Obama, Rick Warren, Gays, & Bible Thumpers

When Obama asked Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his inaugural later this month he apparently managed to do a pretty difficult thing: he made almost everybody mad.

The Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender community is mad because they view Rick Warren as too conservative and right wing to satisfy their biblical interpretations and worldview.

The Bible Thumper community is mad because they view Rick Warren as too liberal and left wing to satisfy their biblical interpretations and worldview.

But apparently Barack Obama isn't mad. He still seems pleased with his choice. I am too. I guess that makes me a moderate and that's right where I want to be.

I've never been a fan of Saddleback, Warren's shopping mall, small-country-sized church in Orange County. Too big for me and not a good match theologically for me either. But in recent years--despite some of my theological differences--I've been very impressed with the direction he has led Saddleback. He has seemingly gone from being a one or two issue Christian leader (meaning homosexuality and gay marriage) to being a Christian leader with a much broader agenda, championing social justice issues such as AIDS and poverty. I've also admired what Saddleback has done in implementing small groups, really being a model in many ways for others churches to follow. And the few anecdotal stories I've heard of Rick have given me the impression he is a good man, seeking to humbly serve God.

I don't agree with his position on every issue, but I very much respect Warren. I'm pretty sure this is where Obama is coming from too.

I also, as a Christian who does not believe abortion is right, don't see completely eye-to-eye with Obama. And yet I still voted for him. Why? In my mind, a theology of Life is one that must extend beyond the womb and be embraced by a society as long as a person lives. This means a concern for quality of Life once the child is born, including issues and policies that relate to poverty, welfare, war, veterans, and the aging. Obama, in my mind, though it could be argued he is lacking in the value of Life in the womb (but I am still hopeful that his campaign promises to work to reduce the number of abortions will be lived into), better fits my idea of what it means to care for and nurture Life in all of its stages.

I'm certain that Warren does not agree with all of Obama's positions, either, yet he clearly respected him enough to agree to give the invocation and has, in fact, called Barack his "friend" in the past.

I don't think I'm alone in my moderate views, but I must admit I am getting tired of listening to the shouting on both sides with those angry at either Obama or Warren--or both.

And as a pastor at a church that probably leans conservative, I've heard a few of those "shouts" and even been encouraged to join in. I've refused and my refusal has, I'm sure, caused some to question my leadership and
my spine.

What really saddens me is the many, many individuals on both sides who are absolutely sure they know the motivations and mind of the person they are vilifying. The arrogance of such a view astounds me!

The right wingers claim that Warren has sold out simply because he wants the glamour and prestige of the moment.

The left wingers claim that Obama has sold out, catering to social conservatives and evangelicals.

How can they possibly know? Couldn't it be possible that Obama extended the invitation to his friend Warren after careful (and even prayerful) thought and reflection? Couldn't it be possible that Warren accepted the invitation from his friend Obama from a position of humility and service?

Why must we believe the worst? And why can't we be friends with people we disagree with?

I guess it's easier to call names than it is to work together. But it makes this moderate, middle-of-the-roader sad.