Monday, August 25, 2025

From Promise to Betrayal: The Class of ’75


SANTA CLARITA, CA - In 1975, as the Hart High Class of 1975 stepped into the world, the country itself was in upheaval. Nixon had resigned the year before in disgrace. The Vietnam draft had ended in 1973, and by April 1975 even draft registration was suspended. The Equal Rights Amendment was at the center of political debate, promising women a new era of equality. We were graduating into a nation already redefining itself.

Fifty years later, we gathered again. At the front of the hall stood a memorial table with twenty photographs, though the truth was harsher. Of our 500 classmates, at least fifty are gone—one in ten erased by cancer, heart disease, drugs, or despair. The glossy pictures reminded me of the newspaper spreads of young Marines killed in combat—faces frozen in vitality, now reduced to symbols of fragility.

The reunion itself was a microcosm of America. About 150 of us, mostly white, married suburbanites in our late sixties, gathered at Hart & Main, a once-industrial space turned mid-century modern event hall. The air conditioning faltered, so fans spun on the tables. The smell of beer from the bar mixed with carne asada from the taco grill. “LGBTQ-friendly” signs around the venue whispered the cultural politics of the present. Looking around, everyone seemed so tall. Or maybe I had shrunk.

From a political scientist’s eye, three great truths stood out: women’s cultural dominance, the collapse of blue-collar whites, and the corrosive impact of affirmative action.


1. Women’s Cultural Dominance

The women—and the room’s only black classmate—organized the reunion. In that moment he was both the token minority and the token man. Their imprint was unmistakable. Hand fans were scattered across tables, a taco bar offered lettuce-heavy plates with nonfat toppings, and a dance floor sat unused. The rooftop bar gathering the night before had replaced the old masculine rituals: no golf outing, no cigar truck, no gleaming vintage cars polished by 68-year-old owners. Instead, the LGBTQ-friendly branding of the venue stood as a quiet emblem of what mattered most now.

This mirrored a national transformation. Women today earn the majority of bachelor’s and graduate degrees and hold most white-collar jobs. They dominate teaching, healthcare, human resources, and household spending, all of which shape culture far more than formal boardroom power. At our reunion, this dominance wasn’t measured in statistics. It was simply the atmosphere: orderly, restrained, designed to please everyone. It showed how far the pendulum had swung from 1975.


2. The Class Divide

The missing faces told another truth. The blue-collar classmates—once destined for factories, garages, or retail—were largely gone. National data confirm it: working-class whites without college degrees have been ravaged by “deaths of despair”—alcohol, opioids, and suicide. Their absence was louder than any speech.

Meanwhile, those who thrived clustered in comfortable security. The teachers, government administrators, and aerospace retirees were easy to spot. They had pensions, second homes, and the assurance of stability. They had been preserved by unions, bureaucracies, and Cold War defense contracts.

One classmate, tooth gaps marking decades of neglect, grinned as if fresh from prison and told me every single friend he’d had in high school was already dead. His confession hung in the air as a verdict on class division.

Charles Murray described this in Coming Apart: the split of white America into two worlds—one stable, professional, educated, and the other sinking into family breakdown and despair. Our reunion was the proof. No drunken antics, no acting out. The addicts and alcoholics had already been buried. The survivors carried themselves with the quiet reserve of people who had endured, but without joy.


3. The Impact of Affirmative Action

The third truth cut deepest. Affirmative action reshaped opportunity—and erased merit. Nationally, surveys show whites increasingly see themselves as disadvantaged; one Harvard Business School study found 11% rated anti-white bias at the highest level, compared with just 2% for anti-black bias. I didn’t need surveys. I lived it.

In high school, I was the prodigy: the highest PSAT score in the school, three track records, the graduation speaker, and a newspaper columnist who learned early how to use words to gain influence—even once trying to use it to get out of a traffic ticket on prom night. (That gambit failed, but it showed how early I was experimenting with power.) I earned a Ph.D. at Cornell. My dissertation later won a national award as the best in my field. Yet the same year I was honored, Williams College stripped me from the tenure track, citing the “low quality” of that very thesis. The real reason was simpler: I was the wrong race, the wrong sex, the wrong faith.

Meanwhile, the lone doctor at the reunion was Hispanic and on his third wife. That, too, told the story of where opportunity had been redirected. The aerospace and government retirees understood affirmative action well; many had implemented it themselves. They knew the price was borne by the poor but talented kids who should have climbed the ladder. My story was only one among millions.


4. Immigration, Crime, and Declining Results

Hart High itself has become another microcosm. In 1975, our class was overwhelmingly white. Today, the school is nearly two-thirds Hispanic and barely one-quarter white. The results are visible. California’s own data consistently show that white students score far higher than Hispanic students in English and math. If Hart High were still majority white, its test scores would place it among the very best schools in Los Angeles County. Instead, overall averages are dragged downward, not because the teachers suddenly got worse, but because the demographics changed. The academic excellence that once propelled so many of my classmates into STEM careers and aerospace has been diluted.

The same is true for crime. Common sense tells us—and national crime data confirm—that violent crime rates are significantly lower for non-Hispanic whites than for Hispanics. Back when Santa Clarita was overwhelmingly white, crime was so rare we hardly locked our doors, and murder was virtually unheard of. Today, the sheriff’s blotter is busier. Santa Clarita remains safer than Los Angeles as a whole, but it is not the all-white suburb I grew up in. The “deaths of despair” among our white working-class classmates were tragic enough; adding in higher baseline crime from mass immigration has left the community doubly weakened.


Conclusion: Rescued, But Too Late

The night ended as it began, with the memorial table. My classmates remembered me as I had been at 18: funny, compassionate, ambitious, a boy with promise. They weren’t wrong. I had been that young man. But government oppression knocked him down again and again until only the scarred man stood in the room.

And yet, America has finally admitted the truth. The students who died did not live long enough to see Donald Trump and the Supreme Court push back against woke ideology and anti-white reverse discrimination. Their entire lives were lived under a system that denied them fairness. Trump proved there was always a better way. He built his rise on our pain. But for us, the Class of 1975, the rescue came too late.

I listened to their praise of my 18-year-old self with objective distance. It was as if they were describing an idealized boy who was now dead too, lying in spirit alongside the fifty classmates whose photographs glowed on the table.

The Class of 1975 was Santa Clarita’s promise. And we were betrayed.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

The Class of 1975: Betrayed by Affirmative Action

NEWHALL, CA - I just attended my 50th high school reunion — Hart High, Class of 1975, Newhall,
California.

The first thing I noticed was how tall everyone seemed. Either they had grown, or I had shrunk. The second thing I noticed was the heat. The hall’s fans struggled against the triple-digit weather, and I thought back to the days when I could run mile after mile in that kind of heat without complaint. What really set the scene was the smell of alcohol from the bar and carne asada from the Mexican taco grill. And everywhere, glossy group photos are being snapped and printed, sealing us in an image of cheerful survival.

But survival was only half the story. About two-thirds of the way through the night, I walked to the memorial table near the stage. Fifty photographs — one in ten of our class — already gone. Cancer, heart disease, alcohol, and drugs. Mortality had been merciless. Looking at those faces felt like staring into a mirror of the future, as if my turn might already be framed and waiting.

Yet the greatest loss was not of bodies. It was of promise. The poor but talented kids who should have risen on merit were instead shoved aside by affirmative action.

I know because I was one of them. The last week of my senior year, the high school counselor revealed that I had the highest SAT scores in the class. I was chosen for Boys State, picked for track captain, and invited to give speeches. I applied to only two colleges — Occidental and Harvard. 

(Ironically, studies show that people who apply to Harvard, even if rejected, do better in life than those who never try.) 

Occidental gave me a full ride, plus scholarships that sent me to England and even covered expenses when I couldn’t work enough summers to pay tuition. I should be grateful. But I also know this: Oxy would never have hired me later, not because of merit, but because of my race and sex.

I had already quit the clarinet and marching band in high school. I set three school records my senior year in the 880, mile, and mile relay.

What stayed with me were words. I wrote a column for the local paper, slipping in classmates’ names to boost readership, using it once to try to get out of a traffic ticket. I decorated my writing with metaphors just learned in English class. It worked. Classmates still remember seeing themselves in print.

I taught myself to give speeches, practicing gestures in the mirror until the words aligned with them. My graduation speech is still remembered half a century later. That’s what presidential scholars call a “first youthful success” — an early sign of leadership. 

Then came the betrayal. At Cornell, I earned a Ph.D. in government. I complained when I noticed that the best job interviews went to the underperforming Black students. I threatened to run my own job search. The threat shook loose an opportunity to interview at Williams College. My dissertation later won a national award as the best in my field. Yet the same year I was honored, Williams College stripped me from the tenure track for the “low quality” of that very thesis. It had nothing to do with merit. I was the wrong race, the wrong sex, the wrong faith.

Walking the reunion floor, the apolitical atmosphere was oppressive. Only one old mile relay teammate, now a cop, shared a laugh with me. He insisted Obama was born in Africa; I countered that he was more likely the son of Communist Frank Marshall Davis.

Much to my surprise, it turns out that young John Drew was somewhat of a famous, beloved character. As if talking about someone not in the room, I learned that John had been a kind and compassionate person. I found he had given the best graduation speech ever. I heard how classmates still maintained control of old Hart Happenings articles that included stories about them. I was, according to one person, the only one he was really looking forward to seeing at the reunion. 

Looking back, I now suspect that the affection and praise I heard that night about my 18-year-old ghost was probably just a preview of how nicely my classmates will speak of me when I join the other fifty already lost. 

All in all, the class of 1975 reminded me of the Dakota after the war of 1862 — some resisted, some collaborated, but all ended up on the same reservation. Affirmative action broke us in half, yet bound us together in the same injustice. The irony is that our Hart High mascot was once an Indian chief. Like us, he has been erased.

The Class of 1975 lost too many lives to time and too many dreams to ideology. Trump and the Court have begun to restore merit, but too late for us. Affirmative action was not compassion. It was injustice. It robbed poor but talented kids of the ladder to success.

Our history page is written now. If America wants another, it must return to merit — the only path that ever made this nation great.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Saturday, July 26, 2025

Obama’s Goldyn Glow-Up: The Truth Behind the Spin

LAGUNA NIGUEL, CA - Like television serial killer Dexter Morgan in yet another improbable reboot, Barack Obama keeps
getting resurrected by the legacy media—not as he was, but as the character they need him to be.

With their full cooperation, he has carefully crafted a public image tailored to middle-of-the-road sensibilities—one that conceals the more radical and uncomfortable truths about his early life. His latest reflections on his relationship with Lawrence Goldyn, his gay college professor at Occidental, are no exception.

According to Obama, Goldyn was a kind-hearted intellectual who helped broaden his perspective on gay people. But I knew both men during that era, and I can say with confidence: this is not the full story—not even close.

When I met Barack Obama during his sophomore year at Occidental College in December 1980, he struck me as a quiet, intensely self-conscious young man. Unlike most of the male students I encountered, he showed no apparent interest in women. In fact, my immediate impression was that he was gay.

It’s no surprise to me that Obama chose Lawrence Goldyn as his academic advisor. Goldyn, openly gay and politically active, was known on campus as a trusted figure among gay and lesbian students. He wasn’t just a professor—he was part of a broader network of support for students wrestling with their sexual identity.

Unlike the other professors in young Obama’s orbit, Goldyn was not a Marxist. Although Occidental employed him as an assistant professor of political science, his most memorable role was that of an in-your-face sexual revolutionary. For that very reason, I remember thinking Occidental made the right call when it denied him tenure in 1981.

Obama’s recent comments suggest that Goldyn enlightened him on gay identity. But this spin is merely a gentle pirouette designed to distract us from a more substantial pattern.

Obama didn’t need anyone to explain gay culture to him—he was already immersed in it. According to Mia Marie Pope, who claims she knew Obama while he was a student at the exclusive Punahou School in Hawaii, he was frequently in the company of older white gay men and seemed completely at ease in that world.

Obama’s mentor back then, Frank Marshall Davis—a known Communist Party member—authored a book under a pseudonym that included graphic bisexual scenes. These were the kinds of influences Obama had before he ever stepped foot on Occidental’s rose-covered quad.

We also have Obama’s bizarre poem “Pop,” published in 1981, full of unsettling references to “amber stains” and “smell his smell” connectivity—an earthy piece some have interpreted as a veiled account of sexual intimacy with an older man.

Thanks to presidential historian David Garrow, we’ve learned that Obama wrote letters to his then-girlfriend Alex McNear in which he openly discussed his same-sex desires. Former classmates also recall his metrosexual style, soft-spoken voice, and emotional distance from women. This wasn’t a guy discovering gay identity through a class—it was someone already deep in the experience, possibly trying to make sense of it all.

The Goldyn story is just one more example of Obama rewriting his past to fit a more electable narrative. Just as he has airbrushed his Marxist sympathies, blurred his religious convictions, and replaced real individuals with fictional “composites” in Dreams from My Father, here he repackages an advisor-student relationship to appear as a moment of enlightened tolerance—when in fact it may have been something far more personal.

Let me be clear: I’m not interested in shaming Obama for his sexuality, whatever it may be. I am simply done with the absurd, unrepentant, self-curated mythmaking.

If a conservative candidate had maintained this level of personal obfuscation—on issues of sexuality, ideology, or even basic biography—the press would have diced them up into nine pieces as quickly as Dexter Morgan logs a souvenir blood sample. Meanwhile, the legacy media lets Obama escape the truth of his past the same way the law enforcement officers do in Dexter: Resurrection—by misreading every clue that points to guilt, simply because the show must go on and the franchise must be protected.

The real Obama chose Lawrence Goldyn for the same reason other gay and questioning students did—because he felt a personal connection, not because he needed an education in tolerance. That’s not a crime. But pretending otherwise is part of a larger deception—the effort to protect Obama’s personal credibility and to prevent any alteration in how he is portrayed in U.S. history—as America’s first post-racial technocrat, rather than someone who intentionally rebranded to achieve power.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist. This article was first published in American Thinker on July 23, 2025.

Thursday, February 23, 2023

Michael S. Heiser: Saying Good Bye to a Brave, Realistic, and Enlightened Scholar of the Bible


LAGUNA NIGUEL, CA - I was sad to hear of the death of a beloved scholar Dr. Michael S. Heiser who died on February 20, 2023. To me, he was an intellectual mentor even though I never met him face to face and only caught on to his ideas last year. 

He quickly became a hero of mine because of his total commitment to telling the truth. For example, he had a fresh take on how to interpret the Bible that explained the meaning of various passages that were so confusing to me in the past that I would just skip over them. (As would just about everyone else.)

For example, there are passages in the Bible where God refers to the others in his midst, the Elohim which is a grammatically plural noun for "gods" or "deities" or various other words in Biblical Hebrew.

Heiser pointed out that the God of the Old Testament had an assembly of divine beings that he presided over to help do his work, just as the Pharaoh in Egypt had a household of officials.

The idea that God has a team of other Gods hanging out with him is controversial because it seems to undermine the monotheism of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

Heiser was a practicing, believing Christian who thought that it was best for the faith that followers understand this supernatural feature of the Bible. In his view, Christianity would be improved and the Bible would be easier to understand if theologians and other faith leaders accepted his view of the unseen realm of the Bible.

He explained questions like

How did descendants of the Nephilim survive the flood?

Who are the assembly of divine beings that God presides over?

In what way do those beings participate in God's decisions?

Why do Peter and Jude promote belief in imprisoned spirits?

Why does Paul describe evil spirits in terms of geographical rulership?

For me, his views also explained odd features in the Bible including the role of giants, the famous Nephilim who are mysterious beings, or people who are large and strong. Personally, I don't see how you really understand the Bible if you forget about, or ignore the way, it sets up a role for giants, particularly the giants who are believed to have died in the Great Flood. 

How else do you make sense of the idea that it was okay for the followers of Joshua to slaughter the giants they encountered when they first found land for themselves in Israel? 

How do you make sense of the David and Goliath story without understanding the back story about the role of the Nephilim?

Ultimately, I admired Heiser because he was honest, brave, and fearless about being absolutely real about the Bible.

You might enjoy his book. After you read it, you will know more about the meaning of the Bible than most of the people who rely on it. See, The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist who has taught at many of our nation's formerly prestigious schools including Williams College in MA. 

Thursday, June 2, 2022

It Takes a Couple to Replace Rick Warren: Andy and Stacie Wood to Replace Iconic Mega-Church Pastor

LAGUNA NIGUEL, CA - I just learned about who will be replacing Rick Warren, 67, the senior pastor at Saddleback Church. The new senior pastor will be Andy Wood, 40, of Echo Church which has a three-campus and online program up in the Sunnyvale, San Jose, and Fremont, CA area. 

As far as I can tell, one of Andy's chief virtues as a candidate for the lead pastor position was his wife, Stacie Wood. Stacie is a teaching pastor at Echo Church and would have the same role at Saddleback Church. She is more telegenic than her husband and is perhaps well suited to such a role. This approach would represent a further movement in the direction of ordaining female pastors which the church initiated in 2021 to the chagrin of those who hold to the tenents of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). Apparently, Echo Church has similarly been in the crosshairs of SBC complementarians because of allowing women to preach.

Warren, as you may know, is leaving due to health problems. According to Christianity Today, he told the church last year that he has spinal myoclonus, which causes tremors and blurred vision, and that it has worsened in recent years. 

Rick Warren was a pioneer in creating a “seeker” church that is designed to not turn off the newest visitors. In fact, the essence of the seeker concept is that the Sunday service is purely focused on attracting new people. The actual religious services of the church take place mid-week instead. This makes the Sunday services an all-hands-on-deck performance piece for the newest visitors. As such, he was part of a larger movement to take the word “Baptist” out of church names to make them more seeker-friendly. 

I first got the news when one of our small group members from Saddleback Church forwarded me a copy of a video of Andy breaking the news to his existing Echo Church followers. He and his wife Stacie were quite emotional, and tearful, in delivering the news to their flock. 


Ever since I moved to Laguna Niguel, I have been interested in following the story of who would succeed the charismatic mega-church pastor who built a small church into an international monolith based on the ideas in his book Purpose Driven Church (1995). This was a book that was later vastly over shined by his exceptionally successful The Purpose Driven Life (2002) book. More news about this appointment is available on the Saddleback website


In this video, Andy mentions he was an early convert to the book in 2001 and that it inspired his own church-building, and church planting efforts. Moreover, Andy earned a master’s degree from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, as did Rick Warren. 

All in all, I have to say I found them to be charming, and easy to look at the couple. His wife, Stacie, looks like she could be a Christian broadcaster. Stacie reports she was inspired by Kay Warren's book, Yes to God: A Call to Courageous Surrender (2010).

What do I make of the choice based on my understanding of charismatic leadership? First, it is almost impossible to follow another charismatic leader. No matter what, there will never be another Rick Warren, not for a century or more. Consequently, whoever follows in his footsteps will be forever labeled as less than no matter what they accomplish. Among charismatic leaders, the sustainability of their efforts is almost always shaky at best. A ministry based on a charismatic leader like Rick Warren can easily unravel in their absence due to a scandal, a schism, or a poorly implemented plan. 

As George W. Bush often joked about his father George W.H. Bush, "I inherited half my father's friends and all of his enemies." 

So, I start, pessimistically, by observing that Andy has a difficult task. Listening to Warren's over-the-top self-confidence and assurance is always a bracing experience. Nevertheless, it is a tough, even impossible act to follow. Even for someone like Andy who appears to be a sincere student of his approach. 

Personally, my advice to him would be to bring with him as many of his current staff as he can so that he has a strong, personally loyal team around him. This too would be an homage to Rick Warren, who employed his sister's husband, Tom Holladay, as his somewhat awkward, even goofy, right-hand man since 1991. What Andy may not fully realize is that his success at Echo Church was a team effort and that it is not always so easy to retain one's charisma in a new environment with a different leadership team in place. 

What else? There are a lot of ways the church, by which I mean Rick Warren himself, might have gone in picking a successor. 

First, it looks like Saddleback was conservative racially. They picked a white guy with a white wife. In a sense, the Warrens have replaced themselves with a younger version of themselves. 

This meant that Rick Warren probably considered and turned down the opportunity to hire an extraordinary black, Latino, or Asian pastor. Doing so would have symbolized the movement of the church into a perhaps more contemporary minority-majority direction and placed greater emphasis on its growth internationally. 

For me, I was assuming that Saddleback would end up with an Asian or Hispanic lead pastor. After all, I tend to see Rick Warren as perhaps too left-wing for the good of his local church, but left-wing enough to the advantage of his international church. I remember Trish and I were particularly disillusioned when he made an early exit during a veterans day service and left the job of thanking U.S. veterans to the always cheerful Holladay instead. 

Likewise, I thought Warren was wrong to go along with the recent mask mandates, lend support to the Black Lives Matter cause (thereby offending law enforcement), and - most recently - violate the tenents of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) in 2021 by ordaining three women pastors. 

This, as you may know, is contrary to the Convention's confession of faith which asserts pastoral ministry is reserved for men. According to Christianity TodaySaddleback was reported to the Credentials Committee, which is charged with deciding whether or not a church is in “friendly cooperation” with the denomination. Significantly, though some churches have left the SBC after naming women as pastors, the denomination has never officially removed any church for having a female pastor. 

Previously, Warren distanced himself from conservatives by focusing too much on people with AIDS, opposing the use of waterboarding, and contributing to global warming hysteria. 

Second, it looks like they made a decision to go with a relative unknown rather than an existing, Christian celebrity figure. I am particularly thankful Warren did not hand over his ministry to Edward John Stetzer, 56, who would have probably brought both stature and an unpleasant aura of wokeness to a church that has already gone too far to the left for my tastes. Stetzer, as you may know, is the Billy Graham Distinguished Chair of Church, Mission, and Evangelism at Wheaton College and Executive Director of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College.

Finally, it is clear that Rick Warren decided it was best to bring in an outsider as well. The most normal approach would have been to promote the next senior pastor from among the ranks of the existing pastors. Here, technically, I think Rick Warren made the right decision. Charismatic leaders typically surround themselves with less powerful people, in large measure, to prevent anyone from outshining them. Accordingly, I am guessing that an insider would have been someone with less boldness and less business/entrepreneurial experience. Bringing in a talented outsider may have been the only way to actually bring in new talent at all. 

From the videotape above, it looks like Kay and Rick Warren believe they have found younger versions of themselves. Kay, in particular, is blown away by the things the two couples have in common and the coincidences they share. 

Given Stacie's confidence in front of the camera, it looks like the Warrens wanted to leave in their wake not just a strong individual leader, but a strong couple. 

After all, at Echo, Stacie is regarded as a teaching pastor. She will apparently have the same role at Saddleback. 

Will that be enough of a difference, that is a useful edge, to keep Saddleback Church thriving for the next decade or so? At least it gives Andy of fighting chance of differentiating his approach from Warren's approach. Then again, it may be that the Warrens have set him up for failure already.

Is Warren betting that having Stacie serve as both a female teaching pastor and the senior pastor's wife is the wave of the future? I am completely sure that this is the case. Frankly, I think it is a mistake. To the extent that Kay influenced Warren's ministry, I think she influenced it in a negative direction. Caving into the feminist approach to mega-church leadership cannot possibly end well. 

Is this part of a larger effort to bring men into the church by first bringing in their wives and children? Potentially, that is the case. Unfortunately, by feminizing the church, Warren's successor may very likely take away the conservative approach which made the church so attractive to its local followers in the first place.

Again, what is my take? I think Rick Warren has always believed the Southern Baptist Convention's prohibition on female pastors is old-fashioned and a hindrance to the growth of the mega-church movement. Nevertheless, he knows this is an unpopular stance. He was ready to implement it only after it was clear he and Kay would be handing off the church to someone else. In a sense, he made his decision and then decided to get out of Dodge.  

Andy will take over full responsibilities on September 12, 2022. He will be an instant national leader in a larger experiment to see how well you can sustain a church with a strong role for female pastors. On the bright side, Echo Church in San Jose was roundly criticized for not taking masking so seriously last year. Perhaps this is a sign that Andy is not as feminist or as woke as the Warrens hope? If so, that would be good for Saddleback Church and good for all of its stakeholders too. 

I do not think you will ever see a mega-church successfully led by women. I doubt Saddleback will be the first. 

______________________________________________________________________

I don't have the time or energy to do a new article on this topic. I will add, however, that the Southern Baptist Convention reacted to the appointment of Stacie as a teaching pastor with a bold and decisive effort to kick out Saddleback Church. This was an effort that completely succeeded on June 13, 2023. I left this post as a comment on a blog site. I thought it made sense to leave it here too. 

I attend Saddleback. I thought it was a mistake to ordain female pastors. I think they tend to be more liberal than male pastors and the last thing we need is a more woke Christian church. 

I think where Rick went wrong is that he campaigned on attacking the leadership of the SBC instead of making a Biblical case. To be sure, his case was weak. He tossed out three Bible stories that really had nothing to do with women serving as pastors. And that was it. He never had a good rebuttal to all the straightforward evidence that the Bible opposes the ordination of women. 

The SBC rightfully called a stop to this and voted against him by 88%. 

What's really going on? 

I suspect Rick is betting that large female-led churches (he keeps mentioning one in Asia) are the secret sauce that will save Christianity for the future. 

I think the supposed superpower of a female-led Church is what attracts him to suggest that the Christian Church of today should model the egalitarian, out-of-control, miracle-popping house churches which developed in the immediate wake of Christ himself. 

As a political scientist, it looks to me like Rick has gotten himself caught up in some sort of bizarre fantasy world where a pre-Paulinian matriarchy becomes the model for the worldwide resurgence of Christianity. 

If that is the case, I just don't think that makes any sense at all. Ultimately, I don't see how you create a larger church by ignoring its foundational document. Or, to put it more bluntly, reconceptualize conservative Christian leadership by wrapping it around a vague feminist-friendly Great Commission instead of the straightforward words of Paul. See,

1 Corinthians 14:33–35 (NIV) states:

"As in all the congregations of the Lord’s people. Women should remain silent in the churches, They are not allowed to speak but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church."

or, the equally straightforward, 

1 Timothy 2: 9-15 (NASB) says:

"Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness. A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint." 

Even worse, I suspect female-led churches will turn into Canaanite fertility temples...staffed with the hottest priestesses on the planet. 


John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist who has taught at many of our nation's formerly prestigious schools including Williams College in MA. 

Most Popular Posts