The bottom line is that secularism doesn’t last, because no faith will always be filled by something else, and so that’s why Islam is making strong inroads into Europe, because faith of any kind will always beat no faith.The reason why Islam is gaining strength in Europe isn't because secular white Europeans are converting in droves--a few are converting, sure, but the prevailing consensus is still secular. The reason why Islam is gaining strength is because birth rates among white Europeans is falling, while it's surging among Arab immigrants. This results in a higher proportion of Muslims in the European population. Clearly, this will present social cohesion problems down the road, and it points out one of the key weaknesses of the European model of society, which is far more grounded in ancient ethnic origins than America is, for we don't have any of those. But the notion that Europe is going to be majority Muslim soon is wrong, and the notion that Muslim gains are due to a tiredness of secularism are silly--Europe has been mostly secular for over a century. France's 1905 law that established church-state separation as a law--widely seen as the beginning of Europe's secularization--has stood for several generations, and that's several generations of people who have lived without Warren's faith resurgence. Warren and his ilk like to make the case that everyone needs religion of some sort, but his argument here is pretty dumb since the religion in question here is Islam, not Warren's Christianity, which is not making many inroads into Europe. Warren's argument here might actually be easily appropriated by the likes of Sam Harris or Chris Hitchens as proof that Christianity isn't some sort of unique or transcendent religion, as Europe is certainly familiar with it but it is not sweeping over Europe, while Islam is making some gains.
The truth is that Warren is simply not a very good spokesman for Christianity. His evolving stance on gays is a case in point: last year, Warren was a very public and spirited proponent of Proposition 8 here in California. Now he disavows the support. His church used to tell gays not to visit his church, but he lifted that language from his website. And he has not given any reason or public explanation for his switcheroos. What we see in these examples is not a principled man or a heartfelt convert to GLBT rights, but rather an opportunist who senses the changing political winds and has already begun to pivot. Now, obviously, as a gay-friendly Christian I am well aware that this is a difficult issue for many Christians, and I can accept that many just don't feel that they can go there. I appreciate it, though I suspect that the reasons for this have less to do with a strict adherence to Leviticus (which nobody in the modern world really does, completely) than a lack of life experience. But I think there's an ironclad argument for humane treatment of gay folks in the Bible, and I tend to think that citing Leviticus as proof of anything is a liability in an argument about Christianity and not a strength. As a matter of civic law I think the case for gay marriage is bulletproof. It would be nice if a religious leader like, I don't know, Rick Warren could participate in some of these complicated and difficult discussions rather than wuss out and say he's too tired to do so, but such is the state of Warren's conviction and seriousness.
I could go on and on, but I don't see any reason why we should continue to take this man seriously. The crowning moment for me was when he appeared on Sean Hannity's show and said that he believed that we should assassinate Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Cause we don't like him, I suppose. That's totally something that you can back up with scripture. Look it up. If Warren is the next generation of the religious right we're in real trouble, I'd even say he's a step down from Pat Robertson, who at least had probably read the Bible at some point, even if he missed the whole point in his preaching. Rick Warren is wrong too, and doesn't even seem to get why a Christian ought to think twice about murdering the ceremonial head of a state with which we are not presently at war, in a way that would likely make him a martyr and would enflame the Middle East even more against us. Giving the Christian imprimatur to hogwash like this is far, far more dangerous than any of Pat Robertson's laughable prophecies.
