Thank you for taking to time to say all that I just didn’t have the patience to spell out. Excellent post.
1 Like
So on the one hand, you assert without evidence that Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney are profiting from their office. On the other hand, you have no idea how in the world President Trump could turn the highest office in the world for a profit. I am quite sure the President is much more full of ideas as to how to turn his position to profit than you are.
Trump’s finances are opaque enough that we would have little idea of how his wealth has been effected by his tenure.
“One could argue…”!!! Yes, one certainly could. I did not say that his pardon was illegal. I said it was corrupt. And when you compare it to the actions Clinton, in many ways the gold standard of corruption, it makes my point. We’ve come quite a long way from “what open corruption?” But yes, I get that since Roger “imma gonna kill your dog” Stone is on “our team”, you’d like him to get the same perks of our corrupt system as the other team gets. But please spare me the tears for a dirty trickster who was long overdue his comeuppance.
And yes, I realize the Senate was far too busy investigating Clinton in 2015, to take break and investigate all of Biden’s corruptions going on in Ukraine. Do I think everything was on the up and up? Probably not. But Hunter’s place on the board of a gas company is hardly a national crisis, and the nepotistic Trump family are the last people on earth with any standing to criticize that. [edited to remove comments about Biden and US policy. It’s beside the point, and I have no need to defend Biden, a man I will never vote for regardless]
Essentially I disagree with all of your assessments of the arrests and investigations, but I doubt I could marshal enough links to make convincing argument to you.
I have no problem condemning him on the basis of other major party candidates. I won’t belabor all the moral filth his life has consisted of. And again, I am not attacking people’s decision to vote for him. However, when that vote brings us to embrace the sort of moral reasoning I see running rampant, where things we once cried out as disqualifying are now treated s as no big deal, we have a problem. However we vote we must not allow our vote to cloud our convictions.
The price will be far higher than all the tragedies you listed. “What does it profit, if he gain the whole world?”
1 Like
No doubt. Time will tell. But if Donald Trump, in 2015, was looking around for ways to become rich, “become the political avatar for the white working class” was a dumber plan than “start smoking meth.” Perhaps he’ll be more successful at this than I give him credit for: No one has gotten rich lately betting against Trump.
Official Washington never had any serious problems with the Clintons’ corruption. There was some harrumphing and a failed impeachment and a phoney-baloney FBI investigation cum coverup of Mrs. Clinton’s emails. When do they get theirs? Who will give it to them? Why does “not as bad as the Clintons” become a poor defense of a politician when the Clintons have clearly established the boundaries of the actual law?
And what did Trump get for commuting Stone’s sentence (not pardoning!), other than a bunch of bad press? If anything, Trump has been far, far too tolerant of the DOJ prosecuting people for the apparent crime of working to get Donald Trump elected. This is an outrage and a scandal. Manafort deserves a commutation and Flynn deserves a full pardon. Papadopolous deserves a full pardon also.
(For the record, I would repeal the law against lying to federal agents. It’s nonsense. But if we are going to have the law, then we should apply it equally or not at all.)
Paul Manafort has been kicking around Washington for decades. St. Ronald’s campaign manager, in fact. Apparently nobody noticed he was into dirty tricks until about 2016. Something happened in 2016, but I can’t quite remember what it was.
What Roger Stone got was certainly comeuppance. It was absolutely not justice. Having a CNN crew cover the man’s dark-of-morning guns-drawn arrest for a process crime is revolting prosecutorial misconduct. Again I ask, where is official Washington’s sanction against Mueller’s attack dogs who carried out this injustice? Quis custodet ipsos custodes?
I have one representative in Washington DC, and it’s very clear that federal law enforcement applies a different standard to him and the people who work for him than it does to anyone else in Washington.
Maybe part of the reason that President Trump has had so much trouble staffing his administration is because people don’t want to wind up in prison for the rest of their lives. Who could blame them?
If we want to apply one standard of measure to all parties, then I’m very open to that. Let’s send them all to prison. Harvey Silverglate contends that the average American commits three felonies per day. Let’s have the FBI set perjury traps for every candidate’s campaign team and incoming cabinet members. That’d be a hoot. It’d probably get a few laws changed too, which would be very salutary. But let’s not have one standard for the Trump campaign and another standard for literally everyone else. (Well, they’d probably screw Bernie too, but I doubt he’ll ever get the chance at this point.)
You are correct that you will not convince me that entrapping an incoming National Security Adviser in a process crime as a way to lash out against American voters was a correct course of action. A sane country would have found a long gallows for the federal agents who perpetrated the seditious Russia hoax on this nation. Instead they get TV contracts and book deals.
If it is your contention that our system is so corrupt that it only produces men unworthy of our votes, that’s not a position I agree with, but it’s one I respect. (I expect I’ll take up that position after Trump leaves Washington. If no one does hard time for the seditious Russiagate conspiracy, I doubt I’ll ever cast a vote in a presidential election again.) But if your position is that Donald Trump is uniquely awful, among the crowd of hucksters, liars and grifters who have made up major-party candidates over the last 30 or so years, well, I’m not swallowing it.
There are certainly those who have become morally compromised by Trump’s sins. Someone referenced it up-thread, and it is a real hazard. But let us not confuse the sidelines for the moral high ground. If a fight is worth fighting, then it’s worth fighting well, and worth winning.
Defending General Flynn gets my blood up. Feel free to take the last word, Martin.
Best,
John
3 Likes
“Be careful, when you fight a dragon, that you do not a dragon become” (Nietzsche). To quote Ben Carmack on this thread, “[Trump] has proven to be the Samson we needed, not the David we thought we deserved”, but Samson’s career as a judge ended in a disaster called Delilah, and so, perhaps, could Trump’s - thus, dragging down with him what he did accomplish.
1 Like
If I’m not mistaken Judges 16 does not end in verse 27 and thus does not end with Delilah. But no one here is either judge or prophet to know what will or should happen to this president.
3 Likes
I’ve never been a registered Republican or Democrat because neither party has enough overlap with my own views. I also didn’t vote for either Trump or Clinton the first time around and have not settled on who I will vote for this time around, if anyone. The reason I say this is to demonstrate my non-partisan outsider bona fides.
Perhaps many people here are too young to remember the Clinton administration, but I recall a lot of apparent corruption that the mainstream media and government officialdom waved off with a, “Nothing to see here.” I use the word “apparent” because there was hardly ever was any mainstream media or government investigation to genuinely dig out the facts rather than cover them up. One is example is Mrs. Clinton mysteriously making $100,000 in commodities trading when her husband was Governor of Arkansas. Well, that certainly looks like a bribe to me, but no one with the hard or soft power to dig into it ever did so.
More recently, former Secretary Clinton used a private computer for official communications and then “lost” a large number of emails. To mention that a lesser government official would get in big trouble for this sort of thing is missing the point – c’mon, I’m adult here – you expect me to believe that Secretary Clinton did this for any other reason than to exercise power for private purposes with impunity from oversight? And yet the mainstream media and government officialdom treats me like a baby and tells me what I see with my own eyes is not what it looks like.
So when it comes to President Trump, I guess I am suffering corruption fatigue. I am not one of his supporters and thus feel no need to take responsibility for his moral failings, but I also clearly see that he is being held to a different standard than others. The Russia investigation was laughable from the very start seemed like an attempt by Democratic partisans to excuse their own campaigning failures and subvert the outcome of the election. Again, I say this not as a Trump supporter or Republican, but as someone who is able to see with his own eyes.
7 Likes
Agreed.
I’m not nearly as philosophically neutral.
For me the two parties, since I’ve been alive and through many possible exceptions, represent two clearly distinct world views; with the Democrats generally representing the worldview of Marxist rebellion. It is a philosophy of envy disguised as philanthropy, of deconstruction, and ultimately one that necessitates authoritarian rule. These are the omnipotent moral busybodies CS Lewis spoke of. The republicans on the other hand, are selling good ol’ fashioned Americana. God, Liberty, Guns, and fried Chicken. What escapes many Americans is the philosophy that undergirds that American dream, and because it escapes so many, we often get sold a false bill of goods. It looks like Americana but doesn’t end up tasting like it.
The commonalities they shared are largely pragmatic, survival, and even Machiavellian, but not so much philosophically. Both sides have their core beliefs, and both sides frequently sacrifice those beliefs at the alter of survival.
I’m not fooled into thinking that voting party line won’t produce that false bill of goods, but I’m not buying the product the other party is selling whether it is ideological or watered down.
I’ve always voted Republican and have almost always been utterly disappointed. None more than when Trump was nominated. I still wrote in my guy from the Primary as a protest. But, there is something about Trump that I didn’t expect. The man gets things done, fast. In all my years of studying politics, and I have two related degrees, I’ve never seen such rapid productivity from a first term President.
Clinton and Carter were both utter embarrassments to their party for their political failures year after year. No so with Trump. He may be embarrassing to watch on the news, but man does he get things done. And he largely does what he said he was going to do.
So while I have major concerns about the moral fitness of the man, I see a leader who knows how to deliver the product he’s selling. That’s got value. So this season, I’m not gonna cry over the 2016 primary, and I’m sure as heck not gonna buy social deconstruction and self-hatred of the other party. It’s a clear choice.
2 Likes
Those that respect the law and love sausage should watch neither being made. Mark Twain
A history prof in seminary applied this proverb to the formulation of Christian creeds, including the Nicene. Mutatis mutandis it applies just as well to Christians who applaud the Presidential leadership of Donald Trump.
Switching perspectives from folk wisdom to Pauline Dogma, I am constantly amazed at Christians - especially those who are the Church’s ostensible leaders - who constantly flash virtue signals to the Universe by criticizing Trump as unworthy of a Christian’s vote, much less their applause or support. Or who fault other Christians who do support him and applaud him, as if such were spiritual dolts, dimwits, or dunces. Have these Christian leaders never read Romans 13, composed by Paul most likely during the reign of Nero? Do they forget that a Babylonian pagan named Cyrus is extolled in Scripture as a servant of the Lord? Do these virtue signalers fault the Lord of Hosts for elevating The Donald to the Executive Headship of America? What do they think of Him when He raised up Samson?
All their virtue signaling is the purest flummery.
Someone somewhere said something about the King’s heart being like rivers of water in the hands of the Lord. I’ll put my trust in those hands, and not in the waters He happens to turn whichever way He pleases.
After decades of Republican presidents and aspirants to that office sweet-talking gullible evangelicals during election campaigns, only to ignore them after they’ve pocketed their votes, a majority of evangelicals have finally turned away from the pious posturing of such dishonest men (or cowards, whichever they be) to vote for someone who is delivering on his campaign promises. I voted for Trump in earnest hope that he would be for America what Samson was for Israel - a wrecker of the Cosa Nostra between the Philistines and Israel’s elders (or, on the modern scene, between the godless Democrats and those religious snake oil salesmen in the Republican Party). It’s a huge evidence that Trump has turned out to be what I hoped that he has enemies just as numerous and bitter within his own party as he does among the Democrats.
9 Likes
Thank you!
3 Likes
I’m afraid what some of them think boils down to American exceptionalism. Our free democratic process should be above this sort of thing because … America! 
3 Likes
Nathan’s somewhat more charitable than I am. I think many Christian leaders simply hope they’ll be spared the wrath of the mob if they’re on the right side of history today. Outrage at all things Trump is an easy way to demonstrate ones bona fides. Men like Russel Moore have no patience for any notion of American exceptionalism.
4 Likes
That’s me.
1 Like
I have no problem believing that most prosecutions at the highest levels are politically motivated. This is how power operates and it shouldn’t shock us. But let’s not pretend this is some new thing that just showed up in 2016. This has been true for a hundred years at least, since Al Capone fell out of favor with the establishment and was indicted on tax fraud.
But making that abstract assessment from where we sit is very different than someone who has just been indicted for tax fraud by the FBI claiming victimhood and crying foul. For a person who has been caught in an investigation, repentance and humility are the right response.
You are prepared to argue that a man who behaved like a mobster during an investigation should just walk, since you can point to a powerful family who has not been given their justice despite decades of their public corruption. Or are we wanting to end all prosecutions and commute all sentences since our justice system is to corrupt and the convictions of powerful men are inevitably political? Quite frankly, that is an insane position to take.
We can’t have it both ways. We can’t point to how corrupt things are, and then cry foul when we embrace and excuse that same corruption (“but everyone else is doing it!”) and suffer the consequences. The constant tensions present in your defenses boggle my mind. “Conservatives are losing because they won’t fight dirty!”… “We support him because he fights!”…”Look how unfair they are being to him, investigating him for using their dirty tricks!”. One could be forgiven for thinking that perhaps embracing dirty tricks isn’t an effective method for actually accomplishing things. Sure it works sometimes. Sure some people get away with it. But when you work overtime to make enemies of huge swaths of the people in power, and have no integrity at all to begin with, you can’t complain to much when the hammer drops.
I couldn’t agree more. And I am doing my best to fight well. And we can disagree about how to best go about it. Spare me the character assassination going on up thread accusing those of us who are critical of President Trump of just wanting to curry favor with the “important people”. I am not accusing those who support Trump of being full of nasty hate, and just enjoying hurling insults at your enemies vicariously. This sort of uncharitable motive judging may make us feel good about ourselves, but doesn’t help anyone.
I think Trump has been extremely effective in certain areas, places where his chaotic style seems to benefit him. However, I think President Trump’s real super power is his lack of shame.
Most people have a natural need to be respected and liked. People are natural man fearers. Part of the attraction of men like Pastor Tim Bayly (I don’t know what terms of respect are common in this community) and Pastor Douglas Wilson is that, while I’m sure they still have that human desire for people to think well of them, they have chosen to build their courage and stand by their convictions and cultivate their fear of God until young men like myself look to them in a sort of awe. They have weight and they command respect. There is a aura of consistency in their lives and one has the sense that they have no “skeletons in the closet” to rob them of moral certainty and spiritual power. The world trembles before such men.
The reason the world trembles is because there are no handles to control them, and shame has no power over them. They cannot be manipulated and blackmailed, and they just don’t care enough about anyone’s opinion for it to deflect their course from their convictions. To get to that place, and to live in that place, is costly and painful and personally demanding. It makes me think of the lines describing Aragon in the Appendix to the LOTR, “he was elven-wise, and there was a light in his eyes that when they were kindled few could endure.”
But there is another way to overcome the power of shame. It is cultivate within myself the cynical nihilism that after all everyone has their secrets. Sure I may have some serious vices, but doesn’t everyone? Who are you to judge me?? Never back down, never apologize, never humble yourself, never repent. When confronted, double down. And you discover that most people are cowards. When faced with this sort of bold shamelessness, they will back down pretty quickly.
And it’s so much easier than spending to time to build virtue. It skips all the hard parts, but it has most of the benefits. Men look to you in awe. You become their champion. But the deep weakness of your fundamental lack of character will come back to destroy you. It’s not a ruse that can last forever…
Oh the irony. They play hardball, so we play hardball, but now we’re gonna hang all the traitors from a tall tree. And implicit in all this is the assumption that if we were in the FBI, we would do better. Now we can defend all the current President’s shenanigans. We can bend the rules however we like, since the other guys are doing it.
If you had been a federal agent in 2016, and Hillary had won, you are telling me you wouldn’t have been willing to bend the rules a bit to finally catch her in her crimes? But now on the other hand suddenly the rules apply again and you wouldn’t pursue any of those suspicions because you don’t want to overturn “the will of the people”? But if we were in DC, we wouldn’t participate in some seditious plot to overthrow a duly elected President.
And of course you would absolutely not bend the rules to get the warrants you want to pursue the intelligence you need to catch the corrupt politician, right? But you’ve just finished telling me how the Left’s corruption changes the whole game! Quite frankly, just reading your arguments, it seems to me that you are saying you absolutely would be willing to set aside any standards of conduct and pesky laws that got in the way of you pursuing the defeat of the enemy.
All your arguments sound exactly like the photographic negative of the “Resistance”. They believe that President Trump is such an existential threat to the union and now all rules must be set aside and a state of total war is the path forward. They will justify anything, since they believe President Trump is getting away with breaking the law. Y’all need to go to an island somewhere and fight it out.
Yes, that is absolutely my position.
Are you really arguing that the blame for the offshoring of jobs to China is the fault of the POTUS? Look, I was opposed to the Patriot Act from day one, but does that mean Bush was a terrible liar/huckster/grifter? Good grief, people can disagree with me on policy and still be honorable men. I think if you sat in the Oval Office making huge complicated decisions, you might want a little grace from those of us out here looking on. Giving that grace doesn’t require compromise, just a little empathy. You gave a laundry list of all details in our societal breakdown from the past three decades, as if it’s the all the fault of “those elites in Washington”, and even insinuating we’d be better off if only President Trump had been sworn in back in 1980. That doesn’t seem remotely reasonable to me.
And yes, President Trump is on a completely different level of moral corruption than any man I’ve voted for. I realize we’ve had some real corkers in the past, but I wasn’t around then. Some of the President’s antics over the past fifty years sound like they come from the plot of a sit com.
- Who gets on nationally syndicated radio (a show that was later banned and exiled to XM for its vulgarity) and talks about their daughter with the show host. Let’s him openly objectify Ivanka, referring to her with crass terms, and replies that it’s “ok”. You really are saying that no different than Mitt “47%” Romney?! He called Stern something like 50 times!! He has said “if Ivanka weren’t my daughter, I’d probably be dating her.” Really?!?! And let’s not forget he described how Epstein “like beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side”?!?!?? Guys, this ain’t normal.
- Who takes money, from their nonprofit foundation, and uses it…to anonymously buy a portrait…of themself…and then gets on Twitter to brag about how much was paid!!! That is some next level narcissism. That almost sounds like the kind of person who would pretend to be their own PR agent, so they could call up reporters and brag about themselves. Can we just accept that this is on the borderlands of mental derangement?? If I had a relative pulling this stuff, I would call them nuts! I have a few that come close, and I do call them nuts!!
- Who talks about their penchant for extramarital affairs in their book?! That no married woman is safe around them?
- Who meets their third wife, while with a date, and still married to their second wife?
- Who has an affair with a porn star while their wife home with their three month old baby?
- Who describes their own book as their “second favorite”, right behind the Bible??
- Who is asked a question about Putin’s murder of journos and responds that the US kills a lot of people too!?!?! Good grief.
- And honestly, I don’t have the time or interest to discuss him publicly calling people middle school insults, mocking a disabled reporter, calling for cops to rough up detainees, offering to pay the legal fees of violent supporters who attack protesters at rally’s, making insinuations about the size of his private parts in a debate (I know he was responding to Rubio’s totally out of character attempt at a dirty comedy routine. Alas, Rubio is a mere mortal, and his attempt felt contrived, humiliated his family, and nearly wrecked his career. He had to apologize, cause…he ain’t Trump. He still has the capacity to feel shame. Too bad for him.)
His vulgarity, and pettiness, and wickedness, is so staggering that it makes a person appear petty or small to even highlight it! Anyway, enough of that. If you want to argue in the face of a mountain of evidence that President Trump is morally equal to all the men who came before him, shame on you. That’s a kind of moral blindness and obtuseness that shouldn’t even be dignified with a response. It’s the sort of thing that Pastor Tim should just put the smack down on like he does anarcho-Libertarians on the masking articles.
Somehow I think we need a definition of “fighting” that is distinguishable from an adolescent temper tantrum. And I’m afraid we will find that a goal of “owning the libs”, while it may accomplish some amazing things in the short term, isn’t a sustainable path to solving our problems as a nation.
There was a time we believed that leading well required character, intelligence, humility, and willingness to learn from mistakes. Turns out we were wrong. All you need to lead is a Twitter account and a penchant for catchy and demeaning nicknames, along with a willingness to make all the important people angry.
Look, you are welcome to argue that we are at such a low point as a nation that we cannot bother about the morals of our leaders, that we must not be too fastidious about these things, we have a war to fight, that the pay off is worth the compromise. Fair enough, maybe you believe that.
But you’re also saying that virtue is weakness and moral character make a man less desirable as a leader. Well, that is a worldview there. Not one I share.
That’s all.
Best,
Martin
4 Likes
It would be more seemly to disagree without attacking the motives of those of us who are concerned about unquestioned support for the President. Many of us mean well, even if we are mistaken. Take that into account. I believe it would be better to listen to your brothers in Christ, without exhibiting a thin skinned sensitivity and quickness to take offense that we see on display far too often in these days. Perhaps trusting the motives of our President less (while supporting him where appropriate and respecting him) and maybe trust the motives of fellow Christians more, even if you differ from them.
Blessings,
Martin
1 Like
Martin,
These sorts of conversations and open disagreements are edifying. I wish Christians were more willing to engage in this sort of debate rather than pretending to be politically neutral. I would much rather argue with someone whose position is different to mine but can defend it scripturally than agree with someone who has no biblical warrant for his position. Thank you for your bold but winsome contributions.
I only have two points to add:
- Many Christians I know were fully aware of Donald Trump’s character flaws in the months leading up to November 2016, yet they still considered him the better use of a Christian vote. Right or wrong, I think everything you have just said shows how much Hilary Clinton is hated and seen as morally repugnant. FWIW, how many of your critiques of President Trump do not also apply in equal or greater measure to the Clinton family? That is not to defend the current president’s immoralities, but to show how bad the choices were. Bonhoeffer’s ‘Letters and Papers from Prison’ makes the startling claim early on that no Christian would escape Nazi Germany with clean hands, and it was folly to think anyone could. He comments that their own sin led them up to that point, now they must accept God’s judgment. The question was not whether anyone was morally innocent anymore, but given the situation how they would respond at that moment. I found that convicting and helpful.
If you go back through the archives here (or on Baylyblog?) you’ll see the agonising mental arguments that took place in the months leading to Nov 2016. Supporting the current president has been a difficult pill to swallow for many here, yet, in God’s kindness, despite the depravity of President Trump’s character, he seems to be accomplishing more of significant ethical value for the US than many other much ‘cleaner’ candidates in recent history.
- The comments here about ‘Christian leaders’ who vilify President Trump are not directed at you, but rather Gospel Coalition and ERLC (and other Southern Baptist/PCA) types who openly show their contempt of him with argumentation that is inconsistent, to say the very least. Think of, again, Russell Moore’s public denunciations against Judge Roy Moore on the basis of allegations of sexual impropriety against Moore, when Russ Moore almost that same week was openly supporting MLK despite known sexual misconduct. The point is not whether one should or should not support MLK or oppose Roy Moore, but rather that the standards for doing so were so openly inconsistent, and seemingly weighted in favour of the politics of the day in current society. That pattern among reformed and reformed-ish Christian leaders is infuriating.
Please know I’m not flattering you, but your arguments here are not along that line. You are not the target in comments about Christian leaders and elites.
8 Likes
Thanks for the kind comments. And I haven’t felt like I was the target, just that the shotgun was choked pretty loose;)
I’m not personally part of the Reformed camp (though I’ve been tempted to call myself Reformed Arminian. For now I’ve settled on neoWesleyan.), and so I perhaps have a different perspective. I read with benefit Russell Moore, Douglas Wilson (a lot), Matthew Lee Anderson, Allan Jacobs, Albert Mohler, Samuel James (ERLC infamy), and of course Warhorn Media. I find things I agree with and things I disagree from each, but watching intelligent and godly men disagree and hone one another through those disagreements is bracing and has taught me so much.
My dad was raised a Quaker, and so you can imagine what strong medicine men like Pastor Tim Bayly and Pastor Douglas Wilson are for me. To be honest, I sometimes flinch a bit from what feels like overstatements, or things that I would have perhaps put in a more irenic tone before publishing. But that fact is part of why I keep reading. Frankly, it’s part of why I’m here in Sanityville. The last thing I need is one more voice to say everything just like I would. The fearlessness of these men has been a safeguard and aid to courage for me, since I came from some weak sauce in the doctrine and theology department.
I have little doubt there was much agonizing around these parts in 2016. I agree completely that our choices were awful in ‘16, and that many of the criticisms of President Trump are just as true of Clinton. There are a couple things to note.
First, when you say they are “even more true of the Clinton family”, I’m not sure I buy that. I agree the Clinton’s are corrupt, but the Clintons are bigger than life size among us and have assumed the proportions of myth. That’s the only explanation for how a man like Pastor Wilson can drop a comment about “the Clinton body count”, with no link or footnote of any kind, and not bat an eye. Am I saying I don’t think the Clintons capable of murder? Not at all. But the main source I was able to track down for the claim was Victor Thorn’s murder volume on the Clinton’s. I maintain strong skepticism when reading the claims of a rabid conspiracy theorist and holocaust denier, even when his latest research really sticks it to the bad guys. So perhaps some of the most over the top claims about the Clinton’s are untrue. I’m fine with being pointed to better sources, maybe this is all true. But it’s not something I accept just because someone said it. And too often in politics something gets repeated so often that it becomes a truism. But in politics, truisms aren’t always true.
I am not in any way arguing that the way we use our vote gives us some sort of moral superiority. I’m aware I carry the stain that comes when my tax dollars are used to pay for abortions. I don’t have a desire to sit on the sidelines, admiring my clean spats, while the real battle rages below in the arena. And I agree that the temptation of those who did not vote for President Trump in 2016 is to feel we are “of purer eyes than to look on evil”, and then to enjoy the fruits of others being able to hold their nose and vote Trump in ‘16. I can understand it even feeling a bit unfair.
But the temptation on the other side is to despise those whose convictions kept them from voting for Trump. “They are too interested in the approval of the elites…”. That’s a deeply uncharitable assessment and it’s divisive to boot. In the day of social media, I can find all manner of foolish things being said, in every which way. But to use the my “nut picking” to justify a dismissive tone to those who differ from me, and also to ascribe the worst of motivations and even to accuse them of not being wise enough to see what ought to be done is the wrong way to handle our differences.
And this brings me to your second clarification. I agree that there are leaders who really, really, really need to grow a spine. In my circles, it’s easy to find all manner of men in positions that I feel would be better served with a man more willing to speak out. But I try to remember that leaders are elevated for reasons. You complain (with reason) that Russell Moore is not loud enough regarding MLK, and I know he was nearly booted from his position over his criticism of President Trump. But let’s put some context in there. The ERLC is part of the SBC. The largest church in the SBC had a “Make America Great Again” Sunday, complete with a bespoke Choir number by that name. They have had Sean Hannity speak from their pulpit. Hopefully we can see that perhaps Russell Moore has reason to be concerned about a certain idolatrous patriotism rampant in certain circles. And if I have to choose between Pastor Robert Jeffress or Russell Moore…I would take Moore every time. And I would guess Jeffress’s praise of MLK (if he’s given any) was quite muted and measured.
Now without opening that whole can of worms so wide that this thread would never end, I’ll just say that on its face, the situation you described is not nearly so inconsistent as it might appear in the way you framed it. There are so many differences between celebrating MLK day, and voting for Moore, as to make the comparison almost unhelpful.
It seems a person can laud MLK’s contribution to the Civil Right’s cause without condoning in any way his sins. Many of those sins were utterly unknown during his lifetime. We are not deciding whether or not MLK is a suitable man to lead our movement. He is simply a flawed historical figure who accomplished some impressive things. I do not know the local opinion on Karl Barth, but I think it’s possible to celebrate his theology, without condoning his wickedness, found out only in the past few years. To put it shortly, there is a great difference between applauding a historical character and voting for current politician.
Finally, I have really appreciated what I have seen from Sanityville regarding masks and COVID. So much careful analysis. A healthy skepticism that doesn’t veer into conspiracy. A reasoned approach that I think untangles very complicated threads and helps so much in thinking through these issues. I could only wish that the same careful analysis and reasoning and thoughtful tone could be applied to things like the investigations into the President. That’s all.
Thanks everyone for a great conversation!
2 Likes
This is just like masks. There are some who wear them to virtue signal. There are others who simply wear them to submit. There are some who reject Trump to virtue signal. Others because they cannot reconcile supporting a man so sinful.
The fact that the latter category exists does not mean the former category should be called out. It’s divisive to call it statist idolatry to wear a mask. It’s divisive to say that only a sexually immoral man would vote for Trump. It’s not divisive to warn that many leaders today are building their own kingdom and love the approval of the world. That’s part of why we see so much punching right and thoughtfully engaging left.
Also, perhaps I missed it, but I don’t remember seeing any reason in this conversation for you to think @Fr_Bill was talking about you, by the way. I sure didn’t think he was talking about you. Or me, for that matter. I did not vote for Trump. I agree with some of your assessments concerning him and would add some of my own.
2 Likes
I didn’t take it to be talking about me. It was a generally broad comment, without being at all clear who it was directed toward. And I was simply intending to address that lack of clarity.
I’ve been a accused by different ones of punching Right and engaging Left, but that’s because I am still working through the bitterness of a sense of betrayal (long predating President Trump, probably reaching back to the Patriot Act, and also realizing many of the things I had learned on Talk Radio weren’t true.), but at the end of the day, I am a Conservative. All the way down.
And the Bayly clan has helped me a lot.
1 Like
It’s a bitter pill to swallow when you realize that the RINOs are the actual Republican party. Or that the right spreads lies, just like the left (something I’ve been shocked and saddened to see so much of during Covid). Or that “conservatives” aren’t actually conservative. Or… that the sinful heart of man is all the way down even deeper.
1 Like
That last point there…
Since I come from a tradition that teaches Perfectionism, an experience that delivers a man from Original Sin, the realization that our motives are so complex, and that we all need grace, all the time, came as a shock to me little system.
But seeing all that went down in politics over the past decade did help knock some kinks out of my theology. Still have a ways to go…
8 Likes