Evangelical Christians castigated Bill Clinton in wake of
his “improper relationship” with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. He had
sinned. He would be stoned.
اضافة اعلان
Franklin Graham, the evangelical minister, wrote in The Wall
Street Journal in 1998 that Clinton’s “extramarital sexual behavior in the Oval
Office now concerns him and the rest of the world, not just his immediate
family,” and that “private conduct does have public consequences.”
He concluded, “Mr. Clinton’s sin can be forgiven, but he
must start by admitting to it and refraining from legalistic doublespeak.
According to the Scripture, the president did not have an ‘inappropriate
relationship’ with Monica Lewinsky — he committed adultery. He didn’t ‘mislead’
his wife and us — he lied.Acknowledgment must be coupled with genuine remorse.
A repentant spirit that says, ‘I’m sorry. I was wrong. I won’t do it again. I
ask for your forgiveness,’ would go a long way toward personal and national healing.”
But Graham never demanded the same of Donald Trump. To the
contrary, he became one of Trump’s biggest defenders.
When a tape was released during the 2016 campaign of Trump
bragging years earlier about sexually assaulting women, Graham revealed his
true motives: It wasn’t religious piety, but rather, raw politics.
He wrote on Facebook that Trump’s “crude comments” could not
be defended, “but the godless progressive agenda of Barack Obama and Hillary
Clinton likewise cannot be defended.” He continued, “The most important issue
of this election is the supreme court.”
The US supreme court represents a more lasting power than
the presidency, a way to lock in an ideology beyond the reach of election
cycles and changing demographics, at least for a generation.
In an interview with Axios on HBO in 2018, Graham said of
his support of Trump, “I never said he was the best example of the Christian
faith. He defends the faith. And I appreciate that very much.”
The courts are central to that supposed “defense,” in
Graham’s calculation.
Case in point: his rigid defense of Brett Kavanaugh, who was
accused by Christine Blasey Ford of cornering her in a bedroom at a 1982 house
party. Graham dismissed the allegations as “not relevant” and said of the
episode, “Well, there wasn’t a crime that was committed. These are two
teenagers, and it’s obvious that she said no, and he respected it and walked
away — if that’s the case, but he says he didn’t do it. He just flat-out says
that’s just not true. Regardless if it was true, these are two teenagers, and
she said no, and he respected that, so I don’t know what the issue is. This is
just an attempt to smear his name, that’s all.”
The hypocrisy of white evangelicals, taken into full
context, shouldn’t have been shocking, I suppose, but as a person who grew up
in the church (although I’m not a religious person anymore), it was still
disappointing.
I had grown up hearing from pulpits that it was the world
that changed, not God’s word. The word was like a rock. A lie was a lie, yesterday,
today and tomorrow, no matter who told it.
I had hoped that there were more white evangelicals who
embraced the same teachings, who would not abide by the message the Grahams of
the world were advancing, who would stand on principle.
But I was wrong. A report for the Pew Research Center
published last week found that, contrary to an onslaught of press coverage
about evangelicals who had left the church, disgusted by its embrace of the
president, “There is solid evidence that white Americans who viewed Trump
favorably and did not identify as evangelicals in 2016 were much more likely
than white Trump skeptics to begin identifying as born-again or evangelical
Protestants by 2020.”
That’s right — the lying, philandering, thrice-married
Trump, who has been accused by dozens of women of sexual misconduct or assault,
may actually have grown the ranks of white evangelicals rather than shrunk
them.
To get some perspective on this, I reached out to an expert,
Anthea Butler, a professor of religious studies and Africana studies, and chair
of the religious studies department at the University of Pennsylvania. She is
also author of the recently released book “White Evangelical Racism.”
As Butler told me, the reason that some people might be
surprised by these findings is that “they believed the hype.” For years,
evangelicals had claimed that they were upholding morality and fighting
injustice. But what the movement has really been since the 1970s, said Butler,
is “a political arm of the Republican Party.” As Butler put it, evangelicals
now “use moral issues as a wedge to get political power.”
Butler concluded, “We need to quit coddling evangelicals and
allowing them to use these moral issues to hide behind because it’s very clear
that that’s not what the issue is. The issue is that they believe in
anti-vaxxing; they believe in racism; they believe in anti-immigration; they
believe that only Republicans should run the country; and they believe in white
supremacy.”
Read more Opinion and Analysis
.jpg)
.jpg)
