A group of mostly mainline and evangelical left leaders and academics has published an open letter on the matter of President Obama’s Christian faith. Though it is signed mostly by a collection of people with whom I rarely agree, in this instance I think they are right on target, and I’ve added my own inconsequential name to it. This is the letter in its entirety:
As Christian leaders— whose primary responsibility is sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ with our congregations, our communities, and our world— we are deeply troubled by the recent questioning of President Obama’s faith. We understand that these are contentious times, but the personal faith of our leaders should not be up for public debate.
President Obama has been unwavering in confessing Christ as Lord and has spoken often about the importance of his Christian faith. Many of the signees on this letter have prayed and worshipped with this President. We believe that questioning, and especially misrepresenting, the faith of a confessing believer goes too far.
This is not a political issue. The signers of this letter come from different political and ideological backgrounds, but we are unified in our belief in Jesus Christ. As Christian pastors and leaders, we believe that fellow Christians need to be an encouragement to those who call Christ their savior, not question the veracity of their faith.
Therefore, we urge public officials, faith leaders, and the media to offer no further support or airtime to those who misrepresent and call into question the President’s Christian faith. And we join with the President in praying that God will continue to bless the United States of America.
I don’t know anything about the depth of the president’s faith, or the sincerity with which he holds to it. I have no idea what kind of theological notions he harbors, though after twenty years at Trinity UCC in Chicago there’s probably more than his fair share of nonsense. I also know that it doesn’t really matter. The question of presidential faith mostly tells us, if anything, what motivates him to pursue the policies he prefers. And Barack Obama has been pretty clear that he’s a liberal mainline Christian, the evidence for which may, I think, be found in almost every consequential stance he’s taken.
The continuing insinuation from some corners that he is a secret Muslim is simply ridiculous, up there with the conspiracy theory regarding his birth certificate. It’s every bit as unseemly as the repeated attacks from the left on George Bush’s evangelicalism, or the whispers that sometimes swirled around Ronald Reagan because he rarely went to church. I have no problem with people disagreeing in the most vociferous terms with Obama’s politics and policies, or even disliking him personally. But folks really should leave it at that. Anything more is adding poison to a civic environment that is already toxic enough.
August 26, 2010 at 2:44 pm
I agree with you, but let’s face it, he sends mixed signals. The most famous was when he..um..accidentally referred to “my Muslim faith” in an interview with George Stephanopolus. Georgie was quick to blurt, “You mean your CHRISTIAN faith!” (I get tongue tied all the time, but I can’t imagine a blunder like that.)Right behind that was his calling the Muslim call to prayer “the most beautiful sound on earth.”
I’m just saying.
August 26, 2010 at 2:46 pm
Indeed the man does send mixed signals and his party and administration continually show deference and preference to Islam… just today people are learning the State Department is funding the rebuilding of mosques overseas and they likewise are funding the Ground Zero Mosque’s imam on a “world tour”.
Exhibitionists who want to prove they are not deranged should stop dropping their pants.
Presidents who want us to believe they are not Muslim should stop acting like exhibitionists!
August 26, 2010 at 2:50 pm
You’re right, he does do stuff like that. But a lot of it (such as his reference to the Muslim call to prayer) just strikes me as standard liberal mainline kumbayah. Of course, having heard the call in Jerusalem through blaring loudspeakers, I’d have to at least question his taste in “beautiful sounds.”
August 26, 2010 at 8:33 pm
13 “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14 “For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.
15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 “You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 “So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 “So then, you will know them by their fruits.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME , YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS .’
24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 “And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock. 26 “Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27 “The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and it fell–and great was its fall.”
August 26, 2010 at 11:07 pm
David. Hey. Greetings in Christ, from Indiana. I’ll try to cobble together an e-mail about this and send it to you soon. I would just ask here if you think that the apostles would consider a “liberal mainline Christian” such as President Obama to be genuinely a follower of Christ. Simon Magus received quite a direct and personal rebuke — “Your money perish with you,” etc., “Repent,” etc., “You are bound by iniquity,” — because of his simony. Would any true prophet say less than that to someone promoting what President Obama promotes?
Yours in Christ,
James Snapp, Jr.
August 27, 2010 at 5:42 am
Brett: Right. Jesus says that. What’s your point? Those verses, while telling us to shun false prophets and judge the actions and words of those who claim to be Christian, never give us the right or authority to judge a person’s heart. That is reserved for God alone. We can say that a given individual’s words or actions are not in conformity with the gospel, but whether he is or is not of the household of God is not for us to know.
James: Thanks for the comment, and the email you sent me. I have no doubt that the apostles would rebuke Obama about any of a number of things, including, for instance, his stance on abortion. Their rebuke would be strong, and it would be personal. They might even have barred him from the church until such time as he repents. There are two problems with this for us, however: one, we haven’t done that (public disagreement is hardly the same thing as going personally to a brother to seek to win him back to the right and true); and second, it still fails to recognize the point I made to Brett. I see no instance in the New Testament where any of Jesus’ disciples, and particularly the leaders of His church, made a pronouncement about whether a given individual was, in fact, a regenerated child of God. Actions are condemned, ideas are repudiated, individuals are cast out until such time as they repent, but the ultimate question of whether one is actually what one professes to be is left in God’s hands. We need hardly approve of anything Obama says or does to make that distinction.
August 27, 2010 at 10:00 am
While he was in office, Ronald Reagan seldom attended church and his wife routinely consulted astrologers. What then can we insinuate from this about his religious faith?
The same Ronald Reagan once famously said, or mis-said, in a speech, “Facts are stupid things.” What should we conclude from this tongue-tied moment about his attitude towards education?
Speaking of mixed signals, the government sponsoring of mosque-construction at the State and Defense departments began under the Bush administration, as did the goodwill junkets of Imam Rauf. George Bush once called Islam a “religion of peace,” and there are an number of photos of him holding hands with or embracing Saudi princes. What can we therefore insinuate about his faith from these facts?
It’s an election year; the party out of power will say any thing, however craven, untrue or absurd, to gain a few votes.
Kudos to you, Rev. Fischler, for condemning guilt by insinuation. We should all heed your example.
August 27, 2010 at 10:35 am
I don’t know if this has appeared anywhere with the poll that was recently published (20-25% Americans believe Obama to be Muslim), but it strikes me as odd and ironic that those in the media who guffaw at this poll seem to insinuate that those 20-25% believe being a Muslim to be a bad thing.
I have to go with the belief that he is a progressive Christian when the wind is blowing in the right direction, for his convenience.
August 27, 2010 at 10:48 am
@David: I’m not sure I agree. When Peter told Simon to perish with his money, he meant eternal judgment. When the church excommunicates someone, they are in effect saying that person is not a believer. Admittedly, we are talking apples and oranges here.
@Christine: I be know how you voted for in 2008!
Seriously though, you are confusing multi-culturalism and politics with religious issues. Those are what has so many Americans confused, even the ones that don’t necessarily think BHO a Muslim.
I don’t remember how often Reagan went to church, but he did. So did Bush, Clinton, and Bush. They may have been little more than photo-ops, but they were.
When have we seen BHO at church? Never. He plays golf. He blows off the National Day of Prayer but holds a Ramadan feast in the White House, etc. This confuses the American people, is all I was saying.
As far as Bush holding hands and embracing Saudi Princes, yes he did these things. Those however we culturally recognized gestures of peace in the Middle East. We do have allies over there. Of course he was dead wrong when he said that Islam was a religion of peace. It never has been. History shows that. It has been peaceful at times, to be sure, but was born of blood. (Read the history of the Church in North Africa.)
August 27, 2010 at 10:51 am
Yikes1 Please forgive the typos! I was distracted.
August 27, 2010 at 11:12 am
G.W. Bush also held Iftar feasts in the White House. Bush Senior and Reagan celebrated the National Day of Prayer exactly once in each of their administrations. Why is that not also confusing to people? If there’s confusion, it’s only because there’s manipulation going on. As I said, it’s an election year.
Besides, the question of any President’s religion or lack of it is entirely moot. The founders, wiser than most current commentators, specifically forbade in the Constitution any religious test for public office holders.
August 27, 2010 at 11:20 am
Thanks for the affirmation, Christine. But in the interest of fairness, I should say that in an election year, and in any other year, both parties have a tendency to resort to the craven, the untrue, and the absurd. It is what they do!
August 27, 2010 at 11:29 am
You are correct, Rev. F. I certainly never meant to suggest otherwise. Putting up with political ridiculousness is sometimes the price we have to pay for living in a free republic.
August 27, 2010 at 11:55 am
And it is also why no responsible Christian should confuse their political allegiance with allegiance to Christ. Christians on both the political right and left, if honest, have to overlook and excuse an awful lot in order to justify their political affiliation. It’s a classic “What frames what?” scenario.
August 27, 2010 at 3:23 pm
Here (http://theaquilareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2801:president-obama-invites-confusion-about-his-faith&catid=79:commentary&Itemid=137) is an interesting, timely, and well balanced article on the subject.
Politics and all other considerations aside, liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, non-religious and religious, all are confused. That’s all I was saying.
August 27, 2010 at 7:28 pm
From all appearances, I would have to say that President Obama worships himself.
August 28, 2010 at 3:55 pm
Kevin, thanks for posting the link to Paul Kengor’s commentary on this subject. Frankly, I believe Kengor’s expertise carries much more weight than the opinions to the contrary offered on this particular posting.
Obama’s faith is not the only thing that is being questioned. Obama has also hid his educational accomplishments or lack thereof. What grades did he get at Occidental, Columbia, or Harvard? And who paid the bill? And who were his college friends?
“Dr. Paul Kengor is professor of political science at Grove City College and executive director of The Center for Vision & Values. His books include “God and Ronald Reagan,”“God and George W. Bush,” and “God and Hillary Clinton.””
August 28, 2010 at 5:31 pm
That a professor at a right-wing evangelical Christian college wonders about the President’s religious beliefs is to my mind not persuasive of anything.
Constitutionally speaking, it still wouldn’t matter if Obama were a Muslim. Or if he had no religious faith at all.
In any event, Rev. Fischler is right. All the commentary does is poison the discourse.