But wait, isn't Peggy invoking too much God in her op-ed?
January 21, 2005 – Reaction to Bush’s Speech
A day after delivering what I thought was the best speech I’ve heard in a long time, President Bush is receiving criticism for his speech, even from Reagan Speechwriter Peggy Noonan. The chief complaint is that the President referred to God too often. I didn’t think you could refer to God too often, but apparently President Bush found a way. My reply is: at least he didn’t kiss the Bible after taking the oath like Truman did. When exactly was it that mentioning God became politically incorrect? Didn’t Martin Luther King, whose birthday we just celebrated, mention God quite a bit? Wasn’t he a pastor, even? If you want to read a speech that is “God-drenched,” read King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. Now there’s an invocation of the Almighty.
But does King’s frequent use of Bible quotes weaken his speech? No, it was, is, and will always be one of the most powerful speeches on freedom ever. Bush’s speech was also a powerful speech on freedom. Really, how can you make a speech on the subject of freedom without mentioning God, who gave us freedom? I know, some don’t believe in God and certainly don’t believe God gave us our freedom. But the question you have to ask yourself is: if your freedom doesn’t come from God, then from whom does it come? Any other source would be frail and so your freedom would also be frail. If it is the government who gave us freedom, then the government could take it away. Perhaps it came from your parents. Then where did they get their freedom from? Maybe you gave it to yourself. Then I choose to give myself more freedom than you have given yourself. What do you do now? You see, your freedom must come from a source beyond humanity. Did it come from the universe? From nature? So, the universe is an intelligent being capable of granting gifts of freedom’s magnitude? But then the universe is finite as well, it has a beginning and an end. So if the universe gave us our freedom, then our freedom would be finite. And a finite freedom is not free. The source of our freedom must be beyond even the universe. It must be absolute and infinite so that our freedom would not have flaws, like a ring made from the purest gold capped with a flawless diamond. What other source could that be but God?
So, not only was it OK for President Bush to mention God in his speech on freedom, but it is the only way he could make such a speech. The righteous certainty that such a speech requires could only come by invoking such a lofty source.
The other complaint about the speech is that it was too far-reaching. Once again, I didn’t think you could take freedom too far. But the President was careful to note that we will not and cannot forcibly overthrow every evil tyrant. But fortunately we have other options at our disposal. Certainly, the task of bringing freedom to every dark corner of the globe is a difficult one that will not be accomplished in this President’s term. It probably won’t even be accomplished before this generation has passed away. And we are not the first generation to take up this task. But freedom, like the mustard seed in Christ’s parable, starts off small but then grows to a very powerful force. Just because we may not see our goal in our lifetime, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t strive for it anyway.
There have also been reports that foreign leaders received Bush’s inaugural speech with shivers. I’m sure that 228 years ago foreign leaders felt the same shivers upon the news of the signing of the American Declaration of Independence. If foreign leaders find freedom frightening, then that is their problem which they will have to examine on their own. We will not water down our righteous ideals for their comfort.
–J.E. Heath
per-fidem.org |
