The first time I observed American Christians creating idols of their ideologies was during the presidency of George W. Bush; I saw people put enormous faith in a president and his policies because—through their post-9/11 prisms—they came to regard his election as God-ordained. Especially within the online political forums I frequented from 2001-2003, Bush seemed nothing less than an agent of the Lord meant to avenge America’s dead, and in so doing either bring peace to the nations or usher in the messianic age.
I admit, being a religious person, and having cast my first vote rightward for Bush, I was not entirely immune from some of that apocalyptic speculation, but my concerns about indulging in idolatry tended to tamp down my fervor. That became easier, of course, by the fall of 2005, when George W. Bush was no longer anyone’s strange god.
Then came the election of 2008, with idols arising amid both the religious right, who swooned for Sarah Palin’s heartfelt nationalism, and the secular left, who called Barack Obama “The One” and “The Lightworker” while Obama propelled the “anointed” analogies forward with his own rhetorical excesses. I started wondering about idolatry, again. What was driving Americans to paint their candidates—these merely human people—with brushes so gobbed-up with malice or over-laden with love? It was impressive enough that Palin had been an effective governor with a sound record on energy policy; why did some need to see her as Mother America and others need to savage her until her humanity could be disregarded? It was historic enough that Obama was the first serious African-American contender for the Oval Office; why was it necessary to herald him with halos, until the other side could only see the devil?
A nation that had witnessed outsized displays of evil and heroism during 9/11, seemed once again—as in those early days with Bush—to need to see something larger than life in her leading players; it was demanding a dose of divinity from its frontrunners, so the opposition must, in turn, become diabolical.
In 2012, there are still some puffs of Obama-fervor to be found amid the members and burning-out embers of the mainstream press; here and there you may find someone on the right launching a heavy breath toward the Romney/Ryan coals, but after decades of non-stop partisan sniping and four years of bursting bubbles, economic misery, and constitutional uncertainty, Americans are too worn, too weary, to expend the energy necessary to burnish any more golden calves.
This time around, President Obama’s halo has gone missing, and if his opponents still think he is the devil, he’s become a minor one they can finally laugh at. Candidates Romney and Ryan seem more like stable pedestals than the bronze thing upon which we gaze and so, no, we are not making idols of our candidates.
Instead some of us are simply nourishing our ideologies—holding them close to the heart and feeding them on our stores of distrust and bitterness—and allowing them to steal all of our instincts to charity, to squeeze out mercy. You can see it on social media, most especially on Facebook where respectable, even admirable, people are beginning to lose perspective and attack each other over news stories, and sometimes over simple questions, reasonably asked. Where angry banning won’t do, full-scale attacks are launched in the form of threads full of red-meat, wherein “friends” are invited to feed, so the hatred may grow.
And it is all done in service to a sad illusion that somehow, if we do not post every story that makes us angry or proves our point, if we do not constantly attempt to fix the erroneous thinking of others, this election will fall out of our control. We must be aggressive unto hysteria in our righteousness, or the other side will win.
It is the flip side of the old Bush-as-Agent-of-God thing, only this time, we seem not to believe that God’s hand may be working within our world at all, and so it is up to us. We “pray” as a means of telling God what we want done, but we don’t trust him very much, hence the hysteria. Both left and right are nearly fainting with fear: “What if the other side wins? The other side is evil!”
Look at the crucifix. Is there any greater reassurance that nothing happens—not even the worst things we may imagine—without it working ultimately to God’s purpose?
Let us ponder these words from the Imitation of Christ, which is the second reading in today’s Office of Readings:
How can anyone be aroused by empty talk if his heart is subject in the truth to God? The whole world cannot swell with pride the man who is subject to truth; nor will he be swayed by the flattery of all his admirers, if he has established all his trust in God. For those who do all the talking amount to nothing; they fail with their din of words, but the truth of the Lord endures for ever.
We are making ourselves ill with the damnable illusions; so fearful are we that our time, our place, our nation, our worldly world quivers upon a precipice, that we will soon initiate our own tumbling unless we let go of these passing mirages and take hold of the Truth which lasts.
We have nothing left to throw into the white-hot crucible but our hyper-emotive selves. And we are not worth idolizing.
Elizabeth Scalia is the Managing Editor of the Catholic Portal at Patheos and blogs as The Anchoress. Her previous articles for "On the Square" can be found here.
Become a fan of First Things on Facebook, subscribe to First Things via RSS, and follow First Things on Twitter.
Comments:
"Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is GOD'S SERVANT, AN AGENT OF WRATH of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." Romans 13:1-4, NIV84, emphasis mine
There it is, in black and white; how could you miss it? Nice straw man, too, adding that part about bringing peace to the nations and ushering in a messianic age, something that George W. Bush nor his followers never said.
"...why did some need to see [Palin] as Mother America...?" Indeed. Why, people find a near-divine Mother figure in several places, but that earns your rebuke only when the sphere is politics. Why is that? Read your Bible again and hear the words of Jesus: "Whoever does God's will is my brother, and sister, and mother." (Mark 3:34-35, NIV84.
Frankly, we'd all be spared a lot of trouble, shaky arguments and misguided votes if all of us would just read our Bible again.
It does:
Psalm 82 (from the 1966 Jerusalem Bible):
"God stands in the divine assembly,
among the gods he dispenses justice:
'No more mockery of justice,
no more favoring the wicked!
Let the weak and the orphan have justice,
be fair to the wretched and destitute;
rescue the weak and the needy,
save them from the clutches of the wicked!'
Ignorant and senseless they carry on blindly,
** undermining the very basis of earthly society. **
I once said, 'You too are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you',
but all the same, you shall die like other men;
as one man, princes, you shall fall.
Rise God, dispense justice throughout the world,
since no nation is excluded from your ownership."
In America we have violently killed well over fifty million of our own children through surgical abortion, over 750,000 of which were as old or older than children routinely cared for in modern newborn intensive care units.
The world does indeed "quiver upon a precipice," so to speak, if the "very basis of earthly society" is undermined when worldly judges make a "mockery of justice," "favoring the wicked," not letting "the weak and the orphan have justice" and are unfair to "the wretched and the destitute." If we do not soon "Rescue the weak and the needy" and "save them from the clutches of the wicked" God will indeed "dispense justice."
The child in the womb has been unjustly sentenced to death by worldly judges who have claimed for themselves authority over innocent human life that belongs only to God. The truth is that all nations do indeed belong to Him. He will inevitably "rise" and "dispense justice throughout the world." This fact is lost on those who, "Ignorant and senseless," "carry on blindly" while the very foundations of civilization are tottering. God's judgment will not so much be directed at the princes who deify themselves, which is nothing new, but at the Church for the idolatry inherent in its silence and complacency, which signals approval of Caesar's demand that we render unto him that which belongs only to God. Judgment starts in the House of God.
Does what you say mean that:
Hitler was an agent of God?
The Nazis were " God's servant, an agent of wrath to punish the wrongdoer": Jews, homosexuals, gypsies, etc.?
Bonhoeffer was wrong to join the conspiracy that sought to overthrow the Nazis?
Rosa Parks was wrong in disobeying the authorities of her community?
Rather, she is simply reminding all of us read and pray and remember Psalm 146.
Politics in and of itself cannot be a First Thing, because it will not be a Last Thing.
It was my pro-life ideology that finally led me home to the Catholic Church, and it was pro-life ideology that finally led me to embrace political conservatism. I do not apologize for it and I make no attempt to moderate it. I'm sorry, but Barack Obama's repeated (4 times!) advocacy of a doctor's right to murder any infant audacious enough to SURVIVE a late-term abortion and come out breathing and squirming, DOES mark him in my mind as a very evil, wicked man. I do not demonize him. He has demonized himself.
The challenge for us Christians is not to compromise with the other side, but to CONVERT them -- and in enough time that we are able to preclude this war going "hot" as the war over slavery did a century and a half ago. Please recall that it, too, began as a cultural cold war.
Just Wondering,John
Obama's consistent track record of corruption, failure and animosity towards Religion was enough for me to oppose him. He has done very little to change his track record since becoming President.
JBP
The truth is that for many Evangelicals and fundamentalists, my scope at the turn of the century comes from personal experience, the election held much gravity because of the Clinton administration (similar zeal and pseudo-prophetic investment into the civil religion took place in '96, as well) and because of the fear of encroaching godlessness. The legitimacy of either concern is rightly debatable.
The fact is that, for the religious right, Bush's facade of Evangelicalism (the remnant of the thoughtful left didn't even consider buying into that nonsense, as the Bush family has been Episcopal for generations) gave them their last gasp hope of a third Great Awakening, subsequent eschatological fulfillment and escape from this mortal coil. Similar gasps can be heard coming from the hard left, here at the twilight of a generation's Fabian hopes for peace and justice with their savior imploding all they had built for decades.
If you only noticed the investment after September 2001, ultimately, you noticed nothing.
Throughout Old Testament , God has shown how the evils of those at the top plays out in lives of those who are ruled and vice versa too - a people getting a leader that they have sort of asked for !
The article tactfully may be avoids the reports of blatant idolatry , in the form of carrying such related objects by the President ..and the other candidate too , in some semblance of same, by holding onto a belief system of man literally becoming The Almghty !
Thus, there are enough reasons for many ,to be concerend as to how we have made gods unto ourselves , of money , sex , comforts etc and in turn, are given leaders who encourage the goverend to monkey with the God given dignity , of men and women ..bringing misery , at many levels , much of which is unforseen even , even in this world !
The exhortation to pray ardently is good to be heard , loud and clear ..
with trust and gratitude that while most of us do not do His will as we ought to , we Do have one , who did - and thus She is powerful , against all evils too !
I believe your penultimate graf got a bit garbled though (especially before the semicolon)?
When you vote it is about good government. Building roads, controlling airplanes and interstate commerce, protecting our country, etc., etc. The "values voter" is a hopelessly needy and naive person. Step back and really examine if the past forty years or so have given us ANY advancements in the morals and religious life of the country.
As I wrote: Look at the crucifix. Is there any greater reassurance that nothing happens—not even the worst things we may imagine—without it working ultimately to God’s purpose?
Building roads: not bloody likely by the time you figure in costs inflated by unions, environmental studies, protests by environmentalists, requirements to use particular sorts of businesses, restrictions on the businesses that bid to build the roads, etc. Each of those obstacles results from some group's values, be they environmentalists, unions, or what have you, values that have been enshrined in law.
Interstate commerce: more often used as an excuse for federal power grabs than to facilitate trade. And that power is used to impose certain values on the nation.
Protecting our country: difficult when roughly half the country believes we need to gut the military to pay for entitlements, when any military action that lasts more than two weeks or costs more than a few lives brings anti-war protesters out of the woodwork. That too is the result of certain values.
Whether or not he or she is aware of it _every_ voter is a values voter, even you. The question is not (naively) do we vote for values or pragmatism (naive not least because pragmatism itself is a value); The question is, for which values do we vote?
We must always beware the assumption that God is, of course, on our political side. A Russian immigrant friend, a former Red Army tank commander, once showed me a switchblade knife that his father, another tank commander, had taken off a dead German soldier in World War II. (His father later died in the battle of Moscow.) Engraved on the blade was the motto, "Gott mit uns." Imagine..."God with us" on a Nazi switchblade!
"But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 'Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages.' He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it." John 12:4-6 NIV84
By your way of thinking, no more giving to the poor, or being Jesus' disciple either!
I think you confuse naivety with optimism about the possible, being so cynical yourself. Odd you would use the words "good government" while denigrating values. But then, the long tradition is ad hominem. It is so much easier than rational argument.
Not a hint of a discussion about politicians that change sides on basic, and contentious, moral issues.
Predictable Republican talking points.
But keep up with those values. They are yours and may result in achieving eternal life. But always remember there are others, and they may not live where you do.
The first is the comparison of Bush and Obama. After 9/11, supported Bush, but never ascribed Messianic qualities to him. None of his supporters thought he would accomplish fiscal miracles (halving the deficit) or physical miracles (lowering the seas).
There is a reason for this-much of the left implicitly or explictly denies the existence of a transcendent God, and most of the left denies the existence of sin-therefore they believe in political messiahs who will make heaven on earth.
I'm afraid that many of the comments on this article prove exactly the point Ms. Scalia is trying to make--that we tend to invest political parties and candidates with ultimate importance. I don't think for a minute that she is recommending a total retreat from political engagement. If we have the power to encourage a just and fair government for all, then we have the responsibility to do exercise it. To those who think the author doesn't take contemporary politics seriously enough, I should like to ask a few questions.
- When the Apostle Paul called the governor the agent of God's wrath, the one who "beareth not the sword in vain," who was the emperor of Rome at that time? Go ahead and look it up.
- Is the political process the ONLY way in which earthly justice can be secured? Granted that the state is the default means of earthly justice, but are there other ways in which Christians can promote just causes?
- Do you believe that true, lasting justice will be achieved at the Last Judgment?
As for politicians who have changed their positions on moral issues: Some of them are pandering. Imagine that! Politicians pandering for votes! Some of them have seriously reconsidered and thought through their positions and decided they were wrong. It happens. Politicians are human beings like the rest of us. I myself have done a political and social 180 since my younger days. Most of us on this board are perfectly well aware how difficult it would be to get any social conservative legislation passed. Personally, I think our culture is rotten at the core and headed inexorably for social and economic collapse. Entropy, including moral, social, and cultural entropy, only goes in one direction. But at least I can look in the mirror and say to myself, "Self, you did the best you could to arrest the decline."
The Old Confederacy and its border states are pretty clearly delineated in Red, the New England and Middle colonies are pretty clearly delineated Blue. The Old Northwest territory, between the Ohio/Pennsylvania border and the Mississippi River, settled largely from New England and upstate New York, is also pretty well painted Blue. So is the Pacific Coast, (including far Western Navada) settled either from New England directly by clipper ship from around Cape Horn, or by a second generation coming from the Nortwest Territory over the Oregon Trail.
The big Red splash across the Rocky Mountains with the little Blue pool in the middle is the most interesting of all. It was the destination of the diaspora of ex-Confederate soldiers fleeing a ruined South, under Union military occupation, with free blacks who could vote and own property (rights that they lost quite quickly after the Union soldiers left). The little Blue pool on either side of the Rio Grande and beyond the Sangre De Cristo Mountains to the north was both settled and Hispanic long before there was any commercial planting of tobacco in Virginia. Way long before, and comparatively few from the Confederate diaspora found a welcome or a home in that region.
These patterns are not set in stone, but I don't think they are merely coincidental. There is a conscious part of our values shaped by deliberate religious and moral choice, but there is also an unconscious part shaped by our family and its extended history, as well as the extended history of our childhood neighbors. I was born north of the Mason-Dixon Line so I can't tell you much about the unconscious historical values south of it. But I can easily put mine in a single commonly known aphorism: Good fences make good neighbors.
Whether it's a matter of Fracking for oil under the fence or spreading the gospel over it, a good deal of our contemporary "clash of values" is bound together with our attitude toward somebody else's fence and how much we value our own.
Not all of it, but a good deal of it.



I think a distinction should be made between those who engage in journalistic fraternal correction. On the one hand, there are those who continually and savagely attack the pro-life movement and "freeze" their leaders with Alinskyish focus on particular scruples, and in so doing weaken the pro-life movement's leadership and its goals. On the other hand, there are those who will write friendly letters to the pro-life movement when it does, in fact, lose focus.