Yes, it is possible to be an evangelical and a Democrat. I even know one.

However, the reality is that the overwhelming majority of evangelicals are Republicans. The simple truth is that the Republican Party is more conservative socially and economically. So evangelicals tend to congregate under that umbrella.

This is not to say that evangelicals own the Republican Party. We are just one segment. However, we are a rather large and influential segment.

Therefore, our influence as salt and light should manifest itself within the Republican Party. That is, Republicans should display some evidence of a higher standard of character, and the righteousness produced by character, because of the influence of evangelicals.

However, my point in the previous post was that Republican are not willing to pursue policies that are best for our country because of the pounding they take in the media as a result. This shrinking from duty for the sake of personal comfort and benefit constitutes a lack of character.

Character consists of a willingness and strength to do what is right even when it is hard. The person who tells the truth even when it is costly has character. The person who bridles his passions when they urge him to do wrong has character.

While there are some individual exceptions, the general trend among Republicans is not to manifest the character displayed by Jesus or the apostle Paul or the prophets. They lack the commitment to righteousness that evangelicals should be instilling.

It is not surprising that people in our secular society lack character. The philosophy we have adopted since the sixties asserts the individual has the right to do his own thing—if it feels good, do it. This mantra in essence teaches that there is no need for character. If I have a right to do what I feel like doing, then I do not need to bridle my passions. Character has become a vestigial organ of the human personhood.

Character must be developed. A society that assigns to people the right to do what feels good has no reason to develop character in itself or its children.

In addition, our society attributes much of human failure to causes beyond the control of the individual. That is, it sees the individual as a victim. I eat too much because I have a food addiction, not because I lack character. Therefore, the solution is not to develop character, but to fix my addiction.

Therefore, we are not surprised that elements of our society under the influence of this philosophy and not under the influence of the Word of God will lack character.

However, we might hope that the presence of evangelicals within the Republican Party would make a difference. The evidence suggests otherwise.

Even more telling is the fact that many, perhaps most, of the courageous Republicans are Catholics. I think of Rick Santorum, Sam Brownback (no relation to my knowledge), William Bennett, Clarence Thomas, Frank Keating, et al.

Why are there not more evangelicals taking courageous positions and influencing others to do so? The answer is that the contemporary evangelical worldview does not promote character. In fact, in many ways, it reflects the character-negating philosophical orientation of our secular society. Future postings will support this assertion.