matters. If you want to see how the OPC related to the culture and other denominations (as one example of how Reformed churches behave), you may want to pick up Between The Times: The OPC in Transition (Hart).
If you want to email me to chat off-line, you should be able to find an address that goes to me on-line.
LikeLike
The Dude even has a contact link at the top of his webpage. I say everyone reading this comment box go test it and flood his e-mail with a million “test” messages. That’ll teach him to be so nice to us plebes!
LikeLike
^^^ joke ^^^
But learning how to make a website is actually kinda fun (the link above was to my latest incarnation).
Done self promoting, here is the real contact link. Just a bit of fun, over here. I’ll be
golfingreading..LikeLike
Thanks guys! I’ll get back after reading Seeking a Better Country. I imagine I will have some more specific questions then.
LikeLike
I haven’t read it, so I should look into it too, Ryan.
I was exposed to Carl Trueman before I found our host here. There’s lots of good stuff to read, on and off line, if you know where to find it. I also come from fundie land, but have my wife to blame for my reformed convictions (she was raised in it). My older church friends have always told me I married well. Any questions, you know where we loiter.
LikeLike
I can vouch for the assertion that “Seeking a Better Country” is a great place to learn about the Old School/New School (and Old Side/New Side) controversies within Presbyterianism. If you read it you will develop a framework by which to process debates which continue on today.
Let’s just say the Oldies are always back on their heels and the Newbies are always on the offensive. It’s just the way of the world and of human nature. The Oldies are right, though.
LikeLike