Burnside Writers Collective
..
...
...
..
Secondary menu
.. Collective Home .. Store
Support BWC
 
General  |  Archives

Why I Miss Ronald Reagan…

 1  |  2       // NEXT >
_40743791_ceremony_7.jpg

USA Today released a new poll today marking President Bush’ approval rating at 31%. If you are wondering, that’s pretty low. This rating indicates that only two communities in America still support the President: the wealthy, and conservative evangelical Christians. These two groups are, quite nearly, binary opposites.

His falling approval ratings have caused me to question, once again, why it is the evangelical community admires this President. I’ve been wondering what the real reasons are, not the ones so commonly given, about him being a defender of freedom and all of this.

Here are a few suggested reasons, judge them for yourselves:

1. He is like them. President Bush is positioned as somebody who is “like” the modern evangelical. Bush speaks candidly and openly about a conversion experience and a personal relationship with Jesus. He’s a Methodist in practice and it is widely known he holds Bible studies and prayer meetings in the White House. These actions are considered discipleship initiatives by evangelicals in America. That said:

2. He is like them. The particular version of Christianity Bush subscribes to is heavily influenced by Americana, that is his spirituality is self-help, his social justice methodology is free-market (that is not entirely a criticism, by the way) and his theology is simple (good guys/bad guys, us vs. them, Jesus wears a cowboy had and fought at the Alamo, all captured in Mel Gibson’s movie about the life of Jesus entitled Bravehart)

3. He is like them. Bush takes stands; he thinks in black and white, he is not a flip flopper. He sees something wrong, and he does not seek to understand, he attacks. He has clearly-defined enemies, both personally and patriotically. This gives the modern evangelical a clear association with someone who is good fighting someone who is bad, and so hijacks the “fans” ego through emotional gratification rather than reason. This personality trait of Bush’s is seen by many Christians as a virtue.

4. He is like them. Bush is not intimidating, either in stature, character or intellect. This trait makes people comfortable.

5. He is like them. Bush stands against gay marriage and for unborn children. These two issues define Christian concern for legislative dealings. Bush is a champion of these issues, and wins the hearts of evangelicals in his stance.

And of course there are more, but this should get the discussion started. And while Bush is all these things, and they are mixed in my opinion in terms of being both good and bad (each idea is certainly debatable), he is also so much more, and the “more” is the part hidden from the evangelical populous who so blindly support him.

Here are some examples of how Bush is unlike the average evangelical.

1. He is not like them. He is dishonest. While Bill Clinton is often seen as a liar by the evangelical community, at least he had the integrity to say “sexual relations” as opposed to “sex.” What he said regarding Monica Lewinsky, then, was technically true (though no less misleading and dishonest and furthermore dishonorable.) It is President Bush who has no such conscience. I can only think he considers his lies justified by his American/Christian agenda. That is, he believes it is okay to use Satan’s tactics to build God’s kingdom. The specific lies are too numerous to mention, but see this short list.

2. He is not like them. He is the product and defender of wealth. Unless you are a millionaire and have close ties to Saudi Arabia, you are not like George W. Bush. His agenda is a pro-oil, pro-corporate agenda. Is this good for Christians? Not necessarily. Corporations have killed the American family, polluted the environment, enslaved children of second and third world countries, along with their parents, been discontent with their own boundaries in alignments with dictatorships and evil regimes, and distorted the American thought process into believing quick fix, unbiblical (read: unrealistic) solutions to problems. (By this I mean a bombardment of commercials has trained our minds to believe a small investment in a given product will solve a problem related to the product, even if the product is a piece of crap.) So close are the ties between Bush and oil, the counsel for the defendants in the Enron trial of Jeffrey Skilling and Ken Lay favored jurors based upon, among other criteria, their pro-Bush sentiments.

3. He is not like them. While evangelicals follow the Prince of Peace, Bush has shown little interest in peace. In a way, however, because there is only one peace studies program at any Christian university or college in all America (Anderson University in Indiana. Pennsylvania’s Messiah College also has a minor) Bush really is like the modern evangelical, but he is not like Jesus in this way. Bush’s idea of peace comes through policing and intimidating the world.

4. He is not like them. Bush’s black-and-white, simplified version of reality is hardly Biblical. The God of scripture describes a complex reality in which steadfast determination is not considered virtuous in a social climate always in flux. That is, the truth doesn’t change, but people are not perfect in their understanding of truth. Paul presents a message of Christ’s soon return, then later urges patience, saying God is not slow within His own experience of time. Peter, upon Paul’s argument about Gentiles, changes his mind to entertain a table with them. A Christian virtue seems to involve an understanding one will make mistakes, and a humility to change, adapt, learn and lead. Bush (along with nearly every other American president since the invention of radio) does not admit mistakes.

 1  |  2 
End

Posted on May 15, 2006 12:00 AM
HR

Comments

Look at you, going all out on a limb. Kudos.

The love affair by some in the church over W is spelled out very well in this piece and shown to be a deeper issue than just "he's a Christian like me". Great job-

Well-spoken and important criticisms, but I'm troubled by the idea that "the wealthy and conservative evangelical Christians] are quite nearly, binary opposites". While conservatives often dismiss the poor as lazy welfare bums, should we assume the wealthy must hold values which oppose Christianity? I hope I've misread this seemingly black-and-white generalization in an article which addresses W's black-and-white thinking!

I'm not completely sure how I feel about what you've written. I guess my problem is this: I see more and more in the church today (from all sides) of everyone tearing each other down. We're too busy pointing at each other and criticizing (in an intentionally hurtful way, no less - whether some of us are willing to admit it or not) and I believe we may be missing the point. Let's quit pointing at people and using them of examples of who or what Jesus isn't, and let's start taking positive action, leading by example, and SHOWING people who Jesus IS. Jesus obviously has a heart for the poor and wants us to serve them. Does that tell me to bemoan our government officials because they're not doing that perfectly or does it tell me to get up off my rear and go help someone? And one area that I think is extremely dangerous is the idea of thinking in black-and-white. We can put ourselves on a slippery slope if we're too concerned with thinking in terms of gray areas. Sometimes people (and I'm including myslef in everything I'm writing) want to use "gray area" as a hiding place from tough issues. We must remember that we're called to love and to uphold God's laws, not to be popular or cool. I refer to a comment by Derek Webb on his live album "The House Show" where he says that the gospel by nature is offensive. Jesus was hated by some, and I believe he tells us that we're going to experience the same thing. Anyway, sorry for the long post. You're an extremely talented writer and I enjoy reading your stuff even if I don't necessarily agree with everything you say. But the world would be a pretty boring place if we all agreed about everything.

I am a fan of your writing, but the comment you wrote about the Vice President and mistaking hunting buddies for small birds did not seem compassionate or Christ-like, even if it was a joke.

I appreciate your efforts to see both sides of things regarding Bush's presidency. However, it makes it easy for people to be skeptical of claims regarding his dishonesty, when the link used to support is a list of cherry-picked quotes (which may or may not be out of context) and broken web links. It makes the evidence seem contrived. Paste a quote along with a random fact about what action a certain committee has taken or not taken, and you have yourself another poorly assembled argument for Bush's failures.

My concern is that it might be impossible to find out what our government is doing most of the time, whether they are Republican or Democrat. Writers and media channels continuously resort to extremes to present their stories and veiled slant about whether Bush is Satan or The Almighty Perfect One. Neither portrayal is accurate, and I appreciate the way you have recognized that in your article.

I have grown increasingly skeptical regarding the government's willingness to be honest with us and the media's ability to know what is going on in our government or speak reality to the public. I've given up listening to the "sound bites" that are offered in the news which bring us no closer to knowing the truth.

I suppose that my only recourse at this point is to do my best to interpret the droning speeches we hear on C-SPAN in an effort to figure out what exactly our government is trying to accomplish.

But who's got the time for that, right?

Post a comment

If you haven't left a comment here before, we may need to approve you before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear.