It was Obama’s religious outreach director, Joshua Dubois, who first mentioned Warren as a choice for the inaugural invocation. Warren and Obama spoke and prayed together about it. When Warren had invited Obama to speak at a California conference two years ago for World AIDS Day, he was harshly criticized by evangelical Christians because of Obama’s position on abortion rights. During last year’s campaign, when Warren conducted his compassion forum at Saddleback, he was criticized by the right for giving Obama that platform. Although both have taken heat from their constituencies for this decision, Obama felt closer to him than to any other minister. After the firestorm erupted, Obama reportedly called Warren and told him that he loved him and that Warren had his full support. David Axelrod, a senior adviser to Obama, also gave the choice his blessing.
And Obama’s move is already yielding results: Warren has taken down the anti-gay material from his Web site and has essentially come out in favor of civil unions. Obama has pledged to rescind the unpopular “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule imposed on gays in the military. Bishop Robinson, who told me that Warren’s view of “people like me and my relationships is pretty horrific,” nonetheless was invited to give the invocation at Sunday’s concert at the Lincoln Memorial and has asked to meet with Warren. He acknowledged that Obama had included “all voices” in the inauguration and added, “No one had a bigger tent than Jesus.”
In the end, it seems that Obama’s choice was brilliant — good for gays, good for the country and good for him. Who knows? Perhaps in a few years, Pastor Rick Warren will have another epiphany . . . and may eventually be officiating at same-sex wedding ceremonies.
I don’t usually find much to agree with in what Sally Quinn writes, but on the matter of what Rick Warren will be doing in a few years, I think she and I have found common ground. My only objection is that it probably won’t take years for Warren to get rolled by the MTV culture on this one.
I’m feeling a bit queasy after reading this.
That “going wobbly” affliction strikes again?
Upon the occasion of the swearing in of a man in which all liberal virtues unite, and who replaces the crudest of villians – to whom, in the headiness of a moment wherein there is such superfluity of grace as to spare, even a kind word may be directed – it is not unknown for enthusiasms to boil over and the better angels to take perhaps excessive flight. No doubt at such a time, the ardent reveler may see the whole of humanity converging in a state of bliss – for surely the heavens have opened and even the vilest cannot but be transported by the descending balm. And so the blind are given sight and the lame walk and in the purple effluvia the heart of stone is melted. Will it be so on the next gray dawn? Perhaps not, but then how can such ardor give thought to such things? Surely there will be a Pro-Life March to stain the grounds of Inauguration Day’s elysium, but even then may not the fervid apostle hope that the aura may linger? Even so obtuse a misanthrop as Pastor Warren may appear to the rapturous eye incapable of indifference. The glow of perfection will surely enflame the blackest of hearts.
Well, maybe not. Perhaps we should give Ms. Quinn her day and speak little of it on the morrow. Methinks that Pastor Warren is perhaps a more level-headed Christian than either supporter or critic claims. And maybe it’s not so bad a thing that even LA Times columnists are capable of noticing the Christians – including Christians who disagree with them – are not utterly bereft of charity. Indeed Hope remains, and the virtue will surely outlive its present misuse. One may indeed Hope.
I have much respect for Warren – he did speak at the Anglican “Hope and a Future Conference in Pittsburgh,” but the warning of an old rector is ringing in my ears “beware when the church is popular…are they preaching the Gospel?”
He needs a ‘Nathan’ to whisper God’s words into his ear, reminding him of his duty to God first.
If any of you bothered to listent to the prayer he PRAYED, at the inaugural, you’d realize he is NOT evolving..
Grannie Gloria
Post-moderns (and I do not use that term pejoratively as some conservative do automatically) regularly employ the term “hegemony”. Language can be used to create an implied hegemony. Here the language is “evolution”. Quinn lets us know that Warren is (not her word but a cognate thereof) “evolving”.
When Warren moves in a direction favored by Quinn and those of similar stripe – he is blessed with the term “evolve/evolution”. And the assumption which Quinn states explicitly! is that eventually Warren will change his views on same-sex relations. “Evolution” you see.
(And if you do not move in her direction you are not “evolving”. Which means you are… what? Stagnating? Devolving? Regressing?)
I find it fascinating how many on the Left find it so difficult to understand how a person with evangelical theological convictions can… oh… you know… be a nice guy who listens to other people and is willing to get along with those who do not share his convictions.
Why is this so shocking? And why must they interpret this as “evolving”?
Smash the imperialistic and marginalizing linguistic hegemony of the Left! (with tongue slightly in cheek)
Huh?
#7, the comments #1-6 were posted before Warren delivered the prayer.