A Genuine ManObituary for the Late Rev. Jerry Falwell (1933-2007)

The Reverend Jerry Falwell, regardless of whether one despises or praises him for doing so, has left an indelible mark on the culture, history, and politics of the American nation. From the founding of the Thomas Road Baptist Church in 1956, to the establishment of Liberty University in 1971, to the creation of the Moral Majority in 1979, Falwell had always been actively engaged in the proliferation of his understanding of the Christian message.

Falwell, as can be corroborated by the countless songs decrying him – my personal favorite being Green Day’s “Minority,” in whose chorus is the line “Down with the Moral Majority” – the many editorials condemning him, and the frequent jab at him from left- and right-leaning politicians, had a penchant for infuriating people. Conversely, he also galvanized much support among the American population, particularly among those self-identifying as “evangelicals.” As a consequence, when he passed away on the afternoon of 15 May 2007, due to “cardiac arrhythmia,” the general reaction was mixed. Yours truly was among those who looked back on Falwell’s life and times, only to see a hazy history of actions that were both positive and negative, good and bad.

In all honesty, I cannot recall when I first heard his name. During the August 2005 controversy surrounding the Reverend Pat Robertson’s comments on the potentially beneficial effects of assassinating Venezuelan President, Hugo Chávez, I do remember searching the Internet for evangelical leaders, only to come across the names of both Robertson and Falwell. As is largely the case now, I was then unsure of how to evaluate these men, especially Falwell.

Criticisms of Falwell abounded on both sides of the political aisle. The political Left (and especially the social Left) was almost monolithically opposed to everything that Falwell represented; that is, adherence to cultural tradition, belief in morally objective truths, regarding America as a Christian nation, and biblical literalism. The political Right seemed largely to grant him a pass, seeing as Falwell helped mightily in the effort to mobilize evangelicals into a cohesive voting bloc – a bloc which now votes en masse for the Republican Party (the party currently viewed as being “conservative”).

Notwithstanding the realignment that Falwell was instrumental in orchestrating, several principled Republican leaders refused to offer their praises to him. The late Senator Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.), for instance, once claimed, “I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass.” Similarly, Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), during his 2000 run for the presidency, referred to Falwell as one of the “agents of intolerance.”

On a personal level, as both a Christian and a Republican, I am inclined to support both Goldwater and McCain’s assessment of Falwell. I am also, however, inclined not to inject so much gusto into my mild distaste for the man. For, as I will elaborate, I find Falwell to have been both good and bad – a man who, perhaps, best illustrates the conflicting sides of human nature.

Let us examine, for instance, Falwell’s organization, the Moral Majority (which dissolved in 1989). Four of its major beliefs were: pro-family, pro-life, pro-defense, pro-Israel.

All four beliefs are ostensibly innocuous, at least for the middle-of-the-road American voter. For example, while considering myself fairly ideologically close to the middle, I also support all four of those planks – although my views on the conflict in Israel/Palestine are far more nuanced than a mere “pro-Israel” stance. However – and this is a gargantuan however – I see no reason why religion or religious faith need have any role in rationally justifying why a political society, viz. governmental institutions, should use coercion to maintain a culture that respects all four beliefs.

Ultimately, religious belief is so profoundly personal and subjective that government should never attempt to reify it into legislation. Not only would the desired objectivity of the law be compromised by such an attempt, but so too would the religious belief be compromised. It is, of course, quite possible that moral imperatives expressed via the metaphorical, contextual, and literal aspects of revealed religious texts may overlap with the secular law, but such an overlap should never be sought. Laws regulating behavior – towards others and oneself – must only and always be justified through the pressing need for social order or through a properly-defined harm principle.

Consequently, Falwell’s actions, with regard to his apparent aspiration to have the law create Christian citizens, is where he is most at fault. Particularly important in this discussion of Falwell’s public life is the issue of evolution. Falwell was a proponent of the school of thought, identified as Young Earth Creationism, which attempted scientifically to explicate the origins of the human species in such a way that they aligned, ideally in a seamless manner, with the creation stories of the Book of Genesis.

This obituary is not intended to ridicule the beliefs of either Falwell or those Christians who consider the Christian Bible to be the source of all scientific and historical fact, but it must plainly be said that the literal creationist viewpoint is sincerely misguided. And while not an evolutionary biologist who can marshal myriad evidence in support of the fact of evolution and theory of natural selection, I can offer an insight into the attitudes of evangelical Christians.

Far too many evangelicals are opposed, prima facie, to the idea of evolution. I can only speculate as to whether the root cause for such an aversion is a self-imposed immaturity, a fear of the secular humanistic belief system (which, in my opinion, erroneously claims that evolution disproves the need for a First Cause), a refusal to grapple intellectually with the idea of the Bible as Truth – and not as Fact – or some other reason. However, in all of my experiences with evangelical Christians – of whom Falwell was frequently a major shepherd – I have consistently noticed an inability to separate themselves from the notion that the Bible is inerrant in every possible way, thus making the reconciliation of the two creation stories, among other seemingly contradictory parts of the Bible, a logical conundrum.

Regarding Falwell’s ecclesiastical activities, it appears extremely difficult not to recoil at the idea of a megachurch – especially Thomas Road Baptist Church, Falwell’s own strikingly Low Church creation. The rise of such consumerist organizations, which seem only to sate superficially the needs of spiritually immature persons, is truly to be lamented. Yet, despite my reservations about Falwell’s approach to the concept of organized religion, I am continually awed at how genuine, and moral, are the congregations and leaders of those megachurches.

I truly believe that the Reverend Jerry Falwell was a good, genuine man, despite many questionable beliefs and attitudes. Nevertheless, his ideology led to the formation of a movement that has produced an unholy, and upsetting, alliance of specific religious denominations with the Republican Party. And so, while he may certainly walk with the Lord as I write these words, we must always remember that the amalgamation of church and state – an end he appeared so often to seek – can only result in the degradation of both. (It is also worth noting, however undeveloped this point may be, that the experiences of many students would corroborate the feeling that the unholy, and upsetting, alliance of the Academy with the Democratic Party has been detrimental to both.)

Reverend Jerry Falwell was a man whose memory will live with humanity for ages to come. Whether you respected him or not, at least respect his place in history. Reverend Jerry Falwell, dead at 73. R.I.P.