The Two Obamas

When the Rev. Jeremiah Wright came to the reluctant attention of the elite media (Mrs. Clinton’s flacks are still earning their keep, even if they have to work harder these days), my first thought was that there are probably a hundred conservative Congressmen whose ministers preach Loony Left sermons on a regular basis. What David Mamet terms “brain-dead liberalism” is the default political stance for contemporary Christian leaders. From what clerical acquaintances tell me, it’s no easier to be a Republican at a church conference than in Hollywood.

Upon closer examination, the Rev. Mr. Wright’s looniness appears to be more conscious and ingrained than the average Protestant clergyman’s. “God damn America”, sympathy for Saddam Hussein and Muammar Qaddafi, declarations that America deserved 9/11 and dark hints that its government created the AIDS virus go a bit beyond what one ordinarily hears from the pulpits of the Religious Left. A sympathetic profile published last year in the Chicago Tribune emphasized how far Pastor Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ is to the left of both a generally very leftish denomination and other black Protestant churches. The Wright ministry began with a political stance and shaped a theology around it. It metastasized into a lesson in why that is the wrong order of priorities. The political starting point, a call for full civil rights for black Americans, was admirable, but putting politics first led to a spurious distinction between “African” and “white” Christianity and eventually to the demonization of white America, “the U.S. of KKK A”.

That a leading Presidential candidate finds such a figure attractive ought to be a cause for worry. It would be a different matter if Pastor Wright were primarily a spiritual counselor. Many men who are wise, even saintly, in the affairs of God have talked foolishly about mundane politics. In the Orthodox Church, we have examples like St. John of Kronstadt, an inspiring preacher, organizer of charitable enterprises and member of the Black Hundred. But Fr. John was a secular naïf, to whom the Cross, the Holy Sacraments and a life of prayer were vastly more important than the City of Man. Jeremiah Wright is the opposite, so far as we can judge by appearances. (I make no judgement about what is in his heart and wish him nothing but the peace and mercy of Our Lord.)

If Barack Obama were a private citizen, or merely one percent of the United States Senate, his close association with Trinity UCC – praise for his “mentor” Pastor Wright, 20 years of active membership, sizeable donations – would be more a personal than a political matter. If he concurred in his church’s radically racist and anti-American ideology, his sentiments could do only minimal harm and would (rightly) be shielded from close scrutiny by our reluctance to pry into other people’s religious beliefs.

The President is on a different plane. One holding Pastor Wright’s views could do immense damage to the country. Am I convinced that Senator Obama sings “God damn America” in the shower? Certainly not. I wouldn’t rate the likelihood as high as 50 percent. On the other hand, it can’t help being significantly above zero, especially after we factor Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Michelle Obama and Tony Rezko into the equation. That friends and ideological soul mates describe the Senator as “most comfortable in the domain of policy and detail” is reassuring only to those who forget that policy wonks can be extremists, too.

Which is the real Obama? The transcender of racial divisions or the faithful acolyte of a radical hatemonger? How much of a chance can we take on getting the answer right?

Democrats and liberals decried George W. Bush’s “risky schemes” (tax cuts, Social Security reform, etc.), urge the “precautionary principle” as the only guide to environmental policy, and express fear that civil liberties will collapse if telecommunications companies can cooperate with government surveillance without a risk of liability. Men of such timid mien really ought to hesitate before gambling their nation on the hope that Barack Obama’s affinity with Pastor Wright is only accidental rather than elective.

The same question would arise if a Christian Reconstructionist were to become a leading Presidential candidate. Could someone who called R. J. Rushdoony or Gary North his mentor, worshiped with Reconstructionists, and gave money to the Chalcedon Foundation reassure us of his non-radicalism by the simple tactic of likening Reconstructionist opinions to those of an eccentric uncle and claiming not to be aware of the most outrageous ones? The fellow might indeed be an utter innocent, attracted solely by postmillennialism and theological explorations of the relation between the Old and New Testaments, with no desire to outlaw heresy or stone adulterers. Nonetheless, it would be elementary prudence, not “guilt by association”, not to make him the most powerful person on Earth.

Comments

[Waldo]

What church did Obama belong to, before joining Rev. Wright's church? I believe he said he joined Rev Wright and Rev. Wright brought him to Jesus. What was his denomination before he found Jesus?

[AF Ticker]

Indeed there are two Obama's but unfortnately only one seems to be in the spotlight while the other is hidden by billowing shrouds of secrecy and deceit. His connection with the FARC, Chicago gangsters, terrorist groups, foreign investors, and foreign government officials present too many red flags that can not and should not be ignored. (http://afticker.blogspot.com/2008/03/too-many-red-flags.html)

Discovering what these red flags are after he is elected will be too late.

[Joan of Argghh!]

Whichever is the "real" Obama, he certainly has not demonstrated any sort of ability to do more than talk. He can't even reconcile his own past, his associations, his public persona to the satisfaction of the press. But nevermind that, after eight questions, Obama quits giving answers.

This guy has so many negatives and so much knowable history, that it makes the unknowable parts that much more dubious in character, judgment and experience.