Is Rick Warren Scared of George Stephanopoulos?
ABC's "This Week" began Sunday with this announcement from a slightly miffed George Stephanopoulos: "For those of you tuning in this morning expecting to hear from Pastor Rick Warren, we were too. But the pastor's representatives canceled moments before the scheduled interview, saying that Mr. Warren is sick from exhaustion."
The interview had promised some fireworks, given Warren's recent conflicting statements about the extent to which he campaigned for the passage of Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that banned gay marriage in the state. Now, I don't want to let the fact that I missed Easter services for the first time in my life to catch and cover the never-was-interview (note to self: buy in-laws DVR) color my opinion about whether Pastor Rick was telling the truth about his exhaustion. But I do think it's valid to examine why he might not have been completely psyched about going through with an appearance on "This Week."
For a man who is arguably the most famous religious leader in the world after the Pope, Warren is surprisingly sloppy when it comes to speaking in public. He acknowledged as much during an April 6 appearance on "Larry King Live," saying that "Everybody should have 10 percent grace when they say public statements." But Warren needs more like 50 or 60 percent grace.
There are two main reasons Warren tends to get himself in trouble when he talks in front of a microphone. The first is that unlike most public figures, he doesn't carefully script every utterance. In the now-infamous Saddleback video address in which he offers a full-throated endorsement of Prop 8--a video Warren seems genuinely surprised ever became public, despite the fact that it was distributed via email to 30,000 people and posted on his blog at the church's website--the pastor appears to be speaking off-the-cuff. "You need to support Proposition 8," he tells the camera. "This is not just a Christian issue; it's a humanitarian issue."
He uses the same winging-it style in the devotions he records on DVD for his new Purpose Driven Connection magazine. Listening to one a few months ago, I was startled to hear Warren recommend that couples whose marriages are on the rocks consider going into heavy credit card debt to pay for therapy. During a time of severe economic collapse. On the one hand, it's refreshing to hear a public figure speak without any filters. On the other, there's a reason "Bullworth" was just a movie. Speaking without thinking doesn't tend to serve people well in real life.
Warren's other habit is to do his best to agree with whomever he's speaking to. I suspect it comes partly from his pastoral experience, but even more from a desire to prove that he's not one of "those" evangelicals. He wears Hawaiian shirts. He has an easy laugh. He hugs people. A lot. If James Dobson is the Grinch, Rick Warren wants to be Mr. Rogers.
It's why when he's talking to Larry King, Warren mentions his gay friends and says he "never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop 8 was going." And when he's talking to Sean Hannity, Warren voices his agreement when the FOX host advocates assassinating the president of Iran. And when he sits down with the Wall St. Journal, he gets downright snarky about Democrats and religious liberals.
When it comes to gay marriage, Warren dearly wants to be a Southern Baptist who believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman--but also a man whose gay friends understand he's not intolerant. He appears to have missed the fact that the gap between those two impulses is what the debate over gay marriage is all about. That's not surprising, though, since as I wrote earlier this year, Warren also "wants to be both the universally admired pastor who speaks to the nation and the influential leader who mobilizes religious conservatives for political ends. But those are two inherently conflicting roles, and he cannot be both, no matter how hard he tries."
Proposition 8 is just the most visible and recent example of Warren trying to have things both ways. Eight days before Election Day, Warren was very clear. In fact, he says so in his video message: "Let me say this really clearly: We support Proposition 8. If you believe what the Bible says about marriage, you need to support Proposition 8." After the election, Warren spoke to Beliefnet's Steven Waldman about his support for the initiative and went even further (watch video here):
BELIEFNET: What about partnership benefits, in terms of insurance or hospital visitation?
WARREN: You know, not a problem with me. The issue to me, I'm not opposed to that [some partnership rights] as much as I'm opposed to redefinition of a 5,000 year definition of marriage. I'm opposed to having a brother and sister being together and calling that marriage. I'm opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that marriage. I'm opposed to one guy having multiple wives and calling that marriage.
BELIEFNET: Do you think those are equivalent to gays getting married?
WARREN: Oh I do.
Not surprisingly, those were the comments that were pointed to by critics when Warren was asked to offer the invocation at Obama's Inauguration. Warren didn't like being called anti-gay--and understandably so. But he is now trying to insist that he never said the things that he did. To Larry King, he complained: "I was asked a question that made it sound like I equated gay marriage with pedophilia or incest, which I absolutely do not believe." (As you can see in the transcript, Warren brings up the comparisons himself.)
He also insisted that he is "not an anti-gay or anti-gay marriage activist. I never have been, never will be. During the whole Proposition 8 thing, I never once went to a meeting, never once issued a statement, never -- never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop 8 was going.” Warren made the same case to Christianity Today: "I never said a word about it until the eight days before the election, and then I did make a video for my own people when they asked, 'How should we vote on this?' It was a pastor talking to his own people."
That's kind of like saying that when Obama sends a message to Congress, it's just a guy talking to his colleagues. Warren has a congregation with 25,000-plus members and a worldwide readership numbering in the tens of millions. If him speaking out on the most controversial issue of the election eight days before people head to the polls, saying "You need to vote for Proposition 8" does not constitute campaigning or an endorsement, then words have lost their meaning.
It's a pretty easy bet that George Stephanopoulos had clips of all these comments cued up and ready to go Sunday morning. Rick Warren is a talented communicator and has inspired millions of people. But in trying to explain or reconcile those contradictory statements, he wasn't going to be able to wing it. Maybe the mere thought of trying exhausted him.
-
1
Rick Warren is DEFINITELY scared of George Stephanopoulos. But the reasons why are a bit more complex than just a lack of good, polished (and sane) rhetoric.
For example: Stephanopoulos might question Warren's involvement in Rwanda and Uganda in regards to criminalization of homosexuality. He's named both countries "Purpose Driven Nations." He's very close to both countries' presidents. He's poured $millions into AIDS programs. He's also opposed needle exchange and AIDS prevention programs unless they preached "abstinence only."
The U.N. recently adopted a non-binding agreement (which Obama signed) to oppose discrimination against homosexuals. Both African countries (like 36 others in Africa) criminalize homosexuality. Rwanda has, in the past, meted out penalties of LIFE IMPRISONMENT. It is now considering a law making it a capital offense for just BEING gay!
Imagine this question from Stephanopoulos to Warren:
"Pastor Warren, given your influence in Africa, especially in the two countries, Rwanda and Uganda, influence as a result of your efforts towards AIDS relief, and given the fact that you've stated that you are not anti-gay, have you ever tried to have those countries change their anti-gay policies?"
Stephanopoulos is professional. He would know about discriminatory policies in Africa.
Warren would not be able to answer the question. At least, not well enough to anyone's satisfaction.
-
2
P.S.:
Amy, thanks for the insightful post. It sheds more light on a man who just might be, well...a bit sinister.
-
3
Perhaps when lienadrijov starts pouring "$millions into AIDS programs" he can start putting his own requirements on the associated programs.
Also, some of Amy Sullivan's own "words have lost their meaning." In my interpretation, being anti-gay does not mean being anti-homosexual, rather it means being anti-homosexuality. In the same vein, being anti-adultery is not the same as being anti-adulterer. I don't personally know Rick Warren, nor have I attended his church, but I have read one of his books. I'm pretty sure that he is both anti-adultery and anti-homosexuality, and that he would turn neither a homosexual nor an adulter away from his church if that person was searching for an understanding of God.
-
4
Rick Warren is as irrelevant as . . . well, as you are, Amy Sullivan. He sold a lot of books once, but the caravan has moved on.
-
5
Very informative article Ms. Sullivan. I hope Pastor Warren drops "the influential leader who mobilizes religious conservatives for political ends". As the comments already show, it just muddies his primary message.
-
6
servetheothers: You can't be anti-gay without being anti-homosexual - it just doesn't make sense. Homosexuality is not a more or less morally measureable existential act, eg like an act of adultery; nor (unless you accept the world's medical establishment is totally wrong) is it a sexual perversion like pedophilia; it is an identity. Saying you're anti-homosexuality but not anti-homosexual makes about as much sense as saying you're anti-heterosexuality but not anti-heterosexual. If that statement seems like nonsense, it's because it is, just like being ok with gay people but not with gayness is. Think about being against blue-eyedness but not against people with blue eyes, or against Dutchness but not against Dutch people per se - it's just crazy. I don't believe people who say they're ok with gays but not with homosexuality, or they hate the sin but love the sinner, because no matter how hard you try, sooner or later your anti-homosexuality will mean you have to unfairly discriminate against and morally judge the homosexual individuals who comprise the social set "homosexuality".
-
7
This ia a complete bailout from Warren. This could get ugly, too. You don't mess with Stephanopoulos...
-
8
Warren's other habit is to do his best to agree with whomever he's speaking to.
.
Good thing Jesus didn't have that problem......
.
Long before I knew who Rick Warren was, I visited the Saddleback Church as a tourist. All I can say is that the celebration of wealth that the entire enterprise represents would have appalled Jesus to no end. To then learn that Rick Warren is an unprincipled hypocrite adds no new information whatsoever. -
9
"For a man who is arguably the most famous religious leader in the world after the Pope"
.
He is? -
10
serveothers: There's no such thing as being anti-homosexuality but not anti-gay. Being gay is not about behavior; it is some people's God-given constitutional orientation, their identity. Committing adultery is an act--a behavior--that breaks a promise to a spouse and presumably hurts him or her. One is not constitutionally an adulterer; "adulterer" is not an identity. Being gay hurts no one; being gay is a morally neutral state, as is being heterosexual. Gay people are part of God's diverse creation. This will be the revealed truth of our time that Christians must come to understand and embrace. Anything less unjustly excludes some of God's people from the community of faith.
-
11
Right wing religious leaders still persist in believing homosexuality is a simple choice. If it's so simple, why have so many high ranking right wing church leaders and politicians been caught in homosexual encounters?
-
12
This cancellation of an appearance on Short Geo's Sun AM whatever could mean that Pastor Rick is seriouly ill. Easter Sunday is the big day for all Christians. Pastor Rick missed preaching at his church too. Pastors are given to preaching a really big sermon on Easter. If Jesus had not risen from the grave-there would be no Christianity. To go on a Sun AM talk show on Easter morning shows that Pastor Rick has poor judgmen. Neither he nor his flock would have a church if Jesus Christ hadn't risen from the grave.
Short Geo may be important but he isn't Jesus. Somebody needs to talk to Pastor Rick about his duty to God & his flock. As I understand it- Pastor Rick's 1st obligation to God, then to his flock. Pastor Rick made a decision to short change Jesus & his (Jesus's & Pastor Rick's people) when he chose to appear on an Easter Sun AM, live, talk show. Pastor Rick might want to pray about his duty as a minister of the Gospel. -
13
serveothers
.
You would be wrong. Saddleback Church specifically bars homosexuals from becoming members of their church. And no, I am not joking nor exaggerating. -
14
Thanks for the post Amy, if only so that I could find out about Warren's roll in criminalizing homosexuality in Africa. Now lien didn't include any links so that I could verify this info but I will definitely try to find out for myself, any help you could offer would be helpful.
.
Man if true, we ought to have a proposition 9 that makes it criminal for Americans to export our worse characteristics abroad. Words have consequences and its about time that right wing zealots, regardless of whether they have learned to disguise their wingnuttiness in public, should have to pay for the pain they cause other people. -
15
"It's why when he's talking to Larry King, Warren mentions his gay friends and says he "never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop 8 was going."
.
Was that not a lie? That wasn't agreeing or not agreeing. It was a lie. -
16
I am pleased to say that you are completely wrong... he is not the second biggest religious figure after the pope.
I live in Canada and the UK and nobody here has heard of him. Sounds like that's a good thing!So he's not very big if it's America only, is it?
-
17
sidaav your criticism only works if you can name somebody bigger. I guess Ayatollah Khomeini is a lot bigger if you count people outside of Christianity though.
-
18
"Man if true, we ought to have a proposition 9 that makes it criminal for Americans to export our worse characteristics abroad".
.
Why not just ban everything you far left liberal extremists don't like Dee. That way you can be really happy and "diverse".
.
It is left wing extremism that is ruining our country before our very eyes. It is the move to Socialism that is destroying the contstitution. It is so-called progressive liberals who want a world that is filled with the wackiest ideals seen in America to date.
.
It is people like you Dee that are zealots.
.
I happen to defend choice. If you choose to be gay, so be it. If Rick Warren and Saddleback church chooses to ban gays in their church, so be it. It is their right to do so. Just because you do not agree with their stand on certain issues doesn't make your opinion right.
.
F@ck off Dee and the rest of the bigots on this blog.
.
And in case you do not know what the word BIGOT means, enjoy.
.
"noun . a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion" -
19
When it comes to gay marriage, Warren dearly wants to be a Southern Baptist who believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman--but also a man whose gay friends understand he's not intolerant. He appears to have missed the fact that the gap between those two impulses is what the debate over gay marriage is all about.
-
Wait, Amy, I have a qualification. One can still believe in the biblical definition of marriage within his own church while refusing to press it upon a secular society by such measures as Prop 8.
-
Now, if churches would be forced to grant weddings to gay couples and/or recognize the marriages of those couples in a religious context, that's a whole different ball game - but it is also unconstitutional, as far as I can tell. Perhaps some of the gay marriage advocates here could reassure me?
-
SG: -
20
yoshi
.
There is no way for the federal government to make churches grant or officiate weddings to gay couples UNLESS the Church uses its facilities in for profit endeavors like allowing it to be rented out to private citizens for other kinds of events. In that situation federal discrimination laws would come into play and the gay couple's right to rent out the property would be upheld but the church still couldn't be compelled to officiate the ceremony. -
21
When it comes to gay marriage, Warren dearly wants to be a Southern Baptist who believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman--but also a man whose gay friends understand he's not intolerant. He appears to have missed the fact that the gap between those two impulses is what the debate over gay marriage is all about.
-
Wait, Amy, I have a qualification. One can still believe in the biblical definition of marriage within his own church while refusing to press it upon a secular society by such measures as Prop 8.
-
Now, if churches would be forced to grant weddings to gay couples and/or recognize the marriages of those couples in a religious context, that's a whole different ball game - but it is also unconstitutional, as far as I can tell. Perhaps some of the gay marriage advocates here could reassure me?
-
SG:
serveothers
.
You would be wrong. Saddleback Church specifically bars homosexuals from becoming members of their church. And no, I am not joking nor exaggerating.
-
Serveothers is still correct. Rick Warren will not turn away a homosexual or adulterous individual from attending his church. He will, however, politely refuse to admit them to membership because if his church is run anything like most Christian denominations, members have to be baptized after acknowledging a code of beliefs (adherence to the Bible being one of them, which speaks against homosexuality). Letting either of those two groups in without evidence of an effort to reform their ways according to the teachings of the church would be an implicit legitimization of their beliefs.
-
Keep in mind, according to the beliefs of Saddleback, homosexuality endangers individuals by keeping them from heaven. They wouldn't want to give the false impression of salvation to somebody who can't get it because they refuse to change their lifestyle - that would be rather cruel. Saddleback is open to these people, though, so they can hear the message of salvation in the first place. -
22
Oops, double post.
-
SG, thanks for clearing that up. -
23
yoshi
.
Thats a reach what you are saying there to say that serveothers is unequivocally correct. I know plenty of churches that don't require baptism in order to join. And there is no specific dictum against adulterers being able to join the church but there is one for gays so the analogy of serveothers simply doesn't work. Honestly Rick Warren can run his church however he wants to, thats what most pastors do. I am just talking about having an honest discussion about how he runs it. -
24
Being of Warren's generation, I can understand that the enormous success of his book tempted him to believe he could become the Billy Graham of his generation, a conservative Protestant icon respected by all.
Trouble is, the job's not available any more. In Graham's heyday . . .
. . . "everyone" (90+%) was Christian: now it's just 75%;
. . . the vast majority (70%) was Protestant: now it's 55%;
. . . conservative Protestantism had not been politicized into a largely one-party faith;
. . . and the relatively primitive state of media technology made it easy for public figures to please divergent groups by taking contradictory positions -- without getting caught.
That Warren continues to behave as though none of this has happened makes me suspect he's just not very bright.
-
25
SG:
Practicing adulterers, i.e. those who still openly engage in adultery, would most likely not be able to receive membership in Saddleback. Neither would those who believe adultery, or for that matter, murder, is okay. Those who have committed those sins in the past, however, would still be accepted, since every human being on earth is sinful. In the same way, gays who are still openly gay (a sin) would not be accepted, but gays working on reforming their lives or former gays would be accepted.
-
Whether Saddleback requires baptism or not is tangential if, like most other churches, membership means that an individual has committed to believing that certain aspects of human behavior are wrong. It doesn't necessarily mean they'll STOP right away, but it means that they recognize those behaviors are a sin and they must be stopped. A person who insists the gay lifestyle is okay by Saddleback's religion, therefore, would not be admitted into the membership rolls.
-
The exact quote from serveothers was "'m pretty sure that he is both anti-adultery and anti-homosexuality, and that he would turn neither a homosexual nor an adulter away from his church if that person was searching for an understanding of God." That still holds correct. Whether the person decides to sit down in Saddleback is a decision totally in their court.
-
Since I am not personally a member of Saddleback, I realize I can't speak with complete accuracy on their policies, but if Rick Warren was to admit a practicing adulterer into his membership rolls, that would be very strange indeed.
Most Popular »
- Best of the Decade: Sci-Fi Movies
- "How Will Dave Ever Make Fun of Sex Scandals Again?"
- Is Harry Reid Burning Out?
- How Will Obama Pay For Stimulus 2.1? (or 3.0, 3.1, whatever you want to call it)
- Why Wells Fargo isn't paying back TARP
- CNN Poll: Man Made Global Warming Takes a Hit
- The Health Reform Abortion Wars, Part Deux
- War of the Supermen: Q&A With Matt Idelson
- Economists Growing More Wary of the Senate Health Bill
- Quinnipiac: Obama Gets Bump on Afghanistan
- The Truth Behind the Leaked Climate-Change E-Mails
- Mexico Witness Protection: Corrupt Program, New Killings
- Tiger Woods Must Face His Fans' Moral Outrage
- Helicopter Parents: The Backlash Against Overparenting
- Taiwan: World's Lowest Birthrate Could Affect Society
- Creating Jobs: Can Obama Government Boost Employment?
- How Strong Is the Evidence Against Amanda Knox?
- Time to Give Up the Ghost on bin Laden
- Humanure: Goodbye, Toilets. Hello, Extreme Composting
- Study: Parents' Sex Talks with Kids Happening Too Late













RSS