The good news about this new manifesto is that it uncouples the presumed linkage between this particular faith and a particular set of political policies and prescriptions. For example, there is no necessary correlation between being a good evangelical and being a good Republican. This is good news for anyone, including myself, who shares the evangelical position that our most deeply held religious beliefs, should be relevant to our political, social, and cultural aspirations, but is concerned about failing to see how those beliefs can be manifested by politicians with widely divergent policies.

For example, might one not argue that supporting gay marriage is actually a pro-family position consistent with a portion of traditional beliefs, even if it runs counter to common Evangelical understandings of the biblical ban on homosexuality? Might one not argue that a pro-capital punishment policy on the part of some Evangelicals runs against the mercy of God which should be witnessed on Earth?

Anything which sensitively argues for the fuller inclusion of our most deeply held beliefs while opening up the range of possible understandings of those beliefs is for me, a good thing. On the other hand, there are lines in this manifesto which make me pause.

While I appreciate the signators disavowal of coercion in any form, be it political, spiritual or cultural, as an appropriate means of sharing the good news of their faith, the fact remains that they do affirm their belief that their faith in Jesus is the only complete truth and the only means through which one can be saved.

Since I do not share their concern with that kind of salvation, their belief in it does not bother me. But the fact is that every tradition or culture which imagines that ultimately everyone must be like them ends up doing some pretty dangerous things. And for that, this document needs to be more accountable….but so do members of any community, including my own, when their redemptive expectations are paired with real political or military power.

Finally, the claim that Evangelicals are defined theologically and not politically, socially or culturally is specious. The truth is that their theological beliefs shape the other three realities, nor can they escape the fact that those beliefs are in turn influenced by them. Like all of us, they understand their faith within the context of their political, social and cultural experience.

This is not a claim for the relativism which would make them, and me for that matter, cringe. It is a plea to admit that none of us can rise above that fact and must therefore practice our faith with more than a little humility. Not so much that we experience the paralyzes of most post-moderns, but just enough to remember that not only we, but our understanding of that which we believe, may in fact be fallible.