|
“If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this
adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of
him when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.” –
Mark 8:38
If political advertising were banned (which would be a
bad thing, though I’m starting to forget why), one could still tell
it is an election year by the spike in church attendance by
politicians. The phenomenon seems to afflict politicos of all
leanings; the fact that there has not been a corresponding increase
in lightning strikes just proves the good Lord’s mercy.
I am not suggesting no elected official is genuine in
his or her faith, and I know several who walk the walk. And since
Jesus was serious about the shame thing, a little Bible thumping is
fine with me when done with grace and backed up by the thumper’s
life.
Not all Americans agree, however, despite having elected
a president who frequently peppers his speech with Biblical
references and is often photographed in church settings. The man
refuses to keep his faith to himself, especially at election time.
I am referring, of course, to Bill Clinton.
So says Paul Kengor, professor of political science at
Grove City College in Grove City, Pennsylvania, and a visiting
fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Kengor
researched “Presidential Documents,” a compilation of nearly every
utterance by sitting presidents, which is published by the U.S.
National Archives and Records Administration. It includes speeches,
press releases, press conferences, executive orders, proclamations,
communications with Congress, appointments and nominations, and just
about everything else that comes out of a president’s mouth except
sneezes and bedtime prayers.
Kengor examined “Presidential Documents” for both
Clinton terms and the first three years of George W. Bush’s
presidency. On average, President Clinton mentioned Jesus 5.1 times
per year, compared to 4.7 for President Bush. Clinton’s biggest
name-dropping year was 1996, the year of his re-election campaign;
Bush’s was 2001, the year of the September 11 attacks.
Kengor also notes that President Clinton spoke in
churches 21 times while in office, or 2.6 times per year. President
Bush addressed church audiences a grand total of three times during
his first three years, which, according to my calculator, is a
whopping once a year.
Both presidents are pikers compared to Hillary Clinton,
though; according to the New York Times, Mrs. Clinton spoke in seven
churches in seven hours on the eve of the 2000 election.
Yet President Bush has been harshly criticized for both
his faith and daring to show it in public. No less than Al Gore,
who if memory serves was Bill Clinton’s vice president, called the
president’s Christianity “the same fundamentalist impulse that we
see in Saudi Arabia” during a recent interview with The New Yorker.
So what is the difference? Why is President Bush seen
as a fanatic in some circles while the Clintons are not?
Political spin and media bias are factors, but the crux
of the matter is much simpler: People react differently to
President Bush because they believe he means what he says.
I don’t know President Bush or the Clintons and have no
idea what is truly in their hearts. All I know is what I read in
the papers, but when President Bush calls Jesus his personal savior
people take him at his word and a lot of them don’t like it.
While many claim to hate religious hypocrites, what they
really detest is genuine faith. They like the trappings of faith,
like Christmas dinner and Easter services, but the real thing makes
them nervous.
I don’t care for faith as a campaign tactic, but if it’s
real it cannot be separated from any part of life. If believers try
to hide it, then shame on them.
|
