MAGA and the Teachings of Christ: A Contradiction That Cannot Be Reconciled: Duane W.H. Arnold, PhD
MAGA and the Teachings of Christ: A Contradiction That Cannot Be Reconciled
“I’ve waited for a long time for someone to explain to me how MAGA is theologically compatible with the teachings of Christ.”
Michael Newnham, 09/23/2025
Well, Michael, no one has succeeded, or will succeed, because the task is impossible. The Gospel and the MAGA ethos are not uneasy partners or two sides of the same coin; they are opposing forces. To claim otherwise is to distort the words of Christ and replace the faith once delivered with an idol draped in a flag.
Jesus pronounced blessings upon the poor, the meek, and the peacemakers (Matthew 5:3–9). He called His followers to love their enemies (Matthew 5:44), to welcome the stranger (Matthew 25:35), and to serve rather than dominate (Mark 10:42–45). His Kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36), and when He was offered political shortcuts to power, He refused them (Matthew 4:8–10).
MAGA, by contrast, thrives on resentment and fear. It dehumanizes the outsider, revels in the insult, glorifies the wealthy, and sanctifies the pursuit of power. It promises safety through walls, greatness through domination, and purity through exclusion. It feeds the very impulses Christ condemned and despised the very people He embraced.
This is not the first time the Church has been tempted to trade its birthright for political favor. In the fourth century, Constantine took up the cross as a banner for the empire. Many Christians rejoiced at the privileges and protections that followed, but in the process, the Gospel was confused with the aims of the state. Through time, baptismal waters mingled with the blood of imperial conquest, and the Sermon on the Mount was silenced beneath the roar of armies marching in Christ’s name.
The Constantinian temptation is always the same: to believe that the Kingdom of God can be advanced through political alliances and coercive power. Yet the cross was not a symbol of conquest but of self-emptying love (Philippians 2:5–8). To this day, the Church struggles with the legacy of that bargain.
The parallels grow even starker in the twentieth century. In 1930s Germany, the so-called “German Christians” movement redefined Jesus in the image of nationalism. They stripped Him of His Jewishness, baptized racial ideology, and proclaimed that Hitler was God’s chosen instrument. The Barmen Declaration of 1934, led by Karl Barth and others, was a desperate cry against this apostasy: “We reject the false doctrine, as though the Church could and would have to acknowledge as a source of its proclamation, apart from and besides this one Word of God, yet other events, powers, figures and truths, as God’s revelation.”
That history stands as a warning. When political movements are granted theological sanction, the Gospel is hollowed out until it becomes unrecognizable. The Church may find temporary favor, but at the cost of its soul.
American history offers its own cautionary tale. In the South, countless churches wrapped themselves in the language of Christianity while defending segregation and white supremacy. The Bible was twisted to serve prejudice. Pulpits resounded with messages that bore the name of Christ but denied His character.
It took the prophetic witness of figures such as Martin Luther King Jr. to remind the Church of its true calling: to stand with the oppressed, not the oppressor; to proclaim liberty to the captives, not sanctify their chains. King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” still rebukes us: “There was a time when the church was very powerful … in the time when the early Christians rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed.” That power was lost when the Church became the quiet chaplain of injustice.
MAGA Christianity walks in the same footsteps. It blesses the sword of the empire as Constantine did. It sanctifies lies and nationalism as the German Christians did. It justifies exclusion and contempt for the stranger as the Southern churches once did. Each time in history, Christians discovered—often too late—that they had betrayed the very Gospel they professed.
What makes the present moment so dangerous is that many sincere believers do not see the bargain for what it is. They hear the name of Jesus invoked, they see a stadium filled, and they mistake cultural triumphalism for revival. Yet Jesus warned plainly that not everyone who says, “Lord, Lord,” will enter the Kingdom, but only those who do the will of His Father (Matthew 7:21).
To follow Christ is to walk the way of the cross, not the way of Caesar. It is to proclaim truth even when lies are popular, to welcome the stranger even when it is costly, and to stand with the weak even when the powerful rage. It is to confess, with Paul, that “God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong” (1 Corinthians 1:27).
The attempt to fuse MAGA with Christianity is not a revival of faith but its corruption. It is a counterfeit religion, a parody of the Gospel, a golden calf fashioned out of nationalism and grievance. The Church cannot serve two masters. It cannot enthrone Christ and Caesar at the same altar.
The verdict of history is clear. Whenever the Church has allied itself with political movements that glorify power, wealth, and exclusion, it has betrayed its Lord. Whether under Constantine, in Nazi Germany, or in segregated America, the results have been devastating. MAGA Christianity is simply the latest version of that old temptation.
So when asked if it is compatible with the teachings of Christ, the answer must be: No. It cannot be reconciled because it is not Christianity at all. It is idolatry, dressed up in the language of faith, and it leads not to the cross of Christ but away from it.
Duane,
Thank you for taking all my concerns and lining them out with clarity.
I wish meaningful discussion over these points was possible…but I don’t think it is.
Still, these things had to be said…and you did it well.
Thank you, Duane. I am so tired of Christians telling me that Trump is not “all bad” and that he is really making the country better. Yes, calling each other names and threatening to kill our “enemies” (as we perceive them) is so Christian!
Michael,
Many thanks… but after all, you started it! 😁
Linn,
Exactly. It’s a kind of moral exhaustion to keep hearing, ‘Well, he’s not all bad.’ The standard for Christians has never been whether a leader is a mixed bag of good and evil—every leader in history has been. The standard is whether our words and actions align with Christ. Calling names, stoking division, and threatening enemies is the exact opposite of His teaching. It’s sobering when people can celebrate that and still call it ‘Christian.’ It shows how far the Church has strayed from the Sermon on the Mount.
Thank you, Duane!
Powerful, prophetic, and accurate words to be sure. But it’s worth mentioning the time period between MLK and MAGA too.
It’s worth naming and owning that even the best of us allowed Brother Dobson, Brother Falwell, Brother Robertson, Sister Bryant, Sister Schlafly, etc. to “National Prayer Breakfast their way” into the government, to fuse partisan political energy with the annual Right to Life March, to form The Family and the Council on National Policy, without any of which today’s organized Christian nationalism would be unthinkable…
…the MAGA tree has many roots, even a folksy dispenser of common-sense parenting advice and an orange juice spokesmodel.
Tec-Dan
You are right, and it needs to be said plainly. MAGA is not an aberration but the fruit of a tree carefully planted and watered for decades. To name Falwell, Dobson, Robertson, Schlafly, Bryant, and the Council on National Policy is not to draw a straight line of blame but to acknowledge the soil that made MAGA possible.
Unless the Church reckons with this history—owning the compromises that allowed the Gospel to be hitched to power—we will imagine that today’s crisis is only about one man or one election. In truth, it is the endgame of choices made across two generations.
Serious questions: How does a person who leans conservative know they are MAGA or not? It there a document that describes the tenets of MAGA? Can a person share some views with MAGA but not be MAGA? Politically, I seek to think for myself and not be too attached to any tribe.
PH
Those are serious questions, and they deserve an honest answer. First, there’s no official document that lays out the ‘tenets’ of MAGA—it isn’t a movement of principles so much as one of personality, grievance, and loyalty. That’s why you won’t find a coherent policy platform, but you will find recurring themes: election denial, contempt for immigrants and minorities, nostalgia for a mythic past, and the willingness to excuse lies or cruelty so long as it serves the cause.
A person can certainly lean conservative without being MAGA. To be conservative is, at least historically, to value order, tradition, and careful stewardship of institutions. To be MAGA is to weaponize fear, to glorify one man, and to embrace chaos if it means ‘winning.’ Those are not the same thing.
So the questions to ask yourself are not: ‘Do I agree with MAGA on this or that issue?’ The real questions are: Do I find myself excusing dishonesty because it advances my tribe? Am I quick to dehumanize people I disagree with? Am I willing to treat opponents as enemies to be crushed rather than neighbors to be persuaded?
If the answer is yes, that’s MAGA. If the answer is no—if you want to think for yourself, to conserve what is good without baptizing cruelty—then you’re not MAGA. You’re simply trying to be a thoughtful conservative, which is a very different thing.
In what world do these assertions constitute a discussion?
In the world where truth matters. When assertions are simply slogans, meant to shut down dialogue, you’re right—they don’t constitute discussion. But when assertions are made as claims to be examined—tested against history, Scripture, and reality—they become the starting point for real conversation.
A discussion isn’t just trading opinions; it’s weighing evidence, asking whether our words align with facts and with the Gospel. If we can’t do that, then all we have left are competing tribes shouting at each other. If we can, then even sharp assertions can become the seedbed for genuine dialogue.
Cruelty isn’t a bug of the MAGA movement, it’s a feature. That has been clear from the beginning. If I believed that Christianity was compatible with that kind of intentional, gratuitous, and even gleeful cruelty, I’d have to stop calling myself a Christian.
Every article we post is yes, a statement of our personal beliefs, but it’s also an invitation to dialogue with what we’ve written.
I’ve spent most of the last five years ensconced in the Gospels…I’ve come to believe that my life has to be measured against the teaching of Jesus.
I fall woefully short and spend most of my time haunted by that deficit…but I haven’t tried to reduce my angst by changing the text…the standard is set.
I have asserted over and over again that I cannot fathom how the ways and beliefs of Trumpism are compatible with the Gospel.
Dialog may enlighten me…
Thanks, Duane, for a thoughtful response. I probably asked the question not so much because I didn’t know the answer, but my hope was that someone else would articulate a response. When it comes to politics, I’m pretty cynical across the board. Trump deserves many of the complaints that are lobbed his way. I don’t think he does everything wrong, but he is a very loose cannon who constantly shoots himself in the foot. I do believe the liberal media sometimes goes overboard in their attacks. But he too often provides a big fat target to shoot at. But conversely, I can get disappointed when politicians on the left aren’t excoriated for doing things that are detrimental to our country. I wonder if their shrewdness helps them avoid accountability. At the end of the day, I have little faith in politicians, because I believe politics is a place where people lose their scruples, their morals, sometimes even their souls.
Pineapple Head,
And yet, the form of government that the Founding Fathers created requires citizens to robustly participate in politics if it is to succeed. The professional class of politicians we have now is not what they intended. But if participation of citizenry tends to corrupt them, then the government the Founders set up and that we inherited is a giant failure of imagination and understanding. I concede that that might in fact be the case.
I used to commute several years ago when I was still working and I would listen to the radio on way to work.
I worked odd hours daily part time so a variety of radio programs came on during my ~45 minute drive.
One day I happened to hear a show with Charlie Kirk speaking. I didn’t know who he was but what he said caught my attention and since he invited emails with comments I sent him one.
He said that ‘the Bible says “All power has been given to us” ’. That got me thinking that’s not what it says. Jesus said “All power is given unto Me in heaven and on earth”. Not us. Mt. 28:18
So I sent an email to correct him, giving him the benefit of the doubt that maybe he just made a mistake.
Since he never responded I must deduce that he was really teaching this serious theological error and I never listened to him again.
Pure and simple.
I have recently reviewed some of his more recent teachings and they also confirm my conclusions.
The pews are basically filled with foamers waiting for the next false preacher/teacher to jump on his bandwagon and rid off into the sunset.
ride
Thank you Duane, and well said. I agree with this.
And thanks Micheal for the challenge/conclusion “I’ve waited for a long time for someone to explain to me how MAGA is theologically compatible with the teachings of Christ.”
This statement from Duane say’s it all..
“It cannot enthrone Christ and Caesar at the same altar.”
Dan from Georgia,
Many thanks…
If I reason like you do the equation is simple. Your politics are Marxist and will end in mass murder, national poverty, the complete end of liberty as our Founders envisioned.
That is what you sound like. And your religion is a form that produces few actual disciples or converts. You gather refugees from the doomsday cult that was Calvary Chapel.
That is why I have never been able to communicate with you. I don’t share your trauma. I don’t fear what you fear.
Now everyone learn the lesson. Whoever sets the terms “MAGA is compatible with Christ’s teachings” or whoever owns the means of communication wins the argument. That is a law and it is sure. So I know it is futile to ‘discuss’ anything here. FUTILE. But Christians are fools for idealism. So I try every few years.
So,
1. I am not claiming that MAGA is anything but populism. Though I believe it to be safer than the alternative.
2. Damning groups of people – like the memorial attendees is really so blind. People were there for Charlie not Donald.
3. At least Charlie actually advocated listening to people for what they ARE saying – though he himself got murdered for what he wasn’t saying or doing.
4. Discussion is hard work and blogging is graffiti with broader reach. Discussion requires listening. You might ask why before you tell us why.
5. I am but I am not.
Can’t talk to people you hate or that you look down upon. I’m sorry the tone here has been smug for a long time. Humility manifest in the TIT column but vanishes for actual discussion.
I try to quit this place but I am a sinner and miss the mark.
Alan’s posts make me wonder how easily pastors lose the ability listen to others.
MAGA is classical fascism plain and simple, no way around it.
Trump is their Il Duce.
Alan,
Populism is not safer than the alternative, but then I suspect you drank the Kool-Aid. Let us see what the Founding Fathers say about people like Trump and the dangers of populism (specificially Hamilton):
In 1792, Alexander Hamilton warned that populist demagogues might try to introduce the alien idea of monarchy or despotic rule to America by “flattering the prejudices of the people, and exciting their jealousies and apprehensions, to throw affairs into confusion, and bring on civil commotion. Tired at length of anarchy, or want of government, they may take shelter in the arms of monarchy for repose and security.”
Who might such a demagogue be? “A man unprincipled in private life, desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper” – “known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty.” When such “a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity – to join in the cry of danger to liberty – to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion – to flatter and fall in with all the non-sense of the zealots of the day – It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may “ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.”
Hamilton’s warnings fit the MAGA cheeto Jesus and his zealots to a tee.
Try better next time.
Duane’s article is good and makes some good points for all of those who claim to follow Jesus should look at themselves in the mirror each day.
However, there are more than one posts here which are just pure hatred of others.
Steve and Muff, I find your responses simplistic and unsatisfactory. That’s not discussion, as Alan is lobbying for. I don’t think I am totally on the same page as Alan, but I agree that the conversations here have become a bit stifling. I’ve commented very little over the past several months. I’d rather see the issues hashed out. As Utah’s governor Spencer Cox said, we need to learn how to disagree better.
Alan
Productive debate and dialogue on something as volatile as MAGA and Christianity requires three things.
Shared Ground Rules.
Both sides must agree that truth matters, that facts can be weighed, and that Scripture cannot simply be bent to fit our politics. Without this, it becomes a shouting match rather than a conversation.
Clarity of Terms.
We have to be clear what we mean by MAGA, what we mean by Christianity, and even what we mean by conservative. Too often people talk past each other because they are using the same words for very different realities.
A Willingness to Listen.
Debate is not about scoring points; dialogue is not about rehearsing our talking points. It means actually hearing what the other person says, asking questions that reveal understanding, and being willing—even if only slightly—to be changed by what we hear.
At its best, debate sharpens us by exposing weakness in our arguments. Dialogue deepens us by reminding us that the other person is made in the image of God. Productive conversations happen when both are at work: we hold each other accountable to truth while refusing to reduce each other to caricature.
Yet years ago we were able to have some very productive, although heated at times, conversations about many things.
What changed?
Alan
I hear the fear and the fury behind these words, but the charge that my politics are ‘Marxist’ and will bring mass murder, national poverty, and the end of liberty is a sweeping claim that deserves evidence, not invective. Political labels are cheap; specific policies and consequences are what matter. If you believe a particular proposal will produce those outcomes, name it and show how—history and facts will decide the argument better than slogans.
Moreover, calling my faith a failed form that produces few disciples, or dismissing those I minister to as ‘refugees from a doomsday cult,’ is an ad hominem that shuts down conversation. Christianity is tested by fruit: how people are formed, how the poor are served, how truth is courageously spoken. If you disagree with my theology, point to doctrines or practices you find wanting. If you doubt my results, point to evidence. That is the only way we move from accusation to genuine engagement.
I do not share your traumas, and you are entitled to your fears. I seek instead a politics and a faith that conserve what is good without baptizing cruelty. If you wish to persuade me, argue with facts and specifics. If you wish to talk, let us set some ground rules: no name-calling, no sweeping condemnations, and an agreement that truth and charity both matter.
Xenia
Politics… Then again, the article is not about politics…
No. Try again.
I’m late to this…mornings are difficult.
Xenia, what do yo think changed?
The rise of social media amped up the polarization over politics. To get traction, one must come forward with an extreme view . “I don’t think he’s the ideal candidate” gets zero clicks. The fact that our current president is a divider, rather than attempting to unify, multiplies the effect. In essence, we have all been radicalized to one extreme or the other, even though none of us feel that we are extreme. We’ve been manipulated.
Josh
You’re right. Social media has taught us that only the extreme gets attention. A quiet, reasoned statement disappears into the noise, while the loudest and most outrageous rises to the top. That economy of outrage has discipled us far more than the Church has.
When you add a president who thrives on division rather than healing, the manipulation deepens. We end up convinced that we are simply holding the line, while in reality the ground has shifted beneath us. We don’t feel extreme, but the culture around us has radicalized us by degrees.
The first step is to name it for what it is—manipulation. The next step is to resist it with the slow, patient practices that do not trend on social media: prayer, listening, thoughtful reading, and deliberate kindness. That is not glamorous, but it is Christian, and it may be the only antidote.
Duane
1. That’s essentially what I am saying as long as you don’t insist on setting the definitions. My point is that whoever sets those wins. So they too have to be debated.
2. Your second answer – I finally made you feel what every conversation I see here makes me feel. “Antichrist, Hitler, Fascist” that’s daily fare here. I said “If I reason like you….” You heard me. Now we’re communicating.
Michael, I have some thoughts but I’d like to wait and see what others have to say.
Alan
Point taken. Whoever controls the definitions controls the argument; that is why definitions must never be ceded by default. If we let slogans name our terms, we have already lost. Definitions are not merely academic hair-splitting; they are the terrain on which persuasion is won or surrendered. Therefore I will push back on careless framing, insist on working definitions that track behavior and evidence, and hold people accountable when they try to substitute a label for an argument.
If we are to keep talking, let us agree on three modest rules: name the terms you mean, show the evidence you rely on, and refrain from apocalyptic labels unless the facts warrant them.
By the way, I stand by my second answer…
“If I reason like you do, the equation is simple. Your politics are Marxist and will end in mass murder, national poverty, the complete end of liberty as our Founders envisioned.”
That comment blows my mind! I have been teaching the Constitution for 28 years, and there is no way in hell what is happening now is what our Founders envisioned!
Never in my lifetime have I ever heard hatred coming from the mouth of a president like DT!
I’ve tried to tell people to stop watching Fox, Newsmax, MSNBC, and CNN. Just listen to the man. Listen to the words of his cabinet appointees. I’m so disappointed in Rubio. He sits on the couch with a blank stare.
At least during DT’s first term, he appointed knowledgeable cabinet members. Many couldn’t stand working with them. Some have written books detailing what he was like.
Xenia, where were you 20 years ago when there were knock-down, drag-out posts concerning Calvary Chapel?
This isn’t about Biden any longer.
Bob
In my mind this is not about politics. The church has always had to live in one or another political realities. This is about baptizing a political movement that is antithetical to the teachings of Christ…
I read this quote and I agree with it:
“We are left with the task of contending for a Christianity unaligned with the kingdoms of this world.”
Rob,
Truth…
Hi Bob, I was here 20 years ago and there was a lot of vigorous back and forth. I think it went down better because there were so many people participating whereas now there’s just a handful who are mostly in agreement with each other.
Well, first of all, “I’ve waited for a long time for someone to explain to me how MAGA is theologically compatible with the teachings of Christ.” That really is beside the point here, as I don’t think anyone here would disagree. I haven’t claimed it. Anyone who has left long ago.
My protest was the damning of the crowd at the Kirk memorial because they applauded both Erika and POTUS.
That was of little consequence, and much more was going on at that memorial than that. The major response to Trump’s own claim of the difference between him and Charlie was laughter because he was using humor. It was revealing humor, but we who loved Charlie saw it.
I was delighted by the day, the testimony to Jesus, the worship, the beauty of a public life that demonstrated the best of what our country stands for, and the fragrance of Christ on a man that cut through the longstanding public censorship of Jesus in public discourse.
So fight us over something we do stand for and tell us what MAGA actually is in your mind. I think it is the monster under the bed.
I appreciate your description of the Kirk memorial, and I don’t doubt that many present experienced it as a day of testimony, worship, and celebration of Charlie’s life. That deserves to be honored. My protest was not about honoring Charlie, but about the way the crowd responded when political rhetoric was introduced into that setting.
The record is clear: Erika Kirk was applauded for her words of love and faith. Donald Trump and Stephen Miller were likewise applauded when they uttered words of contempt, culminating in Miller’s repeated declaration that other human beings were ‘nothing.’ That is not my spin—it is in the reporting, and in the footage. What disturbed me was not the honoring of Charlie, which was right and proper, but that in the same breath a crowd claiming Christ’s name cheered the dehumanization of others.
That is why I raised the theological question. The applause mattered because it revealed what was tolerated, even celebrated, in a self-described Christian gathering. To dismiss that as ‘of little consequence’ is, in my mind, to miss the gravity of what happened.
So yes, let’s be clear about what MAGA is. It is not a monster under the bed. It is a movement characterized by election denial, by disdain for immigrants and minorities, by the embrace of political lies, and by the dehumanizing of opponents. Those are not abstractions—they are the movement’s own words and actions. That is what I believe is incompatible with the Gospel. If we are going to applaud that rhetoric in the context of Christian worship, then we must reckon with what we are blessing.
“So yes, let’s be clear about what MAGA is. It is not a monster under the bed. It is a movement characterized by election denial, by disdain for immigrants and minorities, by the embrace of political lies, and by the dehumanization of opponents. Those are not abstractions—they are the movement’s own words and actions. That is what I believe is incompatible with the Gospel. If we are going to applaud that rhetoric in the context of Christian worship, then we must reckon with what we are blessing.”
I couldn’t agree more!
Well Duane, probably all those people in attendance voted for Trump and were thrilled to see him in person. He was his usual crazy uncle self and people love him for it. I actually though his admitting he wasn’t as holy as Erika and Charlie was rather self-effacing.
We need a Lutheran here… what happened to all the Lutherans. We need one to explain God’s left hand, associated with power and justice, and His right hand, associated with spiritual issues.
Erika was demonstrating God’s right hand and Trump was a representative of His left hand.
Xenia
To call Trump’s performance ‘self-effacing’ is to ignore the substance of what was actually said. Joking that you are less holy than Erika and Charlie while your ally proclaims that whole groups of people are ‘nothing’ is not humility—it is mockery wrapped in showmanship. The crowd’s laughter and applause at that moment did not sanctify it; it revealed how normalized contempt has become in spaces where Christ’s name is professed.
As for the Lutheran doctrine of the two kingdoms: Luther never envisioned it as a license to baptize cruelty or excuse a leader’s dehumanizing rhetoric. The left hand of God—His governance through law and justice—is not meant to underwrite lies or the demeaning of human beings created in His image. To suggest otherwise is to misuse Luther. If anything, Luther’s theology insists that both hands of God are subject to His sovereignty and accountable to His Word. A ruler who despises truth and dehumanizes others is not God’s ‘left hand’; he is simply a ruler under judgment.
Duane,
Were we being humane in the last 4 years in a way that was consistent with the Gospel?
You think MAGA is racist and dehumanizing and thus the alternative was noble and Christian?
And you think unless I booed the President and Miller then I am what? Subchristian? What am I?
Alan
No, I have never said the last four years were noble, humane, or especially Christian. Every administration stands under judgment, and none get a free pass. Pointing out that MAGA traffics in racism and dehumanization does not sanctify its opponents—it simply names what is plainly true about the movement itself.
And no, I have not demanded that you boo anyone. What I am saying is that applause matters. To cheer when someone declares other human beings ‘nothing’ is to lend our voices to dehumanization. The alternative to cheering is not mindless booing—it is refusing to join in, it is keeping silence, it is bearing witness that Christ is not mocked.
So what are you? Not ‘sub-Christian,’ but a brother accountable, as we all are, to the Gospel we claim. The question is not whether you booed or voted, but whether your actions in that moment aligned with the Christ who calls every person His image-bearer. That is the measure I am holding before you, and before myself.
As I said recently, I did find some cringe-worthy moments in the memorial. Steven Miller was one of those times.
By the time the memorial was coming to an end, the program had been going on for nearly nine hours, plus the people had been waiting to get in the stadium for many hours. By the time Miller and Trump came on stage they were exhausted. They were cheering everyone and everything by then.
Anyway, I liked the memorial very much, by and large. As I said (I think I said), it was a Calvary Chapel Sunday morning service on steroids. I rejoiced to see so many people raise their hands in praise to Jesus and I am not going to judge them to question their motives. And neither should you.
Not too much conversation here about the type of Christianity that formed Erika into the kind of person who forgives the person who killed her husband.
Xenia,
Fatigue does not explain away applause for dehumanizing words. People do not cheer ‘nothing’ about whole groups of human beings because they are tired; they cheer because, in that moment, they agree or at least find it acceptable. To say ‘they were just exhausted’ is to minimize what was actually revealed.
I am not judging motives hidden in the heart—I cannot. What I am judging is the action itself. Public applause in a Christian memorial is a public act, and public acts can and must be assessed in light of the Gospel. The same hands that were raised in praise to Jesus also clapped for contempt. That contradiction is what disturbs me, because Christ is not divided.
And yes, Erika’s forgiveness is luminous and deserves to be honored. But let us be clear: her Christlike act does not cancel out the crowd’s cheer for what was anti-Christ in spirit. To pretend otherwise is to use her witness as a fig leaf for what should trouble us all.
Well Duane, you seem to require complete capitulation.
Xenia,
This is not a zero sum game…
Stephen Miller did not sound like a Christian because he’s not a Christian.
No, the Christians just cheered his comments…
I have some people in my church who blur politics and Christianity. I don’t understand it, but it happens. For the most part, I believe it’s rooted in ignorance rather than malice. None of these people are Nazis or fascists. They probably watch too much Fox News. They’re tired of the way government swings like a pendulum.
I have other people in my church who despise Trump so much that they, from my perspective, sort of lose their minds with self-righteousness. There’s no discussion about anything, because to do so may mean they might have to agree with an opponent on something.
And then we have people in the middle of all the rancor and tribalism who would like to get through one day without all the political noise.
My task is to love and pastor both of these camps. I believe much of what they say doesn’t always match what’s in their heart. They are actually better than the two-dimensional caricatures they appear to be.
PH
I’m in a similar situation. You have to love them where they’re at…
PH,
I suspect that most of my church voted for Trump.
I’m still their pastor until they choose otherwise.
Like here, many seem to be able to separate their faith from their politics…see them as different categories with different rules.
It honestly makes me wonder if they’ve heard me at all…but I’m still their pastor.
I often take our church to the sermon on the mount and 1 peter. I believe this to portions of the NT are the most challenging for people, because they hold onto certain idols. I’m going to preach through 1 Peter starting in January, because it seems very appropriate.
I’ll be honest, the emergence of a very outspoken, militantly anti-Trump contingent in our church surprised me. (I am in North Idaho!) I knew that some people were never-Trumpers. And, to a degree, I understood why. I have to say, I have a harder time having give-and-take discussions with this group. It kind of reminds of how some people were when Obama one. For 8 years these people did nothing but complain and belittle Obama every chance they could. Maybe that; just the reality of how we are stuck in a pendulum-swinging culture.
Duane, you do not know that “the Christians just cheered his comments” as a whole 70k were there, some for political and some for Christian reasons. You cannot judge the whole by this public event. Stop it! Humans are mixed. I live with and around conservative Christians, we had no trouble discriminating what was good and what was not good. We are not monolithic.
My wife and I hated Miller and endured the president. We all noticed people were leaving by then.
I did not claim that every one of the 70,000 present rose to their feet in unison. Of course crowds are mixed, and of course individuals experienced the day differently. My point is not to erase that complexity, but to name what was plainly visible: a crowd that claimed Christ applauded when Miller declared fellow human beings ‘nothing.’ That happened. To say so is not to judge the secret hearts of 70,000 individuals—it is to observe the public witness of the gathering.
You and your wife may have hated Miller and endured Trump—that is to your credit. Yet the sound that carried on camera, and the impression that the world saw, was not your silent dissent but the thunder of applause. Public events form public testimony. When the Church is seen cheering contempt, that cannot be excused away by saying, ‘Well, some of us didn’t mean it.’ The watching world cannot hear our private misgivings; it only hears what we chose to applaud.
Off for a gin and tonic…
Duane,
You are a dog with a bone, that much is sure. Tenacious and exacting.
Ad Hominem Dread
Bulldog…
I am a long time christian, spirit filled, bible reading, praying, very short leash, follower of Jesus.
I am a conservative, MAGA, pro-life, never jabbed for covid.
Neither I nor any MAGA i know of is violent, racist, or any of the other negative character traits or biblica tradeoffs that we have been labled with in this article.
Seeing how this article is written in unquestionable facts. Then i must be a lier who has traded her faith away?
I love you Dusty
I Am Charlie Dread
Thank you Dixie Dread. I love you too
I am dusty Charlie
I sure would like to see some honest, charitable discussion on the issues. Obviously immigration is huge.
Dusty,
I hear you. You’re telling me who you are, and I don’t question that you read your Bible, pray, and seek to walk closely with Jesus. What I wrote was not a personal indictment of you as a liar, nor an attempt to deny the sincerity of anyone’s faith.
What I did say—and will not retract—is that the movement of MAGA, as publicly voiced by its leaders and embraced by its rallies, traffics in lies, stokes resentment, and dehumanizes people made in the image of God. That is not a slur; it is a matter of record. We all know the statements about migrants being ‘animals,’ the mocking of the disabled, the indulgence of white nationalist support, the repeated falsehoods about elections. These are not inventions of outsiders; they are the actual words and actions of MAGA’s standard-bearers.
You may personally reject violence and racism, and I take you at your word. But when you identify with a movement, you are also taking responsibility for the baggage that movement carries. To be pro-life or conservative does not require you to baptize every word and deed of MAGA. My appeal is not that you abandon your faith—it is that you measure every political allegiance against the Gospel and ask honestly: does this witness look like Christ, or does it obscure Him?
Did Charlie Kirk dehumanize people?
Alan,
The article was not about Charlie Kirk. It was about the crowd’s response at his memorial when words of contempt and dehumanization were spoken from the stage. My point was not to judge Kirk’s life or ministry but to highlight what happened in that moment: Christians applauded when Stephen Miller declared that others were ‘nothing.’
Charlie Kirk himself has used rhetoric that many find dehumanizing—about immigrants, LGBTQ people, and even fellow citizens—but my article wasn’t a dossier on him. It was a theological reflection on the incompatibility of MAGA rhetoric with the teachings of Christ, and the danger when the Church publicly cheers such rhetoric. The focus is on our corporate witness, not on Kirk as an individual.
Trump has certainly frequently dehumanized people, as have Vance and Miller and etc.. Many of the leaders of MAGA have dehumanized other people and whole people groups. When you identify yourself as MAGA, you align yourself with all those leaders and that dehumanization; if you are a Christian, that should trouble you greatly. This is not about being a politically conservative Christian. Conservative is one thing; MAGA is another.
I think you can condemn dehumanizing of people and be associated with those “accused” of dehumanizing others. I think you can eat with Pharisees and not be one, hang out with whores and not be one. I think you touch lepers and stay clean.
I see you being a little careful not to condemn Charlie but still you smell the stench on him and are careful. I am sorry I don’t want to play the game that says if your are at the table with MAGA you cannot be with Jesus.
You broad smear often. The article is designed to conclude that to be MAGA is to be associated with the worst crimes of humanity. It’s beautifully and carefully written but the message is clear. Clap for Trump and you are demonic.
I’ve seen Dusty gone after before— surgically dismantled. It’s not ok. She carries no baggage on this point.
Leper Dread
Alan
I am not saying that sitting at a table with MAGA makes someone demonic, any more than eating with Pharisees made Jesus one of them. The issue is not proximity but participation. Jesus ate with sinners, yes—but He never applauded their sin. He confronted it. That is the distinction.
The article was not written to smear Charlie or Dusty, but to name a moment of public witness. At a memorial, words of contempt were met with applause by a crowd gathered in Christ’s name. That applause was not neutral; it was a corporate act that carried weight. To say so is not to damn every person present, but to call the Church to account.
If we can no longer distinguish between condemning an act and condemning all individuals, we have surrendered moral clarity to tribal loyalty. The Bible itself teaches us that crowds bear responsibility for what they choose to cheer. The same crowd that hailed Jesus with palms also shouted ‘Crucify him!’ days later. Not every voice may have joined, but the witness was corporate—and history remembers it that way.
I will honor Charlie’s life where it reflected Christ and Erika’s forgiveness where it embodied the Gospel. But I will not excuse the applause of contempt, because when the Body of Christ lends its voice to dehumanization, it betrays the One whose image is in every human being.
Duane you wrote
“You may personally reject violence and racism, and I take you at your word. But when you identify with a movement, you are also taking responsibility for the baggage that movement carries. “
So what responsibility were you ascribing to Dusty? – I don’t care what I get smeared with. I know I’m worse than anything someone thinks of me.
You insist on smearing the whole stadium at the Kirk memorial. Interestingly you don’t bother putting a love for Christ on everyone who cheered or clapped for Tucker, Turek, Rubio, or Erika. Plus they are all MAGA and so was Charlie.
So are you guilty of all the crimes of your political allegiances. I don’t think you’re a separatist.
Life is way more messy that you allow. There is a kind of purity code here in this space that just is without grace. You’re not qualified to judge so broadly.
Alan,
You’re right—life is messy. None of us are free from contradiction, and every political allegiance drags baggage with it. But that does not erase the difference between honoring someone’s love for Christ and naming when a crowd cheers words that dehumanize others. Both can happen in the same stadium, in the same hour. To pretend the one cancels out the other is not grace, it is denial.
What responsibility was I ascribing to Dusty? The same responsibility I hold for myself: when we identify with a movement, we carry its baggage as well as its virtues. That is not smear—it is moral reality. If the baggage is too heavy to acknowledge, then the allegiance is too compromised to defend.
As for grace: grace does not mean looking away from sin. Grace begins with truth. The prophets judged broadly, Jesus judged broadly, the apostles judged broadly—not because they lacked grace, but because without judgment, as Bonhoeffer pointed out, grace is cheap. My aim is not to create a purity code but to recover clarity. The applause of contempt is not excused by the applause of praise. Christ is not divided.
The quest to come against MAGA and the continued references of this web site to Bonhoeffer and his stand against Hitler caused me to seek some other valid opinions or thesis.
I found this 2012 article from Richard Weikart, a professor of history at California State University Stanislaus, who was very interested and focused on this period.
‘The Troubling Truth About Bonhoeffer’s Theology’
A worthy read to consider.
https://www.equip.org/articles/troubling-truth-bonhoeffers-theology/
https://www.equip.org/PDF/JAF5356.pdf
Of course if one hates CRI they will just ignore and throw the article out.
My overall take is how all of us can become overwhelmed by the circumstances around us and forget where we actually are, sharing in the toxicity and hatred of the world.
TH
I know the article… It is a fair assessment. Bonhoeffer was far more complex than is often imagined or acknowledged.
For those of us who have actually read Bonhoeffer…none of this is surprising or troubling.
We have written here that he was not an evangelical…but neither am I.
Duane,
I have not had the time to participate in this thread, but let me say you have throughout, starting with your article, spoken very, very well and with much clarity.
With MAGA, as with Charlie Kirk, there is a big mix of good and bad. But as you wrote from the beginning, focusing on MAGA and what happened at Kirk’s memorial service, we Christians cannot ignore when the bad get mixed up in our faith, especially when we want to support or identify with at least some elements, if not fully identify with the movement that is doing it.
The question posed by Duane remains unanswered as those who appreciate MAGA unload their grievances.
How is any of this rhetoric compatible with the teachings of Jesus?
How can you dehumanize large groups of people and claim compatibility with the Gospel?
I think the difficulty today is how to evaluate what is happening politically and how someone who loves God and follows Jesus should respond.
I also think the non-stop rhetoric from all the sides of the media have made people miserable and confused, to the point that violence becomes justified.
It doesn’t matter if it’s the assassination of Kirk, shooting at ICE, the burning of a city in the name of Floyd or the robbing of stores, all of these and more are in opposition to the teachings of Jesus. But how do followers resolve and be part of the answer instead of the problem?
I wish I had a perfect solution to this question, but I can clearly state this, I will not support anything which promotes or brings harm to others.
TH
To balance out your study of Bonhoeffer, you might do a deep dive on the career of Gerhard Kittel…
Michael
“How can you dehumanize large groups of people and claim compatibility with the Gospel?”
In particular the illegal immigrants in the USA.
The complexity of the issue grows so one has to decide where to start and put their focus on.
First of all was it the right /moral thing to do when people in the USA encouraged and provided the means for people to come to the USA outside of the normal means of entry?
Keeping it really simple, now that 10s of millions of people have entered and live in the USA illegally what is the moral and right thing to do, even according to the Gospel? One obvious answer is to feed and cloth them. But the next difficulty is where does this begin and end?
Do we in our efforts of compassion actually cause more harm, hurt and facilitate destructive behavior to individuals and our communities?
Example, in Seattle the City decided to provide safe means to take drugs. Compassionate? Yes. Outcome they facilitated more drug use and thus increased individual misery and criminal activity in the city. They also made the city more dangerous for visitors and residence in those areas.
Everything thing we do has consequences.
“To balance out your study of Bonhoeffer, you might do a deep dive on the career of Gerhard Kittel…”
Thank you!
TH
This article in First Things is a good place to start:
https://firstthings.com/the-gateway-drug-to-post-christian-paganism/
TH, Your failure to mention acts of violence by people on the right against people on the left, such as: the assassination of a MN state congresswoman a few months ago by a conservative radical, the murder of a police officer at the CDC just two months ago by a conservative anti-vaxxer , an attack on the Capital on Jan 6 2020 by a conservative mob, and have been many others; your failure to do mention things like that, underscores just how difficult it is to fairly assess the moral failures of the other political side against ones own.
Robert F
So add them to the list, doesn’t change but actually builds on what I wrote.
Hatred is so invasive we may never see it in ourselves.
Duane thank you I will start there.
The conservative side is winning in the rhetorical battle regarding the degree of violence of the left vs that of the right because MAGA government is deleting and destroying the statistical facts gathered over decades showing just the opposite of what MAGA wants them to show. In this country, the left is in fact not anywhere near as violent as the right.And this deleting and destroying of historical statistical fact is the case not only regarding political violence, but many other matters. Lies are the standard operating procedure and strategy of this government in a way far beyond any other government in my lifetime; in this, it shamelessly exhibits the spirit of antichrist, the spirit of the Father of lies,which is the main reason why it is incompatible with Christianity.
You can’t get me drunk enough to discuss immigration here again…or the “drug wars”.
I will say that if you think blowing Venezuelan boats out of the water without any proof of trafficking is anything but theatre, you know nothing about how and from where drugs come.
But, you do enjoy theatre…
Michael,
And it’s state terrorism theater, at that. Vance’s delight in making his remarks about fishermen off Venezuela being afraid to fish, and his live audience’s laughing at this “joke”, is another example of MAGA delight in violence and cruelty.
Michael,
And now the POTUS is marching on Portland, giving permission to active duty troops to shoot to kill Americans in the name of protecting immigration facilities. Illegal immigration is his excuse for undertaking all his and his allies’ authoritarian plans. But it’s very hard to control a country the size and population of ours in the throes of a guerilla insurgency, and, sadly, that is exactly what his strong arm tactics are likely to create. We will all suffer, and we will lose many of the rights and privileges we have become accustomed to. But you don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
Robert F,
I’ve put significant time and resources here over the last 20 years trying to help people understand these issues.
They don’t want to.
The power of Trump lies in his willingness to scapegoat two groups …migrants and the LGBTQ bunch.
The Portland issue is more complicated.
I’m against sending federal troops in…but that used to be a beautiful city…as was Seattle…and I won’t go near either one anymore.
I was astounded when I went up there to the medical center…
Someone’s policies have turned our cities into dehumanizing ghettos. Rhetoric in stadiums did not do that; policy did.
Alan
That’s a convenient deflection. Policies can certainly harm, but to sneer at the power of words is willful blindness. Scripture itself tells us that ‘the tongue is a fire… it sets on fire the course of life’ (James 3:6). Entire societies have been poisoned not just by policy but by rhetoric that made cruelty acceptable. Nazi Germany did not begin with laws; it began with rallies. Jim Crow did not spring from a statute book alone; it was sustained by pulpits and newspapers that dehumanized Black neighbors.
So yes, bad policy dehumanizes. But so does cheering when someone calls fellow human beings ‘nothing.’ To pretend otherwise is to excuse the seed while condemning the fruit. And that is not discernment—it is denial.
Duane,
It is not a deflection. I will say all day long that you are wrong about what happened last week. You are also right. It just isn’t one thing, and your language is subtle and sophisticated but no less dehumanizing of your own brethren. I don’t mind the rebuke, just its universality and smugness. it is wrong. I will not stop talking about issues. But you have made it into something that it is not. We are not looking at 30s Germany. We have many problems of many kinds and MAGA has actually put some of them at bay and others it has put in our face. We will see, I do not expect you to cede any points. That good enough.
But those cities are FAR more dark than that stadium was. That is simply factual. It is real.
Now I have to use my Saturday otherwise.
Alan,
You can repeat ‘that’s not what happened’ all day, but the footage speaks louder than either of us. People did applaud when Miller declared others ‘nothing.’ To say so isn’t smug—it’s fact.
Yes, life is complex and not reducible to one thing. But complexity doesn’t excuse contradiction. A stadium filled with worship that also cheers contempt is not absolved because cities are dark. That’s whataboutism, not discernment.
And no, naming the danger isn’t dehumanizing brethren. It’s calling the Church back to her Lord. If the comparison to 1930s Germany makes you bristle, good—that’s the point of a warning. Better to feel the sting now than repeat the shame later. The Church should not measure itself against the failures of the city, but against the holiness of Christ.
“The Church should not measure itself against the failures of the city, but against the holiness of Christ.” THIS!
The decay of cities is due to a whole cocktail of problems, among them: lack of affordable housing; drug addiction; wealth and income disparity; the dissolution, yes, but also the dysfunction — a portion of the former driven by the latter — of extended familial support networks. It cannot be laid only at the feet of one political side or the other; and, indeed, some of it may be beyond political solution.
As for stadium vs city darkness: certainly the Nuremberg rallies were well lighted and orderly and even filled with a kind of ebullient energy and a kind of hope, compared with the poverty and crime and desperation of Wiemar city slums and ghettos; but on the basis of that you’d be mistaken to think the former less dark than the latter. That is a fact.
(And please no nonsense about how inappropriate it is to compare a fascist rally with a memorial worship service. For one thing, I’m making a point about how appearances cannot be used to evaluate the “darkness” of different social phenomena; for another, Miller’s comments and Trump’s expressed hate were very fascistic in tone and content. And Christians applauded and cheered at both.)
May God bless each of you.
Captain Kevin!!!!! Dixie Dread, and Michael you both are always in my prayers. I concider you my brothers. I love you dearly. Xenia you will always be my sister and i love you and admire you.
I do not wish to cause stress or fights nor do i want to be stressed or fight, so I’ll see you around. If you have prayer requests feel free to email me.
MAGA ‘Christianity’ is fascism, plain and simple, there’s no way around it.
Muff
In the course of the last few of days, I’ve been called a Marxist, accused of practicing a barren form of Christianity, mocked as a leader of ‘refugees from a doomsday cult,’ told that I smear entire crowds, set up a graceless purity code, and that I am unqualified to judge. My theology has been dismissed as barren, and my rhetoric caricatured as extreme.
None of this actually engages the claim I made—that MAGA is theologically incompatible with the teachings of Christ; that applause for hateful words or dehumanization at a Christian memorial compromises the Church’s witness. One may disagree with those claims, but an ad hominem approach does not answer it. If the best response is to attack me rather than wrestle with the issue, then we have confirmed how difficult it is to look the problem in the face and to define what is happening in a substantial section of American Christianity…
I love and admire you too, dear Dusty. May God bless you and keep you.
Love,
Xenia
Duane,
I find it interesting that NONE of the posters here defending MAGA (Dusty, Alan, and Xenia) actually engaged in the claims you made nor rebutted the substance of your arguments.
Why don’t all these MAGA cultists go to some South American country and enjoy an enhanced flavored beverage and save us the trouble?
90 Years ago he same people applauding Trump at that Kirk memorial would have been applauding another madman in Nuremberg. And like those Germans civilians who just went all along with it, these MAGA fans deserve the same fate when their madman takes them over the cliff. Consider me a B-17 pilot over Dresden or Hamburg. Sucked to be those German civilians and it will suck to be these MAGA fans. History repeats itself. They sow the wind, they WILL reap the whirlwind.
“Why don’t all these MAGA cultists go to some South American country and enjoy an enhanced flavored beverage and save us the trouble?”
I really hate when you say crap like that.
In debate it’s easy to slip into scoring points, caricaturing, or even demonizing each other. But as Christians we don’t have that luxury. Our opponents in argument are still our neighbors in Christ’s eyes, still people made in His image. We may contend sharply for truth, but we are never released from the duty to love—even those we believe are profoundly wrong. To forget that is to win the argument and lose the Gospel.
Josh,
If the cult followers of another authoritarian madman who vowed to make Germany Great Again had opted for the Guyana option it would spared the world the Second World War and some 75 million lives. That being said, I am sure Bonhoffer prayed to God to open his fellow Christians eyes’ of their delusion. But they were given over to strong delusion, so in the end the only way to stop the madness was the utter destruction of the cult even if it meant the deaths of many of only those who attended the rally (or memorial service) but were not necessarily all in on the program.
I am not MAGA, I am an old-time conservative to hates to see my local library hosting drag queen story hour.
My thoughts on immigration: Keep all the law-abiding immigrants who have been here for a while. Many came because Biden invited them so it’s hard to see their fault in the matter. Deport the criminals ASAP. Secure the border and invite people in an orderly manner.
As to what God expects of Christians regarding “the stranger,” I don’t think this refers to national policy, I think it refers to how we as individual Christians respond to the real people in our real lives. A foreigner moves in next door? Introduce yourself, incorporate them into your life, bake them Christmas cookies, give them garden produce and eggs from your hens, knit them baby blankets, give them rides if needed… you know, love your neighbor. My neighbor next door, no matter where they come from or how they got here, is the one I give my love to. This is a little harder than typing on one’s laptop about nameless immigrants but I believe this is the actual heart of Christ. It might cost you something.
“Why don’t all these MAGA cultists go to some South American country and enjoy an enhanced flavored beverage and save us the trouble?”
That is beyond the limits of this site.
The commandments God gave to Israel regarding the foreigner and stranger were given to a nation…the NT application would be to all the people of God.
It can certainly be more nuanced than that, but the nuance wouldn’t include separating families and shipping people to countries they’ve never set foot in.
It would most certainly not include the cruelty being practiced by this administration to the cheers of much of the “church”.
@ Ra’s al Ghul,
My dad flew a B-17 in the air war over Germany (1944).
He and one of the waist gunners were the only two out of a ten man crew, who survived all 25 missions.
Where did family separation policy originate? Pretty sure it is not a MAGA innovation.
Alan,
You’re right that family separation as a practice did not begin with MAGA. The U.S. has a long, tragic history of separating families—Native children forced into boarding schools, enslaved families broken apart, and more recent immigration detention stretching back into the 1990s.
But what did happen under MAGA was the formalization of a deliberate, zero tolerance policy. In April 2018, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that every undocumented adult crossing the border would be criminally prosecuted. Because children could not be held in federal prison, they were systematically separated from their parents. By the administration’s own admission, this was intended as a deterrent. The DHS Inspector General later reported that the policy was rolled out with no system for tracking or reuniting families. By 2019, thousands of children had been separated, some of them never reunited.
So yes, family separation has ugly precedents. But as a public, intentional, and large-scale strategy, it was very much a MAGA-era policy—and it was ended only after massive outcry and court orders
See also: https://www.phoenixpreacher.com/the-banality-of-evil/
“I was reminded of this when I read the widely reported account of the 2018 meeting of US cabinet officials, including, among others, Sec. Pompeo, Sec. Azar, Sec. Nielsen and then Attorney-General Sessions. The meeting was chaired by White House senior advisor Stephen Miller. Round about a conference table in the White House situation room they discussed the new “zero tolerance” policy for immigration at the southern border. According to two officials present, they decided by a show of hands to separate children from their parents as a part of the new policy. Over three thousand children would be separated from their parents as an immediate result.”
Notice who chaired the meeting… The same Steven Miller applauded at the Kirk Memorial.
So there is some common ground. We are all against family separation, whether that occurs under Obama, Biden, or Trump. This is good!
Can we all agree that we are against masked agents detaining people based upon suspicion, and no due process? Seems pretty elementary really.
Forgive me, but I’ve grown weary of trying to speak in biblical and practical ways about immigration.
I’ve written protestations about the policies of every administration in this century.
It’s never been about actually solving the problem…it has always been theatre to appease one side or the other…humans as political footballs stripped of any humanity at all.
Through it all, I’ve never seen such blatant cruelty and disregard for the image of God in others as has been done by Trump and Miller.
Nothing I’ve written about has caused more people to leave the site…and summarily ended financial support by all but a very few.
Very few…truth is expensive to find and harder to speak…
Michael, the problem with saying it’s the church as a whole’s responsibility says that all the individual has to do is vote properly. I don’t think that’s what you mean.
Also, when you speak of “the church,” who do you mean? I realize in one sense, all Christians are part of an invisible church. I also believe there are “churches,” such as the Anglican Church and the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod. And my neighbor next door who isn’t affiliated with any particular church body but is still part of “the church” in the broadest sense. I can’t wrangle the people in town who belong to a MAGA church any more than I can wrangle the people who belong to a church, if you want to call it that, who major in affirming homosexuals. I have no influence on these people at all and I have no right to interfere. All I can do is be a sister to the people in my own parish and in my own neighborhood. It always boils down here to some amorphous group that I can’t do anything about yet until this group is subdued/corrected, there’s no point talking about anything else.
I believe I gave people who care about foreigners a path they can follow. But it’s not good enough, it’s never good enough.
We cannot excuse such behavior, and we certainly cannot applaud it. When the Church cheers rhetoric or policies that demean human beings, it ceases to be a neutral bystander and becomes complicit in the very dehumanization Christ condemned. The fact that individuals within the Body may dissent silently does not erase the public witness of the whole.
This isn’t about controlling every parish down the street. It is about refusing to baptize cruelty with our applause or our silence. If the Church raises its hands in worship and then claps for contempt, the watching world will not parse the difference. They will see a Body that blesses Jesus with one breath and denies His image in the next.
“I believe I gave people who care about foreigners a path they can follow. But it’s not good enough, it’s never good enough.’
I care about humans, especially those fleeing poverty, hunger, and violence…I’m not real concerned about where they were born. I learned that from this book…
I’m going to back away…I’ve stumbled upon a trove of wisdom I need to process…
If the church, (both institutions and individuals) had committed to remaining radically neutral in terms of partisan politics, we may have had the integrity to call out both sides when they were lacking.
Well what are you going to do about it, Duane? Michael honestly tells us that he suspects his entire congregation voted for Trump. His years of teaching made little impact on their politics. This is not to blame Michael, but if he can’t affect his own people, I certainly can’t. All Michael and I and all the rest of us can do is be a neighbor to real people in real life. That’s where we should put our focus. And this might be how a change of heart could take place.
If you want to follow a good example, someone not tainted with a hint of MAGA, follow Linn.
Linn is the only person here who has caused me to pause and think.
I’ve suggested a humane solution to the immigration situation (Keep the established, deport the criminals, manage the border) and crickets. It always goes back to people clapping at a memorial service. Or go drink poison…
Josh,
Yes…
For myself and my wife, we have supported our local emigrant welcome Center for over 20 years and have served on the board. Additionally, we have opened our home to immigrants in danger of arrest and deportation until they could obtain legal counsel.
A humane solution to immigration is worth discussing—but don’t pretend that applause for contempt at a Christian memorial uttered by Miller and Trump is a side issue. Policy matters, but so does witness. The Church is not judged only by what it proposes in white papers, but by what it blesses with its voice and its hands.
If we claim Christ and then clap when others are called ‘nothing,’ or ‘animals’, no amount of policy detail will undo the damage. The world doesn’t just hear what we suggest; it sees what we celebrate. And in that moment, the Church’s witness was compromised.
Michael, by the way, has been aware of our activities for a number of years…
Xenia,
The problem is in the minds of most of the MAGAs/Christian Nationalists is that any and every illegal (or not) immigrant is a criminal. Which is why they DO NOT CARE when ICE detains illegals going to mandated hearings BY an immigration magistrate to discuss their petitions and status according to the rules, laws and regulations. All Trump, his cult followers and supporters like yourself, and his gang of brown shirts only care about the numbers of removed and the daily quota.
To put it easier to understood terms, it is like you being arrested for driving on a suspended license on your way to the court hearing to determine if you license is to be suspended. And when that happens, all the local law and order friends of yours cheer the arrest of another dangerous driver in the local community. How would you feel?
Which is yet another reason I do not care if Charlie Kirk or any other MAGA leader dies.
As a long time reader that used to be interested in the diversity of Christian and political opinion that could be found here until the last year or so, I will no longer be reading here as I cannot bear the absolute abuse and utter arrogance of commenters like Raas Ghul. It brings this sight down to what has now become unbearable nonsense. First and last comment.
Former reader – I share your disgust. It seems that Ra’s is begging to be banned, and will probably be obliged.
Hang in there. We are still having some good discussions in these most polarized times.
“Which is yet another reason I do not care if Charlie Kirk or any other MAGA leader dies.”
We have made it clear that this does not represent the writers on this site or the values of the vast majority of readers…
“Any man`s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind.”
I missed that one…I can hardly tolerate being here myself.
I’ll deal with it…
Ra’s al Ghul,
There comes a point in many resistance movements where the resistance starts to look like what they are resisting.
You are there.
Stop it or I’ll moderate you.
I rarely share my personal devotion time, but I’m going to make an exception here. In my prayer time this morning that was centered around Luke 11:1-4, I think God gave me a call to press in with the prayer,
” Our Father in heaven,[ Hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven( (Luke 11:2 [NKJV]). (Yes, I’m aware other manuscripts don’t have the last phrase, but so what?)
As one who is not expecting a dispensational rapture to occur, I think this is our last chance.
Ra, I myself do not consider every illegal to be a criminal since the Obama administration invited them.
I meant the Biden admin. I get those two confused sometimes.
pstrmike,
Thank you…and I concur…
For those interested in real data about the Biden admin on immigration…
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-immigration-legacy
Every administration since the 20th century has wrestled with this or used it as a political football.
At the end of the day, we need immigrants…as some have already found out.
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,”
The Statue of Liberty has been inviting them since 1903.