Eric Erickson has an interesting article at The Resurgent discussing Pete
Buttigieg’s interview last Sunday on Meet the Press. It’s entitled, “Pete Buttigieg Shows Why Progressive Christianity is a Hypocritical Farce.”
You can read the entire piece, which contains a video clip of the T.V. interview under discussion, by clicking on the title above. Or you can read a brief excerpt provided below.
I am writing this post for several reasons:
First, I found Erickson’s article interesting. I agree with his argument about Buttigieg’s moral relativism with respect to Buttigieg’s decision to lead a gay lifestyle, including his marriage to another man.
Erickson is right to point out that Buttigieg can’t call out President Trump’s hypocrisy for ignoring Biblical commands to “help the widows and the orphans” while simultaneously ignoring the New Testament’s condemnations of same-sex intimacy.
Nope, that doesn’t wash, Mr. Buttigieg.
Buttigieg’s judgments on this score not only look like cherry-picking from among the select pieces of scripture he happens to like (or dislike), it IS cherry-picking of the most obvious sort.
Secondly, however, Erickson commits a few blunders of his own that make me hesitant to call him an ally in my concerns about filtering our political thinking through the presence of God’s kingdom on earth. (Again, check out my book, I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America).
My concerns begin with the title of this article — “Pete Buttigieg Shows Why Progressive Christianity is a Hypocritical Farce.”
The title raises a number of troubling questions which Mr. Erickson never tries to answers.
How does he define Progressive Christianity? What is it exactly? A writer really shouldn’t be attacking something that he makes no effort to describe.
And why should I accept Mr. Erickson’s assumption that Pete Buttigieg is a (if not the) representative of said Progressive Christianity? Has Mr. Buttigieg ever made that claim for himself? Has an official spokesperson for “Progressive Christianity” ever claimed Pete Buttigieg as its chosen candidate?
Nope and nope. So, I have to ask, on what basis is Erickson implying that connection now? In fact, what the heck is he trying to say by making such a suggestion???
Nope, Mr. Erickson. This is an underlying assumption of yours that I’m not willing to share. Such ill-conceived innuendo does not constitute an argument.
Furthermore, demonstrating one respect in which Buttigieg is being hypocritical (an extremely human trait by the way, displayed by all of us at one time or another) is a far cry from proving that the entirety of Progressive Christianity (however that is defined) is either hypocritical or farcical.
You are grossly over-reaching Mr. Erickson, which always makes me suspicious that there is something other than a concern for proper Biblical interpretation and its consistent application animating your arguments.
I think I smell a purely political agenda brewing in the background; partisanship disguised in the popular garb of Christian conscience.
Actually, in a round-about fashion, Erickson ends up showing us that his view of Christianity is every bit as skewed by partisan loyalties as is Buttigieg’s.
In his article chiding Buttigieg for publicly denying the possibility that president Trump might be a Christian, Erickson begins by pointing out how “badly” Buttigieg himself performs while “trying to play a Christian on television.”
The implication is clear: Erickson can’t believe that Buttigieg is a genuine Christian, either.
Ouch. I can’t help but wonder if Erickson is “trying to play a Christian” at The Resurgent?
In one way, I agree with Buttigieg. I do not find Trump’s profession of Christian faith the least bit believable, either. The man is a career criminal who admits that he has never felt the need either to confess his sins or to ask God for forgiveness. Trump’s past, as well as his present, suggest that our president is a sociopath.
And that, sadly, assures us that our current president is (for now, at least) a son of perdition.
On the other hand, I don’t know know much about either Mr. Erickson or Mr. Buttigieg, and I can’t judge either man’s faith in Jesus. (Perhaps I will write another post in the near future about how a Christian may or may not pursue a gay lifestyle.) However, I’ll happily remind them both that being a Christian means submitting the entirety of our lives, in every respect, to the teaching and the Lordship of the resurrected Jesus.
That Jesus was not a progressive or a conservative or a democrat or a republican. Christ’s only partisanship is to the eternal glory of his heavenly Father. Thus, he remains the eternal Son who requires that his followers seek after God’s kingdom, first, last, and always.
Here, finally, is that excerpt I promised:
“Buttigieg said he thought evangelicals backing President Trump were hypocritical because when he goes to church he hears about taking care of widows, the poor, and refugees, but Trump does not do that. Buttigieg went on to draw a distinction. In his professional conduct, Trump does not take care of widows and refugees as scripture commands and Buttigieg is right on this. Then Buttigieg continues that in Trump’s personal life as well he falls short of Christian behavior (he is right on that part too, by the way, but then we are all sinners). You can see the full, unedited exchange here.
“Interestingly, Buttigieg goes on to note that evangelicals are too focused on sexual ethics these days. He seems to be arguing that they need to drop that aspect of their faith, as he has. Then comes the pivot exposing Buttigieg’s own hypocrisy.
“Buttigieg thinks the President is not really behaving as one who believes in God because, as President, Donald Trump is not taking care of the widows, the orphans, the poor, and the refugees. Chuck Todd asks Buttigieg about his position on abortion and Buttigieg’s response is that abortion is a moral issue and we cannot legislate morality.
“This is why progressive Christianity is so corrupt and flawed. As much as Buttigieg makes a valid critique on the President’s behavior and evangelicals excusing that behavior, Buttigieg wants to reject the inconvenient parts of faith he does not like. He is a gay man who got married; he does not think homosexuality is a sin despite express statements in scripture, and he thinks abortion is a moral issue and we cannot legislate our morality. Buttigieg wants to use the social obligations as Christians against the President, but wants to avoid any implication on the personal obligations of Christians in terms of clear Biblical sexual ethics and how we are to live our lives applying our faith even for ‘the least of these.’
“He wants to have it both ways and in reality is showing he is no better a Christian than Donald Trump. What is particularly damning here is that Buttigieg claims to be governed by some moral code and he claims he will lead as a more moral President than Trump. At the same time, he claims we cannot do exactly what he is proposing.
“Everyone has a moral code and we all conduct our actions by our moral code. Buttigieg just wants a pass on his moral code, which is all about not taking inconvenient stands on parts of scripture that might make his life a bit uncomfortable. He will wield it against the President and abdicate when it comes to himself.”
