So I was cruising around The Huffington Post this evening. (Yes, indeed I was. Remember, I am someone who reads from several different points of view, rather than just swallowing the party line from those who advocate a point of view that resonates with mine.) Of particular interest to me was an article entitled "The Victorious Jesus" written by Christine Wicker. I raised my eyebrows in a gesture that implied "Hrm?" Effective bait. Obviously I had to click.
I am not sure I can agree with her argument—it takes a lot more than rhetorical flourish to convince me of something—but I have to admit that I appreciate the contrast she was drawing. Whether you agree with her or not, it seems that for Wicker there was something of a spiritual contrast being waged in the 2008 Presidential campaign, which she saw as the 'Jesus' that John McCain exhibited and the 'Jesus' that Barack Obama exhibited.
She described the 'Jesus' that the McCain/Palin ticket exhibited as the Fighting Jesus, who is militant about doctrine to a degree that lacks compassion, tolerance, and mercy, who is divisive and speaks in the language of battle. And she characterizes those McCain supporters who are Christian in obviously similar terms, and that they "feel compelled to speak boldly against evil and unbelief. They must rebuke and correct those who don't follow their Jesus." This Fighting Jesus, Wicker comments, "is a divider" and unrelenting.
I would take serious issue with her characterization, but only because she paints with a brush that is entirely too broad. Maybe an argument can be made to support this Fighting Jesus she identified as being represented; however, I think it is a rather minor population of the American public that advocates this stance. In other words, I do not think it is nearly as prevalent as her article could be interpreted as implying. Such people are out there, sure, and McCain's campaign certainly resonated with them, but they are comparatively few in number—which I think the final election results showed.
And she described the 'Jesus' that the Obama/Biden ticket exhibited as the Peace Jesus, who is subdued, inclusive, inspiring, peaceful, concerned more about the people than the status quo, who advocates loving one's enemies over cutting them down, who shows more concern over a person's spiritual well-being than what goes on in their bedroom, who shatters the walls that divide us and calls for people to unite.
I take issue with this characterization, too, but only because it fails to account for a huge portion of the New Testament gospels that contradict her broad brush strokes here too. (For example, Jesus did not eradicate walls that divide us but, rather, took those divisions out of the hands of man and asserted that God is the only rightful arbiter. Despite her harsh sentiments about the Fighting Jesus camp, it was indeed Jesus who "divides the world into the sheep and goats," e.g., Matt. 25, or John 10). Jesus was a lot of things but he was nowhere near the '60s hippie that Wicker wants him to be.
Having said that, I do have to appreciate the contrast she was drawing, however inaccurate she might be in the theological arena of biblical exegesis. There definitely was a spiritual contrast between those two men running for the highest office, the type of campaign they waged and the spirit they engendered in their supporters. One could not easily argue against that. "Barack Obama didn't preach his faith nearly as much as Sarah Palin did," Wicker notes, and she is right about that. But she is right, too, that it would be very difficult to not see the implicit spirit of the gospel in Obama and his campaign, and which he tirelessly endeavored to foster in those both working for and supporting his campaign. Whether that was intentional or not, that spirit could be seen.
I cannot verify the truth of this anecdote but Wicker reported that when news of Palin's seventeen year old daughter's pregnancy surfaced, "[Obama] forbade his staff to capitalize on it and said he would fire anyone who did." And she also noted that during the debates, Obama never once stooped to McCain's level of derision and vitriol, persistently focusing on issues rather than characters, and always with a moderate tone that invited the support of anyone regardless of party affiliation. The examples could be multiplied several times over, especially given Palin's rallies, but the crux of the message is clear: it was a lot easier for people to see the spirit of Jesus in Obama's character and campaign than it was in McCain's. And that spirit of Jesus, as Wicker noted, did not look weak and vulnerable but, quite the contrary, looked very strong and capable, demonstrating through behavior what practicing the gospel should look like.
I would not say that McCain is more Christian than Obama, nor vice-versa. This is not a competition of personal piety or doctrinal purity. It is not the point. What is the point? I do not know what Wicker's intended point was but I can tell you how I interpreted it: The point is that there was an important and significant difference between the Christian ideologues of the McCain/Palin campaign and what appeared to be the real spirit of the gospel that the Obama/Biden campaign embraced. Neither campaign preached the message of the gospel, obviously, but they did profess to be Christians so we can judge their individual campaigns according to the spirit that the gospel advocates. And, like Wicker commented, I think that people would have to recognize 'Jesus' more in the Obama campaign than that of McCain, for better or worse.
----------
Wicker, Christine. "The Victorious Jesus" (6 Nov. 2008). The Huffington Post. Retrieved 10 Nov. 2008 <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christine-wicker/the-victorious-jesus_b_141701.html>
No comments:
Post a Comment