September/October 2003

Saluting Bush

by George Caylor

Most folks would not notice anything, but military people see it right away. When President Bush leaves his helicopter or Air Force One, the honor guards salute and face him as he disembarks, then turn their faces towards him as he passes by. They continue to salute his back as he walks away. This kind of salute was not common in the previous eight-year administration, though it is customary courtesy to the Commander-in-Chief.

You see, soldiers aren't required to turn and face the President as they salute. They are not required to salute his back. They are only required to salute. They can remain face-forward the entire time.*

Why is such respect afforded to President Bush? The following incident from Major General Van Antwerp may give us an insight. General Antwerp is president of the Officers' Christian Fellowship. He lost nearly all his staff when the Pentagon was attacked on September 11. His executive officer LTC Brian Birdwell was badly burned and in the hospital when President Bush visited him.

Our President spent time and prayed with Brian. As he was getting ready to leave, he went to the foot of Brian's bed and saluted. He held his salute until Brian was able to raise his burned and bandaged arm, ever so slowly, in return. The Commander-in-Chief almost never initiates a salute, except in the case of a Congressional Medal of Honor winner. The injured soldier did not have to return the salute. But he did, out of respect to his President -- a soldiers' President.

On Special Report with Brit Hume, at the close of the show when they normally have some funny video clip, they showed President Bush and the First Lady on their way to Maine to leave for Camp David for the weekend. As the video starts, the First Lady is leading the way into the helicopter with the spaniel, Spotty, on the leash, and the President is right behind her with the Scottie, Barney, on the leash.

As the First Lady entered the chopper, the Marine at the gangway saluted and held his salute. The president was walking Barney when the Scottie decided to sit down right when he got to the steps of the chopper. The President pulled on its leash, but the stubborn Scottie persisted in sitting. The President bent down, scooped up the pooch and entered Marine One. After he entered, the Marine cut his salute and returned to the position of attention.

Moments later the President reemerged from the helicopter and out onto the steps. The Marine was standing at attention, head eyes straight ahead. The President leaned over and tapped him on the left arm. The startled Marine turned his body toward the President and received his returned salute!

I was so impressed by this true act of respect for our military people by our President! He really does get it. Most any other person of his stature would have just continued his journey, disregarding the neglected return salute. Not George W. Bush. He is earning the respect of the military community, not expecting it -- as most have and would.

Bush named Jesus Christ as Lord of his life on public T.V. Not an oblique reference to being "born-again" or having a "life change." He actually said the un-PC-like phrase, "Jesus Christ!"

On September 11, he was thrust into a position only known by the likes of Roosevelt, Churchill, Lincoln and Washington. The weight of the world was on his shoulders, and the responsibility of a generation was on his soul. So President George W. Bush walked to his seat at the front of the National Cathedral just three days after two of the most impressive symbols of American capitalism and prosperity virtually evaporated.

When the history of this time is written, it will be acknowledged by friend and foe alike that President George W. Bush came of age in that cathedral and lifted a nation off its knees. In what was one of the most impressive exhibitions of self-control in presidential history, President George W. Bush was able to deliver his remarks without losing his resolve, focus or confidence. God's hand, which guided him through that sliver-thin election, now rested fully on him. As he walked back to his seat, the camera angle was appropriate. He was virtually alone in the scene, alone in that massive place with God, just him and the Lord.

Back at his seat, George H. Bush reached over and took his son's hand. In that gesture his father seemed to say, "I wish I could do this for you, son, but I can't. You have to do this on your own." President George W. Bush squeezed back and gave him a look of peace that said, "I don't have to do it alone, Dad. I've got help."

What a blessing to have a professing Christian as President!

*Note: When this special appreciation for Mr. Bush was first reported to me, I asked an Honor Guard friend to verify what we had witnessed -- since the act of saluting is for the Office of the President, not the man himself. His commander later denied any special salutes and the Honor Guard now salutes face-forward.

But Not Everyone is Cheering

by Raymond A. Schroth

I used to think that it was a good thing for a president of the United States to believe in God.

Now I'm not so sure.

When I was born, there were still people alive who had seen Abraham Lincoln. The wounds of the Civil War still bled. My father had met Woodrow Wilson, and I grew up listening to the simple prose and sonorous tones of Franklin Roosevelt promising both hope and sacrifice as he led us through World War II.

It helped me to know that these men were believers.

In Lincoln's second inaugural address, he declined to identify God's will with the Union cause. The war was God's punishment for the sins of both sides. Wilson's religious convictions most likely reinforced his righteousness. But, "too proud to fight," he had to be dragged into the horrors of World War I, and he expended his last breaths struggling to build an international body, the League of Nations, to save us from future wars. FDR's prayer for the troops on D-Day told us frankly that many would not return.

The religious faith of these presidents was both a strength and a source of some humility. None was an angel or a saint. But these were our greatest wartime leaders.

However, when we read the articles on George W. Bush's religion and watch him in action, we see a very different phenomenon. The faces of Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt were ravaged by stress and sorrow. Bush is on a roll. Deaf to opposing ideas, he sees himself as an instrument of providence. He sports that leather bomber jacket, and his stride has become a swagger.

Various publications have chronicled Bush's religious conversion and its effects on his personality. At age 40, he realized that his heavy drinking was ruining his marriage -- and threatening his political future. He joined a 10-man community Bible study group and for two years studied the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts.

He was touched by Paul's conversion and the idea of Jesus as a friend. He gave up drinking and gained access to an evangelical political network that formed the backbone of his presidential campaign. He labeled himself a "compassionate conservative," but his visit to the ultra-fundamentalist Bob Jones University signaled that he was really one of them. Even before I learned that Bush had read Luke, I wondered how his religion could square with what Luke says.

Luke's Jesus stands with the poor against the excesses of the rich; he breaks down the barriers between nations and classes and replaces them with a universalism that reaches out to every sect and nation. Luke's Jesus opposes the "demons" who are threatened by the announcement of his "good news," but he does not divide human beings into "good" and "evil." He dines and drinks wine with tax collectors, sinners and women with bad reputations.

He shocks the religious establishment by violating Sabbath laws and tells us to love our enemies. And he forgives, forgives, forgives.

In Luke 1, the newly pregnant Mary tells her cousin Elizabeth how God has "filled the hungry with good things and sent the rich away empty," and in Luke 16, the rich man at his table tosses scraps to the dogs at his doorstep, to be shared by poor Lazarus covered with sores. Luke condemns rich fools who pile up luxuries while the poor starve.

Compare that with the Bush economic policies, which have systematically shifted wealth to the top one percent of the population.

In Luke chapters 22-23, Jesus is the victim of a conspiracy between the church and state to remove an agitator who embarrasses them both. His death is the judicial murder of an innocent man. How can anyone meditate on the trial, torture, imprisonment and execution of Jesus and not consider the possibility that some prisoners today may be wrongfully convicted and condemned to death?

Of the 152 prisoners whom Bush executed when he was governor of Texas, between a fourth and a third had incompetent lawyers or were convicted on flimsy evidence, like the testimony of jailhouse snitches or unscientific "hair analysis." Yet Bush, unlike other governors, never had a doubt that he was right.

An article in The Atlantic, by a conservative, suggests that Bush lacks imagination. Imagination is what enables us to enter into and share the experiences of others. Without imagination, true compassion is impossible.

With that same certainty, Bush has led this country into a war that world opinion, the overwhelming majority of the United Nations and religious leaders including Pope John Paul II, the American Catholic bishops, Jesuit provincials and a cross section of Protestant and Jewish theologians and intellectuals have declared unjust.

Unjust mainly because of the cost in human lives.

The Bush administration promised us a quick war, with "precision" bombs that would kill only "evil" people and pass over the innocent. Newspaper and TV coverage tells us they were wrong.

But somehow the President has read something in the gospel of Luke that allows him to watch all these people die -- from death row to Baghdad -- and still feel sure he's absolutely right. 

© 2003 Religion News Service

"Straight Shooter"
or "Loose Cannon?"

Warfare and its moral implications polarize Christians. On the one hand, Christians pray in the name of the Prince of peace. On the other, some Christians cheered as bombs were dropped on Iraq. Our cover story in May/June 2002 ("Should Christians Fight?") presented four perspectives Christians have traditionally taken, all within the boundaries of biblically based practice and teaching (see www.ptm/02PT/MayJun/war.htm).

Some Christians who gravitate to biblically defensible views that are polar opposites are not even talking to each other. Can Christians differ about this topic without dividing, without fighting and attacking one another? Let's talk.

The war in Iraq that remains far from finished, as well as the continuing war on terrorism, has forced this issue into the spotlight.

President Bush is not only a Christian President, but a President that often employs biblical language to get his points across, painting the United States as "good" and "virtuous" and national foes as "evil." If the polls are correct, such language has captured the imagination of a majority of Americans.

Yet not all Christians are happy with the President.

Mainstream clergy have been nearly unanimous in their objection to the war in Iraq -- often in opposition to their parishioners. Some analysts suggest that radically different perspectives about the morality of war represent a deep ideological split between the more liberal mainstream clergy and conservative laity. Other commentators and observers believe the rift caused by differing views about warfare is deeper, driving a wedge between all Christians.

What Do You Think?

In this issue, we have published two differing viewpoints concerning President Bush, his role as a Christian and as Commander-in-Chief and the war in Iraq. While many evangelical Christians strongly support the President, our mail reflects a variety of opinions. With that in mind, we invite you, our readers, in 100 words or less, to tell us what you think. Let's talk.

Does a Christian President of the United States have a biblical mandate to use force to eradicate evil on an international level? If the United States has such a duty and right, why does it? Does God want the United States to be the world's policeman? What responsibilities does the New Testament give nations to enforce justice outside their borders?

We will publish excerpts from some of the best comments in our November/December 2003 issue, so we need to receive your responses by mail, fax or e-mail no later than September 20th.

Let's talk! Tell us what you think!

-- the Editors

Let's Talk! Send us your opinion by September 20th. By Mail: Peacemaker or Warlord? Plain Truth Ministries Pasadena, CA 91129 By Fax: Peacemaker or Warlord? at 626-304-8172 On the web: http://www.ptm.org/PeacemakerOrWarlord.htm

Return to Plain Truth Ministries Home Page