Elderly Men and Mental Gaffes: Biden, Trump… and Scott

Elderly Men and Mental Gaffes: Biden, Trump… and Scott

Getting older! It happens to all of us. Although increased wisdom can come with added years, many of us also experience a decline in our physical and mental abilities. It can be difficult to contemplate intentionally reducing our public activities due to this decline.

This is the situation before us in our national political situation. A week ago, special counsel Robert Hur issued his report in which he concluded that President Joe Biden was not guilty of any criminal activity in his handling of sensitive government documents. Nevertheless, he also wrote that Biden was a “well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory”. Biden’s mental gaffes are well-known. In his attempt to refute the poor memory accusation, he gave a talk in which he confused the leaders of Egypt and Mexico.

On the other hand, former President Donald Trump has also committed his share of memory gaffes. The most recent was a campaign speech in which he confused Republican Nikki Haley with Democrat leader Nancy Pelosi. Both men are of advanced age and make many mental mistakes. So do I. Although I am not as old as Biden and Trump, I am not far behind. I show the wear and tear of my years in my body and in my mind.

Should Biden or Trump drop out of the race for the presidency at this late date? Is there a precedent? Yes, there is. Back in 1968, President Lyndon Johnson dropped out of his race for re-election in March. I personally believe that the two main political parties (and therefore, the nation itself) would be better off, if Trump or Biden (or both) would drop out. Age and mental acuity are not the only issues. Biden’s handling of the border crisis has not been great (although Republican representatives in Congress are also at fault). Trump’s legal problems are even worse. He has already been found guilty of sexual assault/rape and financial fraud. If the other trials take place this year, he will likely be convicted of other, serious crimes.

Who do I suggest take the place of these men? Although I disagree with some of her policy proposals, Nikki Haley would do a far, far better job as president than Trump. In my opinion, he is morally repugnant, at all levels. On the Democrat side, among the many potential candidates, I would like to see Michelle Obama. She is smart, and of even more importance, very wise due to her life experiences. In addition, her life partner would make a great first “First Gentleman”.

Who Really Won in Iowa? It Depends How You Spin It.

Iowa celebrated its presidential caucus on Monday. Due to the frigid temperatures, voter turn out was lower than expected, but over 100,000 Iowan Republicans braved the weather and participated in the caucuses. Who won? It depends on who is spinning it.

On the one hand, Donald Trump won with about 51% of the votes. Ron DeSantis came in second place with 21% and Nikki Haley in third with 19%. This was the largest victory in the history of the Iowa caucus. From this perspective, it is extremely likely that Trump will become the Republican nominee for president. Most of the other principal candidates have dropped out. Haley has a small window of opportunity. She would have to win the primary in New Hampshire next week, then ride the momentum to win in her home state of South Carolina plus some victories on Super Tuesday. DeSantis has almost no possibility.

On the other hand, there are troubling signs for Trump. Although 51% voted for Trump, 49% of Iowa Republican caucus participants voted against Trump, by selecting other non-Trump candidates. (For example, if Obama had sat out for four years after his first term as president, and only received 51% in Iowa, nobody would describe it as a victory).

In addition, the entrance polls revealed that about one third of Republicans would not vote for Trump in the general election if he were convicted of crimes in federal courts. Although he is currently faring well against Biden in a hypothetical match up, he cannot afford to lose a third of Republican voters. That is why Trump and his lawyers are trying as hard as they can to delay the court hearings until after November.

We, the American people, deserve to know the essential truth about leading candidates…before we vote in November. No one is above the law. If Trump is found to be not guilty, let that become widely acknowledged. If he is found by juries of his peers to be guilty of serious crimes, we need to be aware of that as well. Democracy flourishes if truth is widely distributed. May all people of good will urge that these court trials occur before the general election in November.

A Lesson from the Epiphany: Don’t Believe Leaders who Lie!

On January 6 many Christians celebrated the Epiphany by celebrating when the Wise Men from the East came to worship baby Jesus with gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Nevertheless, before they reached Bethlehem, they visited King Herod in Jerusalem and asked him if he knew where to find the newborn Messiah. Herod was worried because a rival to his own kingly rule had appeared on the scene. After consulting with religious priests and teachers, Herod found out that Jesus was to be born in the town of Bethlehem. Herod gave the Wise Men this information, and then added, “Go and search carefully for the child. As soon as you find him, report to me, so that I too may go and worship him.” (Matthew 2:1-12).

Herod lied. He had no intention of worshipping Jesus. He was using the Wise Men’s naivete to find out Jesus’ exact location in order to kill him. But God spoke to the Wise Men and told them to return their countries by a different way. This they did. When Herod discovered their “disobedience”, he became furious and ordered the massacre of all the little boys in Bethlehem. God told Mary and Joseph to take Jesus to Egypt to find refuge.

There are many interesting lessons to learn from this story, but I would like to concentrate on one. King Herod lied. And he used a religious motivation to cover his lie. Sadly, Jesus, when he was a grown man, taught that kings and other rulers all too frequently lie. They lord it over their subjects yet claim to be doing good (Luke 22:24-25). What is the lesson to be learned? We should not be gullible. We should not be naïve. We should not believe lying leaders…even when they cloak their lies in religiosity.

There are some leaders who are women and men of integrity who generally tell the truth. Nevertheless, we should use great caution and discernment when we hear politicians. Many leaders in every major country frequently lie. Many Democrat leaders and many Republican leaders frequently lie. Lying is not the exclusive domain of our political enemies.

Former President Reagan borrowed the Russian proverb “trust, but verify” and popularized the phrase in the English language. This is what I urge us all to do. Don’t naively believe everything you hear, especially in an election year. To the degree that is possible, question, fact check, and verify the affirmations of all politicians.

I eagerly watched the Republican presidential debate last night. Three candidates had qualified for the debate (Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Donald Trump), but Trump chose not to participate. It was a lively debate with some substance and some smoke. DeSantis said, “Don’t trust Haley. She is lying.” Haley mentioned a dozen times the website DeSantisLies.com which points out the multiple lies of DeSantis and refutes them with evidence. Here are Republican leaders who tell us not to believe the words and promises of their rivals. They also accused Trump of lying, not just the “little” lies of the value of his properties, the unwanted fondling of women, or the immunity of presidents for all their actions while in office, etc., but the “Big Lie” of the 2020 election being stolen. Haley affirmed, “Biden won, Trump lost. It’s time to move forward.”

Leaders are not usually as good as they claim to be. Their lies must be unmasked. They point to the need for those who will double-check the facts and ask the tough questions. Let us be discerning as we seek the truth that can set us free.

Good News from Latin America: Christian Reflections on Suffering and Crisis

My readers may or may not know that some friends and I began publishing the Journal of Latin American Theology: Christian Reflections from the Latino South back in 2006. With two issues per year, the Journal has become one of the most important voices of Latin American Christian thinking in the English-speaking world. I have the privilege of being the General Editor of the Journal and I believe this issue is one of the very best. It deals with bringing God’s love to those who live in the midst of suffering, trauma and crisis. For those who are interested, here are the contents.

The Journal of Latin American Theology Volume 18:2

Disease and Healing: The Bible and Today’s World by Edesio Sánchez Cetina

Living from the Resurrection Narrative in the Midst of Speculation and Death by Fabio Salguero Fagoaga

An Interdisciplinary Approach for Supporting Women Displaced by Violence and Affected by COVID-19 by Mary Luz Reyes Bejarano

Pandemic, Trauma, and Lament: A Psycho-Theological and Pastoral Approach to Caregiving and Companioning by Daniel S. Schipani

Keys to Post-Traumatic Coping in the Life of Paul of Tarsus by Luis Cruz-Villalobos

Justice vs. Righteousness: A Contextualized Analysis of “tsedeq” in the KJV (English) and RVR (Spanish) by Esteban M. Voth

Sustaining the Momentum of Theological Education by Dieumeme Noëlliste

Film Review – Waaki by Victor Masayesva by Samuel Lagunas

Book Review – Las huellas del reino de Dios: perspectivas teológicas en América Latina (1970–2000) by Martín Ocaña Flores

Book Review – The Lord Roars: Recovering the Prophetic Voice for Today by M. Daniel Carroll R.

Book Review – Los Profetas: The Prophetic Role of Hispanic Churches in America, ed. Daniel F. Flores

Book Review – Introducción a la teología del Nuevo Mundo by Oscar García-Johnson

Theopoetry – “De las cosas sencillas / Of the Simple Things” by Luis Cruz-Villalobos

Available via Amazon and the ATLA theological data bank.

Mary’s Magnificat was neither Meek nor Mild

The Christmas season is when we emphasize the birth of Jesus. Of course, his earthly parents, Mary and Joseph, are highlighted for their actions of faith. The popular notion is that Mary was so meek and mild that she would never rock the boat nor challenge the status quo. Wrong! She was a courageous champion of social change. Inspired by the Holy Spirit, Mary sang out her mighty message of social transformation:

“My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
for he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant.
From now on all generations will call me blessed,
for the Mighty One has done great things for me—holy is his name.
His mercy extends to those who fear him, from generation to generation.
He has performed mighty deeds with his arm; he has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts.
He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble.
He has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty.
He has helped his servant Israel, remembering to be merciful to Abraham and his descendants forever, just as he promised our ancestors.” (Luke 1:46-55)

Jesus set in motion this non-violent revolution by what he preached and practiced in his life, death, and resurrection. He urged a radical love for our neighbors…and for our enemies. God continues this social change through simple human beings who follow the Lord’s leading in filling the hungry and lifting up the humble. Some examples come to mind: St. Francis of Assisi, Martin Luther King, Mother Teresa. May this Christmas season be filled with a renewed commitment to advancing God’s love… on earth as it is in heaven.

Genocide against Israel is Evil…and so is Genocide against the Gazans

On October 7, Hamas attacked Israel and killed over a thousand Israelis and took over a hundred hostages. In response, Israel launched air attacks upon Gaza and, as a result, over ten thousand Palestinians have been killed. Israel also restricted food and water supplies in Gaza, and many additional thousands have died. Hamas is guilty of genocide…and so is Netanyahu’s administration. Both halves of the previous sentence are true and must be affirmed.

In our polarized society, we must apply the same ethical standards to both sides. We must no longer be like sports fans whose favorite team is never guilty of rule violations and whose opponents are never right. International laws that prohibit the targeting of civilians apply to friends and foes alike. If we don’t apply these criteria to all, we are guilty of hypocrisy. The tragic result is that anti-Semitism and anti-Palestinianism have skyrocketed in our country and around the world.

I add my voice to the call for an immediate ceasefire with the following goals:

Hostages on both sides be exchanged.
Humanitarian aid flow into Gaza.
Reasonable Israelis and thoughtful Palestinians sit down together and acknowledge their own guilt.
Both sides sketch out the first steps to achieve a just peace for all involved.
Nations around the world overcome their own interests and biases in order to stimulate and accompany this process of seeking a just peace.

Why do White Evangelicals prefer Trump when they have Better Options?

Why do White Evangelicals Prefer Trump when they Have Better Options?

In the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, approximately 80% of white evangelicals voted for Trump. Since then, they have remained some of Trump’s strongest supporters. This is somewhat strange, because his life runs contrary to evangelicals’ most cherished virtues. This must be unpacked a bit. Evangelicals are a subsection of Protestant Christianity which claim that their lives are guided by Biblical principles. Although this is somewhat true at an individual level (honest, hard-working, dedicated to their family, etc.), this is not accurate at a political level. Numerous surveys reveal that fewer than 15% of evangelicals have their political positions shaped by Scripture on important issues of our day (immigration, foreign policy, environment, health care, etc.). Their most important political concern has been to reduce the number of abortions taking place. Since Reagan, Republican presidential candidates have promised to re-shape the Supreme Court with enough conservative justices to overturn Roe v. Wade. During his presidency, Trump appointed three conservative justices to the Court, and as a result, Roe was overturned, and the legal status of abortion has been returned to the states.

Although Trump lost the 2020 election, he is running again and is way ahead of his Republican rivals: Nikki Haley, Ron DeSantis, Chris Christie and Vivek Ramaswamy. My question for white evangelicals is the following: Why do you continue to support Trump when his lifestyle runs contrary to core Christian values and you have better options? Here is a small sample of his character flaws.

Trump is a racist. He began his campaign in 2015 by declaring that Mexicans were drug pushers, criminals, and rapists. In 2018 he called African countries, plus Haiti and El Salvador “shithole” countries.
Trump is a womanizer and treats women as objects. In his Access Hollywood tape, Trump affirmed “And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. … Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.”
He is a bully. In his rallies, he demeans others based on their physical handicaps, their looks, etc. instead of using reasonable, logical arguments.
He is a compulsive liar. On the day of his inauguration, he lied about the size of the crowd, then told hundreds of significant lies during his presidency, including the allegation that he won the 2020 election. You can google “Trump and lies” for a long list with evidence.
He is narcissistic. His demands for “loyalty” required people to violate the Constitution and their conscience. For those who violated their religious convictions, they have brought shame and disrepute to their faith.
His vanity has led him to make false predictions. He predicted that under his leadership, Republicans would win so many elections, they would “get tired of winning”. That turned out to be false. Republicans lost the 2018 midterm election, the 2020 presidential election, and the special election in Georgia. They underperformed in 2022. Republicans are, in fact, tired of losing with Trump.
His many crimes have led him to be charged with 91 counts in federal courts. It is likely that he will be found guilty of some felonies by the time of the election in November, 2024.

I know people who refuse to acknowledge any of these defects. This was understandable during the heat of the 2016 and 2020 elections, but is totally unreasonable today. There are better options: Haley, DeSantis, and Christie. They are fallen human beings (just like me). They have their own defects (just like me). They probably have skeletons in their closets (just like me). I have significant disagreements with each of them and some of their policies. Nevertheless, they all have been governors and have experience in constitutional positions of leadership. Each of them has a basic minimum integrity as public servants. Each of them would be a better option than Trump.

For further reading, I suggest the new book by Tim Alberta: The Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory. American Evangelicals in an Age of Extremism.

Violence Begets More Violence

A week ago, Hamas viciously attacked Israel with missiles and ruthless kidnappings. This attack took the Israeli government by surprise, but Israel then responded by bombing Gaza. These mutual attacks have been bloody. Thousands of people have already been killed and more than a hundred people are being held hostage by Hamas. It is understandable that Israel wants to get revenge and they are poised to launch a massive ground assault in Gaza. Although this is understandable, it is also immoral and shortsighted. Their announced goal is to permanently rid Gaza of Hamas leadership. It is a flawed plan for the following reasons:

Hamas leaders are probably hidden away in underground tunnels throughout Gaza, making it difficult to capture or kill them. In this pursuit of Hamas leadership, a ground assault will become prolonged and will lead to the death of many Gazan civilians.
In addition, the Israeli government is cutting off food, water, and electricity to the 2.5 million civilians who live in Gaza. This is already producing a humanitarian crisis of gigantic proportions and the death of numerous innocent people.
Although Israel currently has the empathy and support of much of the world community, that will soon evaporate if large numbers of civilians lose their lives.
A ground assault will lead to the death of the hostages, not their liberation.
Neither the Israelis nor the United States have proposed a viable exit strategy. When will enough of the Hamas leadership be destroyed for Israel to claim victory? How many civilians will have died?

Positive actions do exist and should be pursued:

A ceasefire should be implemented immediately which would permit humanitarian aid to enter Gaza.
The U.S. should lean on Egypt to open their border crossing into Gaza to permit refugees to escape.
Neutral countries should step up to mediate and promote a long-lasting peace that would lead to the removal of Hamas leadership and would promote a two state solution and self-government for Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

Continued “justified” violence is not the answer. It would only lead to more senseless violence.

Is Affirmative Action “Racist”?

Is Affirmative Action “racist”?

Conservative media commentators frequently label Affirmative Action as “racist”. I understand why they want to do this. They are applying a word that has a negative connotation to a policy they don’t like. Nevertheless, that label is neither accurate nor helpful. Racism is essentially defined as “prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group”. The important words are prejudice, discrimination, and antagonism. Affirmative action policies did distinguish Afro-Americans from other races, but was it was designed to help level the playing field for black Americans, not to implement prejudice against them. Applicants from other ethnicities were at a relative disadvantage, but it was usually minor. This was an unintentional consequence and is sometimes known as collateral damage.

It is helpful to look at collateral damage in similar situations. Whenever an organization gives a benefit to a certain category of people, those not in that category are at a relative disadvantage, but this is not necessarily “wrong”. For example, many restaurants give a “Senior Citizen” discount to customers who have reached a certain age (usually 62 or 65). Younger customers pay more than senior citizens for the exact same meal, but we don’t denounhce this preference based on age as “age-ist”.

Many people acknowledge “financial need” as a valid criterion for considering educational scholarships. As a result, richer students pay more than students with financial aid scholarships for the same education. Should we label this collateral damage based on financial need as “classist”? Few would do so.

There might be valid reasons for opposing affirmative action, such as trying to demonstrate with evidence that the playing field has now become level. But just labeling it as racist is not accurate nor useful. May we use language in ways that enable good communication and not distort it.

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.”

So states the Good Book in Isaiah 5:20. The prophet Isaiah pronounced God’s judgment on those religious and political leaders who misrepresented God and distorted the Lord’s teaching on moral issues. To be sure, there are some ethical challenges that are “gray areas” in which right and wrong are not clearly discerned. On these issues sincere people might disagree.

Nevertheless, there are other topics where positions are clearly right or wrong and attempts by leaders to blur these distinctions do indeed deserve God’s judgment and our repudiation. One such issue is taking place before our eyes in Florida. On Wednesday, that state’s Board of Education approved a new curriculum for the teaching of Afro-American history, including slavery in the United States. Instructions for teaching this history to middle schoolers is that students learn how slaves developed skills which could be applied “for their personal benefit”.

I hope my readers would agree that slavery in the United States was horrific. Thousands upon thousands of Africans died in the voyage across the Atlantic. Many more died due to the hard labor and harsh conditions of slavery itself. Black families were torn apart. We fought a long, bloody civil war to rid ourselves of this evil institution. Although some slave owners were not as bad as others, they all benefited from the involuntary labor of the slaves. (Some of my ancestors owned slaves, and therefore, I benefited indirectly from that slave labor). Although many slaves were resilient and endured horrific slavery with God’s help, this does not soften the evil of slavery itself.

The obvious results (and probable purpose) of Florida’s educational curriculum and guidelines are to distort our history and put a benevolent aura upon a sinful system. This is calling evil good and deserves our repudiation. I call upon Florida’s Board of Education to rewrite their guidelines to make their history curriculum more in line with what truly happened.