It is now just over 7 hours since the death of the Reverend Jerry Falwell. While I certainly am not capable of offering anything like a eulogy for this man, I can’t help but feel something like a twinge of … disappointment? Relief? Hope? Not too many people can stir up the kinds of mixed emotions that I suspect the news of Falwell’s passing will awaken in thousands, perhaps millions, of Americans.
The fact is that today the United States lost one of its most controversial and yet influential figures of recent history. The Thomas Road Baptist church lost its founder, shepherd, and senior pastor. Liberty University lost its founder and president. The remnants of the Moral Majority lost its founder, and many in the Religious Right looked to Falwell for moral guidance in developing a Christian response to politics with some clout. Regardless of what we think–thought–of Falwell’s ideas and of the type of leadership he represented, it is still true that American politics and its relationship to the churches was transformed, perhaps permanently. Whatever the state of affairs vis a vis the separation of the State and the Church (by which I only mean Institutional Religion, not simply Christian churches), that relationship is not likely to ever be the same. History will help us decide whether or not that is a good thing.
I myself owe a considerable debt to Jerry Falwell, although he never knew it. His deeply offensive comments about Muhammad and of those who practice alternative lifestyles provoked in me such anger, not simply over his remarks, but over the fact that his comments were likely to be taken as representative of all Christians, that I decided that I could not sit back while Christianity went on an offensive of hate and intolerance to those “not us.” For me, that entailed returning to school, first to seminary and ultimately on for my doctorate in Religion.
And despite the fact that Rev. Falwell’s beliefs did not speak for many, or even most, of those who profess to be Christians (including myself, obviously), I have to admit that he had the stones to actually believe in something and he believed that he was right. There was simply no room for gray areas or wishywashiness in Falwell’s psyche or his religious belief system. I think that he was dead wrong on a lot. So did a lot of people. But it is easy to find critics. It’s not so easy, I’m discovering, to find churchgoers who believe in anything other than Falwell’s “wrongness,” but they nothing to replace that wrong with. It was easy to make Falwell the scapegoat for intransigent, stubborn, judgmental fundamentalism across the Christian board. But the work of putting together something (an alternative “Christian” worldview, perhaps?) to replace the legend that passed today is something else altogether. I am hopeful that this can still be done, despite the fact that there are plenty of other Jerry Falwells that are more than ready to carry on his vision. “Fundy-bashing” is in vogue, but the act of building and planting something that we believe in, other than the wrong-headedness of “them,” has barely begun. Perhaps with Rev. Falwell’s passing, we can get past some of the vilification and reach out to each other for reconciliation. I guess that may be asking too much, but part of being hopeful is having hope even in the absence of much optimism.
Brother Falwell, I’ll meet you on / God’s Golden Shores.
15 May 2007 at 8:21 pm
I grew up liberal – liberal theology, liberal politics. I learned from older liberal people in my family and church and school to fear fundamentalists and evangelicals and conservatives – without ever really knowing any fundamentalists or evangelicals or conservatives. What I learned is a prejudice. I found the most acute prejudice against fundamentalists, evangelicals and conservatives at the liberal protestant seminary I attended, where most faculty and students described themselves as radicals, where radical feminist and liberation theologies and politics were professed and all others were anathema.
Seminary had an effect on me similar to the effect that Jerry Falwell had on you – it repulsed me. The hatred and acute prejudice I encountered there repulsed me. Nevertheless, my theology remains liberal. It is a habit that I am not able to break. As much as I love the Bible, I am a child more of the enlightenment than of the Bible or tradition. I am more at home at a university than in a church.
At the seminary most of the students had grown up evangelical or fundamentalist and left it because they felt oppressed. They morally objected to such religion. They hated it more than the liberals I grew up among feared it. They sought refuge in the churches that liberals had made.
I don’t hate my roots. I don’t morally object to them. I was not oppressed. I do think that my roots have left me searching for meaning and skeptical that meaning exists. That is not comfortable, but it is not an oppression.
The people who taught me the prejudice towards fundamentalists and evangelicals did not really believe much in or about God, except perhaps that if there is a God that God is surely kind and merciful. They stopped going to church long ago. They took their mission into the world. They tried to build a better world for the sake of their children, a world that surely a kind and merciful God would build and bless, if there was a God.
I hope your project (the alternative world view) is successful. I will certainly be interested to read about it. But the truth is, I doubt that it is possible, even though I wish it would be. I am afraid that Yeats is right, in the Second Coming: “The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
15 May 2007 at 8:44 pm
Ken, that’s so beautifully skeptical that I do believe I see a shred of hope in there!
15 May 2007 at 8:53 pm
At least to me, liberalism in its extreme – in either religion or politics – eliminates one of its core principles: tolerance. So it becomes just as bad as the far other extreme. Both extremes will build for itself a tiny box of “comfort zone”, unwilling to look outside for long enough to get by the criticism to see potential benefits.
16 May 2007 at 8:01 am
I’m afraid your post heading is all wrong, my friend. The Legend will live on, mark my words.
16 May 2007 at 9:04 am
Likely to grow, for sure.
16 May 2007 at 11:23 am
What he set in motion can only self-destruct. I don’t think there’s much that can stop it aside from an implosion.
16 May 2007 at 11:24 am
Of course, that’s mere literary hyperbole…
14 September 2007 at 5:57 pm
Falwell will be always a perfect subject to mock on.