Category: Evangelicals & Politics

Senator Amy Klobuchar Speaks Truth to the Judicial Committee

Please take 15 minutes to watch Senator Amy Klobuchar (Dem. MN) provide a clear, straightforward summary of the important issues at stake in the

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D. MN)

contested nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court (watch here).

Yes, the charges of sexual assault are vitally important (see my previous posts here and here), but the Senator also refers to the history of Kavanaugh’s disturbing judicial rulings which have not received anywhere near the attention they deserve.

This is a man who believes that presidents should be exempt from criminal investigation (is this why Trump nominated him despite Senator McConnell’s objections?); supported the use of torture when he was in the George W. Bush administration; endorsed the Supreme Court’s Citizen United decision (allowing unlimited, “dark money” political contributions from corporations); supports the Patriot Act (the single most unconstitutional legislation since the Alien & Sedition Act); the mass, warrantless surveillance of the American public; has been hostile to the enforcement of the Voting Rights Act and anti-discrimination laws; and has consistently sided with corporations and CEOs against workers and workers’ rights in labor disputes.

 

 

Kavanaugh’s Distress, His Evangelical Support and the Problem of Angry Men

Yesterday’s  online edition of The New Yorker had a series of short articles on the testimony offered at the Brett Kavanaugh/Christian Ford hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.  The best of the  lot was a piece written by Alexandra Schwartz, “Brett Kavanaugh and the Adolescent Aggression of Conservative Masculinity.”

You can read the entire piece here.  Below is an excerpt (emphasis is mine).

“…Kavanaugh was setting a tone. Embedded in the histrionics were the unmistakable notes of fury and bullying. Kavanaugh shouted over Dianne Feinstein to complain about the “outrage” of not being allowed to testify earlier; when asked about his drinking, by Sheldon Whitehouse, he replied, “I like beer. You like beer? What do you like to drink, Senator?” with a note of aggressive petulance that is hard to square with his preferred self-image of judicious impartiality and pious Sunday churchgoing. Lindsey Graham eagerly took up the angry-man mantle, using his allotted five minutes of questioning to furiously shout at his Democratic colleagues.

“What we are seeing is a model of American conservative masculinity that has become popular in the past few years, one that is directly tied to the loutish, aggressive frat-boy persona that Kavanaugh is purportedly seeking to dissociate himself from. Gone are the days of a terse John Wayne-style stoicism. Now we

Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally at the Treasure Island Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada June 18, 2016. REUTERS/David Becker/Files

have Trump, ranting and raving at his rallies; we have Alex Jones, whose habit of screaming and floridly weeping as he spouts his conspiracy theories is a key part of his appeal to his audience. When Kavanaugh is not crying or shouting, he uses a distinctly adolescent tone that might best be described as “talking back.” He does not respond to senators. He negs them. His response, when he is asked about his drinking, is to flip the question and ask the senators how they like their alcohol; his refusal to say whether he would coöperate with an F.B.I. investigation brings to mind a teenager stonewalling his parents. If Kavanaugh is trying to convince the public that he could never have been capable, as a teenager, of aggression or peer pressure, this is an odd way to go about it.”

Odd indeed.

The D.C. train-wreck otherwise known as the Senate Judiciary Committee exemplifies almost everything wrong with American politics today.  (More on that another day, perhaps.)

Sadly, but not surprisingly, yesterday’s exercise in public brow-beating and male chest-thumping gave US evangelicalism another chance to shame itself by revealing again how alienated it has become from our crucified Savior and his gospel. (I am sorry, but if your natural reaction yesterday was to imagine Kavanaugh as a Christ-figure, you have more in common with Judas Iscariot than Simon Peter.)

A Maris Poll conducted for NPR and PBS reports that among America’s white evangelical Christians:

72% approve of Trump’s performance in the Oval Office

56% have a favorable impression of Brett Kavanaugh

32% have an unfavorable impression of Christine Blasey Ford

48% believe Kavanaugh should be approved by the committee even if he is guilty of attempted rape

45% believe Kavanaugh is telling the truth, while only 14% believe Christine Ford’s story of sexual assault is true

64% support Kavanaugh’s appointment to the Supreme Court despite Ford’s allegations

The Holy Spirit has abandoned much of American evangelicalism just as he vacated the life of king Saul in that poor man’s spiritual collapse.

This DC horror show has NOT been about “innocent until proven guilty” or belief in the possibility of redemption and forgiveness.  (Kavanaugh needed to confess his guilt and ask for Dr. Ford’s forgiveness had that been the story-line).

No, what we have witnessed is an exercise in raw political power and shameless hypocrisy by politicians in both parties, more eager to do the bidding of their corporate contributors than in serving the people.  The main selling point in Kavanaugh’s judicial portfolio has been his consistent record of pro-corporate, pro-big business rulings that shaft the little guys.

By faithfully serving their money masters, the Senate committee has run roughshod over innocent lives without the slightest attempt to discover that near-extinct DC rarity called The Truth.  Democrats are as guilty as Republicans.

Anita Hill telling her story of sexual harassment by Clarence Thomas. Conservatives, including conservative Christians, didn’t believe her either.

I believe that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford has been telling the truth.  She will be remembered as this generation’s Anita Hill.  (Yes, I believed her too.)

The story of Dr. Ford’s unwanted exposure to public scrutiny is not a tale of Democratic conspiracies, as Kavanaugh alleges.  The trauma she describes is all too common, more common than most men could ever conceive.  Unbeknownst to us, we all know women and little girls who are victimizes of sexual assault and have never told anyone about it.

Most never will.

The only conspiracy surrounding Dr. Ford was plotted and executed by the Senate’s old boys club that refused to allow a pesky FBI investigation interfere with their well-laid plans for a vacant seat on the Supreme Court.  The Senate has ever so politely and cunningly traumatized her again.

Senator Lindsey Graham vents his hypocrisy while decrying the partisanship he helps to maintain

The fury unleashed by Brett Kavanaugh and Senator Graham was the graphic territorial display common to powerful men of privilege when their well-considered goals are frustrated by something, or someone, as inconvenient as a woman meddling in things that don’t concern her.

The Republican dismissal of Dr. Ford’s harrowing account had been  telegraphed by the committee long before yesterday’s testimony.  It was also entirely predictable, as predictable as the shocking “boys will be boys” defense ridiculously repeated by Kavanaugh’s most slimy supporters…many of whom are conservative, evangelical women.

Ford vs. Kavanaugh: Do Alleged Victims of Sexual Assault Matter to the Senate?

Men with power – and partisan women, too – enjoy judging by appearances, telling other people what to do and how they should  feel.  They especially love to get their own way, preferably without opposition.

Loyal, mindless partisanship precludes the need to evaluate all sides of an argument equally. Why bother with evidence or facts when they can be buried, ignored or shouted down?  If an odd malcontent harboring foolish disagreement manages to stand (however briefly) in the way of power, well then, those with the power simply mow them down.  Whatever it takes.

Naturally, a clever use of power will dispatch the opposition in ways so seemingly fair and genteel that few observers will notice the stiletto shiv discreetly plunged into the critic’s backside.

That’s the way power works.  And power is the main currency in our nation’s capital.  For far too many, politics is the dark art of manipulating power for personal gain while wearing the mask of public service.

We are now watching a raw exercise of such partisan power in the nation’s capital.

Dr. Christine Ford has accused Judge Brett Kavanaugh of attempted rape when they were in high school together.  One might think that this new “era” of the #MeToo movement has sensitized our leaders to these kinds of charges; that such accusations would be taken seriously by all political parties; that people – especially women, for cryin’ out loud – could rise above partisan rancor in order to give an alleged victim the time and space needed to revisit what was probably THE most traumatizing experience of her life.

But, no, not in Washington, D.C.

Dr. Ford has agreed to tell her story before the Senate Judiciary Committee, after making one simple request:  hoping to avoid an exercise in he-said-

How intimidated would you be sitting before this group, knowing that most of them had already judged you to be a liar?

she-said futility, Ford asked that the committee delay her testimony until after the FBI completes an investigation into her charges.

Not a criminal investigation, mind you, but the sort of inquiry performed for standard, nominee background checks.  Yes, Kavanaugh has undergone several of these investigations already, but that is a moot point.  The FBI have never been asked to look into this particular charge.  And there is no reason to think evidence would have turned up accidentally when they weren’t looking for it.

Dr. Ford’s request sure sounds reasonable to me.

It’s hard to believe that a woman making false accusations would ask for an FBI investigation into her bogus claims as a prelude to being questioned by a (largely hostile) Senate committee while sitting in the hot seat on the national stage.

I can’t imagine that the investigation should be difficult.  Others have stepped forward to say that they knew of rumors circulating about such an incident when they were students at the same school.  Dr. Ford claims to have sought professional help to cope with the trauma and its psychological aftermath.  It wouldn’t be difficult to subpoena the therapist’s records, with Dr. Ford’s consent, in order to learn what was shared in their sessions.

If she is lying, let the investigation unmask her.

Of course, Kavanaugh insists that the alleged assault never happened.  Yet, I can’t help but be sympathetic to Dr. Ford.

If the Trump presidency has demonstrated anything, it is that the truth no longer matters to many Americans, not in our capital city, not among our politicians, not for the average Republican, not even within the church.

Lisa Graves, a former Senate staff-worker, has published credible evidence that this would not be the first time Kavanaugh has perjured himself before a Senate committee. Why isn’t that grave allegation being investigated?  Because power is never concerned with truthfulness except when it serves the interests of more power.  Senate Republicans don’t care about the truth of Brett Kavanaugh.  They simply lust for another “win” registered in their party’s column.  They are the ones in power.

The evangelical church is no better.  In fact, it is far worse.  Truth is not a priority to evangelical spokes-people, the mawkish figureheads representing Trump’s most vocal constituency.  For instance, if you can bear it, watch Franklin Graham’s shameless, partisan boot-licking in his recent CBN interview.  He basically tells Dr. Ford to sit down, shut up, and stop complaining about something that was not a real crime anyway.  It’s disgusting and pathetic.  His father, Billy, is surely weeping in heaven.

If men and women like Graham are not careful, they will one day find themselves eternally shaken by Jesus’ angry lament, “Get away from me, you evildoers.  I never knew you!” (Matthew 7:23).

They are traitors to the kingdom of God, every last one of them.  Sycophantic grovelers before a political Moloch, falling over themselves for the privilege of burning their own spiritual children in the political fires of partisan barbarism.  They know nothing about Jesus, the ethics of his kingdom, or the superiority of God’s reign on earth.

Every rapist denies the charges brought against him, insisting that he is innocence.  In this respect, Kavanaugh is no exception.  He is imitating the man who nominated him.   They are two peas in a pod.

If he is innocent, let the investigation exonerate him.  He should welcome it.

Every victim hesitates to come forward, fearing the harsh gauntlet of public spectacle which so easily morphs into ridicule and character assassination.  Dr. Ford and her family are already receiving death threats from Trump stalwarts — and today we have sadly learned that Judge Kavanaugh’s family is also receiving vicious hate mail and threats. Democrats and so-called progressives are every bit as sinful as anybody else.  Wickedness knows no political boundaries.

But only Dr. Ford is receiving unsolicited advice about what she should have done when she was a teenager.  Yet, grizzled old Senators and shiny news anchors have no business lecturing this woman about what she “should” or “shouldn’t” have done when she was 15 years old.

Senator Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is auditioning for the role of sensitive committee granddad by offering Ford a variety of scenarios where she could tell her story in a one-on-one session along with Kavanaugh next Monday.  The problem, however, is that all of Grassley’s options include meeting with the committee before an FBI investigation would be complete.

Republican efforts at painting Dr. Ford as the unreasonable, demanding woman remind me of an old Saturday Night Live sketch with John Belushi and Dan Ackroyd. The two comedians were immigrant brothers, apparently from Greece, operating a greasy spoon diner.  The only item on their menu was cheeseburgers.  Every customer’s question got the same easy answer:

What’s today’s special? Cheeseburger!

Any desserts?  Cheeseburger!

How about side dishes?  Cheeseburger, cheeseburger, cheeseburger!

Senate Republicans have only one dish on offer:  a  Monday, September the 24th cheeseburger.  Regardless of Grassley’s superficial attempts to dress it up, his only offer so far is a Monday cheeseburger.

Dr. Ford, however, is declining the Monday cheeseburger.  She is asking for an after-the- investigation French dip.  It doesn’t sound unreasonable or outlandish to me.  Why not wait?  (We all know why, actually. Fearing that the midterm elections will strip them of their majority, Republicans are feverishly trying to railroad Kavanaugh’s nomination through while they still have the power).

The truly outlandish aspect of this entire affair is the unmerciful, belittling behavior of those who claim most loudly to speak for God.  Listen again to Graham’s interview, if you can, and then pray for his soul.

Where is the voice of God’s prophet today?  Who speaks out for true justice, equality, fair-mindedness and generosity?  Who stands with the many, many women victimized by sexual assault?  Who will defend the weak against the strong?  Who will call the rich and powerful to account?

“Whoever justifies the wicked, and the one who condemns the righteous, both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD.” (Proverbs 17:15)

“He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” (Micah 6:8)

Michael Gerson, The Boiling Frog that Finally Jumped…Maybe

Perhaps you know the parable.  How do you boil a frog alive?

Don’t throw the frog into boiling water.  It will jump out.  Rather, turn a stove burner on to low heat.  Fill a kettle with water at room temperature.  Put your wiggling, green frog into the kettle.  Set the kettle onto the burner.  Wait…

Supposedly, as the water temperature slowly rises, the frog – being a cold-blooded creature – will enjoy the sauna without alarm.  Eventually, the cooperative frog allows itself to be cooked alive without ever objecting to the rising water temperature.

I have enough of a conscious that I’ve never tested the truth of this parable (have you?), but it serves as a popular warning against the dangerous allurements of compromising one’s conscience.  How many compromises does it take before principle and morality become waterlogged labels tossed by deceased idealists into the world’s pragmatic stew called “the ends justify the means?”

I don’t know.  Maybe Michael Gerson could tell us.

Gerson, now a columnist with the Washington Post, has become one of president Trump’s most vocal, conservative critics.  And I admire him for taking up the cause of repeating out loud that this president has no clothes.

Gerson prints what few other Republicans are willing to say out loud (except behind closed doors).  He appears to be working as a conservative conscience (in a kinda, sorta way) for an otherwise fetid Republican party that misplaced its public service conscience years ago – undoubtedly lost in the fancy parlor of some corporate contributor.

A graduate of Wheaton College, Gerson is noteworthy because he claims the mantle of “evangelical Christian” while openly condemning the boot-licking, brown-nosing antics of those religious-right leaders and their millions of followers who boast about their elevated status on Trump’s White House guest list.

In this regard, Gerson certainly has his head screwed on straight.  Perhaps he learned a lesson or two from his own time of service in the Bush White House.

GWB : 1630 : Speech Preparations – State of the Union. Oval Office

Gerson was chief speech writer for George W. Bush from 2001 to 2006.  From 2000 to 2006 he was also a White House Senior Policy Analyst and a member of Bush’s White House Iraq Group.

The primary purpose of the WHIG was to advance the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld plan “to sell” the American public on the imaginary threat of Saddam Hussein’s non-existent WMD program.  In other words, Gerson was on the president’s marketing team charged with candy-coating one of the most catastrophic, illegal, immoral wars in the history of American foreign policy.

Everyone on that team knew exactly what they were doing.

Here is Paul Waldman’s assessment (in a very cogent article published in

President George W. Bush speaks about Iraq and Afghanistan, January 4, 2006. Standing with Bush from left are National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque – RTR17RZC

This Week) of the work accomplished by Gerson and his associates in the WHIG:

“What the Bush administration launched in 2002 and 2003 may have been the most comprehensive, sophisticated, and misleading campaign of government propaganda in American history.”

That’s what Gerson helped to accomplish.

Gerson is widely regarded as the author of the “smoking gun/mushroom cloud” fear-mongering metaphor that became the most effective rhetorical trick used by Bush officials in promoting the Iraq War.  (Check out Gerson’ Wikipedia page for some interesting anecdotes told by his fellow speech-writers [with citations]).

I have always wondered what happened to Gerson’s Christian conscience during those crucial years in the Bush White House.

In 2012 Gerson gave a public lecture at Calvin College.  I was there.  As he often does, Gerson talked about the formative influences of Charles Colson and Senator Jack Kemp, two Christian leaders with whom he worked closely as a young man.  He credits them for positively shaping his Christian social and political conscience.  He also talked briefly about his years with George W. Bush, but had precious little to say about his work in the White House.

When it came time for the audience to ask questions, I took my place in the short line forming behind a public microphone.  I don’t recall my exact words, but this is essentially what I asked Mr. Gerson:

Torture at Abu Ghraib prison

“You have talked a lot about how your Christian conscience has directed you through your life in politics.  Yet, your political career includes working for an administration that legalized and carried out the torture of other human beings.  Your White House also violated our Constitution with its warrantless, mass surveillance of the American people.  When asked, the president you worked for knowingly lied to us about that fact.

The man packed in ice is Manadel al-Jamadi, an Iraqi prisoner who died while being tortured in Abu Ghraib prison

 “How did you, how do you, reconcile all of that with your ‘Christian conscience?’  How could you do that?  What do you have to say?”

Gerson’s answer was a disheartening example of double-speak and evasion.  He never answered my question, not really.  And I was surprised that he didn’t have a more polished response.  Certainly, he had been asked this question before?

I have no idea if Mr. Gerson has ever answered that question within himself.  If he felt ashamed or had experienced any regret over his years of deliberate, knowing collusion in clearing a path for one of the greatest American crimes of the 20th century, he gave no indication of it.

Though I strongly disagree with almost all of Gerson’s policy positions, I am pleased to see him take up the pen and use his position with the Washington Post to shed some sensible, moral – perhaps even somewhat Christian – daylight onto the sweaty, belching, obnoxious, moral turpitude that is the Trump administration.

Apparently, the water temperature in this current White House is too hot even for Michael Gerson.  But his previous ability to flourish at criminally high temperatures causes me to bite my tongue as others commend him for his Christian cajones.

My understanding of Christianity says that redemption first requires confession of and repentance from sin.  Public sins demand public confession.  We may have learned a little about Gerson’s tolerance of the current heat in Washington, D.C.

I am not convinced that his current opposition to Donald Trump tells us anything at all about Gerson’s Christian discipleship.

I am still waiting to hear a public confession of his past, political sins.

A Prayer Request and More Praise for My Book, I Pledge Allegiance

Like most authors, I always appreciate receiving feedback from my readers.  I am especially grateful whenever I hear a story about how my work has stirred positive transformation and been encouraging to someone, especially when that someone is trying to follow Jesus faithfully.

Below I have copied a very kind note I recently received from a minister who has read my newest book, I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America (Eerdmans, 2018).

Thank you, pastor, for taking the time to be an encouragement to me:

“At the recommendation of [a] long-time friend and former parishioner… I just finished reading….for the second time…your book, “I Pledge Allegiance”. All I can say, David, is THANK YOU!!! You’ve helped me find some renewed sense of balance in what it means to live in this country at this time as a follower of Jesus. Having just recently retired from parish ministry… I’m aware of how often I waffled, especially in my preaching. There are times when I experience guilt and wish I could begin again to deal in a better way with the influences of congregants. And then there are those times when I’m grateful that I made it through without getting kicked out. The events of this past week put me into an even deeper depression. However, your insights and reminders have helped me immensely. Again, thank you!! And, please, keep writing. David”

In response to this man’s last sentence, let me say that I am trying to continue my writing.  But I am facing a few obstacles.  I mention this because, if you are a praying person, I could use your prayers about my next (possible) writing project.

I want to write a book about both(1)  the theological problems of Christian Zionism and (2) the human suffering entangled with American evangelicalism’s blind support for the nation of Israel.  The book will be half Biblical theology and half real-life stories.

The theology sections will explain the serious errors of “Christian Zionism” (i.e. those who believe that modern Israel is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy in need of the church’s, and America’s, wholehearted support).

The real life stories will describe graphic instances of Palestinian suffering and abuse that I have witnessed first-hand during my visits to the West Bank area (captured by the Israeli army during the 1967 war and kept under military occupation ever since).

My proposal for this book has now passed over a number of publisher’s desks.  One publisher said (I am paraphrasing), “Dave, we think this would be a good book, but your previous books haven’t been great sellers for us.  We don’t think we’d make much money from this one, either.”

Four other well-known publishing houses have all said something similar, “David, we like and agree with your proposal.  We think this would me a good book, but we can’t figure out how we would sell it.  Sorry.  Good luck.”

Needless to say, I am a bit frustrated and disappointed.  So, I would very much appreciate your prayers as I try to figure out where next to send the proposal.  I firmly believe this book needs to be written.

Otherwise, perhaps I am at the end of my writing career.  I hope not, but who knows.

Why Erasing “In God We Trust” Would be a Good Thing for Everyone

Genuine Christians don’t trust in God.

Real Christians trust in the eternal, heavenly Father of the resurrected and ascended Lord, Jesus Christ.  There is a difference, a BIG difference between these two deities.

Trusting in God does not require anything of us, because God-trusters always make God in their own image.

The generic God of the God-trusters is a God of convenience.  And what is America today if not the wasteland of endless, ad nauseum convenience?

Idolatry’s promise of religious convenience is at the heart of why God-trusters embrace their ever-convenient God.  Like all idolatry, trusting in the God of American civil religion is easy-peasy religion, because that God is always on our side.  What’s not to like?

Who wouldn’t want to be on God’s side when you already think you know that God’s side is always your side?

The angel of American manifest destiny

He is always, predictably, the God of our nation, our history, our wars, our empire, our manifest destiny, our foreign policy, our political party, our consumerist lifestyle, our race, even our skin color, if and when appealing to such racial niceties becomes necessary.

How nice it is to believe in an agreeable God who wants for your nation what you do, who believes in the rightness of your cause just as you do, who excuses the world-wide bloodshed caused by your country for the same reasons you do.

How insufferably convenient to embrace a religion of such logical redundancy.  Clear-headedness is never expected of anyone.

This is always the way with idolatry.

This In-God-We-Trust God emerges from our own selfish desires, hopes and priorities.  For even when we fail to achieve our desires, this God of the God-trusters is flexible enough to adopt failed outcomes as the deepest desire of his heart.  So, America can do no wrong, even when she fails abysmally and wreaks havoc among those who suffer from her miscalculations.

On the other hand, if there is one thing the Bible tells us about the one, true God, Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the eternal Father of Jesus of Nazareth:  God is never convenient.

Following Jesus of Nazareth is not convenient, not at all convenient.  That’s why so few people really do it, consistently, day in and day out, for a lifetime.

When Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712 – 1778) devoted a chapter in his book, The Social Contract (1762), to the centrality of civil religion in the modern nation-state, he emphasized the civic dangers of Christianity.  In fact, he believed – rightly, in my opinion – that the gospel of Jesus Christ, when embraced by true believers, posed the single greatest threat to the long-term survival of any modern nation-state.  He even went so far as to insist that the Roman Catholic church (the only form of Christianity he knew) be outlawed if the nation-state hoped to survive.

Rousseau’s fears can be boiled down very simply:  The Christian God was not controllable.  The Christian God is neither predictable nor convenient – at least, not from a human point of view.

Jesus Christ can never be relied upon to cast his vote for “my side.”  And he always demands an allegiance transcending national, political and social loyalties.

The atheist Rousseau understood Christianity better than most American Christians.

If we understood the import of the gospel of Jesus Christ, Christians would be the first to ask that idolatrous phrases like “In God We Trust” be erased forever.

We would abandon the silly, meaningless conflicts over state-sanctioned “prayer” in public schools.

We would shun idolatrous ceremonies demanding that we “pledge allegiance” to a flag.

We would laugh hysterically whenever we hear the next televised nattering nabob boast about winning some war over saying “merry Christmas” in the public square.

We would speak up and declare, “No, I do not trust in your God of convenient nationalism.  I trust in the heavenly Father of Jesus Christ; Savior of ALL people everywhere; King of the universe; the Lord whose kingdom of righteousness makes public inconvenience a hallmark of the faithful.”

More Whining from the Evangelical Advisory Board Spokesman

CBN News posted the following headline today:

“’This Is an Attempt to Intimidate Certain Voices’: Group Says Meetings Between Trump, Faith Leaders a Violation of Law”

The story concerns a letter (fully documenting its assertions) sent by Americans United for the Separation of Church and State asserting that president Trump’s so-called Evangelical Advisory Board is violating federal law.  Below is the substance of their complaint. I have highlighted the essential clauses:

“…the Advisory Board is subject to, but has failed to comply with, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 2. It is clear that the President’s Evangelical Advisory Board is doing substantive work with the Trump Administration behind closed doors—without any sunlight for the public to understand how and why decisions are being made. We respectfully request that the Advisory Board cease meeting and providing advice to the President unless and until it fully complies with FACA, and that you produce to us certain documents relating to the Advisory Board.

 “FACA applies to ‘any committee, board, commission, council, conference, panel, task force, or other similar group, or any subcommittee or other subgroup thereof . . . which is . . . established or utilized by the President . . . in the interest of obtaining advice or recommendations for the President or one or more agencies or officers of the Federal Government.’  The Evangelical Advisory Board’s activities are well within FACA’s scope.”

The gist of CBN’s reporting, particularly in its online interview with Advisory Board spokesman, Johnnie Moore, blatantly misrepresents the

Johnnie Moore, graduate of Liberty University

AUSCS letter.  Describing it as one more secularist attempt to “intimidate” evangelical voices in government, both CBN and Johnnie Moore distort the real complaint beyond recognition.

As anyone who reads the letter can see, the problem is not that Trump hangs out with evangelicals – although given the cataclysmic demise of evangelical integrity these days, they certainly can’t be anything but a corrosive influence on a president in dire need of both spiritual and practical advice.  (I would warn the president about the dangers of associating with “backsliders,” but I don’t think he is familiar with the term.)

The problem is not that Trump converses with evangelicals but that he hangs out with them in lonely back alleys, in the dead of night, where they talk in low whispers, without anyone taking notes or keeping a record of their conversations.  Such behavior would be unremarkable if these paragons of Christian virtue were swearing fealty to The Donald in the crushed velvet, over-stuffed chairs of Trump Towers.  Politically aware followers of Jesus have come to expect such treachery from the mammon-loving leaders of their mega-churches and other televised “ministries” lusting for more TBN airtime.

But the president is a public servant, at least in theory, not merely the crime boss he was before winning the election.

The American people have every right to know, as a matter of public record,

The recent dinner for evangelicals at the White House

with whom the president is meeting, from whom he is taking advice, and whether that advice is affecting the rest of us who pay the president’s salary.

American’s United is simply asking the president and his evangelical bed-fellows to obey the law.  That’s it.

Didn’t the Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, cite Romans 13 not very long ago as an ominous reminder of just how law-abiding all Americans were supposed to be?  True evangelicals ought to be jumping at the chance fully “to comply with, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 2.”

Of course, good ‘ole boy Johnnie (any grown man who insists on being called Johnnie has got to be a good ‘ole boy) insists that there is no such thing as an Evangelical Advisory Council. CBN reports,

“’From the very beginning we’ve made it clear that there is no evangelical advisory council at the White House…I don’t know how many times I’ve said that.  I think everybody just needs to recognize that this is an attempt to intimidate certain voices, and voices that will not be intimidated,’ said Moore.

While there is no doubt that Sessions was trying to “intimidate certain

Rev. Paula White opens the evangelical dinner with prayer

voices” with his immigration policy of separating immigrant children from their parents, under the aegis of Romans 13 no less, I confess that the intimidation factor in the American’s United letter escapes me completely.

Johnnie’s bald-faced insistence that there is no such thing as an Evangelical Advisory Council reminds me of the Monty Python “Dead Parrot sketch.”  After his recently purchased parrot dies, the disgruntled customer tries to return his now dead parrot to the pet shop, only to be faced with the recalcitrant owner who insists – contrary to all the evidence – that the bird is not dead, only resting.  Classic Monty Python.

Well, Johnnie Moore.  Monty Python disbanded long ago.  Your attempts to resurrect the group with a new Evangelical Council sketch won’t work.  It’s not funny.

After all, there is a stable collection of “evangelical” church leaders who periodically gather collectively with the president in Washington D.C., providing him with counsel about issues dear to their hearts, urging him to adopt policies favorable to their concerns.  The recent White House dinner for evangelicals was a gathering of the usual suspects.

Johnnie Moore’s denial and complaint is only the latest example of evangelicalism’s pathetic sense of entitlement and bogus victimization.

Paula and Franklin Graham say ‘cheese’ for the White House photographer

You, first, demand special treatment – why do we have to make a public record of our meetings with the president?  It’s not fair! – and then you cry the crocodile tears of “religious discrimination” when a public service organization calls you out for trying to play by your own rules.

Why can’t evangelical leaders willingly abide by the same standards applied to every other lobbying group?  Why the skulduggery, followed by another “stop picking on me” burst of tears?  It’s pathetic.

Sadly, this story, which is paradigmatic of the many reprehensible ills afflicting evangelicalism today, is one layer of dishonesty on top of another, and another, and another…

If you will, allow me to paraphrase the apostle Paul’s lament over mortality as I close.  Paul says, “Oh, my God, who will deliver me from this body-politic of death?”  (Romans 7:24).

What Readers are Saying about My Book I Pledge Allegiance

Not long ago a good friend and former colleague sent me a message with encouraging words about my new book, I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America (Eerdmans, 2018). 

She unexpectedly bumped into another friend while they both were marching in a local protest demonstrating against president Trump’s immigration policies.

She passed along these kind remarks:

“…(my friend) mentioned that the men’s book club had finished reading I Pledge Allegiance this morning, and found it really good and deeply challenging in all the right ways – and also that he had been in touch with you to say how superb he finds the book. I’m really glad that he took the initiative to contact you!! He and I have been talking a lot about it recently, and how we need to keep it close by to help us to navigate the insanity.”

I could not be more pleased.  She describes everything I hope would happen when disciples wrestle with God’s word while considering the arguments found in my book.

I am pleased as punch.

If you haven’t yet read I Pledge Allegiance, please join the crowd of those who have and ask the Holy Spirit what He wants you to be doing for the kingdom of God in this world right now.

There is No Disrespect in Telling the Truth About Dead Senators

I am sorry, but I can’t abide the heaping shovels-full of shamelessly fawning bromides being spewed out by the corporate media in their oh-so UN-journalistic obituaries of John McCain.

Apparently, patriot and patriotism are the civil-religion mantras of choice at the moment, intended to numb our critical faculties and mesmerize us into another dreamscape of American greatness and war-hero sainthood.

Don’t fall for it.  We need to resist.

You see, John McCain never met an American war that he didn’t like and wish to expand.  He was a rabid hawk who seemed incapable of feeling anything like  empathy for the untold masses of people killed, maimed and displaced by American military adventurism around the world.

It is one thing to believe the mythology of noble America’s military virtue as a little child, but to leverage those nationalistic lies over and over again from Capitol Hill in the merciless mission of immolating country after country (e.g. Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, to list only a few of McCain’s wars of choice) upon the altar of American hegemony is an unconscionable evil perpetrated against God and the divine image placed within every human being.

As citizens of God’s kingdom first and foremost, who view this world and its shenanigans through the lens Jesus’ kingdom ethics, nostalgically memorializing McCain’s political career is the last thing any follower of Jesus should be doing.

I don’t know anything about McCain’s religious convictions.  I hope that he confessed his sins and surrendered to the Lord Jesus while he still had the opportunity.

For an unvarnished, historically accurate appraisal of Senator McCain’s political career, please watch this clip (22 minutes) from Democracy Now.  Amy Goodman interviews Norman Solomon, Medea Benjamin and Mehdi Hasan who remind us of the many unsavory facts about McCain’s politics that the corporate media deliberately omits from its obits.

 

The War Prayer, by Mark Twain

Besides being a brilliant author and humorist, Mark Twain was a man of deep conscience.  But that won’t surprise anyone who has read his books.

From 1899 to 1902, the United States was embroiled in another of its imperialist wars.  This time in the Philippines.  Twain was a staunch opponent of American empire and publicly protested against the Philippine-American war.

His short story, “The War Prayer,” was submitted to the magazine Harper’s Bazaar in March, 1905.  The editor’s rejected it.  Because Twain was under contract, he couldn’t submit it to anyone else.  He wrote to a friend lamenting,

“I don’t think the prayer will be published in my time. None but the dead are permitted to tell the truth.”

The Prayer was finally published in 1923, thirteen years after Twain’s death.  When I was teaching, I made it a regular practice to read Twain’s story to my students.  It is as relevant for us today as it was in 1905.

 

The War Prayer

by Mark Twain

It was a time of great and exalting excitement. The country was up in arms, the war was on, in every breast burned the holy fire of patriotism; the drums were beating, the bands playing, the toy pistols popping, the bunched firecrackers hissing and spluttering; on every hand and far down the receding and fading spread of roofs and balconies a fluttering wilderness of flags flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched down the wide avenue gay and fine in their new uniforms, the proud fathers and mothers and sisters and sweethearts cheering them with voices choked with happy emotion as they swung by; nightly the packed mass meetings listened, panting, to patriot oratory with stirred the deepest deeps of their hearts, and which they interrupted at briefest intervals with cyclones of applause, the tears running down their cheeks the while; in the churches the pastors preached devotion to flag and country, and invoked the God of Battles beseeching His aid in our good cause in outpourings of fervid eloquence which moved every listener.

It was indeed a glad and gracious time, and the half dozen rash spirits that ventured to disapprove of the war and cast a doubt upon its righteousness straightway got such a stern and angry warning that for their personal safety’s sake they quickly shrank out of sight and offended no more in that way.

Sunday morning came — next day the battalions would leave for the front; the church was filled; the volunteers were there, their young faces alight with martial dreams — visions of the stern advance, the gathering momentum, the rushing charge, the flashing sabers, the flight of the foe, the tumult, the enveloping smoke, the fierce pursuit, the surrender!

Then home from the war, bronzed heroes, welcomed, adored, submerged in golden seas of glory! With the volunteers sat their dear ones, proud, happy, and envied by the neighbors and friends who had no sons and brothers to send forth to the field of honor, there to win for the flag, or, failing, die the noblest of noble deaths. The service proceeded; a war chapter from the Old Testament was read; the first prayer was said; it was followed by an organ burst that shook the building, and with one impulse the house rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts, and poured out that tremendous invocation:

God the all-terrible! Thou who ordainest,
Thunder thy clarion and lightning thy sword!

Then came the “long” prayer. None could remember the like of it for passionate pleading and moving and beautiful language. The burden of its supplication was, that an ever-merciful and benignant Father of us all would watch over our noble young soldiers, and aid, comfort, and encourage them in their patriotic work; bless them, shield them in the day of battle and the hour of peril, bear them in His mighty hand, make them strong and confident, invincible in the bloody onset; help them crush the foe, grant to them and to their flag and country imperishable honor and glory —

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and noiseless step up the main aisle, his eyes fixed upon the minister, his long body clothed in a robe that reached to his feet, his head bare, his white hair descending in a frothy cataract to his shoulders, his seamy face unnaturally pale, pale even to ghastliness. With all eyes following him and wondering, he made his silent way; without pausing, he ascended to the preacher’s side and stood there waiting. With shut lids the preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued his moving prayer, and at last finished it with the words, uttered in fervent appeal, “Bless our arms, grant us the victory, O Lord and God, Father and Protector of our land and flag!”

The stranger touched his arm, motioned him to step aside — which the startled minister did — and took his place. During some moments he surveyed the spellbound audience with solemn eyes, in which burned an uncanny light; then in a deep voice he said:

“I come from the Throne — bearing a message from Almighty God!” The words smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no attention. “He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd, and will grant it if such be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import — that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it is aware of — except he pause and think. “God’s servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two — one uttered, and the other not. Both have reached the ear of Him who heareth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this — keep it in mind. If you would beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon your neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain on your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse on some neighbor’s crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.

“You have heard your servant’s prayer — the uttered part of it. I am commissioned by God to put into words the other part of it — that part which the pastor — and also you in your hearts — fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so! You heard the words ‘Grant us the victory, O Lord our God!’ That is sufficient. The whole of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory — must follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

“Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth into battle — be Thou near them! With them — in spirit — we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with their little children to wander unfriended in the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames in summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it —

For our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimmage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet!

We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.

(After a pause.) “Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits.”

—

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.