Last week, a group of evangelical leaders released a new document entitled “The Evangelical Manifesto”. These kinds of things can be problematic, as they often result in building up more walls than they tear down. The last thing we need is another “us vs. them” spat among people of faith.

As I peruse through the document, there’s a lot to like. The aim of this group and the document really seems to reclaim the word “evangelical” from those who have used the word as a means of acquiring political (or religious, in some cases) power. It’s a repudiation of both the religious right and the religious left in those cases where either side has used its faith as a crowbar to open the doors of power.

This is a very helpful document whose time has come. I think the 2008 election will, in many ways, signal the end of the so-called “religious right” as it’s been known for almost three decades. The coalition that Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson birthed that has been nursed by the likes of Jim Dobson and others, seems to have become increasingly irrelevant and listless. As arguably the most evangelical president of all-time prepares to leave office, he does so amidst a political and cultural landscape littered with the casualties of the culture war. Has much changed in 30 years? All of the key issues of the religious right remain largely unchanged. Abortion is still legal. Gay marriage is becoming more and more accepted both legally and culturally. Meanwhile, the entertainment media has become more violent and sexually explicit as ever. Pornography dominates the Internet. Real wages for working families are stagnant. Poverty continues to loom large over an economy with gas at $4 a gallon. America continues to live in fear of terrorism. The war in Iraq continues with no end in sight.

Change is the buzzword of the campaign this year. It’s no surprise that a document like this has emerged at such a time as this.

Signatories include: Kay Arthur, Stuart Briscoe, Jack Hayford, Max Lucado, Duane Litfin, Erwin Lutzer, Mark Noll, Alvin Plantinga, and Jim Wallis among many others.

Notable non-signatories include: Jim Dobson, whose board of directors advised against it because the process lacked diversity (yeah, I’m sure that’s why); Billy Graham, who supports the document but won’t sign it; Chuck Colson apparently declined; Richard Land wasn’t asked; neither was Pat Robertson.

Reaction to the document: Alan Jacobs says it’s not strong enough for a manifesto, Cathleen Falsani seems to endorse it, and Hugh Hewitt misses the point.

The most ridiculous response I’ve seen so far comes from Janice Crouse, of Concerned Women for America who said: “Basically, they were saying ‘those of you who care about abortion, who care about homosexuality, who care about the family disintegrating don’t speak for us, because we are too intellectual, we are too sophisticated to be concerned about those kinds of things.’”

Interview with Os Guinness about some of the concerns being raised.