The Christian Right in the United States - Origin, Structure, and Political Activism

i

Contents

1  Introduction  1

1.1  Structure and Goals of this Thesis  2

1.2  The Area of Focus and the Structure  2

1.3  Survey of Existing Literature  3

2  An Introduction to Evangelical Protestantism  4

2.1  Evangelical Denominations  7

2.1.1  Fundamentalism  7

2.1.2  µ ODVVLFDO RU1 HR-Evangelicalism  8

2.1.3  Pentecostalism and Charismatics  9

2.1.4  Conclusion  10

2.1.5  Analysis of the Socio-Demographic Details of Evangelicals  12

3  Evangelicals and Politics  14

3.1  Religious Reasons for Political Abstinence  14

3.2  The 1920s Sporadic Activism, Followed by Retreat  14

3.3  The Fundamentalist Comeback of the 1950s  16

3.3.1  Anticommunism  16

3.3.2  Further Organizations of the 1950s  17

3.4  The Height of Liberalism and its Consequences for Evangelicals  18

3.5  20 7 KH1 HZ5 LJKW V)RUPDWLRQ  

3.6  The Creation of the New Christian Right  21

3.6.1  Targeting Conservative Evangelicals  22

4  The First Generation of Organizations  24

4.1  The Moral Majority  24

4.2  Other Organizations of the 1980s  26

ii

4.2.1  Religious Roundtable  27

4.2.2  Christian Voice  27

4.2.3  American Coalition for Traditional Values  28

4.3  Fundraising  29

4.4  Summary: The Christian Right of the 1980s  30

4.5  30 7 KH)LUVW:DYH V'RZQIDOO  

5  Pat Robertson Bringing Charismatics and Pentecostals into Politics  32

5.1  33 3 DW5 REHUWVRQ V3 UHVLGHQWLDO DPSDLJQ  

5.2  Conclusion 7 KH DPSDLJQ V,PSDFW  36

6  The Second Generation The Christian Right in the 1990s  36

6.1  Christian Coalition  37

6.1.1  Ralph Reed  37

6.1.2  The launching of Christian Coalition  38

6.1.3  Membership and its Structure  42

6.1.4  Funding Finances  45

6.1.5  The Christian Coalition and the GOP  46

6.1.6  KULVWLDQ RDOLWLRQ VFRQIOLFWZLWKWKH)( DQGWKH,56  47

6.2  Focus on the Family  48

6.3  Family Research Council  48

6.4  Concerned Women for America  51

6.4.1  Strategy Pioneering in Juridical Action  52

6.4.2  Structure and Organization  53

6.4.3  Funding  54

6.4.4  Membership  54

6.5  Eagle Forum  55

7  56 7 KH6 HFRQG HQHUDWLRQ V6 WUDWHJLHV  

7.1  A Transformation of Strategy  56

iii

7.2  Focusing on legal action  57

7.3  Juridical Organizations of the Christian Right  58

7.3.1  American Center for Law and Justice  58

7.3.2  Rutherford Institute  59

8  Strategies Issues  60

8.1  Homosexuality  60

8.2  Foreign Policy  62

9  The Development of Evangelical Party Affiliation  64

9.1  From Democrat to Republican  64

9.2  Infiltrating the GOP  65

9.2.1  Gaining Control at the Local Level  67

9.2.2  Conflicts between established Republicans and Christian  

  69  

  Right Newcomers  

9.2.3  Premises for Evangelical Involvement  70

10  Conclusion  70

10.1  What they really want: the ultimate goals of the Christian Right  70

10.2  Has the Christian Right been successful so far?  72

10.3  Looking Ahead A Personal Forecast  73

11  Works Cited  74

11.1  Primary Sources  74

11.1.1  Publications of the Christian Right  74

11.2  Secondary Sources  76

11.2.1  Monographies and Collected Editions  76

11.2.2  Newspaper Articles  79

11.2.3  Articles from Periodicals  81

11.2.4  Unpublished Articles  82

11.2.5  Miscellaneous Internet-based Sources  82

iv

11.2.6  E-Mail Correspondence  82

12  Appendix  

12.1  Websites  

  List of Illustrations  

  Figure 1 : White Evangelical Religious Traditions  12

  )LJXUH7 KH KULVWLDQ RDOLWLRQ VMembership and Budget  43

0  DS7 KH KULVWLDQ5 LJKW V,QIOXHQFHLQ5 HSXEOLFDQ6 WDWH3 DUWLHV  68

1

1. Introduction

This thesis will address the political movement of the Christian Right (see chapter 3.6 on why this term is most apt), one of the most controversial movements in the American political system. Clyde Wilcox fittingly summarized the amplitude of views about the Christian Right:

³At their most extreme, these divergent views of the Christian Right paint a picture of stalwart Christians battling satanic forces for the soul of America or of neo-Nazi storm troopers rounding up homosexuals or roasting marshmallows in the flames from the books they have culled from the public library.´ 1

Its critics have accused it of trying to establish a theocracy in the United States, ² of trying to strip homosexuals of their civil rights, ³ and called it fascist, ⁴ to name but a few allegations. ⁵ Leaders of the Christian Right, on the other hand, have harshly attacked those they made out as advocates RI³VHFXODUKXPDQLVP´ ⁶ have accused them of anti-Christian bigotry, ⁷ and have repeatedly employed extreme rhetoric when addressing their (political) adversaries. ⁸ Within about twenty-five years, the movement developed from almost complete political abstinence into a highly organized political force.

The subject is appealing for research for several reasons: firstly, it is a good example of how vivid and influential religion and religiously motivated political action still are, in spite of the secularization theory widely adhered to in the respective period of time. It is also still current, as there has been some fluctuation in terms of activity and degree of organization, but so far the Christian Right has not ceased to exist.

¹ Wilcox, Clyde. Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996. 95.

² Boston, Robert. The Most Dangerous Man in America?: Pat Robertson and the Rise of the Christian Coalition. Amherst (NY): Prometheus Books, 1996. 161.

³ Wilcox, Clyde. Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 93.

⁴ Brocker, Manfred. Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung: Die christliche Rechte im politischen System der USA. Frankfurt a.M.: Campus Verlag, 2004. 13.

⁵ Compare Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 13-14.

⁶ Falwell apologizes to gays, feminists, lesbians. Ed. CNN.com. 2001. 30 Mar. 2008. .

⁷ Boston 161.

⁸ "Robertson Letter Attacks Feminists". New York Times. 26.8.1992. 30 Mar. 2008.

For examples of anti-homosexual rhetoric, see also: Diamond, Sara. Not by Politics Alone: The Enduring Influence of the Christian Right. New York, London: The Guilford Press, 1998. 156-172.

2

1.1 Structure and Goals of this Thesis

The goal of the thesis is to explore the emergence of the movement, to portrait the developments that brought theologically conservative Protestants (Evangelicals) ± from isolation and retreat into a subculture ± to active and organized political involvement. Due to WKHWRSLF¶VFRPSOH[LW\DQGWKHLQGLVSHQVDEOHUDWKHUH[WHQVLYHLQWURGXFWLRQWR(YDQJHOLFDOLVP a focus has to be set: instead of developing a complete survey of the movement, its origins and its time of prosperity will be explored in detail, including particularly descriptions of the organizations7KLVPHDQVWKDWWKH&KULVWLDQ5LJKW¶VDFWLYLW\LQWKHFXUUHQWGHFDGHwill not be analyzed as thoroughly, for two UHDVRQV )LUVWO\ *HRUJH : %XVK¶V SUHVLGHQF\ DQG KLV DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ¶V FRQQHFWLRQV DQG UHODWLRQV WR WKH &KULVWLDQ 5LJKW, offer more additional material than what could be included here. Secondly, the research available so far for the period from 2000 on offers not nearly as much sources and comprehensive works as there are available for the previous decades (as explained in the survey of existing literature). Therefore, references to those years will only be made selectively, as far as appropriate and possible. The central questions to be answered are linked to the controversy surrounding the movement: (1) Has the Christian Right been trying to accomplish what its critics fear, a theocracy, and a Christian nation in which there would be no place for dissenters?

(2) Is the Christian Right a legitimate movement operating within the frame of the political system, or is it set out to ultimately change that system?

Resulting from those questions is the evaluation of WKH&KULVWLDQ5LJKW¶VSHUIRUPDQFHVRIDU (regardless of what can be concluded to answer the above questions): (3) Which of its goals have been achieved, what balance can be drawn?

1.2 The Area of Focus and the Structure

The key to understanding the individual and collective motivation of Christian Right activists is their faith, as well as the characteristics of the various subgroups of Evangelicalism. Therefore, chapter two will provide an introduction to American Evangelicalism: its development, theological basis, and various currents will be treated. Chapter three will then deal with the Evangelicals¶ZD\LQWRSROLWLFVIURPWKHILUVWLQYROYHPHQWLQWKHVYLDWKH retreat from the public, political abstinence, and the sporadic engagement in the 1950s, until the emergence of the New Christian Right at the end of the 1970s. The thesis will be focused on the developments of the late 1970s through the end of the 1990s, as this period covers the formation of the movement and its organization, and the most important events that triggered

3

it. In order to describe and explain the activity of the various groups and actors, a detailed survey of the main organizations, their activity, strategy, membership, and performance will be provided (chapter four). Following that, the transition from the first wave of Christian Right activity to the second one will be described in chapter five, including the presidential campaign of Pat Robertson in between. The second half of the main part in chapter 6 will deal with the organizations and activities of the 1990s, it will also address the important differences between the first and second generation of organizations. Subsequently, the newly adapted strategies and approaches the Christian Right employed in the second decade of its existence will be examined, including the increasingly intense connection with the Republican Party, and the juridical strategy (chapters seven and eight). Finally, a conclusion will be drawn in chapter nine to sXPPDUL]H WKH &KULVWLDQ 5LJKW¶V DFWLYLVP WR DQVZHU WKH questions brought up in the introduction, and to evaluate the influence, successes, and failures the Christian Right has had so far.

1.3 Survey of Existing Literature

Works on Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism are numerous, both specialized theological and sociological studies (Marsden 2006, Dayton/Johnston 1998, Hochgeschwender 2007, Smith 2000, Hunter 1983, Pieh 1998), and briefer introductions in works concerned primarily with Evangelicalism as a political phenomenon (Wilcox 1992; 1996, Brocker 2004, Bruce 2000) exist. The latter works (generally those by political scientists) usually also include studies about socio-demographic details of Evangelicals.

$VIDUDVWKLVZRUN¶VPDLQSDUWWKHHPHUJHQce of the Christian Right, its triggers, structure, and political activity are concerned, the existing literature provides a variety of studies, both specialized and more general. Broad studies about the Christian Right include Brocker 2004, Wilcox 1992; 1996, Brown 2002, Bruce 1990; 1995, Green/Guth/Smidt/Kellstedt 1996, Watson 1997, Oldfield 1997, and Liebman/Wuthnow 1983. More specialized works (e.g. about single organizations or aspects of the topic) are numerous. A great deal of attention has been devoted to Evangelicals in election studies (focusing on religion as an influence), and in VWXGLHVFRQFHUQHGZLWKWKH&KULVWLDQ5LJKW¶VFDPSDLJQDFWLYLWLHVDV%URFNHUKDVQRWHG 9

As already mentioned above, the majority of available literature (especially the comprehensive studies about the Christian Right) focuses on the time before 2000, there

⁹ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 32.

4

seems to be no newer study dealing with the developments in the Christian Right during the last years. A reference handbook containing short articles on a wide variety of issues related to political involvement of conservative Christians provides some newer research (Utter/True 2004).

2. An Introduction to Evangelical Protestantism

This chapter will try to shed light on the phenomenon of Evangelicalism in order to provide a basis for an understanding of this part of Protestantism. The approach taken here will first provide the theological definition of Evangelicalism, as well as a brief survey of its historical development, and finally an introduction into the main branches of Evangelicalism. Defining Evangelicalism is by no means an easy task; the existing literature holds a multitude of different approaches and explanations, ¹⁰ making it difficult to find a uniform definition. 'RQDOG 'D\WRQ DUJXHV³WKDWWKHFDWHJRU\ µHYDQJHOLFDO¶KDVORVWZKDWHYHUXVHIXOQHVVLWRQFH PLJKWKDYHKDG´ ¹¹ due to the equivocality of the term and the misunderstandings that might arise from it; Weber ¹² and Smith ¹³ hold similar views. Despite these problems of definition, the term will be used here, in the sense of EYDQJHOLFDOLVP DV ³DQ H[WHQGHG IDPLO\´ ¹⁴ of subgroups, which will be introduced in the following (at least those relevant to the topic).

Evangelicalism predominantly is a Protestant phenomenon (although evangelical Catholics and even Jews exist), ¹⁵ and it is important to note that the term here will be used to refer to all those denominational and non-denominational branches of Protestantism that have developed out of mainstream Protestantism in the course of the Second Great Awakening (ca. 1800-

¹⁰ Seefor instance Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung; Dayton/Johnston; Hochgeschwender; and Smith, American Evangelicalism: Embattled and Thriving.

¹¹ Dayton, Donald W. "Some Doubts about the Usefulness of the Category "Evangelical"". The Variety of American Evangelicalism. Eds. Donald W. Dayton, and Robert K. Johnston. Eugene (OR), Pasadena: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1997. 245±251. 245.

¹² Weber, Timothy P. "Premillenialism and the Branches of Evangelicalism". The Variety of American Evangelicalism. Ed. Donald W. Dayton, and Robert K. Johnston. Eugene (OR), Pasadena: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1997. 5±21. 13.

¹³ Smith, Christian. Christian America?: What Evangelicals Really Want. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000.

15.

¹⁴ Johnston, Robert K. "American Evangelicalism: An Extended Family". The Variety of American Evangelicalism. Eds. Donald W. Dayton, and Robert K. Johnston. Eugene (OR), Pasadena: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1997. 252±269. 252.

¹⁵ Hunter, James Davison. American Evangelicalism: Conservative Religion and the Quandary of Modernity. New Brunswick (NJ): Rutgers University Press, 1983. 139-140.

5

1840, ¹⁶ the first one had taken place around 1740 ¹⁷ ). ¹⁸ Evangelicalism first and foremost describes nothing more than a Christian piety LQ OLQH ZLWK WKH *RVSHO¶V DXWKority, but the WHUP¶V PHDQLQJ KDV VKLIWHG VRPHZKDW DQG QRZ UHIHUV WR WKH VHULHV RI DZDNHQLQJV (from within mainline Protestantism, which refers to established denominations, like Presbyterianism, Methodism, Baptism, and others), ¹⁹ in the course of which a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and the acceptance of Christ as a messianic Redeemer were emphasized. ²⁰ The experience of accepting Jesus Christ as Redeemer is one collective characteristic shared by all (white) EvangelicalVLWLVFRPPRQO\NQRZQDV³EHLQJERUQDJDLQ´ (although not all evangelical churches use this term, which might make this criterion too narrow). ²¹ Basically, these criteria (following Hunter) ²² can be used to identify Evangelicals:

1. Accepting the Bible as inerrant and the word of God

2. 7KHEHOLHILQ-HVXV&KULVW¶VGLYLQLW\

3. The Belief WKDW -HVXV &KULVW¶V OLIH GHDWK DQG UHVXUUHFWLRQ PDNH UHGHPSWLRQ RI WKH soul possible

Even at this basic point, various definitions of what Evangelicals are defined by can be found LQOLWHUDWXUHDVLPLODUFKDUDFWHUL]DWLRQZKLFKLVVOLJKWO\GLIIHUHQWIRUP+XQWHU¶VFRQVLVWLQJ of four points can be found elsewhere, ²³ which gives an idea of how difficult it is to find a uniform definition. In the following, an important aspect (which would have consequences concerning the EvangelicalV¶ relation to politics) of Evangelicalism will be explored: millennialism. A great majority of evangelical preachers of the eighteenth and nineteenth century adhered to postmillennialism and believed that the second coming of Christ was imminent (derived from the Revelation to John, 20, 1-15). ²⁴ The opposite of postmillennialism is premillennianism, to which only one evangelical denomination of the

¹⁶ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 38.

¹⁷ Hochgeschwender 86.

¹⁸ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 38; Hochgeschwender 23-24.

¹⁹ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 61.

²⁰ Hochgeschwender 23.

²¹ Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 45; and Wilcox, *RG¶V:DUULRUV 43.

²² Hunter 7.

²³ Kellstedt, Lyman A., et al. "The Puzzle of Evangelical Protestantism: Core, Periphery, and Political Behavior". Religion and the Culture Wars: Dispatches from the Front. Eds. John C. Green, James L. Guth, Corwin E. Smidt, and Lyman A. Kellstedt. Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield, 1996. 240-266. 244.

²⁴ Hochgeschwender 96.

6

early nineteenth century adhered, the Millerites. The difference between both interpretations is that

³)RU WKH SRVWPLOOHQQLDOLVWV &KULVW ZRXld come after the millennium, a thousand-year period of perfect peace and tranquility. In contrast, the premillennialists believed that Christ would return prior to the PLOOHQQLXPDQGGHIHDWWKH$QWLFKULVWLQDPDMRUEDWWOH´ 25

While premillennialists believe in a literal interpretation of the Revelation to John (which reads that Christ will return to earth in an act of mercy, and establish the millennium ± as described above ± without requiring human engagement), ²⁶ postmillennialists emphasize the necessity of becoming involved in order to facilitate the return of Christ, through improving the world and establishing the millennium themselves. ²⁷ This meant that only postmillennialists ZRXOG VHH DQ\ VHQVH LQ WU\LQJ WR LPSURYH WKH ZRUOG¶V VLWXDWLRQ DV premillennialists would not see much sense in trying to improve a world bound to be ended by the Second Coming shortly; premillenianism led to a certain other-worldliness and isolationism, disencouraging its adherents from any sort of social movement. ²⁸ Besides these differences, both interpretations did have much in common prior to the American Civil War. ²⁹ From the 1870s on, premillenianism spread and became more accepted among Evangelicals, and eventually provided the basis for dispensational premillenianism, a doctrine opposed to the theological liberalism among Evangelicals in the post-Civil-War period of time. ³⁰ Dispensational premillennianism, in short, is based on an interpretation of a prophecy in Daniel 9, 24-27, (see Marsden for details) ³¹ assumes that history is split into seven separate periods of time, dispensations, of which the sixth has been reached so far; the GRFWULQH ZDV EDVHG RQ -RKQ 1HOVRQ 'DUE\¶V YLHZV DQG WKHQ LQVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG E\ &, Scofield. ³² &KULVW¶V return, and thus the beginning of the millennium, was seen as

²⁵ Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 2.

²⁶ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 58, footnote 45; and Hochgeschwender 96-97.

²⁷ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 58, footnote 45; and Hochgeschwender 97.

²⁸ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 58, footnote 45; 59; and Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 2.

²⁹ Marsden, George M. Fundamentalism and American Culture. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. 51.

³⁰ Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture 51.

³¹ Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture 51; 58.

³² Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 58, footnote 46; Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture 51-55; Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 2.

7

immediate. ³³ Darby also introduced the highly controversial concept of pre-tribulational rapture: Christ would come to remove his saints from earth before the seven years of tribulation, and then return with them after that period to establish the millennium on earth. ³⁴ This doctrine was to be re-interpreted by some leading evangelists in the last third of the twentieth century, since it obstructed their attempts to mobilize Evangelicals into political action; others, like Pat Robertson, believed in the concept of a post-tribulational rapture, DIWHUZKLFK&KULVW¶VIROORZHUVZRXOGUHPDLQRQHDUWKGXULQJWKHWLPHRIWULEXODWLRQSRVVLEO\ actively participating in fighting the Antichrist ± thus, the concept encouraged political engagement. 35

Due to the limited extent of this thesis, this brief introduction into the details and developments of Evangelicalism during the nineteenth and early twentieth century will have to suffice, see Dayton/Johnston, Hochgeschwender, and Marsden for far more detailed surveys of American Protestantism and Evangelicalism.

2.1 Evangelical Denominations

2.1.1 Fundamentalism

The first large evangelical group to be introduced here is that of Fundamentalism, which developed from 1910 on, out of a theological dispute among Presbyterians: the central synod of Presbyterians in the Northern States established five authoritative dogmas for all their members. ³⁶ :KLOHWKUHHRIWKRVHPHUHO\UHSHDWHGZKDWZDVDOUHDG\FRQWDLQHGLQWKH$SRVWOHV¶ Creed, the remaining two ± absolute inerrancy of Scripture, directly originating from God, and the establishment of the historicity of the depiction of Biblical miracles as facts of belief ± were key factors for the upcoming controversy. In the following years, conservative theologians of the Princeton Theological Seminary published a series of writings called ³The Fundamentals: A Testimony of Truth´, which provided the name of the newly developed movement; it was opposed to religious liberalism, Catholicism, Mormonism, and to other religions that it saw as deviations. ³⁷ Fundamentalism comprised groups from different Protestant denominations, it was, and always remained, a rather loosely connected movement

³³ Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 2.

³⁴ Weber 9-10.

³⁵ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 60, footnote 49.

³⁶ Hochgeschwender 145.

³⁷ Hochgeschwender 146-148.

8

that did not become organized in through a central institution. ³⁸ The criteria introduced to identify Evangelicals in general do also apply to Fundamentalists; Brocker names five points ³⁹ largely congruent with those given by Hunter. Beginning with the 1930s, Fundamentalism spread to the South and Midwest, constituting the common image of the Bible Belt, dominated by this version of conservative Protestantism, despite the fact that there has always been a majority of Protestants who cannot be apportioned to Fundamentalism. 40

2.1.2 µ&ODVVLFDO¶RU1HR-Evangelicalism

Fundamentalism did not substitute Evangelicalism as such, it is merely a radical version of (YDQJHOLFDOLVP EXW WKH ³FODVVLFDO´ YHUVLRQ RI (YDQJHOLFDOLVP FRQWLQXHG WR H[LVW ,W ZDV labeled neo-Evangelicalism in 1942, in order to avoid a mix-up with Fundamentalism, which was now often equated with Evangelicalism. ⁴¹ The split between Fundamentalists and neo-Evangelicals was most visible in the creation of two organizations, the National Organization of Evangelicals (NAE), which was open to a variety of denominations and Evangelical groups; it did adhere to the core principles of Fundamentalism, but it did not demand a strict separationism, e.g. from Pentecostals (a further subgroup, see below). ⁴² In contrast, the American Council of Christian Churches (ACCC) was purely fundamentalist, much smaller than the NAE, and opposed to Pentecostalism. ⁴³ Nevertheless, Fundamentalists and neo-Evangelicals are far less different than the sharp separationism might imply, both are closely related subgroups of the same broad movement, sharing most of their doctrines ± although neo-Evangelicals accept a broader array of doctrines, e.g. variations of millennialism, while Fundamentalists are somewhat more conservative ± but differing in their attitude towards other subgroups of Evangelicalism. ⁴⁴ Neo-Evangelicals agree with Fundamentalists about the %LEOH¶VLQHUUDQF\EXWWKH\GRQRWLQVLVWRQLWVYHUEDWLPWUXWK 45

³⁸ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 62-63.

³⁹ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 62.

⁴⁰ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 62.

⁴¹ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 64.

⁴² Marsden, George M. "Fundamentalism and American Evangelicalism". The Variety of American Evangelicalism. Ed. Donald W. Dayton, and Robert K. Johnston. Eugene (OR), Pasadena: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1997. 22±35. 29.

⁴³ Marsden, George M. "Fundamentalism and American Evangelicalism", 29.

⁴⁴ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 64-65; and Marsden, "Fundamentalism and American Evangelicalism" 32-33.

⁴⁵ Wilcox, Clyde, and Carin Larson. "In den Schützengräben: Amerikanische Evangelikale und der "Kulturkampf". God Bless America: Politik und Religion in den USA. Ed. Manfred Brocker. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2005.89-108. 91.

9

2.1.3 Pentecostalism and Charismatics

Pentecostalism as a movement originated around 1900 near Topeka (KS), although it is possible that it originated six years later in an African-American mission in Los Angeles instead. Hochgeschwender gives the Apostolic Faith Gospel Mission in Los Angeles as the 3HQWHFRVWDO PRYHPHQW¶V RULJLQ LWV SUHDFKHU ZDV D IROORZHU RI &KDUOHV 3DUKDP ZKR KDG FRQWULEXWHG WR WKH PRYHPHQW¶V HPHUJHQFH LQ DERXW ⁴⁶ The most distinctive features of Pentecostalism are its belief in the gifts of the Holy Spirit, mainly glossolalia (speaking in tongues), and healing by faith. ⁴⁷ Nevertheless, the adherence to glossolalia alone cannot serve as a criterion to identify Pentecostals, as it had already existed among Mormons and Shakers ± denominations that do not have much else in common with Pentecostalism ± in the nineteenth century. ⁴⁸ As far as theological doctrine is concerned, Pentecostals share much of what FundamentalistV DGKHUH WR HJ WKH %LEOH¶V LQHUUDQF\ and the belief that personal salvation is needed. ⁴⁹ But unlike Fundamentalists, Pentecostals emphasize the role of the +RO\ 6SLULW LQ H[SHULHQFLQJ *RG¶V ZLOO WKH PRYHPHQW¶V QDPH LV GHULYHG IURP WKH GD\ RI 3HQWHFRVW ZKHQ WKH RXWSRXULQJ RI WKH +RO\ 6SLULW HQDEOHG &KULVW¶V GLVFLSOHV WR VSHDN LQ tongues) ⁵⁰ while the former group relies entirely on the study of Scripture. The concept of premillennial dispensationalism was rejected by Pentecostals, since it did not contain the possibility of miracles; ⁵¹ ³FODVVLFDO´3URWHVWDQWGRFWULQHDUJXHGWKDWWKHSRVVLELOLW\RIZRQGHUV ended with the apostolic era. ⁵² The acceptance of doctrine and tenets was one-sided: Fundamentalists (as well as others) at least rejected Pentecostalism and its practices, especially the belief in glossolalia. ⁵³ Open hostility was common, expressed both by prominent evangelists of the earlier days, such as Reuben Archer Torrey, who went to such

⁴⁶ Dayton, Donald W. "The Limits of Evangelicalism: The Pentecostal Tradition". The Variety of American Evangelicalism. Ed. Donald W. Dayton, and Robert K. Johnston. Eugene (OR), Pasadena: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1997. 36±56. 37; and Hochgeschwender 237.

⁴⁷ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 65; Hochgeschwender 238; Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 143.

⁴⁸ Dayton, "The Limits of Evangelicalism: The Pentecostal Tradition" 39.

⁴⁹ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 65; Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 143.

⁵⁰ Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 28.

⁵¹ Hochgeschwender 238.

⁵² Dayton, "The Limits of Evangelicalism: The Pentecostal Tradition" 44.

⁵³ Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 144.

10

H[WUHPHVDVWRFDOO3HQWHFRVWDOV³WKHODVWYRPLWRI6DWDQ´ ⁵⁴ and fundamentalist leaders of the late twentieth century, such as Jerry Falwell; it took until the 1980s for Fundamentalists to take a more lenient stance toward Pentecostalism. 55

A movement very closely connected with Pentecostalism is that of the Charismatics, which emerged in the 1950s, out of the Pentecostal movement; it shares its doctrine and also emphasizes a personal religious experience. ⁵⁶ The difference between the two is that Charismatics stay within their original denominations and churches (which extends this branch of Evangelicalism to Catholicism, in the form of the movement for charismatic renewal within the Catholic Church), while Pentecostals form independent churches and denominations; Pentecostalism is based on local structures. ⁵⁷ Altogether, 29 million Americans identified themselves as Charismatics in 1980, 19 million thereof belonged to Catholic or Protestant churches. ⁵⁸ As of 2007, Pentecostalism was the fastest growing denomination in the U.S. 59

2.1.4 Conclusion

The purpose of this brief introduction of the diverse branches of Evangelicalism is to provide the basis necessary to understand the circumstances of their political engagement during the twentieth century, it is therefore admissible to XVH ³HYDQJHOLFDO´ IURP KHUH RQ DV D transdenominational term embracing all denominations and movements to which the characteristics listed above fit. All of the following can be (but of course do not necessarily have to be) included LQWR WKH FDWHJRU\ ³HYDQJHOLFDO´ JLYing an idea of its transcending QDWXUH ³%DSWLVWV Methodists Presbyterians, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Charismatics, Independents, Anabaptists, Restorationists, Congregationalists, Holiness Christians, even (SLVFRSDOLDQV´ ⁶⁰ It is necessary to keep in mind that there are different approaches

⁵⁴ Cited in Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 29.

⁵⁵ Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 144-145; Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 29.

⁵⁶ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 66; Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 143-144.

⁵⁷ Hochgeschwender 26; 232.

⁵⁸ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 66-67.

⁵⁹ Hochgeschwender 232.

⁶⁰ Smith, Christian. American Evangelicalism: Embattled and Thriving. Emerson, Michael, et al. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1998. 87.

11

concerning the identification of Evangelicals employed by researchers who conducted studies including detailed accounts of the constituency. Three main operational approaches exist: (1) identification through the denomination a person belongs to, (2) identification through doctrine and religious practice, and (3) self-identification; each one of those has certain deficits, e.g. different meanings of certain terms among respondents asked how they would identify their own religious identity (see also Smith¶V view of the problem ⁶¹ ). ⁶² Since this thesis draws on many different works, it is inevitable that the single sources might have employed different methods for identifying Evangelicals, leading to a certain inconsistency. +RZHYHUWKLVLVSHUPLVVLEOHDVWKHWKHVLV¶IRFXVOLHVHOVHZKHUH

⁶¹ Smith, Christian. Christian America?: What Evangelicals Really Want. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000. 15-18.

⁶² Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 42-45.

12

2.1.5  Analysis of the Socio-Demographic Details of Evangelicals  

  This chapter will anticipate the contents of the main part, the (largely chronologic)  

  description of Evangelical involvement in politics, as it seems more convenient to explore the  

  social and demographic details of Evangelicals as a group in American society at this point,  

in  order to be able to revert to it for addressing details later on. A detailed historical approach  

  will not be necessary (nor would it be possible within acceptable limits), as it will suffice to  

  provide data for the period of time mostly relevant: the 1980s and 1990s  

  First, the proportions the subgroups introduced above make up within all Evangelicals are of  

  interest  

  Figure 1 63 :  

  Note that the percentage of Charismatics is higher than the 9 given here, as those belonging  

  to non-Protestant denominations are not included. 64 All in all, white Evangelicals constituted  

  about 25 of the total population in the U S. (1996 ), 65 Smith gives a percentage of  29

  (2000 ), 66 but apparently included Afro-Americans, making it impossible to determine if there  

  has been an increase from these two numbers alone. As African-Americans have never been a  

63  Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics  47

64  Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics  47

65  Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics  46

66  Smith, Christian America?: What Evangelicals Really Want 16  17

13

substantial part of those Evangelicals mobilized into political action by the Christian Right, ⁶⁷ they will not be included here. What is of interest here is an overview about the sociodemographic data concerning Evangelicals, in comparison to that of other denominations; furthermore, it is important to find out whether or not they generally differ (from other denominations) in their political views.

Based on the results drawn from the data of the 1988 American National Election Studies (ANES), ⁶⁸ Evangelicals predominantly come from rural areas (49%, compared to only 25% of non-evangelical whites) in the South (68% vs. 20%) and Midwest (17% vs. 31%), the age distribution of Evangelicals compared to non-Evangelicals shows only a small discrepancy. As far as education and income are concerned, Evangelicals have both a lesser degree of education (31% did not graduate high school, and 34% have at least some college education, compared to 16% and 50%) and a lower income, 35% of Evangelicals have a lower income than $15,000 p.a., and only 8% have more than $50,000 p.a., compared to 26% and 19% for non-Evangelicals; both groups have about the same percentage of blue-collar employees, but Evangelicals are somewhat more likely to identify themselves as working-class. There are also more women and housewives among Evangelicals. When it comes to religion, Evangelicals attend church more often than others, pray significantly more often (81% pray daily, compared to 44% of non-evangelical respondents), and 70% (vs. 22%) find religion very important. The data of the 1992 ANES confirms these results, although variations occur and some items are different. ⁶⁹ Evangelicals prove to be considerably more conservative as others as far as socio-moral issues are concerned, especially on abortion, civil rights of homosexuals, and the role of women in society. It is important to notice that the degree of conservatism on these issues increased ZKHQ WKH GHILQLWLRQ RI ³HYDQJHOLFDO´ ZDV VHW PRUH narrow (in terms of doctrine, denominational affiliation, and religious practice), while the number of Evangelicals included in this more narrow raster decreased. 70

⁶⁷ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 61-62, footnote 50; Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 41; see also the portrait of Christian Coalition in chapter 6.

⁶⁸ Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 46-47.

⁶⁹ Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 47-49.

⁷⁰ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 68-72.

14

3. Evangelicals and Politics

3.1 Religious Reasons for Political Abstinence

It is rather difficult to find a single point of time or incident which marked the beginning of the political involvement of Evangelicals, and it is necessary to focus on recent developments in order to be able to examine them properly within the limits of this thesis. Therefore, the main time of interest starts with the end of the 1960s and the dawn of the 1970s, as this time marks the beginning of ZKDW:LOFR[ODEHOHG³WKHWKLUGFRPLQJRIWKHIXQGDPHQWDOLVWULJKW´. ⁷¹ In the following introduction, an overview of the previous decades, from the early 20 ^th century on, will be given, since an understanding of the Evangelicals¶UHODWLRQWRSROLWLFVSULRU to the 1970s is necessary to explain the distinctiveness of their increasing involvement with politics.

3.2 The 1920s ± Sporadic Activism, Followed by Retreat

Prohibition and the teaching of evolution in public schools were two issues important enough to spark the FundamentalistV¶LQYROYHPHQWPentecostals did not become involved until much later in the twentieth century) in politics, although it is not clear why it was the evolution issue that led to an opposition of this sort. ⁷² Tarek Mitri finds an explanation in the fact that pious parents could not accept that their children were taught a theory incompatible with their belief, the conflict between evolutionists and Fundamentalists became a political one. ⁷³ Fundamentalists launched several organizations to reach their goal, such as the Bible Crusaders of America or the Defenders of the Christian Faith, to name but two. ⁷⁴ The fight against the teaching of the theory of evolution in public schools culminated in the Scopes Trial, in which the teacher Thomas Scopes was convicted of breaking a Tennessee state law prohibiting the teaching of anything in contradiction to what the bible contained on creation. The trial is remarkable for ³LWVLQWHUSUHWDWLRQDVDFRQIOLFWRIVRFLDODQGintellectual YDOXHV´ ⁷⁵ and for the fact that it was stage-managed and inspired by an ACLU announcement promising support to those willing to dispute the Tennessee law. It turned out to be a disaster

⁷¹ Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 10.

⁷² Wilcox, *RG¶VWarriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America. 2.

⁷³ Mitri, Tarek. In Gottes Namen? Religion und Politik in den USA. Frankfurt a.M.: Verlag Otto Lembeck, 2005. 41-42.

⁷⁴ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 11, footnote 1.

⁷⁵ /LQGHU'RXJODV2³6WDWHY-RKQ6FRSHV7KH0RQNH\7ULDO´University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law. N.d. 30 Mar. 2008. .

15

for Fundamentalists despite the fact that Scopes was conviFWHG VLQFH WKH GHIHQVH¶V ODZ\HU Clarence Darrow, an agnostic, managed to humiliate the prosecutor William Jennings Bryan, Fundamentalist and former presidential candidate for the Democratic Party. ⁷⁶ Michael Hochgeschwender, in contrast, does not describe the Scopes trial as a heavy defeat for FundamentalistV VLQFH WKH GHIHQVH LWVHOI VRXJKW 6FRSHV¶ FRQYLFWLRQ WR EH DEOH WR FUHDWH precedence, but their plan failed, Tennessee v. Scopes never became what the ACLU had wanted. ⁷⁷ Alcoholic beverages were made illegal and prohibition thus enacted, but this did not, as Bruce briefly describes, change society in the way Fundamentalists had endorsed, it rather led to the thriving of organized crime, demand for alcohol did not decrease as hoped for. 78

A period of retreat followed after these political campaigns, the Fundamentalists did not enjoy wide public support for their views and thus withdrew from larger political action, concentrating on ³LQVWLWXWLRQ-building and soul-VDYLQJ´. 79

Another explanation for their retreat lies in the fact that the doctrinal presupposition of premillennianism, the millennium, had not arrived (again), while the third awakening had supposed it would arrive soon, its failure to do so had taken a part of thH PRYHPHQW¶V impetus ⁸⁰ . This was also due to the change in society: the decline of the world economic crisis ± which corresponded to the premillennialists¶ SRLQW RI YLHZ DQG WKHUHIRUH ZDV QR incentive to become politically active ⁸¹ ± led to a decline of the new morality of consumerism and a reflection on values which Fundamentalism had sought to restore. Besides, liberal Protestantism, the FundamentalistV¶ PDLQ DGYHUVDU\ RQ WKH WKHRORJLFDO OHYHO YDQLVKHG DV well, which eased the cultural conflict between the two, so Fundamentalism (and Evangelicalism) partly became moot. 82

⁷⁶ Bruce, Steve. Fundamentalism. Cambridge (UK): Polity, 2000. 69.;

^{Pieh, Eleonore. Fight like David - Run like Lincoln: Die politischen Einwirkungen des protestantischen Fundamentalismus in den USA. Münster: LIT Verlag, 1998. 72. and Linder, Douglas O. 77 Hochgeschwender 160-163. 78 Bruce, Fundamentalism 69-70. 79} Bruce, Fundamentalism 69-70; and Mitri 43-44.

^{80 Hochgeschwender 163. 81 Pieh 73. 82} Hochgeschwender 163-164.

16

3.3 The Fundamentalist Comeback of the 1950s

Evangelicals had not been active in politics for almost three decades ⁸³ , but they returned to the political stage after World War II, in the 1950s. This chapter will explore why conservative Christians became actively involved in politics again, since their point of view KDGEHHQWRVHH³SROLWLFV>«@DVDQXOWLPDWHO\IXWLOHHQGHDYRU´ ⁸⁴ during their retreat from the 1930s on. ⁸⁵ A brief digression into the political and socio-cultural circumstances of those years during which a new evangelical engagement in politics began is necessary in order to be able to explain the multifarious factors which influenced both society as such and, in turn, the conservative forces aiming to alter it. Firstly, the political situation during the 1950s will be examined; secondly, the changes of relevance to the topic called forth by the thriving socio-cultural liberalization of the 1960s and early 1970s ⁸⁶ will be described.

3.3.1 Anticommunism

The emergence of a single foe image sparked another wave of organized political involvement by the Christian Right: the rise of the Soviet Union as the U.S.¶VPDLQULYDOand WKHIROORZLQJULVLQJ³IHDURIGRPHVWLFFRPPXQLVWLQIOXHQFH´ ⁸⁷ Furthermore, the Korean War had influenced American society in the same way, anticommunist sentiments were amplified, the Chinese and the Russians were adopted as new foe images. ⁸⁸ Prosecution of Soviet spies was only a part of what expanded into a system of controlling suspected communist attitudes RIIHGHUDOHPSOR\HHVDUWLVWVDQGLQWHOOHFWXDOVWKLVFXOPLQDWHGLQ6HQDWRU-RVHSK0F&DUWK\¶V radical anticommunism. ⁸⁹ On a broader scale, McCarthyism had been the manifestation of the attempt to allow as little discrepancy from the political and cultural norms of the middleclass; ⁹⁰ an attempt which stood diametrically against the slow but steady decline of social

^{83 The exact length of time varies according to the point of time at which a new engagement is seen, Oldfield (1996, P.35) names about 30 years, Pieh (1998, P. 73) names the 1950s; others, such as Bruce (2000, P. 70), see the 1970s as the beginning of a new, organized involvement; as well as Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung (2004, P. 47), who speaks of a marginal degree of politicization before the 1970s. 84 Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 34. 85 Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 33-34. 86} Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 42.

⁸⁷ Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 34.

^{88 Heideking, Jürgen, and Christof Mauch. Geschichte der USA. 5. ergänzte Auflage mit CD-ROM. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag, 2007. 303. 89 Heideking/Mauch 303-304. 90} Heideking/Mauch 304.

17

conformity and the resulting alteration of norms and values. ⁹¹ Anticommunism, however, had been a part of the Fundamentalist¶V DJHQGD VLQFH WKH end of the 1920s, and remained so throughout the following decades, it was not adopted as recently as the beginning of the 1950s. ⁹² An example of this earlier anticommunism is the split between Fundamentalists and the newer movement called neo-Evangelicalism (see chapter 2.1.2): in 1941, the American Council of Christian Churches (ACCC) had been established by Fundamentalists, its leader was a fervent anticommunist. The more moderate organization, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), whose members had the same religious set of beliefs as the Fundamentalists it tried to distinguish itself from, did not support the FundamentalistV¶ separatism, the NAE was willing to cooperate with other denominations and refrained from WKH$&&&¶Vstern anticommunism. 93

3.3.2 Further Organizations of the 1950s

There were some organizations devoted to anticommunism, which had emerged out of the $&&&¶VOHDGHUVKLSH[DPSOHV DUHWKH&KULVWLDQ $QWL-Communism Crusade, and the Church League of America. ⁹⁴ Their agenda was only somewhat broader than that of the earlier organizations of the 1920s, it now included opposition against Medicare and sex education, but all elements expanding their agenda still were embedded in their core concern, the battle against communism. ⁹⁵ The Christian Rights engagement did not find a greater audience, and WKHJURXSVYDQLVKHGDIWHU6HQDWRU0F&DUW\¶Vdownfall and the defeat of Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential campaign, but the development of infrastructure, such as Bible colleges, continued. ⁹⁶ Thus, the situation was similar to that of the 1920s: anticommunism in the extreme form (including the belief in a conspiracy) ⁹⁷ the Christian Right had adopted was no longer fashionable, and a retreat into continuing a less public engagement followed, only for different reasons than before.

⁹¹ Heideking/Mauch 304.

^{92 Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 9. 93 Wilcox, God's Warriors: The Christian Right in Twentieth-Century America 8; and Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 34. 94 Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 34. 95 Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 34-35. 96 Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 35. 97} Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 34.

18

3.4 The Height of Liberalism and its Consequences for Evangelicals

During the 1960s and 1970s, the United States experienced an era of a vast sociocultural liberalization throughout many aspects of society, driven to a large part by legal actions brought in before the Supreme Court by liberal organizations. This subsequently led to an increasingly different interpretation of the Bill of Rights: it was more and more interpreted in a way that emphasized an individualistic understanding of freedom and therefore lessened the influence of Christian concepts of morality on federal law. ⁹⁸ Naturally, the latter consequence could not be in the interest of evangelical Protestants. Moreover, the separation of church and state contained in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States ⁹⁹ was now enforced and interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States as the Jeffersonian wall of separation, which meant that prayer, as well as Bible reading in public schools, and the placement of sacral items in public spaces were declared unconstitutional. ¹⁰⁰ As UHFHQWDVLQWKHVWKHH[SDQVLRQRIWKH3OHGJHRI$OOHJLDQFHE\WKHZRUGV³>RQH QDWLRQ@XQGHUJRG´ DQGWKHFUHDWLRQRIWKHQDWLRQ¶VPRWWR³,Q*RG:H7UXVW´ ¹⁰¹ , had taken place, of course these new decisions made by the Supreme Court were greatly at odds with the former handling of references to God. This (as well as other changes yet to be addressed) startled conservative Protestants, as they could not understand how this could have happened in the country founded by Puritan settlers and as a Christian Nation. ¹⁰² A Supreme Court decision of far-reaching impact not only for conservative Christians was that of Roe v. Wade (1973), in which the Court held that

³6WDWHFULPLQDODERUWLRQODZVOLNHWKRVHLQYROYHGKHUH

that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her

⁹⁸ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 42.

⁹⁹ The respective part of the First Amendment reads as follows:

^{³&RQJUHVVVKDOOPDNHQRODZUHVSHFWLQJDQHVWDEOLVKPHQWRIUHOLJLRQRUSURKLELWLQJWKHIUHHH[HUFLVHWKHUHRI>«@´} The Bill of Rights: A Transcription. Washington, D.C.: The National Archives and Records Administration. N.d. 30 Mar. 2008.

.

^{100 Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 42. 101 Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 42. 102} Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 45.

19

pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due

Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy.´ 103

This liberalization of abortion was most likely the issue of the greatest importance to conservative Protestants, as it seemed fundamentally morally wrong to them and would also ultimately contribute to the demise of the conservative image of the family. ¹⁰⁴ The same of course applies to conservative opposition against the Civil Rights Movement: the effort to promote equal rights and opportunities for women, as well the protection against discrimination based on sex (Civil Rights Act of 1964), and the slowly increasing toleration of homosexual partnerships were equally inacceptable. ¹⁰⁵ For a more detailed description of the events and alterations of theses decades, see Brocker (2004). However, these changes did not yet bring great numbers of organized conservative Protestants into politics right away: the first reaction was a retraction into their church communities, and evangelical denominational schools and colleges, in order to avoid the advancing liberalization. ¹⁰⁶ Consequently, racial segregation, DQG WKH H[FOXVLRQ RI ³XQ&KULVWLDQ´ FRQWHQWV LQ VFKRRO FXUULFXOD FRXOG EH XSKHOG E\ FLWLQJ UHOLJLRXV EHOLHIV DV legitimization, at least somewhat longer. But as the tax-exempt status of colleges and schools became endangered when racial segregation was ended (starting with Brown v. Ferguson, which ended segregation in public schools), isolation from society became increasingly impossible. ¹⁰⁷ Eventually, first involvements of conservative Christians in politics occurred, on local and state levels: protests against a textbook used in schools in Kanawha County (WV), a homosexual rights referendum in Dade County (FL), and similar local initiatives (some of which expanded to a national engagement later). 108

¹⁰³ ROE V. WADE, 410 U. S. 113 (1973). Ed. Justia.com Beta US Supreme Court Center. N.d. 12. Feb. 2008.

^{. 104 Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 45. 105 Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 45. 106 Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 46. 107} Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 46-47.

¹⁰⁸ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 46-47; and Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 35-36.

20

-LPP\ &DUWHU¶V FDPSDLJQ IRU 3UHVLGHQW LQ VKRZHG WKDW Evangelicals could indeed become politically active in greater numbers, and in a more organized way than before. ¹⁰⁹ Moreover, a theological development had taken place between 1965 and 1976: the Fundamentalist¶VDQGEvangelicals¶WHQGHQF\WRLVRODWHWKHPVHOYHVIURPWKH³HDUWKO\´ZRUOG KDGEHHQRYHUFRPHDQG&DUWHU¶VSUHVLGHQF\KDGFRQVHTXHQFHVDVZHOODVLWEURNHWKHtaboo of becoming involved with politics sustainably (since Carter himself was an Evangelical, born-again Christian). ¹¹⁰ The next chapters will deal with the emergence of a well-organized, long-term involvement of conservative Protestants in United States politics.

3.5 The New Right¶V)RUPDWLRQ

The New Right (NR) HPHUJHGRXWRI*ROGZDWHU¶VIDLOHGSUHVLGHQWLDOFDPSDLJQRIWKH more conservative parts, to be more exact. ¹¹¹ Three names are generally considered the main IRXQGHUV RI WKH PRYHPHQW 5LFKDUG 9LJXULH ZKR HVWDEOLVKHG D ³GLUHFW PDLO HPSLUH´ out of the campaign; Howard Phillips, another Goldwater-activist; and Paul Weyrich, who helped found several think tanks and other organizations. ¹¹² Others active in the creation of the NR include Terry Dolan, Senator Jesse Helms, and Reed Larson. ¹¹³ The NR must not be seen as a movement incorporated into the Republican Party, according to Duane Oldfield, it by far was QR SDUW RI LW DQG UDWKHU NHSW LWV GLVWDQFH IURP ³WKH HVWDEOLVKPHQW´ DQG ³FRXQWU\ FOXE 5HSXEOLFDQV´ LWV VHOI-image ZDV UDWKHU ³EOXH FROODU´ WKDQ ³EOXH EORRG´ ¹¹⁴ Its demeanor, aptly, was populist, fierce, opposed to the status quo, and tended to be antiintellectual. ¹¹⁵ $V IDU DV WKH 15¶V VWUDWHJ\ DQG DJHQGD DUH FRQFHUQHG LW IRFXVHG RQ establishing a broad network for direct mailing D WHFKQLTXH PDQ\ RI WKH 15¶V OHDGHUV KDG mastered), ¹¹⁶ work in political action committees, and lobbying; its agenda did not consist of a well-planned platform, campaigns were conducted to oppose (it seems as if the NR much rather opposed issues instead of promoting their own issues, which would be consistent with

¹⁰⁹ Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics 46.

¹¹⁰ Pieh 74.

^{111 Oldfield, Duane Murray. The Right and the Righteous: The Christian Right Confronts the Republican Party. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 1996. 96. 112 Oldfield 96 113} Oldfield 96.

^{114 Oldfield 96-97. See also Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 49. 115} Oldfield 96-97.

¹¹⁶ Brocker, Protest - Anpassung - Etablierung 49, footnote 24.