Hewitt’s bias

Hugh Hewitt (“Christianity Today only hurt itself,” Dec. 19) needs a refresher course in Christian religious history. A brief walk through the Old and New Testaments of the Bible is replete with instances of religious figures taking an “absolute stand” on radically divisive issues: Joseph in Egypt, Moses v. the Pharaoh, the conquest of Canaan, King David, the books of Kings and Chronicles, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, the Babylonian exile, Herod and the coming of the “Messiah,” Jesus and the domination system (Romans and temple authorities), Peter and the Romans, Paul and the Romans, and the book of Revelation, to name a scant few.

As for non-Scriptural history, let’s not forget every pope: Peter, the medieval and Renaissance popes, Pope Pius XII, Pope Paul II and his part in major events of the 20th century, Pope Francis — and their significant roles in political and radically divisive issues. Contemporary religious leaders inserting themselves into political issues of the day include Billy Graham, and as for intemperate outbursts, Franklin Graham certainly leads the pack.

Politics and theology are not nearly as separate as Hewitt suggests.In fact, if religion and theology expect to have any relevance in today’s culture, they must interact. Religious spokespeople have always engaged in the social and political issues of the day.

Sadly, I suspect that Hewitt revealed the real reason he is unhappy (and not at all bewildered) with CT: it is exactly the political content it is providing – the so-called left-wing sort. His bias was revealed clearly, and just as clearly, undercuts his argument from the start.

Jody M. Cramsie

Spokane