Here are the President’s remarks on the lighting of the national Christmas tree. Note that he doesn’t refer to it as a holiday tree.
More than 2,000 years ago, a child was born to two faithful travelers who could find rest only in a stable, among the cattle and the sheep. But this was not just any child. Christ’s birth made the angels rejoice and attracted shepherds and kings from afar. He was a manifestation of God’s love for us. And He grew up to become a leader with a servant’s heart who taught us a message as simple
as it is powerful: that we should love God, and love our neighbor as ourselves.That teaching has come to encircle the globe. It has endured for generations. And today, it lies at the heart of my Christian faith and that of millions of Americans. No matter who we are, or where we come from, or how we worship, it’s a message that can unite all of us on this holiday season.
So long as the gifts and the parties are happening, it’s important for us to keep in mind the central message of this season, and keep Christ’s words not only in our thoughts, but also in our deeds….
And this holiday season, let us reaffirm our commitment to each other, as family members, as neighbors, as Americans, regardless of our color or creed or faith. Let us remember that we are one, and we are a family.
While it is possible to read his language in “universalistic” terms, it seems to me pretty explicitly addressed to Christians. The message that “can unite all of us on this holiday season” includes a reference to the first table of the Decalogue. Christians love a God who calls them to love their neighbors as themselves and to regard one another as God’s children. I can certainly be generous to my fellows “in the spirit of the season” (not quoting Obama here) regardless of the faith or lack of faith they profess. I can regard us all as members of a family “regardless of our color or creed or faith.” (There’s room for more nuance here, to be sure, and perhaps some quibbling, but, again, this is a recognizably Christian message.) Maybe the President means that “our commitment to each other” is “merely” as fellow Americans, but somehow I don’t think so; that’s not the context.
He may not mean a word of it, but he said it. He called us to generosity and openhandedness and gratitude and unity by using recognizably Christian language. Would any other language have worked as well?
I am most emphatically not one of those who would question the President’s personal faith. To say the least, that’s politically unproductive. Not presuming to know what’s in his heart, I am, however, prepared to explore the implications and ramifications of his public statements, as well as of his deeds. I can praise or blame his speeches and deeds (even on religious grounds, if I need to) without impugning his faith.
Merry Christmas, Mr. President.
Joseph Knippenberg is Professor of Politics at Oglethorpe University.
December 2nd, 2011 | 7:29 pm
Mr. Knippenberg,
It pains me to agree with your commentary, in as much as it speaks as kindly as it does of a president who has caused undue, and immeasurable, harm to this nation. I am even somewhat taken aback by the President’s remarks in there deference to Christians, given his other irreligious past remarks. However, it is the season in which we recall Our Savior’s birth, and it is to He that I am ultimately accountable. With that, and in such spirit, I too wish a Blessed Christmas to the president.
December 3rd, 2011 | 9:25 am
I think the speech seems fine. In fact, I am relieved that the tree is acknowledged as a Christmas Tree, and not as a Holiday Tree. I have often wondered if non-Christians were ever offended by calling them by the correct name or if that were an overly sensitive PC move.
In Alexandria, Virginia there is a store called The Christmas Shoppe—it sells Christmas ornaments, etc. year round. The local newspaper reported that starting 1 December, The Christmas Shoppe would turn its facade into an enormous “Holiday Advent Calendar”—each window is covered by a cloth that conceals some Holiday-Advent-appropriate picture. I look forward to seeing what is concealed behind the cloth for 24 December.
December 3rd, 2011 | 1:03 pm
“let us reaffirm our commitment to each other, as family members, as neighbors, as Americans, regardless of our color or creed or faith.”
This part doesn’t ring true to me, and it is a philosophical mistake that all of us are prone to make in our culture.
Of course, there is value in remembering that all people, regardless of where they come from or what they believe or do, are human beings made in God’s image. But when you call a group of people to unite in harmony with one another, regardless of each person’s creed or faith, you get a contradiction. The contradiction is that some of those faiths and creeds may be adamantly opposed to the unity you are calling for. Ultimately, you end up with an illogical pluralism that does not recognize it’s own inconsistencies and doesn’t understand why people such as militant Islamists refuse to get along with us nice folks.
Ultimately, every call to love, to embrace, or to reject our fellow men IS a creed and a faith.
December 4th, 2011 | 3:20 pm
I’m with Mr. Mator.
The speech and the commentary it has generated here remind me too much of my days as an Episcopalian, when we would spend every Sunday afternoon in round robin phone calls analyzing the morning’s sermon for signs our America-hating, hetero-loathing (but other than that completely inclusive) rector was finally starting to take baby steps toward “our side”.
Ultimately, those sessions went a long way to getting my wife and me into the Catholic Church–and away from that “illogical pluralism” Mr. Mator speaks of. Because no matter how much you try to embrace everyone, your commitments are going to jar on someone who has made equal yet opposite commitments. And, depending on what those opposite commitments are, you could very easily find yourself cast out of the cozy picture the President’s remarks conjure up. That’s why my wife calls this administration “the Episcopal Church writ large”.
Let us not forget two things. First, despite our liturgical churchgoing and lack of personal firearms, we were all lumped into the “bitter clinger” category not too far back. Second, next year is an election year.
December 4th, 2011 | 7:54 pm
Mr. Knippenberg,
All well put, but I can’t help but paste in this excerpt from an lengthy interview with Chicago-Sun Time religion columnist Cathleen Falsani (”God Girl”)
GG:Who’s Jesus to you?
(He laughs nervously)
OBAMA:Right.
Jesus is an historical figure for me, and he’s also a bridge between God and man, in the Christian faith, and one that I think is powerful precisely because he serves as that means of us reaching something higher.
And he’s also a wonderful teacher. I think it’s important for all of us, of whatever faith, to have teachers in the flesh and also teachers in history.
GG:Is Jesus someone who you feel you have a regular connection with now, a personal connection with in your life?
OBAMA:Yeah. Yes. I think some of the thigns I talked about earlier are addressed through, are channeled through my Christian faith and a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.
GG:Have you read the bible?
OBAMA:Absolutely.
I read it not as regularly as I would like. These days I don’t have much time for reading or reflection, period.
And later in the same interview:
GG:Do you believe in sin?
OBAMA:Yes.
GG:What is sin?
OBAMA:Being out of alignment with my values.
GG:What happens if you have sin in your life?
OBAMA:I think it’s the same thing as the question about heaven. In the same way that if I’m true to myself and my faith that that is its own reward, when I’m not true to it, it’s its own punishment.
More here.
December 5th, 2011 | 12:18 pm
Douglas,
Not to be too picky but I think quite a few everyday Christians would botch that same interview if they were being ‘graded’ by a rather strict theology professor. But then there’s nothing actually wrong with what he said that I can detect. If it was you being interviewed, I’m sure, you’d phrase your answers differently but strictly speaking there’s nothing unorthodox about describing Jesus as a ‘bridge between God and man’ as well as a historical figure. The real out, though, is the question “who is Jesus to you” which calls for not an ‘objective’ answer about Jesus’s nature that one would get from a Catechism or theology textbook but what happens to be of particular importance to an individual at that particular time.
December 5th, 2011 | 1:23 pm
And Obama’s answers would be consistent with several major Founders and American politicians of the 19th century and even 20th century until about 40 years ago. It’s not new. It’s pretty old by now.
December 5th, 2011 | 1:50 pm
Mr Pepperium, Anthony Mator
Ultimately, those sessions went a long way to getting my wife and me into the Catholic Church–and away from that “illogical pluralism”
Sorry to disappoint both of you but the Catholic Church has not declared ‘turn the other cheek’ to be a mistranslation. You may want to pretend the assertion that we should “reaffirm our commitment to each other, as family members, as neighbors, as Americans, regardless of our color or creed or faith” is non-Christian, the reality is rejecting such an assertion would make you a very unOrthodox Christian….if a Christian at all.
December 5th, 2011 | 2:23 pm
Booton,
Please note that all the conclusions about the interview that Obama “botched” it, that his answers could have been phrased differently, etc. came from you, not me.
Liam, you say that Obama’s answers are consistent with several major Founders and American politicians…” Several politicians today are atheists, Muslim, etc. So what?
December 5th, 2011 | 3:24 pm
Douglas,
I have seen that interview cited before (possibly by Joe I believe) as evidence that Obama is not an orthodox Christian. I would imagine many might have answered “Jesus is the Son of God” or incorporated something like that in their answer which is why I suspect some viewed it as questionable. However it seems to me to simply be different ways of wording a consistent idea.
What was your take on the interview and reason for posting it? Just general information? Your preamble sounds like it was meant to refute Knippenberg’s assertions about Obama’s Christmas speech?
December 5th, 2011 | 5:18 pm
Booton,
My point in posting it is that Mr Knippenberg’s post and the comments discussed what Obama believes about Christ and the church. I have not seen another interview that reveals a lengthier discussion on this topic straight from the President’s mouth.
I did find it interesting that you seem to be defending the President against anyone that might question his faith, but when I posted his own words at length with a link to the entire interview you immediately read the President’s own words as indicting him on matters of Christian faith and leapt to defend him against his own words. What to make of that? Not sure, but as I said, I find it interesting.
December 5th, 2011 | 8:56 pm
Well my impression was biased because I recall that very interview being cited by Joe years ago as evidence of some type of violation of orthodox Christian belief. To be honest I would have thought ‘Son of God’ or ‘God’ would have been the first thing to be said or at least incorporated into the answer. That would after all be the old Baltimore Catecism method. But then the “mean to you” part of the question does give it a more personal edge which pushes the answer away from the more objective and towards the subjective.
December 7th, 2011 | 2:54 am
Barack exposed:
The President’s obvious eschewal of the Gospel message during a “Christmas” speech shows he does not believe in Jesus, nor even understand Jesus.
Jesus died in our stead, and rose as the first born of many siblings, so that all who believed in him would have eternal life.
This speech is not an attempt to appeal to believing Christians. Rather, it wraps Christianity in a humanistic, New Age-palatable taco shell to make himself appeal to the non-believing masses.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact