Bishop Sprong writes in his December 7th newsletter.
"I think that we have in recent years entered a "New Dark Age" in the Western world. It is marked by the rise of religious systems that seek to build security by encouraging prejudice against a designated victim. Both evangelical fundamentalism and the kind of ultra-conservative Roman Catholicism that is at present installed in the Vatican are publicly defined by their visceral and uninformed hostility toward homosexual persons. What the heretic was in the Middle Ages, the black in the days of slavery and segregation, and the Jew in Nazi Germany, the homosexual has become in the religious hysteria of our day. This kind of behavior is always a response to fear and to a rapidly changing world. Security-providing religion, which always requires a victim, is like a drug that carries us over the rough places of life. It is certainly not the wave of the Christian future.
Dark Ages do not last forever. . . ."
In fact Spong argues that the majority of religious people are already beginning to reject this fear based theology. As I see it reactionaries in the Religious Right are desperately trying to reassert power as the United States becomes increasingly more pluralistic and detached from old forms of social control. The majority of our fellow citizens will support progressive options if these are presented to them, in a way that respects their spiritual convictions. Religious liberals have a role to play in articulating a vision of our country that is both deeply inclusive of all people, and progressive in finding ways to overcome racism, cultural domination, classism, sexism and heterosexism.
According to a recent Gallup Poll about 40% of Americans identify themselves as Evangelical. This number has been constant for many years. Indeed all measures of religion tracked by Gallup have been stable for over twenty years. We are not in a wave of anything.
Bishop Spong may dislike Evangelicals for personal or theological reasons, but it is not accurate to associate Evangelicals with particular political opinions. On average, Evangelicals political views are about the same as those of the average American.
Bishop Spong might say, "I was thinking only of white Evangelicals." In that case he is hating people because of a combination of theology and skin color, an absurd position. (Even among white Evangelicals Republicans outnumber Democrats by only 2-1. There are 20 million white Evangelical Democrats out there.)
Wouldn't it be better, if you didn't like people's politics to attack their politics instead of their theology? I don't see how you both attack people's "fear based theology" and say that you honor their "spiritual convictions"
Polling data show substantial increases in the acceptance of gay people in the US in recent years. The same period has seen no change in theology. My conclusion is that attacking people's theology is the absolute worst way to try to win a political argument.
Spong used the term evangelical fundamentalist, rather than evangelical. Some forms of religiousity are homophobic. . .and theologies do have a way of influencing people's ethical choices, and way of relating to the world. And vice versa.