Bush, Pax Americana, and the loyalty of Christians

In the interests of full disclosure, let me state right now that I think Bush is a terrible leader. He was a bad governor, and has been a worse president. Beyond his lackluster job performance, however, he disturbs me on a personal, "gut" level, but I have never been able to adequately describe why he makes me so uneasy. The best I've done is that he uses his Christianity as a club: get in his way, and he'll either beat you into submission behind him, or he'll step over your unconscious, bleeding body.

All of which leads up to this, emailed to me by a dear friend, which states (much more eloquently than I have) the problem I, as a Christian, have with George W. Bush. The complete article is quite long, so I've edited like crazy in order to hit the high points. If you're at all interested, I encourage you to read the entire article at www.sojo.net...

The use of the word "empire" in relation to American power in the world was once controversial, often restricted to left-wing critiques of U.S. hegemony. But now, on op-ed pages and in the nation's political discourse, the concepts of empire, and even the phrase "Pax Americana," are increasingly referred to in unapologetic ways.

William Kristol, editor of the influential Weekly Standard, admits the aspiration to empire. "If people want to say we're an imperial power, fine," Kristol wrote. Kristol is chair of the Project for the New American Century, a group of conservative political figures that began in 1997 to chart a much more aggressive American foreign policy.... The Project's papers lay out the vision of an "American peace" based on "unquestioned U.S. military pre-eminence." .... It is imperative, in their view, for the United States to "accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles." That, indeed, is empire.

In the run-up to the war with Iraq, Kristol told me that Europe was now unfit to lead because it was "corrupted by secularism," as was the developing world, which was "corrupted by poverty." Only the United States could provide the "moral framework" to govern a new world order, according to Kristol....

To this aggressive extension of American power in the world, President George W. Bush adds God.... It's one thing for a nation to assert its raw dominance in the world; it's quite another to suggest, as this president does, that the success of American military and foreign policy is connected to a religiously inspired "mission," and even that his presidency may be a divine appointment for a time such as this.

....

The Bush policy has become one of potentially endless wars abroad and a domestic agenda that mostly consists of tax cuts, primarily for the rich. "Bush promised us a foreign policy of humility and a domestic policy of compassion," Joe Klein wrote in Time magazine. "He has given us a foreign policy of arrogance and a domestic policy that is cynical, myopic, and cruel." What happened?

Bush has made numerous references to his belief that he could not be president if he did not believe in a "divine plan that supersedes all human plans." As he gained political power, Bush has increasingly seen his presidency as part of that divine plan....

Every Christian hopes to find a vocation and calling that is faithful to Christ. But a president who believes that the nation is fulfilling a God-given righteous mission and that he serves with a divine appointment can become quite theologically unsettling. Theologian Martin Marty voices the concern of many when he says, "The problem isn't with Bush's sincerity, but with his evident conviction that he's doing God's will." .... The president's faith, wrote Klein, "does not give him pause or force him to reflect. It is a source of comfort and strength but not of wisdom."

The Bush theology deserves to be examined on biblical grounds. Is it really Christian, or merely American? Does it take a global view of God's world or just assert American nationalism in the latest update of "manifest destiny"? How does the rest of the world—and, more important, the rest of the church worldwide—view America's imperial ambitions?

Bush seems to make this mistake over and over again—confusing nation, church, and God. The resulting theology is more American civil religion than Christian faith.

....

Since Sept. 11...George Bush is convinced that we are engaged in a moral battle between good and evil, and that those who are not with us are on the wrong side in that divine confrontation.

In Christian theology, it is not nations that rid the world of evil—they are too often caught up in complicated webs of political power, economic interests, cultural clashes, and nationalist dreams. The confrontation with evil is a role reserved for God.... But God has not given the responsibility for overcoming evil to a nation-state, much less to a superpower with enormous wealth and particular national interests. To confuse the role of God with that of the American nation, as George Bush seems to do, is a serious theological error that some might say borders on idolatry or blasphemy.

America's foreign policy is more than pre-emptive, it is theologically presumptuous; not only unilateral, but dangerously messianic; not just arrogant, but bordering on the idolatrous and blasphemous. [It] is a dangerous mix of bad foreign policy and bad theology.

In the meantime, American Christians will have to make some difficult choices. Will we stand in solidarity with the worldwide church, the international body of Christ—or with our own American government? It's not a surprise to note that the global church does not generally support the foreign policy goals of the Bush administration.... Only from inside some of our U.S. churches does one find religious voices consonant with the visions of American empire.

Once there was Rome; now there is a new Rome. Once there were barbarians; now there are many barbarians who are the Saddams of this world. And then there were the Christians who were loyal not to Rome, but to the kingdom of God. To whom will the Christians be loyal today?

Originally posted by sandge
To whom will the Christians be loyal today?

This is something I have thought about quiet a bit. In America today, I see too many christians pledging their alleigance to their country more than their god. Many christians I know think that America is the land of God's chosen people. Whenever I mention that scripture says that Israel is the nation of God' chosen people, they just shrug it off, acting like my argument isn't valid. Many christians have told me that they believe it is their duty to make sure a certain christian president stays in the white house.

I think that they could benefit from reading things from this site: www.sojo.net...

Originally posted by sandge
In the interests of full disclosure, let me state right now that I think Bush is a terrible leader. He was a bad governor, and has been a worse president.

I'm going to disagree with you on the governor part. Did you know that George Bush is the only governor in the history of Texas to win back-to-back elections. It's never been done before. It's a really difficult thing to do, and that achievement speaks volumes as to what Texans thought about President George W. Bush.
His presidential service will be determined in the future. I believe that we are too close the facts to see the long term effect Time will tell.