I’m in the midst of weaning myself off Facebook. It’s been a great venue for staying connected to friends and family but the partisanship and divisive speech of late has taken its toll, casting an increasing pall over my spirit. I don’t like the outcome and as Harry Truman used to say, if you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
On the way out of what will surely be a revolving door, I ran across a Dear Zachary letter by Wayne Grudem where he responds to an anti-Trump friend in defense of voting for Trump. It was in a friend’s Supreme Court post that morphed into an anti-abortion discussion that then converged into a pro-trump advocacy.
Grudem’s letter immediately caught my eye as I remember how his support for Trump four years ago influenced many of my friends, family and even some of my pastors. They saw him as a trusted source, bringing confirmation to a choice they wanted to make but uncertain just how to defend and justify it.
I read it once and then read it again. The evangelical support of Trump has been and continues to be an enigma. Yes, I’ve read all the different explanations for this, both from supporters and detractors of the president, but there’s still this unsettling feeling that won’t go away. Its almost like there’s two different gospels of Jesus Christ, two different practices of Christianity, or two different understandings of what it means to press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling.
So I read it once more, this time, however, with an eye on how I would respond to my own set of friends who see Grudem’s defense once again as a justification and confirmation of their presidential choice in this current election. Recognizing that many of them will be familiar with this letter, I choose to respond to some of the more critical points in Grudem’s letter rather than writing a new, stand-alone, polemic on why I cannot vote for Trump.
Let me begin with Grudem’s third point of response entitled “Am I sacrificing moral principles for the sake of political gain.” Here we are in agreement. The scriptural injunction for good works doesn’t stop at the public square. I like the way Tim Keller puts it: “Christians should be a community radically committed to the good of the city as a whole and while awaiting the return of the King, we become part of God’s work of reconciliation which, is a state of the fullest, flourishing in every dimension – physical, emotional, social, and spiritual.”
But the political calculation of flourishing is tricky business, a complex calculus that integrates intersecting and often competing policies with the downstream effects of leadership, a moral calculus that targets the well-being of a nation as we, again in the words of Keller, “work for the peace, security, justice, and prosperity of their city.”
Hence I agree with Grudem’s point #4: yes, there are two choices before us, like the Joshua 24:15 admonition to “choose this day whom you will serve.” But unlike the choice of old, our two options are both flawed, creations of fallen men and women that requires us to sort through a complex mix of policies and personalities, balancing the pros and cons of both sides.
Just this week, Trump called Harris, the first woman of color on a major party ticket a communist and a “monster,” who wants to “open up the borders to allow killers and murderers and rapists to pour into our country.” As the self-proclaimed “chief law enforcement officer of the country,” he fervently doubled down on calls to incarcerate his presidential opponent, inciting calls from his base to “lock Biden up.” He continued to toy with the Q-Anon conspiracy, refusing to distance himself from them while praising some of their beliefs. He retweeting a conspiracy theory that Joe Biden orchestrated to have the NAVY SEAL Team Six killed to cover up the fake death of Bin Laden. His lies roll down like waters and this past week was no exception. He said 85% of people who wear masks get the coronavirus, Not only is that not true, it gives coin to the anti-maskers who look to Trump for their direction. He said thousands of ballots were found in dumpsters – a blatantly false statement that undermines a most critical institution to the sustainability of our democracy. He said that he’d “protect people with pre-existing conditions” as his administration is presently in court seeking to do the opposite (and yes, I know about the executive order).
Grudem says that these distortions, these consequential lies, and these dystopian beliefs are not disqualifying flaws. Moreover, they need to be examined in light of a total package inclusive of policies. After all, as he asserts in the following section, “Trump is not perfect, but your criticisms of him are excessive and speculative.”
In every dimension that life’s taken me through these past 66 years, from employment to public service, from non-profit boards to family and community associations, such statements would be disqualifying flaws no matter how much good I’ve deposited on the other side of the ledger. Yet, the above statements are just a subsample of Trump’s comments in the past week. And then there was the week before and the week before that… A non-stop cacophony of dog whistles, demonization, twisted conspiracy theories, and lies with potential life or death consequences that obviates any sort of “complex process that requires wise judgements based on a wide variety of factors.” He’s the President of the United States, not some “crazy uncle” whose words do not matter.
I agree with Grudem’s 7th point that Trump’s conduct in a second term can be predicted from his conduct in the past four years. Trump’s character deficiencies include a stunning absence of competency, from foreign affairs to this pandemic, from a penchant for authoritarianism to a distain for the rule of law when its against his interest. In fact, I recently connected with some like-minded Republicans who, like me, see Trump as a moral test for the nation. Calling themselves Republicans for the Rule of Law, they have sought to bring light into darkness, showing how President Trump and his underlings have increasingly acted as if he is immune from oversight, investigation, and inquiry. They show how he plays this shell game with the states, Congress, and the courts. Whenever one of them tries to hold him accountable, he points the finger at another one. Then when that is adjudicated, he deflects again, asserting that the second entity has no power over him either.
Trump loves the rule of law – as long as it targets his enemies. He openly goads prosecutors to reward his friends and punish his enemies. He has relentlessly sought to undermine an independent judiciary and Department of Justice. His abuse of executive discretionary authority has eroded the concept of checks and balances. His gaming of the judicial system has exploited weaknesses in our legal process. His attempts to place himself, family and business interests above the law have called into question basic notions of fairness and justice. He constantly asserts powers he doesn’t actually have as he bullies the institutions under his control to cross the line and make it so. And over time, he’s gotten better at this, allowing us to see more clearly how an extrapolation of these trends into a potential next four years would look like.
Grudem’s 8th point, that the strategy of the political left is increasingly to avoid policy discussions and focus on ad hominem arguments, is fascinating given the actions and behavior of the Republican Senate these past 3.5 years. Haven’t the Republicans essentially given up on policy, relying instead upon the courts to stop the Democratic agenda while advancing their own cultural agenda? Take health care for example, one of the central issues of the day. I’ve been looking for and hoping to see a detailed concrete Republican policy for a decade. In fact, I can’t think of any issue more foundational to those who seek the good of the city and this lack of policy interest-which is widely perceived to arise from a lack of caring – has been noticed by the electorate, moving the needle away from the Republican party during the mid-term elections of 2018. Or take immigration, or climate change, or even current life and death issues like a national pandemic policy. Here, there is no higher calling than to own the libs, to Cancel Democratic ideas, policies and initiatives while offering little in return.
I believe Grudem’s 10th point about party policies and platform is one of the most important topics facing the church today. We need a theology of flourishing that advances God’s kingdom plan of restoration, independent of political tribe and platform.
Grudem, however, stays solidly within the four walls of the Republican party. After going through a long list of Republican political positions that he sees consistent with Christian values, he then provides a shorter list of Democratic political positions which he sees to be inconsistent with Christian values.
My Christian values, start with gospel values which is to love God and love our neighbor with the second as unto the first. Those two great commandments along with the great commission is the core of the gospel and the foundation by which everything else stands. This core is evidenced through how love and unity, the two defining marks of a Christian according to Jesus, show up in our orthopraxy and orthopathy. Our life verses must include Micah 6:8 and 2 Cor 3:18, so that when people see us, they see an unveiled reflection of Jesus with the Sermon on the Mount and the mandate of Micah 6:8 being lived out every day.
Love your neighbor. Feed the hungry. Welcome the stranger. Hear the cry of the poor. Pursue justice, love mercy and walk humbly with your God. Share out of your abundance with the needy. See others as created in God’s image, imputing honor without categories, without filters, without any preconditions. And in doing so, embrace our calling to be the imago dei, a reflection of His divine character to show the world what our God is like. These are moral principles derived from core Christian values. All top shelf issues of Jesus according to Matthew 25.
Everything about Trump is the antithesis to those values. So is much within the current Republican party – from their stance on health care to climate change, to hazardous waste regulations, etc. For many, I’m sure it’s not purposeful, its not like they made a decision to hate their neighbor. Instead it’s an outcome from a political ideology that champions an I-based society rather than an other-based society. In their desire to promote flourishing through incentivizing the individual, people fall through the cracks and are left behind.
Although I-based ideologies have merit, doesn’t the gospel require a priority given to other-based societies, both in our personal lives and in our public policies? The call to love thy neighbor does not stop at the ballot box. It’s the core Christian value that invades all of life and, as such, is the benchmark for all of life too. Take Supreme Court justices and the desire for them to be originalists. I’ve always leaned towards originalism, but that’s a really low priority to me and in any event, an unnecessary condition to promote flourishing in our society. Although Chief Justice Warren was a Republican, he was also an activist jurist, one that would be shunned by the current Republican party. Yet so many outcomes of the Warren court showed a spectacular promotion of a love your neighbor mindset. What a gospel legacy in so many of his decisions! Not all of them course, but he sure bent the arc of justice towards the gospel in a number of their decisions. Yep, the preoccupation with originalists jurists just doesn’t move my 2 Cor 3:18 needle very much and doesn’t it seem like the willingness to overlook nearly anything else including support of Trump just to get constitutionalist judges crosses the line on idolatry?
Grudem’s 12th point about the need for greater civility offers a further point of agreement until you read his analysis which is once again, one sided, a fully tribalist argument focused solely on the behavior of anti-trumpers while neglecting the favorite parlor sport of his team which is to “own the libs,” I see the witness of this sport many times each day on Facebook with memes posted by my evangelical Facebook friends ranging from funny to flat out wicked as they make fun of or demonize their enemy, the libs. An everyday tribute to what Nikki Haley has warned against and what Brendan Buck, a senior Republican congressional aide, once confessed: “Owning the libs and pissing off the media. That’s what we believe in now.”
Grudem’s 9th point about divisiveness misses the point but yet its perhaps the most important issue of the election – at least from a gospel perspective. Unity is a non-negotiable part of God’s kingdom. It’s one of two essential marks of the Christian. Hence, any flourishing in God’s kingdom must pass through the two doorways of love and unity as Christians committed to the good of the city lay aside every weight that stands in the path of God’s kingdom purposes.
At one level, divisiveness in our hearts is truly a “both sides” affair. Its part of the human condition and an outcome of our need to belong. There’s a “we the good” versus “they the enemy” world out there and the boundary lines are drawn. “None is righteous, no, not one,” hence no party is immune from the sin of divisiveness as there’s a force deep inside that pushes us against the other. I see that force alive and well every day, even within my evangelical tribe called to love thy neighbor.
The real point Grudem misses, which is the other half of the issue, is that leadership matters through both words and actions. Leaders profoundly affect the atmosphere of an organization as their underlying character and values becomes amplified through what they say and how they act in the public square.
Here’s the problem. Trump’s daily practice of lies and insults along with his use of political power to pursue vendettas and foster divisiveness is unprecedented in modern history. I read his tweets and listen to his speeches. He is a cruel man, a pathological liar, who purposefully seeks division by fanning the flames of grievances with tweets that can be race-baiting, conspiracy theorizing, and violence embracing. This character deficiency isn’t a just some “saltiness” that you give mulligans to. It’s a divisive mindset that’s antithetical to our faith, a flat-out rejection of the very core of the gospel (the second commandant as unto the first) and it works like yeast spreading throughout his followers that take up the same mantle and demonize the other. It’s a divisiveness that gets amplified time and time again as it circulates both within his party and also with those outside of his party.
Divisiveness has been a dealbreaker since Mark 3:2. It was forbidden by Patrick Henry and other founding fathers. Abraham Lincoln spoke out against it during the great battle for the soul of the nation. And its destructive force continues today gaining strength from both sides, but particularly from a president who unabashedly embraces division and discord every day. It’s a dealbreaker.
Final Thoughts
The thread running through nearly all of Grudem’s points and argument is clear. Defense of his team is on the line and he is up to the challenge.
I’m reminded of G.K. Chesterton response when asked by the Times: “What’s Wrong with the World?”
Dear Sirs,
I am.
Sincerely yours,
G. K. Chesterton
The enduring influence of that “self,” that “I am,” which is called to die so that Christ might live, is the greatest hinderance to the gospel and here’s the problem: we are unaware of its influence and sustaining power to shape our identity, colorize the “others” in our life, shape our political beliefs, and redirect life’s priorities.
We see this on display every day, especially in our political discussions and analyses. Truth and balanced assessments are not our goal, when it’s our team and our relationship to that team that matters most. They motivate our reasonings and create a hostility to the other side. We end up seeing the other side as blind, unchristian, and illogical when the blindness actually resides in us. We need to stop believing the fiction that we are rational people and holders of truth just because we say so. Confirmation bias is not an add-on to our mental system, but deeply embedded into how we think and who we are. We self-judge ourselves to seek an “evenhanded consideration of alternative viewpoints, yet we utterly fail in this as are more interested in looking right in the eyes of our team than being right. And when arguments don’t work, we make them up and the amazing thing is not only that we believe what we invent, but we convince ourselves of the virtue of our response.
Its time we change the script and my real goal for writing this is less about Trump than a call for non-partisanship as we challenge longstanding presuppositions and beliefs in light of unveiled gospel solely focused on the life and message of Christ. Our identity must be solely centered in Christ, visibly imprinted as a servant of Him and Him only. As the early church once showed, this is not an impossible task beyond the reach of normal people. By viewing everything through the cross, they became a countercultural force, believing that God had a plan for this world and that they were part of that plan to restore hope and goodness to His world. Their impact, an outcome born of a singularity of purpose and identity, holds a remarkable place in history and serves as a lesson for Christ-followers like us today.
Grudem ends with “We as a nation are facing many crucial political decisions. We need God’s wisdom, which will come about through reasoned discussions such as represented in your two thoughtful emails, and, I hope, in my response to your thoughts. “But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere” (James 3:17).
I hope this letter contributes to those reasoned discussions. But for that wisdom from above to bear fruit, we will need the transformation of Romans 12:1-2 to prepare the soil as we “lay aside every tribal weight, and the cognitive sins which doth so easily beset our arguments and diminishes the gospel as it distorts our identity for an ekklesia called to show what our God is like.
