On Clarifying God's Role in Missouri Politics

I mean no disrespect, but there are more and more reports that God has been meddling in Missouri politics. Now, to be sure I am not one to tell God how to spend his time. I'm a strong supporter of God; I've even befriended him on Facebook. Maybe it's just a matter of his not having time to read up on things, but when it comes to Missouri politics I am a little worried that God may be in over his head.

It starts with the Republican candidates for the U.S. Senate seat held by Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill, whose position favoring such issues as health care, Social Security, and public education have apparently put her on political hit lists that no self-respecting Christian would want to be on.

There were three major candidates in the Republican primary this week and it would be difficult to find anything of significance separating them on issues. Mostly their focus was persuading GOP voters that they were more conservative than their opponents, or than any other human being on the face of the earth for that matter.

They did use different strategies, however. One candidate likened herself to Sarah Palin and brought Sarah to town for an endorsement. Didn't work. Another relatively unknown businessman put $7.5 million of his own money in the race. Didn't work.

The third candidate is a six-term member of Congress who is considered one of the most unflinching conservatives in the House. He kept a low profile and to his credit chose not to run attack ads. He didn't reveal the secret of his success until he was declared the winner of the primary, and then he immediately disclosed how he did it and who helped him do it:

I want to give thanks to God our Creator who has blessed this campaign, heard your prayers, and answered them with victory. Through the months, we have seen frequent instances of His blessing and are reminded that with Him all things are possible. (Kansas City Star, August 8, 2012, page 1)

That one worked.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/08/08/3750097/show-me-state-showdown-akin-will.html#storylink=misearch#storylink=cpy

This announcement by U.S. Rep. Todd Akin demands analysis, if only to avoid scorn. One is tempted, indeed required, to ask the obvious questions. Is God registered as a political lobbyist in the state of Missouri? If so, do we know for sure whether he is a Republican who drinks tea? And further, in view of his "creator" role mentioned in Akin's statement can we even assume that God is a U.S. citizen? Wouldn't the folks in Mozambique expect that God is one of their's as well? And what about birthing documents? One analyst opined that they may have been lost in the Flood. Yes, THAT flood.

Greek Orthodox Archbishop Michael visits
 President Harry Truman at the White House,
January 20, 1950

Missouri politics can be tough. Ask Tom Pendergast. Ask Harry Truman. I really do not know what kind of political acumen God brought to Akin's campaign. Here in Missouri God usually shows up at Sunday School, church picnics, and the like. I'm just a little concerned that if God has signed up for Akin it may have been because of political naiveté rather than political enthusiasm.

You see, here in Missouri these days candidates who believe in things like caring for the poor and healing the sick tend to get accused of horrible sins like killing puppies and supporting Medicare. And whether God knows it or not, if he hooks his wagon to Akin's star he is going to be expected to shed that wimpy "no attack ads" position and start turning out those commercials.

Now it is true that God has a pretty good résumé. The vetting process will be burdensome but ultimately revealing. Here's what I think will come of it all. Once these folks who claim God as their campaign manager get a good look at God's record they are going to discover that it isn't quite the fit they were expecting.

And as for God, I am confident that a few days with the Akin campaign will make it clear that there are other disasters more worthy of God's time and energy than Missouri politics.

Like Darfur.

Sex, Politics, and Stupidity

a photo by gwilmore on Flickr.

American politics never cease to amaze me. I just watched 30 minutes of Andrea Mitchell Reports, always a thoughtful interview program on MSNBC.

It began with a terrific analysis of the U.S./China relationship by Jon Huntsman, former ambassador to China and former Republican candidate for president of the United States. He demonstrated a vast command of the history and culture of China and urged all candidates to avoid the sound bites and give the issue the thoughtful reflection that this very complex and highly consequential matter deserves.

Jon Huntsman

I never did understand why Huntsman didn't make a bigger splash in the GOP nomination process. He always seemed to be a guy who understands the importance of bipartisanship; he was appointed to the ambassadorial post in China by Democratic President Obama. The Republican base saw that as a problem not as evidence of his ability to be effective across party lines.

Instead of listening to the likes of Huntsman the party preferred a three ring circus where the lion tamer was up first, soon replaced by the high wire artist, and then completely taken over by the clowns. And the ringmaster? Nowhere to be found.

Foster Friess

So just as I settled back appreciating Huntsman's civility and intelligence, there cometh Foster Friess, the millionaire backer of Rick Santorum's presidential aspirations. Asked about the statements attributed to Santorum that contraception was "dangerous" he dismissed the issue by saying, "Back in my days they used Bayer Aspirin for contraception--the gals put it between their knees." Even the veteran reporter Andrea Mitchell was nonplussed, stumbling along in an effort to salvage a moment of grace out of the statement's stupidity. 

It's this kind of stuff that comedians like Bill Maher loves. On the Tonight Show he left Jay Leno cracking up when he said that Rick Santorum "believes that life begins at erection." I laugh right along with everyone else, always willing to be titillated by a little naughty joke or edgy comment now and then. 

But then I stop. Do we realize that the world is laughing at us? We have people who are considered serious candidates for leader of the free world babbling on about social issues that have been settled for decades, sometimes generations. 

Mr Santorum, it is not contraception that is dangerous. It is you.

On Tolstoy, Forgiveness, and the Waffle House

Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910)

A while back I found myself at a local Waffle House, filling a little time between appointments with my orthopedist and my ophthalmologist.  Life is like that for me these days, requiring far more visits to medical facilities than I ever would have imagined.

That morning I was visiting the surgeon who had patched together the remnants of a knee that took the brunt of an ungraceful descent down the stairway in my home. That nasty surgery left me with a couple of months spent mostly in a recliner, my foot elevated and my ego bruised.

Later that day I was at the eye doctor, demonstrating once again that I could not make out the bottom row in the vision test. Never mind that I had long ago memorized the darn thing, although that knowledge seems a bit useless.

For some reason these medical appointments are often followed by visits to Denny's or IHOPs or such--the comfort foods, the brassy waitresses, the bottomless coffee pots, and the morning paper. On this occasion it was the Waffle House I visited. I learned a little history from the greasy menu--there is a Waffle House Museum in Decatur, Georgia at the site of the first restaurant opened in 1955. That was interesting to know, but hardly life-changing.

But never did I imagine that in the midst of the maple syrup, the buttered waffle, and the black coffee I would run into Leo Tolstoy. He came by way of a story in the New York Times which I was reading on my iPhone. I see a lot of irony in the circuitous route that connected me to Tolstoy that morning, but that is not the point of my musings today.

Waffle House Museum

The piece in the Times dealt with an effort underway in Russia to rehabilitate Tolstoy's reputation on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of his death. It seems that although he is fondly remembered among literary types, and is an important figure in Russian history, he is not beloved by the Russian Orthodox Church. A century ago the  church had excommunicated and blacklisted him because they believed he had supported the rise of the Bolsheviks.

Clearly Tolstoy had radical views and was a favorite of Lenin. But even those who abhorred his politics had to acknowledge that War and Peace and Anna Karenina, among others, were such a worthy contribution to the world's literature that he could be forgiven his political myopia. And so, a decade ago Tolstoy's great-great grandson wrote to the church requesting that Tolstoy's 1901 excommunication be "revisited." There was no response.

As the centennial approached the effort was joined by the literary establishment and a most remarkable request ensued. The president of the Russian Book Union wrote to the church and in effect asked for forgiveness on behalf of Tolstoy, something Tolstoy himself had never requested. The church's response, while praising his books and other literary accomplishments, noted that Tolstoy had never made peace with the church nor renounced his "tragic spiritual error" and as a result his excommunication could not be lifted. They did say that those who held him in high regard would be allowed to offer "sincere, humble prayer for his soul." (The full text of the letters are well worth reading and can be found here.)

At this point the waitress at the Waffle House asked if I would like my coffee refilled.  I did.

Russian intellectuals were appalled by the church's response:

“It’s as if in the 20th century the church did not survive persecution that made Tolstoy’s criticisms look like childish prattle,” wrote the literary critic Pavel V. Basinsky, whose new book examines Tolstoy’s final days. “It’s as if we have found ourselves in the situation that we were in at the beginning of the last century.”

As the waitress two booths over hollered "Two eggs over easy, hash browns, and bacon extra crispy," I shook my head in agreement and chuckled at the silly rigidity and narrow interpretations of those church officials unable to migrate to the modern age.  I poured a little maple syrup on what remained of my waffle.

And then a little chill rippled through my body.

I stared at the words. I wrote that statement by the Secretary of the Patriarchal Cultural Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, I thought, lukewarm coffee gurgling in my throat. Not that statement, of course. I had never upheld the excommunication of Leo Tolstoy. Never even knew about it.

But my entire career was spent in various roles in a faith community, eight of them as its president. In that moment in the booth of the restaurant du jour I started to wonder how many times had I written policies or responded to inquiries in a manner that leaned on custom or comfort or precedent but ignored the Waffle House test.

Does it make sense to the world as we know it, as it has become over time? Does it honor the past without being bound to it? Does it stifle or does it breathe with new life?

 My mind raced.

A few days ago I stopped by the Waffle House again after seeing the doctor. A little bladder problem if you must know. I had some things I have been wondering about since my last encounter with Tolstoy. Many things. I needed to know what he thought.  That same waitress was yelling something about link sausages. No Tolstoy though.

Maybe I'll check at Denny's, just in case.