*Sightings* 5/26/05 -- Petitioner or Prophet? (fwd)
David Domke
I thought you find this interesting for your discussion group. Would it
be possible to have it posted to the discussion? I appreciate your
commitment to your beliefs.
David Domke
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 07:20:56 -0700
From: Sightings <jbi...@midway.uchicago.edu>
To: sigh...@listhost.uchicago.edu
Subject: *Sightings* 5/26/05 -- Petitioner or Prophet?
Sightings 5/26/05
Petitioner or Prophet?
-- David Domke and Kevin Coe
President Bush delivered his first 2005 commencement address on May
21 at Calvin College, a small evangelical Christian school in western
Michigan. This address marked the latest attempt by the Republican
Party to use talk about God for political gain.
In the past two months alone, GOP leaders have suggested God is on
their side in public discussions about the medical care of Terri
Schiavo, judicial-nominee votes in the U.S. Senate, and the treatment
of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay over charges of unethical conduct.
This follows an election in which the president regularly spoke of
the need for government to support "faith-based" initiatives, a
religiously grounded "culture of life," and traditional marriage.
For some time now there has been heated debate about whether
President Bush is different from other presidents in his wielding of
religious rhetoric. He is. What sets Bush apart is both how much he
talks about God and what he says when he does so.
In his Inaugural and State of the Union addresses earlier this year,
Bush referenced God eleven times. This came on the heels of
twenty-four invocations of God in his first-term Inaugural and State
of the Union addresses. No president since Franklin Roosevelt took
office in 1933 has mentioned God so often in these high-state
settings.
The president nearest Bush's average of 5.8 references per each of
these addresses was Ronald Reagan, who averaged 5.3 references in his
comparable speeches. No one else has come close. Jimmy Carter,
widely considered to be as pious as they come among U.S. presidents,
only mentioned God twice in four addresses. Other also-rans in total
God talk were wartime presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon
Johnson at 1.8 and 1.5 references per address, respectively.
Bush also talks about God differently than have most other modern
presidents. Presidents since Roosevelt have commonly spoken as
petitioners to God, seeking blessing, favor, and guidance. The
current president has adopted a position approaching that of a
prophet, issuing declarations of divine desires for the nation and
world. Among modern presidents, only Reagan has spoken in a similar
manner -- and he did so far less frequently than has Bush. This
change in rhetoric from the White House is made all the more apparent
by considering how presidents have historically spoken about God and
the values of freedom and liberty, two ideas central to American
identity.
For example, in 1941, Roosevelt, in a famous address delineating four
essential freedoms threatened by fascism, said: "This nation has
placed its destiny in the hands and heads and hearts of its millions
of free men and women; and its faith in freedom under the guidance of
God." Similarly, John F. Kennedy, in 1962, during the height of the
Cold War, said: "[N]o nation has ever been so ready to seize the
burden and the glory of freedom. And in this high endeavor, may God
watch over the United States of America."
Contrast these statements, in which presidents requested divine
guidance, with Bush's claim in 2003 that "Americans are a free
people, who know that freedom is the right of every person and the
future of every nation. The liberty we prize is not America's gift
to the world, it is God's gift to humanity." He has made similar
statements a number of times, across differing contexts of national
addresses, presidential campaign debates, and press conferences.
These are not requests for divine favor; they are declarations of
divine wishes.
Such certainty about God's will is troubling when found in a
president and administration not known for kindly brooking dissent.
This makes it particularly noteworthy that Bush encountered something
in his visit to Calvin College that he has rarely faced as president:
vocal and public criticism from other Christians, many of them
evangelicals.
More than 800 faculty, alumni, students, and friends of the college
signed a letter published by the Grand Rapids Press, decrying Bush
administration policies. The letter included these words: "By their
deeds ye shall know them, says the Bible. Your deeds, Mr. President
-- neglecting the needy to coddle the rich, desecrating the
environment, and misleading the country into war -- do not exemplify
the faith we live by." Another letter expressing similar sentiments
was signed by one-third of Calvin's faculty, while dozens of
graduating seniors wore stickers on their caps and gowns that read,
"God is not a Democrat or a Republican."
Such courageous words prompt the hope that, in these challenging
times, politicians who are quick to speak about God might also learn
to listen.
David Domke is an Associate Professor in the Department of
Communication at the University of Washington, and is the author of
God Willing? Political Fundamentalism in the White House, the "War on
Terror," and the Echoing Press. Kevin Coe is a doctoral student in
the Department of Speech Communication at the University of Illinois.
----------
The May Religion and Culture Web Forum, featuring "Red Medicine, Blue
Medicine: Pluralism and the Future of Healthcare" by Farr A. Curlin
and Daniel E. Hall, is now available at
http://marty-center.uchicago.edu/webforum/index.shtml.
----------
Sightings comes from the <http://marty-center.uchicago.edu/>Martin
Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School.
Submissions policy
Sightings welcomes submissions of 500 to 750 words in length that
seek to illuminate and interpret the forces of faith in a pluralist
society.
<http://marty-center.uchicago.edu/sightings/index.shtml>Previous
columns give a good indication of the topical range and tone for
acceptable essays. The editor also encourages new approaches to
issues related to religion and public life.
Attribution
Columns may be quoted or republished in full, with attribution to the
author of the column, Sightings, and the Martin Marty Center at the
University of Chicago Divinity School.
Contact information
Please send all inquiries, comments, and submissions to
<mailto:%20sighti...@listhost.uchicago.edu>Jeremy Biles,
managing editor of Sightings, at
sightin...@listhost.uchicago.edu. Subscribe, unsubscribe, or
manage your subscription at the Sightings
<https://listhost.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/sightings>subscription
page.
----------
JohnC
then posts a biased article with many falsehoods in it, to try to prop
up the leftists at Calvin and their politicizing of the Bush
commencement speech. Stop trying to say Bush is not a Christian just
because you disagree with him politically. He is pro-life and working
towards a culture of life, while the Democrats he opposes are
virulently pro-abortion. We can argue about policy differences, whether
one tax policy or national defense policy is better or worse, but those
are not Christian or non-Christian decisions.
Conservatives have proven that lowering taxes on all working Americans
leads to a better economy and more jobs and a better life for all.
Liberals want to increase taxes and create a larger and more intrusive
government, while winking at immorality and making more of it legal.
So on taxes, we really can't say one way is Christian and one is not
Christian. We can say that one way works and one way has failed.
You see the difference. We can survive a Jimmy Carter and high taxes,
high inflation and high unemployment. But when Reagan cuts taxes and
causes the economy to boom, that is not a "Christian" act. It is an
economic act for the good of America. We can survice a Bill Clinton
with his sexual harassment lawsuits, his impeachment for perjury,
obstruction of justice and contempt of court.
But to put ads in the paper were beyond the pale when they claimed that
"we see conflicts between our understanding of what Christians are
called to do and many of the policies of your administration" and
"the policies and actions of your administration, both domestically
and internationally over the past four years, violate many deeply held
principles of Calvin College" and that Bush's policies "do not
exemplify the [Christian] faith we live by". This is arrogant and
wrong.
David Domke, your article is correct about "President Bush delivered
his first 2005 commencement address on May 21 at Calvin College, a
small evangelical Christian school in western Michigan."
But then the article breaks bad on us..." This address marked the
latest attempt by the Republican Party to use talk about God for
political gain."
If you read the actual speech, at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/05/20050521-1.html
and the Chuck Colson commentary at:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/chuckcolson/cc20050524.shtml
you will discover that it was the liberals that were making a fuss for
political gain, but falsely claiming that Bush's policies are
anti-Christian.
Why, David Domke, do you think God was NOT on the side of protecting
the life of Terri Schiavo, an innocent, disabled American woman who was
starved and dehydrated to death at the demand of her estranged and
adulterous husband?
And David Domke, you think God is NOT on the side of judges who
interpret the law, and not make new law from the bench, laws like Roe
v. Wade that made the killing of innocent growing, pain-feeling
children acceptable and legal?
And David Domke, you think it's OK to smear the House Majority
Leader Tom DeLay over unproven charges of unethical conduct? You know
he has never been charged with breaking any law or ethics rule. Judge
not lest ye shall be judged.
And what is not Christian about not discriminating against faith-based
programs that are in place to help the poor and needy? Do you think God
WANTS us to discriminate agains them and give the funds to other
programs who have their own humanistic faith-based agenda?
And what in the world is wrong with Bush promoting a culture of life
and traditional marriage? Are you for a culture of death and changing
the definition of marriage?
And what is wrong with Bush's claim in 2003 that "Americans are a free
people, who know that freedom is the right of every person and the
future of every nation. The liberty we prize is not America's gift
to the world, it is God's gift to humanity."
Why? Do you think God wants us to live under tyranny and
totalitarianism? Of course God wants us to have liberty...what is wrong
with Bush saying it? "This reflects a misunderstanding about Mr.
Bush's faith. Bush actually prays for guidance, for wisdom, for
strength. Bush doesn't think 'I'm God's guy, he agrees with
everything I do'. If he did it would be disturbing to say the least.
But Bush is not John Brown saying God himself told me to start this
war, and he's not an ayatollah saying death to the Great Satan. Bush is
just a Christian asking God for help and trying in turn to do what is
helpful. When you do this you're acknowledging your inadequacy and
dependence. It's a declaration not of pride but of humility. To a
Christian it's like declaring reality. It's like saying, "There's
weather outside."
So Mr. Bush doesn't shy from conclusions and he isn't embarrassed that
he asks for and needs God's help." From "Gut Time"
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110003048
David and Kevin: please don't push your failed liberal ideas on your
students and hold their grades over their heads based on their
agreement or disagreement with your politics. See:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Content/read.asp?ID=50
We need academic freedom and diversity of opinion on college campuses.