It hasn’t all been clear skies for Cizik: James Dobson of Focus on the Family and Pat Robertson have assused Cizik of “dividing evangelicals” and environmentalists have speculated that he has been kept on a short leash by the NAE. Still, Cizik has persevered. More evangelical leaders than ever are now preaching green. As global warming becomes an increasingly divisive issue in D.C., Cizik could emerge as a crucial powerbroker in the effort to get a carbon-emissions reduction bill to the president’s desk. He recently spoke with NEWSWEEK’s Matthew Philips. Excerpts:
NEWSWEEK: What was it about 2006 that brought evangelicals to the front of the green movement?
Richard Cizik: We really went from zero to 50 miles an hour in short order. There were those who laid a foundation in years gone by, but in no way have we ever seen the kind of energy that this year produced. We put the opponents of our movement on the defensive and established a name as the go-to community in D.C. on the topic of climate change.
Which is amazing considering the history of the evangelical community. How in the world did that happen?
It was a confluence of things. There was a moment of opportunity to persuade the public that this is not a Red or Blue issue but a moral one. And there was a vacuum of leadership on this front in Washington, and evangelicals stepped into the void saying it’s our duty to protect God’s creation.
You’ve drawn harsh criticism from conservative evangelicals who still see the environment as a cause of the radical left. How hard has that been to endure?
It’s been a year of great highs and lows, and those attacks from friends on the right was surely the low point. To be spoken against so publicly for unjust causes, it’s certainly been a body blow. But has it been fatal? By no means. We have not only survived them, but we’ve come back, I believe, with compelling arguments and evidence, and I always strive to do so in the fashion of Jesus. And as Jesus said, you have no authority except that which is given from above, and I believe political leaders [who balk on the environment] will be held accountable.
After the midterm election, do you feel you’ll have more partners to work with in Congress?
Absolutely. And we’re perfectly aligned to collaborate with all those groups interested in addressing climate change. Those Republicans who had continually denied the issue, they’re no longer in power. And if they are, they’d better take heed now, because this is only the beginning.
You’ve made a point of reaching out to the scientific community, not a group that evangelicals have been in agreement with all that much recently.
Yes, unfortunately, one of the things that’s been foundational to evangelicals’ indifference to climate change has been a reluctance to accept the science behind it, so this December theologians and scientists met together outside D.C. for the first time. Members of the first rank on each side met to discuss what we may have in terms of common ground, and we’ll be coming forth in the new year with proposals on how to bridge these new worlds.
What’s on tap for ‘07?
Well first, we still need to convince those evangelicals who remain unconvinced that this is central to their biblical obligation. And in doing so we’ll be changing history, we’ll be going back almost a century to the Scopes trial. So we’re rewriting the notion that evangelicals are antiscience troglodytes. We think ‘07 will be the year we put a climate-change initiative bill on the president’s desk.
Do you think the president will sign such an initiative?
I think so. Otherwise, he’ll be the last person in America to acknowledge this crisis, and that would be a really unfortunate mar on his legacy.
There’s a prevailing sense that in the past you’ve been reigned in by the NAE for being too outspoken about climate change. Under the new leadership of NAE interim president Leith Anderson, do you feel a bit more free?
[ Long pause. ] Yes, yes I do. The evangelical movement is clearly on board with this. Does everybody agree entirely on solutions? Not yet, but that doesn’t bother me. What’s important to acknowledge is that there have been institutional changes in our movement that will make it more likely that we will assume our rightful place in public dialogue.
Do you think there will be a restructuring of core values with the “new evangelicals?”
Not entirely. Look, I care just as much about the sanctity of human life as does James Dobson. But the way I look at it includes believing that we should take action to protect babies in the womb from mercury poisoning that comes from coal-fired power plants.
