“Jesus did not come to teach a way of life…his role is that of a savior…”
-John Howard Yoder
Listening to Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama speak about their credentials, Yoder’s statement came back to me. Advocates of dramatic change, the Democratic candidates have emphasized the failure of the Bush presidency and the stack of problems either will face upon entering the White House. So I’ve asked myself (in very secular terms): do I want a president who teaches me an American way of life or a savior?
So what’s the difference? For the sake of argument, I’ll categorize the Democratic candidates as “savior”. A Democrat in the White House means a deliverance of the American people from the War, a mounting Health Care problem, and a descending Economy. John McCain, on the other hand, suggests a guidance of American ideals: Finishing our job in Iraq responsibly, addressing the recession with a Hooverian “I don’t believe we’re heading into recession” and “providing families with incentives to buy health care” not to mention the moral compass he provides on life issues: anti abortion and human cloning.
Can a savior- concerned with making dramatic changes- guide the America way of life? How Christ-like should our president be?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
"Can a savior- concerned with making dramatic changes- guide the America way of life?"
Even though you added a secular lens to this post, I feel it is impossible to speak of a savior in secular terms. Jesus Christ was a revolutionary who changed the world with his progressive agenda and fearless leadership. He created change in a way that the world will never witness again. With Christ as our guide, we should be looking into embracing the dramatic changes, like those that led to the rise of Christianity. The American way of life is one of organic growth and constant reflection. Change is positive. Though I am not proposing a correct choice in political parties, I think its important to keep these ideas in mind while making this case.
Yesterday at Mass, Father Shanley spoke about the importance of humility as the core meaning of the Beatitudes, which are, in many ways, the core of our moral lives as Christians.
A president who goes into office expecting to change everything is, in no way, going to "SAVE" us the way that Jesus did, of course. However, our president must be Christ-like (whether he is Christian or not). America needs to be guided and lead by a president with a healthy dose of humility, morally grounding us as a nation, and thus naturally changing things for the better-- not a president who focuses on "change" at the expense of honest politics.
When looking to this presidential election, I find myself asking a different question: which candidate is going to be the least destructive? To be completely honest, the American presidency in its current state of progression has attained and is continuing to attain much more power than it was ever intended to have by the founders. Their conception of the office was that the president would be as a "super-clerk" - someone to simply enforce the statutes passed through Congress and deal with foreign policy issues. However, within the last century, the President has attained such a high degree of power that when in a head to head contest with Congress over issues of legislation, the president is more often than not the victor. We saw this in the 1990s under Clinton in his fights with the Neo-Conservative House and Senate, and we continue to see it today with Bush's policies toward the war - especially before his approval rating plummeted.
So, entering into this election, I am asking first and foremost, which president will ensure that American democracy remains a democracy. The accumulation of power under the executive, the politicizing of judges, and the recent inefficiency of Congress all undermine the stability of American democracy. My hope is that it is not only stopped, but when or if it begins to become too severe down the road, we do not legitimately look to a savior president, as history has demonstrated messianic politics is riddled with crimes against humanity and bloodshed. Germany saw Hitler as the savior to German economic and social problems in 1928, Italy looked to Mussolini in the early 1920s, and Russia looked to the Communist party during WWI. I guess I'm saying I'm hesitant to look to the president as the savior of American economic and social issues - history only demonstrates that it leads to authoritarianism or single party "democracies".
Post a Comment