The final speaker in the 2005 January Series was also the best received. Fleming Rutledge, an Episcopalian Priest from New York with one of those genteel southern accents I’d only previously heard in movies, took on the most politically charged issue in modern America and did so impressively.

As she began to laud evangelicalism while critiquing theological liberalism I was rather concerned. In the context of a series which has had a clear conservative bent and a talk entitled “Christian Right, Christian Left: The Polarized American Religious Scene” the danger of an hour on the merits of legalistic theology was very apparent. Thankfully, that apprehension was quickly subdued as it became clear that Rutledge was not interested in tight definitions but was looking for theology that surpasses the narrow confines in which modernist liberalism and conservative evangelicalism both languish.

Noting the near-omnipresence of Jim Wallis in the popular media over recent weeks, Rutledge urged those on the “Christian left” to follow Wallis’ lead in being explicit about their engagement of faith and politics and declared that she was keen to try and engage the “Christian right” in dialogue. She talked of the dangers of a church that makes no public comment on the fact that a man recently jailed for his leading role in the Abu Ghraib abuses was a committed member of his local church, of the need to be humble in the wake of disasters such as the recent tsunami, and the need to be radically inclusive.

Rutledge has clearly thought deeply about the much-discussed clash of civilisations, and the forecast confrontation between Islam and Christianity in both the global north and south. She called for a faith that in its inclusivity, its respect for human life and its determination to be good news, did not enter any such confrontation as a belligerent party. At the same time, she didn’t hold back from pointing fingers, most notably at Dick Cheney for his many abuses of power. The talk clearly embodied the bold assertions she was making.

It is easy to be cynical about the possibility for reclaiming the name of Christian in America. As the voices of Richard Land, Jerry Falwell and James Dobson continue to ring loud, clear, and increasingly insanely, it is tempting to simply search for other battles. Despite Rutledge’s words I very much doubt that serious engagement can take place between evangelicals who remember the root of their label and the figureheads of the “christian right.” Perhaps if figures like Wallis and Rutledge continue speaking clearly there is some chance that they could chip away at the support for these mavericks. Or perhaps that’s just the memory of the standing ovation talking?

Tags: CalvinCollege religion politics usa jamesdobson

Howard French‘s penultimate January Series lecture couldn’t have been more different than that which preceded it. Where Frank Deford offered light-hearted stories, French dug deep into the issues facing Africa and its portrayal in the West. Where Deford had a light, informal stream-of-consciousness approach, French read from a script in a manner that was often hard to follow, but rewarded careful attention.

French’s style was hard to follow. A Senior Writer for the New York Times, he demonstrated very clearly the skill with prose and clear grasp of critical issues that won him that position but was much more impressive when questioning took him away from his script. Nevertheless, his topic was a vital one and I sincerely hope he made the impact it deserved.

Probably the closest thing to a left-leaning speaker the series has thus far presented (he spoke in the wake of Frederica Mathewes Green‘s naive call for single-issue voting on NPR this morning) French highlighted hypocrisies in Western approaches to Africa and was particularly impressive when making an impassioned response to a question as to whether African problems aren’t Europe’s responsibility rather than America’s. His two-pronged argument that America was complicit in imperialism even if not an imperial power, and that anyone who believes in humanity has a responsibility to care for a continent facing so many trials, received a strong round of applause. Personally I bristled at his positive casting of US involvement in Latin American politics, another area where the US government has not lived up to its freedom rhetoric, but I suspect given more time he might not have made that generalisation.

French was also good at making clear that we must look beyond the headlines to see what is happening in Africa beyond the crises. He cited the growth of democracy in Mali as one positive sign neglected by the press, as well as similar moves in a number of other countries. As a significant player in the media he was critiquing, he didn’t entirely own the problem but encouraged his audience to hold the media to a higher standard in its coverage of Africa.

The talk was clearly rushed and didn’t provide the clarity of thought on how we should respond that might be hoped for. French’s talk of the need for reform of international trading practices fell on receptive ears here, but it would have been good to hear more on how we could enact change there, and for all the use of the word ‘debt’ and criticism of the lending practices of the richest nations in past decades, too little was made of the ongoing debt crisis. Nevertheless, another interesting contribution that I hope fosters further debate.

Tags: Africa Debt Trade Mali