How not to engage the Pope

We, and particularly I, have been quite critical of Accommodators, those so-called Progressive Christians who, in their quest for relevance in a secular, liberal world have traded away the only thing that makes them unique -- Orthodoxy -- in exchange for the illusion of acceptance by liberal elites. As we have mentioned before, another faction within evangelicalism is, if not equally as puerile as the Accommodators, at least as embarrassing to thoughtful evangelicals, which we here in the Cloakroom strive to be.

We have termed this latter faction the Know Nothings, after the Nineteenth Century political movement that was characterized by its anti-Catholic bias. Today, Know Nothings earn the appellation not by preserving the secrecy of their societies and meetings but by deliberately fostering an anti-intellectual fideism, a skepticism of religious and institutional authority, and a dogmatic commitment to theonomous reasoning. For an example, consider Pat Robertson predicting that Orlando, Florida would suffer natural disasters as a result of its decision to host a gay pride parade and, on a separate occasion, castigating mainline Protestant denominations as harboring the spirit of the Antichrist.

The Know Nothings have found one of their own in Mike Huckabee. However, perhaps no current American politician better deserves the label of Know Nothing than Tom Tancredo. Here's Tancredo responding to Pope Benedict's call for United States Bishops to welcome and support recent American immigrants: "[T]he pope's immigration comments may have less to do with spreading the gospel than they do about recruiting new members of the church."

There are compelling prudential arguments in favor of an enforcement-first immigration policy. Mr. Tancredo would do well to articulate those arguments. Accusing the Pope of placing proselytization over the Gospel is neither persuasive nor helpful. In the first place, it is not at all clear that the Pope's comments were directed toward American immigration policy. Regardless, what possible harm could come from the growth of the Catholic Church in the United States, by (legal) immigration, evangelizing, or proselytizing?

Just as we criticize the lunacy of the left wing of evangelicalism, we reject the reactionary rhetoric of some of our conservative, evangelical brethren. We can do much better.