An Evaluation of Christianity Today‘s Editorial Statement as a Christian
Editor-in-chief Mark Galli of Christianity Today published an editorial entitled Trump Should Be Removed from Office on Thursday. Of course he and his magazine have every right to have an opinion related to the President. They join almost every other American who does have an opinion. Mark Galli suggested that an event of this magnitude requires comment.
Many would perceive, although I am not sure that is the case, Christianity Today as a leading Evangelical voice. As such, his comments were quoted by other media outlets as an authoritative position for Christians. Whatever kind of voice CT is for Christians, I think it is important to address what they said and argued.
This is one of my major problems…as Christians, when we talk about politics, our discussions should include accurate knowledge and appropriate logic. Furthermore, every Christian has the opportunity to stand alongside CT and wish for him not to be re-elected in 2020. This blog is not about being Pro-Trump or Anti-Trump. This blog is about the substance of the argument in the editorial, not on whether or not President Trump should be re-elected and/or impeached.
Brief Synopsis of CT Editorial
Mark Galli begins his piece with the assertion that normally he nor the magazine are political. They usually remain above the fray as neutral. However, as it says in the by-line, “It’s time to say what we said 20 years ago when a president’s character was revealed for what it was.” He senses that he is compelled to speak after the very partisan process of the past month. He recognizes the partisan nature of the process and even suggests that people are assuming each other’s motives (which is certainly true).
He states, “But the facts in this instance are unambiguous: The President of the United States attempted to use his political power to coerce a foreign leader to harass and discredit one of the president’s political opponents. This is not only a violation of the Constitution; more importantly, it is profoundly immoral.”
He further describes the president as “a human being who is morally lost and confused.” Further, he continues, “None of the president’s positives can balance the moral and political danger we face under a leader of such grossly immoral character.”
As his argument goes, he then makes comparison to President William Jefferson Clinton 20 years before, who was also impeached after lying under oath, which is a crime. Galli writes, “Whether Mr. Trump should be removed from office by the Senate or by popular vote next election—that is a matter of prudential judgment. That he should be removed, we believe, is not a matter of partisan loyalties but loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments.”
Regarding other Christians, he writes, “To the many evangelicals who continue to support Mr. Trump in spite of his blackened moral record, we might say this: Remember who you are and whom you serve. Consider how your justification of Mr. Trump influences your witness to your Lord and Savior.”
In his concluding paragraph he states, “So we have done our best to give evangelical Trump supporters their due, to try to understand their point of view, to see the prudential nature of so many political decisions they have made regarding Mr. Trump. To use an old cliché, it’s time to call a spade a spade, to say that no matter how many hands we win in this political poker game, we are playing with a stacked deck of gross immorality and ethical incompetence.”
A Critique
I believe there are at least three key areas of clarification needed with this editorial.
First, he declared: “But the facts in this instance are unambiguous: The President of the United States attempted to use his political power to coerce a foreign leader to harass and discredit one of the president’s political opponents. This is not only a violation of the Constitution; more importantly, it is profoundly immoral.” Unambiguous means, “not ambiguous, or unclear; distinct; unequivocal.” In fact, they are the opposite – ambiguous, or in other words, open to or having several possible meanings or interpretations. If they were so unambiguous, Constitutional law expert and liberal democrat Jonathan Turley would not have boldly asserted to impeach President Trump would be an abuse of power. He remarked, “We’re all mad – but that’s not a good enough reason for impeachment.” He further stated, “I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and abundance of anger.” My point is simple: There is nothing here that is unambiguous.
Second, he implied that this impeachment meets the standard of constitutional impeachment. Here Galli asserts a constitutional violation. Although the Democrats desired to make a clear and convincing case of a constitutional violation, they dimly suggested that this was the case. Abuse of power is so nebulous that almost any politician could be criticized as such. The U.S. House of Representatives voted in an almost party-line vote (except for those Democrats who either voted present or sided with the Republicans) to impeach on two issues: Abuse of Power by a 230-197 margin and Obstruction of Congress by a 229-198 margin. The abuse of power is a general claim based upon assuming the President’s motive alone. The President claims that his only interest is in getting to the heart of the problems in the 2016 election. The Democrats (and Galli) claim that the President must have been referring to the 2020 election. If this were more than mere assumption, there would have been additional articles of impeachment. Further, the obstruction of congress relates to the President going to the courts proclaiming executive privilege. The Democrats, however, were not willing to wait on the courts to adjudicate this issue; therefore, this should not be obstruction.
Third, he suggested the president’s character is a reason for impeachment. Although we could all critique the president’s character, that is not an issue related to impeachment. Before he was ever elected, many Republicans and Christians opposed his election, known as Never Trumpers. Many Christians have never appreciated or supported his character (as I pointed out the difficulties for Christians of voting for him in other blogs when he ran in 2016). In his lifetime, as a Christian, it is impossible for any of us to defend his morality; we should be very concerned regarding his immorality. However, as the president, we cannot impeach him for what we consider to be character issues. This is an issue for each Christian to wrestle with in 2020, not an issue of impeachment. He conflates both issues into one editorial which is, at best, very confusing and, at worst, unintelligible.
The Bottom Line for the CT Editorial
What he should be discussing is the 2020 election, not the impeachment. In my opinion, as Christians, it is embarrassing to have someone so broadly and authoritatively speak to an issue that at its face is inaccurate. Every person has the opportunity to provide opinion as to whether or not they like the job approval or character of the president. Each person can express his or her opinion as to whether or not he or she desires for any president to remain in office into a new term.
Of course, as a citizen, it is appropriate to discuss whether or not you think the articles of impeachment meet constitutional standards.
However, whatever we say, let us do that with wisdom and intelligence. For Mark Galli and CT to make a case against Mr. Trump’s character and then suggest people should not vote for him in the new election is their absolute right. Many people who are part of the Never-Trump camp would be happy to join them. Any person would be “blind” to not see his weaknesses as a sinner and struggler.
However, if you are going to make an argument and try to compel other people to join you, one in which includes impeachment at its core, at least speak in a way that does not embarrass those you claim to represent. As a fellow Christian, I want his voice to be articulate, fair to the issue, and accurate.
As Christians, speak clearly, accurately, and charitably. Discuss the real issue which relates to next year’s election. The issue of impeachment, in the editorial argument of CT, fails to match the facts at hand.
A Lesson for Us
As I said in yesterday’s blog, there is nothing wrong with discussing politics and giving your political opinion. When we do, we do that as Christians who are also citizens. We must practice self-control in order to provide our opinions in wisdom, grace, kindness, and respect toward all. The problem here is that CT misrepresented the facts and conflated the issue of impeachment and next election into one, when they would have been better served, we would have been better served, had they kept them separate. We want our voices to matter. Therefore, choose to speak carefully and rarely enough that people are willing to listen.
Editor’s Note: For a clear discussion of the impeachment issues, listen to Al Mohler’s Briefing from Thursday, December 19th.
Image Credit AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta
KevinCarson.com | Wisdom for Life in Christ Together
I was not a fan of President Trump in the last election. I wanted to vote for ANYONE but Trump; I even supported the Libertarian party when it appeared Austin Peterson was going to be the candidate. — but when the real choices came down to Trump or Clinton — I discovered I could more easily vote for Trump and his moral failings and the hope that he’d protect some freedoms I hold dear than Clinton and her promise to continue the cultural slide into moral degeneracy, including expanding the “Right” to kill babies of certain ages. President Trump has surprised me in how conservatively he has governed and I will be happily supporting him in 2020. I wish he was nicer in the way he spoke and didn’t say some of the things he did, but the proof, for me, are in his actions as President.
This is very sad day for our nation. The Bible says that we are to pray for our leaders. We can’t expect believers to act like believers. When we vote we have two choices. The choice needs to be the one we think will do what is best for the citizens as opposed to what they want for themselves. As believers we need to stay out of politics and just pray for our leaders and vote for the best candidate. God is control!!
I should have said unbelievers to act like believers. Sorry.