-
U.S. President Donald Trump reacts to impeachment while speaking during a campaign rally in Battle Creek, Mich., Dec. 18, 2019. Trump was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives earlier the same day, becoming only the third American president to be formally charged under the Constitution's ultimate remedy for high crimes and misdemeanors. (CNS photo/Leah Millis, Reuters)
Dec. 24, 2019
Catholic San Francisco
The president of Christianity Today supported the magazine’s editor-in-chief's commentary that President Trump should be removed from office, saying evangelicals' alignment with Trump has caused "enormous damage" to the movement.
In a Dec. 22 article in the evangelical periodical, founded by Billy Graham in 1956, Timothy Dalrymple said the issue is not merely about impeachment or about the president.
"He is a symptom of a sickness that began before him, which is the hyper-politicization of the American church," Dalrymple said. "This is a danger for all of us, wherever we fall on the political spectrum."
Meanwhile, nearly 200 evangelical leaders posted a letter defending their political alliance with the president.
The flap began Dec. 19 with an editorial by Mark Galli, editor-in-chief of the theologically conservative periodical Christianity Today, titled “Trump Should Be Removed From Office.”
Galli wrote, “We believe the impeachment hearings have made it absolutely clear, in a way the Mueller investigation did not, that President Trump has abused his authority for personal gain and betrayed his constitutional oath. The impeachment hearings have illuminated the president’s moral deficiencies for all to see. This damages the institution of the presidency, damages the reputation of our country, and damages both the spirit and the future of our people. None of the president’s positives can balance the moral and political danger we face under a leader of such grossly immoral character.”
Christianity Today’s Dalrymple, titled his response “The Flag in the Whirlwind: Why our editor in chief spoke out against Trump, and why the conversation must continue.”
Dalrymple wrote, “Out of love for Jesus and his church, not for political partisanship or intellectual elitism, this is why we feel compelled to say that the alliance of American evangelicalism with this presidency has wrought enormous damage to Christian witness. It has alienated many of our children and grandchildren.
“It has harmed African American, Hispanic American, and Asian American brothers and sisters.” he continued. “And it has undercut the efforts of countless missionaries who labor in the far fields of the Lord. While the Trump administration may be well regarded in some countries, in many more the perception of wholesale evangelical support for the administration has made toxic the reputation of the Bride of Christ.”
In a response highly critical of Galli’s editorial, nearly 200 evangelical religious and political figures, including Michele Bachmann, a former Republican House member from Minnesota, and former Family Research Council president Gary Bauer.
“We are, in fact, not ‘far-right’ evangelicals as characterized by the author,” the letter states.
“Rather, we are Bible-believing Christians and patriotic Americans who are simply grateful that our President has sought our advice as his administration has advanced policies that protect the unborn, promote religious freedom, reform our criminal justice system, contribute to strong working families through paid family leave, protect the freedom of conscience, prioritize parental rights, and ensure that our foreign policy aligns with our values while making our world safer, including through our support of the State of Israel.
"We are not theocrats, and we recognize that our imperfect political system is a reflection of the fallen world within which we live, reliant upon the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, which is freely given to sinner and saint, alike.
“We are proud to be numbered among those in history who, like Jesus, have been pretentiously accused of having too much grace for tax collectors and sinners, and we take deeply our personal responsibility to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's --- our public service,” the letter continues.
“As one of our signatories said to the press, ‘I hope Christianity Today will now tell us who they will support for president among the 2020 Democrat field?’
“Your editorial offensively questioned the spiritual integrity and Christian witness of tens-of-millions of believers who take seriously their civic and moral obligations,” the letter concludes.
In a commentary in the non-denominational Christian Post, Jack Graham, president of Prestonwood Baptist Church in North Texas, detailed his reasons for continuing to support the president. His Dec. 19 commentary was titled "Why it is wise for Christians to support President Trump."
"From this pastor’s perspective, we have a leader for our country who is giving heart and soul to restore and renew the greatness of the American vision as one nation under God," he wrote. "It is wisdom, not foolishness, which has prompted many of us to support this president and to pray for and to pray with him. I personally believe I am called by God to use my influence for the sake of generations to come, including my own children and grandchildren. And this includes collaborative efforts of evangelicals across denominational lines with a president who is not only faith-friendly but faith-affirming."
Four days later, an editor of the Christian Post announced his resignation on Twitter. "They decided to publish an editorial that positions them on Team Trump," Napp Nazwoth tweeted Dec. 23. "I can't be an editor for a publication with that editorial voice."
On Dec. 24, another group of evangelicals came out in support of the original editorial in Christianity Today.
"The false binary posed by allegiances of certain evangelical Christians to one political party inhibits our ability to be faithful to the witness of Christ and his kingdom," the group said in an open letter published on Religion News Service. "May Christians in the United States enter into the 2020 elections with a recommitment to the Good News of the gospel that calls us to righteousness in Christ, faithful Christian witness, and responding to the needs of our neighbor.
"Although one may not agree with Mark Galli, we have an obligation to consider the character and actions of this president. Our faithful witness to Christ and the future legitimacy of American Christianity is at stake."
Where do Catholics stand?
Some Catholic experts quoted by the National Catholic Register in a roundup of Catholic comments on the president’s impeachment by the House of Representatives noted they felt the process was politicized. Columnist Russell Shaw said the public is polarized.
Carl M. Cannon of the website Real Clear Politics, in a November article on a national poll of Catholic voters’ views on the 2020 election, said a partisan split runs through the Catholic community. He said the disparity is cultural and generational.
The recent survey found that some 37% of non-Hispanic Caucasian Catholics identify as Democrats, while 42% identify as Republicans. “By contrast, 60% of Latino Catholics are Democrats, while only 24% side with the GOP,” he says. “In addition, while only 22% of white Catholics consider themselves liberal -- and 36% as conservative -- these numbers are virtually flipped for Hispanic Catholics (33% liberal, 26% conservative)."
The survey, he writes, revealed that “56% of registered Catholic voters under age 35 are Democrats, while only 23% are Republican (with 20% identifying as independent).
“In comparison, Baby Boomers and other Catholics over age 55 break out this way: 45% Republican; 36% Democrat; 18% independent.
“Among Catholics 55 and older, 45% identify as conservative, with only 15% self-describing as liberal. Among Catholics between the ages of 18 and 34, however, these numbers are upside down: 39% are liberal, nearly twice as many who identify as conservative.
“Donald Trump is not immune from this generational undertow: While 55% of Catholics over 55 years old approve of the job he is doing as president, only 34% of younger voters give him high marks,” Cannon says.
“Younger Catholics were also significantly less likely than older Catholics to credit Christianity for having a ‘positive influence on American culture,’”
Cannon continues. “Likewise, less than half (48%) of younger Catholics report that they accept all (16%) or most (32%) of the church’s teachings. More than two-thirds (69%) of Catholics 55 years or older say they do accept all or most church doctrine.
“These findings have momentous potential implications for the future of the Catholic Church and the Republican Party,” Cannon concludes. “Put most simply: Those least committed to the church’s teachings and to Christianity itself are its younger adherents. Those most committed to the faith – like those most committed to the GOP – are older. In other words, a critical mass of the most loyal Republicans and most devout Catholics are gradually aging out of the population. This suggests that a generation from now, the GOP and the Catholic Church will look different.”
In a Dec. 20 editorial, the liberal National Catholic Reporter named House Speaker Nancy Pelosi its “newsmaker of the year.”
“We may be disappointed that someone of Pelosi's political acumen and status has not taken the opportunity to move the party to the broad middle on abortion,” the editorial states. “But we also understand the messy limits of politics in an environment where even the nation's Catholic bishops, given 40-plus years of trying, have been unable to persuade public opinion, including among Catholics, any further in their direction.”