Tag: Christianity

Mr. Trump, Here is Good Advice from the Good Book regarding an Exit from Iran

Although you have frequently claimed to have helped the Christian cause more than any other politician, you have also frequently denied a basic Christian doctrine: the forgiveness of your sins. You have often said you have never asked God for forgiveness because you don’t acknowledge any sins that need to be forgiven. Two passages from the Good Book seem quite pertinent to your situation. The Apostle John wrote, “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, God is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (I John 1:8-9) You claim that you are without sin generally, and specifically regarding your decision to go to war with Iran. Just this past weekend, you responded to questions about the war and the increase in oil/gas prices by saying you will “never apologize” for taking us to war nor for the resulting rise in the price of gasoline.

In the Biblical book of James, we read about the origin of wars. “Where do wars and fights come from among you? Do they not come from your desires for pleasure that war in your members?” (James 4:1) James provides a general principle that wars are usually the expression and extension of human selfishness. For those who claim that a specific war is an exception, that it is “justified”, the burden of proof lies with them.

Let’s unpack this a bit. When the word “sin” is mentioned, many people think of religious actions against God. On the contrary, the Bible has a different understanding of sin. Precisely because all people are made in God’s image, all human actions against our neighbors, near or far, are also directed toward their Creator. When John the Baptist proclaimed his message of repentance from evil, he emphasized economic sins, whether it was apathy when we are faced with our neighbor’s hunger or poverty, or the sins of bribery and extortion (Luke 3:1-20). This pointing out of human sin is called good news (gospel) because it is an essential component for repentance and forgiveness. The prophet Amos teaches us an additional, important truth, especially for people who rule in public office: many sins are not individualistic, but national. Racism, war, inhumane treatment of foreigners, and national indifference to the suffering of people in other countries, are also denounced as sin against their Maker. (Amos 2:1-3:15)

Therefore, Mr. President, I ask you to look at the following evidence and to examine your heart regarding your war against Iran. I am inviting you to have a political conversion.

  1. Your war with Iran is illegal. Our US Constitution appropriately assigns war responsibilities to Congress, not to the President. No one person, not even the President, is allowed to take our country to war. If a President believes war should be declared, he or she should go to Congress and ask them to make a Declaration of War (as took place in World War II). If the President believes a true emergency requires an immediate military response of self defense, he or she is allowed to do so, but then needs to obtain congressional approval within 48 hours via the War Powers Resolution. You also did not bring the United Nations into deliberations as required for member nations.
  2. Your war against Iran broke your own campaign promises of not taking our nation into war, especially “endless wars in the Middle East”. As a result, your war was not supported by our citizens (about 65% of the public are against this war, according to national polls).
  3. You never presented a clear goal for the war to the American people. You have jumped from one goal to another as if you were grasping for straws (regime change, the re-opening of the Strait of Hormuz, deterring the development of nuclear weapons). This last goal is seen as a sham because you claimed you had “obliterated” Iran’s uranium stockpiles a year ago.
  4. Your war with Iran showed woefully little preparation. You said it would last only 2-4 weeks and we are now at the six-month mark. There were no exit strategies and we still have no end in sight.  Supply problems on the USS Abraham Lincoln and a significant depletion of defensive missiles were not planned for.
  5. Although the Iranian takeover of the Strait of Hormuz had been anticipated by every presidency during the last five decades, your administration seems to have been caught totally ill-prepared. With some significant control over the Strait, Iran now has more leverage than it did before the war began.
  6. A negotiated and just peace deal is not on the horizon. On at least 38 occasions, you have made public predictions that a peace accord was “at hand”, but then Iran strings your envoys on again and again. Neither the US people, nor our allies, nor Iran believe you and your baseless promises.
  7. You did not consult with our NATO allies before going to war, nor with our Arab friends in the region. In fact, this week you repeatedly threatened to strike militarily our ally Oman for not supporting your war!

For all of the above-mentioned facts, your taking our country into war with Iran was a huge mistake with serious political, economic, and ethical consequences for Americans and for the whole world. This is the bad news. The good news is that you are not beyond hope. While many of your critics think you cannot change, I believe in a compassionate and all-powerful God. While we have breath, there is hope we might experience a genuine change in our lives. This requires true repentance on your part leading to a profound transformation. This will not be easy because you have surrounded yourself with people who tell you how “great” you are. Do not believe them. They are lying.

Now an exit strategy. Bombing Iran has not worked. Bullying other countries with tariffs has not worked either. Inept negotiators have not had success. But if you would truly and publicly confess your political sin, the world would be shocked and amazed! If your conversion were genuine, international offers to negotiate a just end to the war would come pouring in. I suggest the United Nations as a good first place to start. This could become the beginning of a new world order (and perhaps even a Nobel Peace Prize). Mr. President, the ball is in your court.

The Senate Judiciary Committee forwarded Todd Blanche’s Nomination to the Full Senate. Have they Lost their Conscience and their Spine?

Earlier today, the Senate Judiciary Committee forwarded Todd Blanche’s nomination to the full Senate. Have they lost their conscience and their spine?

This was not a minor congressional decision of little importance. No, this is about our country’s top law enforcement official, the position of Attorney General and Director of the Justice Department. This decision is about the moral integrity of our potential Attorney General, the moral integrity of our Senators, and … our own moral integrity.

Todd Blanche used to be President Trump’s personal criminal defense lawyer and is currently the Acting Attorney General (in replacement of Pam Bondi, who resigned the AG position). The vote in the full Senate would probably take place this week and would make Blanche the permanent replacement for the Attorney General position. There are three major ethical issues at stake:

  1. The 1.776 billion dollar “Anti-Weaponization-Slush” Fund (to compensate some citizens for alleged discrimination against them by the (Biden) Justice Department. This would include those who injured police during their participation in the January 6, 2021 insurrection in Washington, DC. These Americans were found guilty by juries of their peers.)
  2. The exemption from an IRS audit for Trump, his sons, some of his friends and the Trump Organization. This is a special, unique exemption in US history. It essentially says that Trump and his friends are “are above the law”.
  3. The Epstein Files. When she was Attorney General, Pam Bondi affirmed that Deputy AG Todd Blanche was the official responsible for implementing the congressional bill which required the names of the perpetrators to be revealed, and the identities of the victims be protected. Blanche did just the opposite and still has not finished the job.  He also changed Epstein’s guilty friend Ghislaine Maxwell’s prison location to a “plush country club level” setting. This is, by far, Blanche’s most horrific ethical failure. The female victims (who have been truly heroic) deserve justice.

Two Republican senators (John Cornyn and Tom Tillis) who had been blocking Blanche’s confirmation for Attorney General gave him their blessing yesterday, after Blanche promised — in writing — to scale back the very lucrative deal (#2 and 3 above) the Department of Justice had cut with Trump. Legal experts agree that these written documents that Blanche signed are NOT legally binding.

The ethical dimensions of these three issues are not gray. We know what is right and what is wrong.

The date for the final Senate vote has not yet been fixed. Unless three senators (Murkowski, Collins, others?) find some courage and integrity, we the people of the United States have lost our way.

Cheap Patriotism: A critique from the Scriptures regarding exceptionalism and “love for one’s country”

The Fourth of July has come and gone and the theme of patriotism often appeared in our social media. Given that there are many, diverse uses and misuses of the topic of patriotism, I suggest that the Bible offers us surprising and helpful corrections.

One initial challenge before us is trying to define patriotism in a functional way. Most popular definitions use phrases like “love for one’s country”, usually suggesting that we should have a deeper love for our nation than we express toward other countries. We need greater precision with this kind of definition. We use the word “love” in a variety of contradictory ways. The object of our love frequently produces in us an extreme self-centered happiness as in one of my favorite phrases, “I love chocolate!”. Note well that chocolate can contribute to one’s happiness while at the same time not contribute to one’s health. This is a cheap, albeit common, use of “love” in English in the Unite States today. The Bible provides a sharp contrast to this cheapened use of “love”. Christians used the Greek word agape to mean seeking the multifaceted well-being of other people, usually at the expense of one’s own interests. It is self-giving rather than self-seeking. The object of agape is a person or a group of people, not things. Let us now look at an area where typical or traditional patriotism is not agape-patriotism at all.

Exceptionalism is the false belief that one’s group or country are God’s special favorites and therefore are ethically “above the law”. Although the Word of God describes the Jews as God’s chosen people, there is no place in Scripture that even hints that God does not hold them accountable for their actions. To the contrary! If Jews have more revelation about God, they are responsible to act more justly, not less. “To whom much is given much is required.” (Luke 12:48) John the Baptist warned people not to trust in their “exceptionalism” by claiming Abraham was their “father”. Like everyone else, they needed a deep conversion of repentance in which they would show by their actions that they had returned to God. (Luke 3:1-20 and Amos 2-3, especially 3:13-15)

There are many Christians in the United States who claim that our nation is exceptional, that is, God’s favorite people. This claim is not found any place in the Bible! Although many of our founders had a genuine deep Christian faith, many did not. Jefferson published a “Thomas Jefferson Bible“, in which he removed every reference to the supernatural or miraculous action. Jefferson and Washingtom, like many of our national founders, were more deists than Biblical theists, that is, their God was like a watchmaker who created the world, then left it “ticking” on its own. Regarding exceptionalism, God does not give a free pass to any ethnic or national group.        

A cheap patriotism wants our country to “win”, usually with the defeat of others. The Bible has a better goal, harmony and shalom for us, but also for our neighbors (Matthew 22:37-39), and even for our enemies. Agape-patriotism can transform our enemies into our friends. I don’t approve of all of our decisions in World War II, but there are a few positive examples (such as our treatment of Germany under the Marshall Plan).

We need to correct the misuse of cheap patriotism words, like “allegiance”. Almost all who believe in a Creator God who is just (such as in Judaism, Christianity, or Islam) would claim that their allegiance to their God is more important than any loyalty to a country. So what do we mean when we say “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America…”? Surely it means a lesser allegiance, a limited loyalty. But history reveals many problems.  Followers of the great theistic religions agree that God said, “Thou shall not kill”. Nevertheless, there are horrible examples (Germans in the time of Hitler) who killed other human beings without any ethical qualms, and all in the name of a cheap patriotism or religious nationalism.

A cheap patriotism leads to a nation becoming more dominant or cruel. A genuine agape-patriotism leads a nation to become more like a city on a hill or a bright beacon of light and hope for all…no exceptions.

It is healthy to confess one’s own sins and the mistakes of one’s elected officials. Did some Republican senators finally get a political conscience?

Last Thursday, rare events happened in both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives. Republicans in both chambers opposed President Trump’s policies and cancelled their voting procedure rather than delivera public rebuke of the president with their congressional votes. After a year and a half of being Trump’s yes’men and yes’women in his second term in the White House, these elected officials finally found the courage to say “No!”. The Hebrew Scriptures might help us understand what happened and how it could be transformed into healing for our nation.

We frequently think of confession as the acknowledgement and repentance of one’s personal sins directly to God or to a representative of God (like a pastor or priest). This usually takes place within a religious context, and I think this can be a good way to begin dealing with our moral mistakes. Confession is much healthier than ignoring our sins or pretending we don’t make moral mistakes.

Nevertheless, it is also healthy to acknowledge and confess the sins of one’s culture and one’s national leaders when they stray from the truth. The Bible highlights examples of believers who expose the sins of their society and their national leaders and call for repentance. Let’s look at the example of Isaiah, a significant prophet in the Hebrew Scriptures.  Isaiah had a vision of God, especially God’s holiness. Isaiah became convinced of his own sinfulness. He cried out, “I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty.” (Isaiah 6:5) God forgave him and then sent him to speak the word of the Lord to Israel.

Sometimes it is not enough to critique one’s own culture. We frequently are so blind or so self-righteous we don’t want to admit our moral failures. We need someone to speak the hard truth into our lives and then lead us to repentance and confession. Nathan’s rebuke of “good” King David is an even clearer example. One evening David saw the beautiful Bathsheba bathing herself. He called for her to come to his palace and he forced her to have sex with him. As a result, she became pregnant. David tried many ways to hide his sin, but was not successful. Finally, he had her husband, Uriah the Hittite, killed by some soldiers. God sent Nathan to rebuke David. Nathan told him a parable about an evil man. When David recognized the horrible action as evil, Nathan told the King, “You are that evil man!”. (2 Samuel 12) David did repent and confessed his crime. He was forgiven by God and turned his life around.                                                         

Something similar happened on Capitol Hill last Thursday. The Senate was to vote on a sweeping immigration funding bill intended to bankroll Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol through 2029.  The leadership then added two Trump-backed initiatives to the bill: up to $1 billion in Secret Service funding tied to security for his planned East Wing Ballroom, and a $1.8 billion  to fund to compensate people who say they were victims of so-called political weaponization by the Biden administration. Because there were no safeguards on this weaponization bill, critics denounced it as Trump’s “slush fund”. What really riled up the Republican senators was the admission that some 1600 insurrectionists who attacked the capitol on January 6, 2021, were charged and convicted by juries of their peers, were later pardoned by Trump, but could be eligible to receive millions of dollars from the slush fund.

Senators who had been staunch allies of Trump in the past broke with him on this issue. Kentucky Republican Senator Mitch McConnell fumed, “_So the nation’s top law enforcement official (Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche) is asking for a slush fund to pay people who assault cops?” He continued, this funding bill is “utterly stupid, morally wrong – take your pick.”

Louisiana Republican Senator Bill Cassidy, who had drawn Trump’s ire, has become a vocal critic of the President, joining together the problem of affordability with the “slushi-ness” of the funding bill. He complained, “People are concerned about paying their mortgage or rent, affording groceries and paying for gas, not about putting together a $1.8 billion fund for the President and his allies to pay whomever they wish with no legal precedent or accountability,”

Enough Republican senators expressed their disapproval of the slush fund proposal that voting on the bill had to be withdrawn until after the Memorial Day recess. Republican opposition to the president’s priorities goes way beyond this funding bill. Criticism is mounting against his war with Iran, the East Wing ballroom, his economic mistakes regarding inflation, his cover-up of the Epstein files, etc.

When faced with moral failure, confession and repentance are always healthier than trying to avoid the truth. May Republican and Democrat leaders rise to the occasion!

It is Healthy to Confess One’s Own Sins and the Political Mistakes of One’s Elected Officials. Did some Republican Senators Finally Get a Political Conscience?

Last Thursday, rare events happened in both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives. Republicans in both chambers opposed President Trump’s policies and cancelled their voting procedure rather than delivera public rebuke of the president with their congressional votes. After a year and a half of being Trump’s yes’men and yes’women in his second term in the White House, these elected officials finally found the courage to say “No!”. The Hebrew Scriptures might help us understand what happened and how it could be transformed into healing for our nation.

We frequently think of confession as the acknowledgement and repentance of one’s personal sins directly to God or to a representative of God (like a pastor or priest). This usually takes place within a religious context, and I think this can be a good way to begin dealing with our moral mistakes. Confession is much healthier than ignoring our sins or pretending we don’t make moral mistakes.

Nevertheless, it is also healthy to acknowledge and confess the sins of one’s culture and one’s national leaders when they stray from the truth. The Bible highlights examples of believers who expose the sins of their society and their national leaders and call for repentance. Let’s look at the example of Isaiah, a significant prophet in the Hebrew Scriptures.  Isaiah had a vision of God, especially God’s holiness. Isaiah became convinced of his own sinfulness. He cried out, “I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty.” (Isaiah 6:5) God forgave him and then sent him to speak the word of the Lord to Israel.

Sometimes it is not enough to critique one’s own culture. We frequently are so blind or so self-righteous we don’t want to admit our moral failures. We need someone to speak the hard truth into our lives and then lead us to repentance and confession. Nathan’s rebuke of “good” King David is an even clearer example. One evening David saw the beautiful Bathsheba bathing herself. He called for her to come to his palace and he forced her to have sex with him. As a result, she became pregnant. David tried many ways to hide his sin, but was not successful. Finally, he had her husband, Uriah the Hittite, killed by some soldiers. God sent Nathan to rebuke David. Nathan told him a parable about an evil man. When David recognized the horrible action as evil, Nathan told the King, “You are that evil man!”. (2 Samuel 12) David did repent and confessed his crime. He was forgiven by God and turned his life around.                                                         

Something similar happened on Capitol Hill last Thursday. The Senate was to vote on a sweeping immigration funding bill intended to bankroll Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol through 2029.  The leadership then added two Trump-backed initiatives to the bill: up to $1 billion in Secret Service funding tied to security for his planned East Wing Ballroom, and a $1.8 billion  to fund to compensate people who say they were victims of so-called political weaponization by the Biden administration. Because there were no safeguards on this weaponization bill, critics denounced it as Trump’s “slush fund”. What really riled up the Republican senators was the admission that some 1600 insurrectionists who attacked the capitol on January 6, 2021, were charged and convicted by juries of their peers, were later pardoned by Trump, but could be eligible to receive millions of dollars from the slush fund.

Senators who had been staunch allies of Trump in the past broke with him on this issue. Kentucky Republican Senator Mitch McConnell fumed, “_So the nation’s top law enforcement official (Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche) is asking for a slush fund to pay people who assault cops?” He continued, this funding bill is “utterly stupid, morally wrong – take your pick.”

Louisiana Republican Senator Bill Cassidy, who had drawn Trump’s ire, has become a vocal critic of the President, joining together the problem of affordability with the “slushi-ness” of the funding bill. He complained, “People are concerned about paying their mortgage or rent, affording groceries and paying for gas, not about putting together a $1.8 billion fund for the President and his allies to pay whomever they wish with no legal precedent or accountability,”

Enough Republican senators expressed their disapproval of the slush fund proposal that voting on the bill had to be withdrawn until after the Memorial Day recess. Republican opposition to the president’s priorities goes way beyond this funding bill. Criticism is mounting against his war with Iran, the East Wing ballroom, his economic mistakes regarding inflation, his cover-up of the Epstein files, etc.

When faced with moral failure, confession and repentance are always healthier than trying to avoid the truth. May Republican and Democrat leaders rise to the occasion!

New Book. Protest Music in Latin America: Politics, Faith and Social Justice

I am excited to announce a new book in which I am one of the authors. The book is titled Protest Music in Latin America: Politics, Faith and Social Justice and has been published by Routledge. It analyzes the Biblical and Christian roots of several songs of protest music in Latin America primarily in the 1960s through the 1980s. This was a team effort of Latin American and music scholars led by Professor Nestor Quiroa and included Wilfredo Canales, Marcell Silva Steuernagel and yours truly. Enjoy!

Should Religious Leaders Criticize the Unjust Acts of an Authoritarian Ruler? Jesus did!

This has been an interesting week as President Trump has waded into the beyond-his-depth waters of religion. On Easter Sunday he posted the following on Truth Social:

“Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the F***’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell — JUST WATCH!” He then added a strange conclusion, “Praise be to Allah. President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

This post merits a few comments:

  • Although most U.S presidents have usually been fairly dignified in their public announcements, Trump’s vulgarity is quite apparent. It did not help his argument, but perhaps it reveals a certain desperation in the president’s emotional state.  
  • The president’s message had nothing to do with traditional Easter themes: Christ’s resurrection or the forgiveness of sins.
  • His out of context phrase “praise be to Allah” probably insulted many Christians and Muslims alike. It surely raised more questions about his mental acuity.

This post occurred within the context of Pope Leo’s incursion into international politics, especially regarding the war in Iran. Although he subtly did not mention President Trump by name, the Pope had condemned the worship of mortals and money, the pitfalls of arrogance, and the “absurd and inhuman violence” unleashed by the U.S./Israeli war with Iran that further destabilized the Middle East.

Trump got the message in spite of the subtlety and has repeatedly posted messages in which he calls the pontiff a liberal who is “weak on crime”. Pope Leo did not back down. “Too many innocent people are being killed,” he said as he began a 10-day African tour. “Someone has to stand up and say there’s a better way.” More recently, Trump posted an A.I. image of himself as a Jesus-like figure, said, “I’m just responding to Pope Leo.” Trump was quite clear about the problem as he perceived it, “I don’t want a Pope who criticizes the President of the United States.” It sure seems Trump wants to be not just above the law, but also above morality.

This is not new. Previous popes had criticized presidents and their politics: immigration, war, climate change, etc., but it does raise a serious question. Should religious leaders criticize the unjust acts of an authoritarian ruler? For many of us, the words and actions of Jesus provide a clear answer.

A dispute also arose among his disciples as to which one of them was considered to be the greatest. Jesus said to them, “The kings of the nations lord it over their subjects; and those who oppress them call themselves Benefactors (doers of good). But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. (Luke 22:24-26)

Pope Leo is following in the footsteps of Jesus in providing a moral critique of an unjust ruler. Although Leo seems quite wise and moral to me, he is a mere human and might be wrong in his evaluation of the president. But at the very least we should listen carefully to his words and not give anyone (including the president) an automatic pass. The lives of too many innocent people are at stake.

Pope Leo and Secretary Hegseth on Christianity and War: Which One is Closer to Jesus?

In the last several days, the Christian faith has been appealed to as a major motivation for the War with Iran. Secretary of Defense Peter Hegseth sees the war against Iran as a conflict between Islam and Christianity. In a recent briefing at the Pentagon, Hegseth quoted a verse from Psalm 144: “Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for war and my fingers for battle.” This is in line with his Christian Nationalism, a defective version of Christianity. I believe that this nationalism is a distortion of the gospel message because it conflates the teaching of Jesus with the goals of national or international governments. It is a heresy. It began to permeate Christendom with the “conversion” of Constantine and has reappeared at various times in history (the Crusades,[i] the Spanish Inquisition, the conquest of the Americas, Manifest Destiny, Nazi Germany, and on and on). It is a betrayal of the message that Jesus taught and demonstrated. Jesus taught love for our enemies, not hatred. He told his disciples not to take revenge against their rivals, he told Peter to put away his sword, for those who live by the sword will die by the sword. He taught that “an eye for an eye” should give way to generous love. (Matthew 5:38-42).

Pope Leo XIV waded into the public debate in his Palm Sunday mass: “Brothers and sisters, this is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war,” Leo said. “He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them.” In a special blessing at the end of Mass, Leo said he was praying especially for Christian believers in the Middle East who are “suffering the consequences of an atrocious conflict. In many cases, they cannot live fully the rites of these holy days.”

Although I strive to follow Jesus, I am not a Roman Catholic. Nevertheless, I think Leo XIV was right on in what he says about Jesus and war. Jesus never approved of war in the Gospels. Our Lord denounced the “rulers of this world” who committed great evil yet claimed it was good. We are NOT to follow their example. (Luke 22:25-26). Jesus showed his followers a better way. The early church sought to be peacemakers and denounced war as an expression of greed. For the first three centuries, up until the time of Constantine, the church was almost universally pacifistic. They affirmed they would die for their faith,  but they would not kill for it.i

Some have tried to harmonize Christianity with war through Just War Theory, a series of criteria that must be met before a war is “justified”. The war against Iran utterly fails to meet these criteria: (1) freedom for the Iranian people could be a “Just Cause” but this goal was quickly abandoned; (2) “Formal Declaration” was not met because Congress never gave the legally required authorization nor did the United Nations; (3) “Civii[an Immunity” was not respected as shown by the bombing of the girls’ school in which over 150 little girls were killed; and (4) “last resort” was not followed as the United States broke off the diplomatic negotiations that Trump himself had labeled as fruitful.  

Therefore, during this Holy Week, I invite those who claim the name of Jesus for war to reread the Gospels to see what it means to follow the Prince of Peace.

 [i] Decades ago, Wheaton College (a conservative Christian academic institution) eliminated the Crusader as their mascot, rightfully deeming it a bad symbol for Christianity. Campus Crusade for Christ eliminated “Crusade” from their name for the same reason. Secretary Hegseth has two Crusade tattoos on his body.

Donald Trump Urges Republican Senators to Pass His “Save” Bill “for Jesus”. The Biblical Jesus Refuses to Be a Partisan Good Luck Charm.

On Monday, President Donald Trump invoked the name of Jesus Christ in a call for Republican senators to cancel their Easter break and to stay in Washington in order to try to pass his package of new voting restrictions. Speaking at a public safety roundtable in Memphis, Tennessee, Trump said the Republican-led Senate should only concentrate on passing his Save Act and shouldn’t leave the capital until they do so.

“Don’t worry about Easter, or going home. In fact, make this one for Jesus, OK?” Trump said with a chuckle. “Make this one for Jesus, that’s what I tell them. It would be a damn good thing.”

Why did Trump invoke the name of Jesus? He was not the first politician to do so, and certainly won’t be the last, but it does raise the question: Why did he do it?

  1. Perhaps he thought it was a “cute” religious joke: senators could worship Jesus better by passing his “Save” legislation than by attending religious services back home with their families. Perhaps…but most Americans are not laughing.
  2. Perhaps it was a nod to Christians in his MAGA base in which he tries to remind these voters of all the “good” he has done for them.
  3. It is more likely that Trump tried to use a cheap Christian Nationalism tactic, similar to what politicians (both Republicans and Democrats) do when they end their speeches with the words, “May God bless America.” Although the phrase is a prayer, speakers frequently use it to suggest that God is already on “our side”, that we are the “good guys”, that God approves of our fallen and failing plans.

Although the Jesus of the Bible is passionate about humanity and the small things of our lives (like daily bread), Jesus does not approve of everything we do. His list of blessed people includes the poor, the hungry, those who weep and those who are hated and rejected as evil. (Luke 6:20-22). He pronounced woe upon people like me, the rich, the well fed, those who laugh and those who are well respected… (Luke 6:24-26). This makes me uncomfortable…and so it should. Apathy towards needy neighbors is really an offense against God.

Pieces of legislation in Congress should be debated and then either be approved or rejected on their own merits, not by cheap appeals to Jesus. The Jesus that I strive to serve, the Jesus of Scripture, refuses to be a good luck charm of politicians. That is taking his name in vain.

If He Walks Like a Dictator, and Talks Like a Dictator, Ergo…

The Good Book teaches that you can know people’s real character by examining their actions. “By their fruits you will know them.”

A more modern version of this truth is the following expression: “If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.”

I suggest this test should be applied as a question for our nation’s president, his cabinet, and our people. “If he walks like a dictator, and talks like a dictator, are we descending into a dictatorship?”

If he walks like a dictator…

  • President Trump sent troops into Venezuela to “extract” President Maduro and his wife and bring them to the United States. This was definitely a military attack because it involved more than 150 military aircraft and Venezuelan military bases were bombed. Trump ordered this attack without seeking nor obtaining the required congressional authorization.
  • He did not even inform the bipartisan, congressional “Gang of 8” which previous presidents had done.
  • Trump did not seek nor obtain the authorization of the United Nations Security Council. Unless authorization is granted, (and it wasn’t) this means Trump violated the UN Charter in Article 2(4), which affirms that member states must refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity of political independence of any state.
  • Stephen Miller is Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff and is a regular spokesperson for the president. He was recently asked a question by Jake Tapper regarding Trump’s use of force in Venezuela and possible use of military power to take over Greenland. He answered, “We live in a world in which you can talk all you want about international niceties and everything else, but we live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power.” This is a rejection of all universal ethics and international rule of law.
  • The Supreme Court has ruled that a sitting president cannot be charged for any crime committed while fulfilling the duties of the presidency. For all practical purposes, this means that the president is “above the law”.
  • Given that the US President also has the power to pardon or to commute the sentence of any person guilty of federal crimes, Trump can extend this “lawlessness forgiveness” to anyone who commits a crime in carrying out his wishes. On his first day in office, Trump pardoned nearly 1600 people who were found guilty of rioting at the nation’s capitol on January 6, 2021.  A mockery of the rule of law takes place when this pardon extends to unrepentant criminals such as George Santos, Rudy Giuliani, and former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez who was serving a 45-year sentence for drug trafficking.
  • This past Wednesday, an ICE agent shot and killed a 37-year-old women in Minneapolis. Before a thorough investigation had occurred, Vice President Vance declared that the ICE agent had “total immunity”.

And talks like a dictator…

  • This past week Mr. Trump sat down for an interview with senior reporters from the New York Times. They asked him a variety of questions.  When asked if there were any limits on his global powers, Trump said: “Yeah, there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
  • At another moment in the interview, Trump affirmed, “I don’t need international law.” When asked if the U.S. government should comply with international law, he answered “yes” but clarified that in situations where it restricts the U.S., the decision-maker is himself, adding, “It depends on how you define international law.” This reflects Trump’s characteristic dismissive attitude toward international law, such as sovereignty and borders. National power as implemented by the president—not law or treaties—should be the decisive factor when great powers clash. In his own mind, he is above international law.

The Descent into a Dictatorship

               To avoid a complete fall into a dictatorship, the Judiciary and Legislative branches of the US government should fulfill their congressional duties of being a guardrail against all excesses of the Executive branch. The checks and balances of the three branches are necessary in a democracy with fallen leaders. Thus wrote our wise ancestors in the Constitution.

PS Dear readers, per our healthy custom, if you find any factual inaccuracy in this writing, please let me know.