Tenchu's Thoughts: Christianity Today
I could write a whole book on the state of Christianity today, even if I just focused on the cross-section between Christianity and American politics. Instead, I'll just focus on "that" article, the one that was prominently featured on Christianity Today and has become a lightning rod of controversy.
Trump Should Be Removed from Office - Christianity Today
Here's the TL;DR version of my post here: The article hits on the right themes, but it misses the mark, and it plays right into the partisan political game that the author claims he wants to be above.
The Right Themes
Yes, I get it. Character counts. This is what drove the impeachment of Bill Clinton, and this should be the driving force behind Trump's impeachment. Republicans used to believe that character counted, but they got shell-shocked at their leaders who exhibited great moral character but still got absolutely eviscerated by the media.
Now we need character taking a back seat. In the driver's seat now is brashness. A fighting spirit. Someone who is willing to get down and dirty for "our side." Trump represents that to Republicans these days. Of course, you can't get a saint to be a dirty fighter. You have to resort to what I've often referred to as the "anti-hero," an otherwise dislikable guy whose character flaws can be excused because the alternative is worse.
Or is it?
The thing about excusing the character flaws of Trump is that you lose whatever moral high ground you used to have. Christians in particular need to be living to a higher standard. That standard should apply to all parts of life, not just those that they find to be convenient.
And yeah, I get it. Politics often boils down to a choice between the lesser of two evils. But that's the thing. You're still choosing an evil. You're playing a game that Satan set up. And that game is rigged.
Hence every Christian needs to ask himself or herself. What is at stake here? Is it worth it to sell my soul for a man who is by any measure not a good role model? Can we tolerate the alternative, i.e. a Hillary or a Biden or even a socialist like Sanders or Warren?
The thing is, Christians are not supposed to be the ones in power. Christians by their very nature are supposed to be the ones who live and die for their beliefs. History is filled with good Christians who became martyrs for their faith. History is also filled with despots and power-mongers who used the name of Christ for their own selfish gains.
Hence it goes against the faith to choose economic prosperity and political security over staying true to Jesus' teachings. By nature Christians are meant to be the persecuted ones. If Christians are supposed to follow in the footsteps of Jesus and his apostles, then the path toward persecution should be expected.
A Missed Mark
Now here is where the author misses the mark. Instead of staying out of the impeachment circus, which I believe should have been the official position of Christianity Today's editorial board, the author actually endorses impeachment. But not only does he endorse impeachment, he also endorses the removal of Trump from office.
Pardon the language, but that is a complete WTF moment for Christianity Today.
The author claims correctly that the Democrats had it out for Trump from day one. The author also claims correctly that the impeachment circus was one-sided and unfair from the beginning. Trump didn't even have a chance to offer his side of the story. Furthermore, the author even calls out the doubt with regard to the facts that are being presented during the whole impeachment circus.
But then the author immediately turns around and says that the facts are "unambiguous" and that the president "attempted to use his political power to coerce a foreign leader to harass and discredit one of the president’s political opponents. That is not only a violation of the Constitution; more importantly, it is profoundly immoral."
No, it is not "unambiguous." There is a case to be made that Trump didn't like the corruption that was rife within Ukraine's political system. There is a case to be made that Hunter Biden has ties that could complicate relations between America and Ukraine, and that such ties should be investigated before financial aid can be approved.
And even if Trump's motives were impure, and even if Trump's decision-making was rash and unwise, the fact is that quid pro quo never took place. The Ukrainian president said there was no quid pro quo. There was no investigation launched. And financial aid was eventually approved without any nefarious strings attached.
The Devil's Game
So what other justifications does the author give for removing Trump from office? He points out all of the character flaws of Trump, all of his moral failings, all of the corruption surrounding his subordinates, and all the times Trump betrayed the trust of the American people.
Fine, but in this highly partisan game of impeachment, the author is falling for the same trap as most other people who also want Trump removed from office:
They want Trump impeached and removed because they don't like him.
Forget the standard of "high crimes and misdemeanors." Forget the fact that the definition of "treason" is being blatantly watered down. Forget the fact that, in the spirit of the American justice system, the burden of proof is on the accuser, and that burden is high for a reason.
Nah, let's just focus on the fact that Trump is unlikable, that Trump is mean, and that Trump is a bad, bad man.
Yeah, we knew this from day one. We even knew this during Trump's presidential campaign which led to his unlikely and unexpected victory. Is any of this really news? Did the impeachment hearings really uncover anything that we didn't know about the president? No.
Hence the only reason that the author endorses impeachment and removal is because he feels Congress should use this opportunity to remove Trump from office while they can.
In other words, impeachment has turned Trump into a "target of opportunity." It's a means to an end. And the end, which is Trump's removal from office, justifies the means, which is a highly partisan, highly political, and blatantly one-sided impeachment process.
Read that again. The ends justify the means.
And that's where the author of the article becomes a hypocrite. In arguing against the theme of "ends justify the means," he actually plays right into it.
That's how the devil works. That's how the devil rigs the game. Even if you don't believe in God, even if you don't believe in the existence of Satan, you cannot deny the diabolical logic behind the devil's game. No matter how you play the game, no matter which choice you make, ultimately Satan prevails.
The Fallout
In trying to respond to the controversy that the editorial created, CT's president released the following statement:
The Flag in the Whirlwind: An Update from CT’s President
The subtitle of this article goes, "Why our editor in chief spoke out against Trump, and why the conversation must continue."
Really? The "conversation must continue"? Give me a break, that's a real cop-out.
The problem is that there IS no conversation. Minds are closed. It was up to Christianity Today to open said minds. How do Christians do that? With scripture, logic, and moral reasoning.
What scripture supports the participation in a political circus? What moral reasoning justifies supporting what you think is the lesser of two evils, namely the Democrats and their partisan coup, instead of actually staying above the fray?
It is obvious that Christianity Today failed to open minds. I personally think the author of that article, as well as many on CT's editorial board, are falling into another trap, namely the "right side of history" trap.
"We want to be on the right side of history by endorsing impeachment." Yeah well that all depends on who you think will be writing the history books in the future you helped to create. And from the looks of it, the writers won't take too kindly to Christians, even those that opposed Trump.
Tenchusatsu |
