Wednesday, November 08, 2006

As Christian leaders fall...

Here in Pennsylvania we had (until yesterday) a strong Christian US senator, Rick Santorum. He went down to a large defeat, about 20 points. It is an interesting story from the viewpoint of The Table...

Being new to PA, I didn't really know much about Mr. Santorum. I don't really pay too much attention to politics, so the opinion I had formed of him prior to a couple of months ago was the result of media coverage of certain events...questionable reimbursement of some of his kids homeschooling expenses, his closeness to President Bush, his strong pro-life position. It was a combination of reporting that made him as undesirable a Senator as possible to left-leaning voters, and the hints of impropriety tainted him a little with the other scandals going on around here and the rest of the country. Nothing substantial ever proven, just insinuation...

Just how effective this was, was brought home to me by my eldest child, Allie. They held a mock election at the high school, in which she had voted for our Democratic governor, Ed Rendell. (Remember that name, he'll be running nationally soon.) She commented that she had voted for Santorum, "even though he had been illegally funding his children's home-schooling", or something to that effect.

I was shocked that even my sixteen-year-old daughter viewed one of our greatest US senators simply as another cheating politician. Senator Santorum was at the forefront of most of the nations conservative issues, and was a leader in issues of national security. One well-known talk show host calls him "the Churchill of our time" for his unvarnished truthfulness and expression of opinion on the threat of Islamic radicalism to the world. This reputation for outspoken truthfulness became the obvious millstone around the senator's neck.

Just Monday, I had, for the first time, a chance to see the Senator on TV in a relaxed talk-show format (it was a Christian talk show) with his wife. I was astounded at just how clearly this man and wife could be seen to be Spirit-filled Christians. They both had a peace with the coming election, even thought the polls were ominous. They had put the whole thing in Christ's hands, and were confident that whatever happened Tuesday would be all part of God's plan for them. He still spoke out courageously about the coming storm, but with peace and conviction so rare in politicians so close to elections. I have to believe that Senator Rick Santorum is one of those rare "men of God's heart". And he was serving the the United States of America as a leader, one of the most powerful senators in the country.

No longer.

But let us not weep for the Santorums, they are in the hands of their protector and provider. Let us weep instead for a country once led by strong Christian spirits, that is plunging down the road of relativism and appeasement, led by people who decide by opinion poll. A country led not by the Shepherd, by by the sheep. A country ungrateful that "God shed his grace on thee", and rushing after the wisdom of men. America, more and more beginning to look like Babylon the Great of the Revelation.

Can this be happening to a nation that just a few years ago seemed swept up in spiritual revival? What has happened?

Sir Chuck of the Vanishing Breed

3 comments:

  1. Can this be happening to a nation that just a few years ago seemed swept up in spiritual revival? What has happened?

    Sir Chuck of the Vanishing Breed
    ___________________________________
    Yes and no. Real spiritual revival is slow, with veers and backtracks. More like an Oregon road then a Kansas one. Trends are slow, and changeable. Wesley took 30 years and a world war. The original Christians took 300 and lots of persecution. There have been greater shocks before-such as Julian the Apostate gaining control of the Imperial throne.
    Zealous Christians compose only a small part of the population and will always do so. And of those only so many thought of themselves as casting votes primarily for religious reasons.
    Moreover it is the disadvantage of Democracy that there is a state of permanant and unjustified discontent because it is in the interest of various groups to foster it. Also because everyone has their personal complaint and the sum of them makes for a lot of discontent. Oddly enough really miserable people don't seem to complain as much or at least you don't hear it. When was the last time you heard the cry for justice for Burmese? It is ironic because we have one of the most efficient-and even just, sort of-establishments in the world. But Americans always want perfection.
    However in any case they were showing their political attitudes not their religious. The two effect each other but are not the same.
    I don't know much about Santorum. One essay said he ran a bad campaign which may be. To be honest I have sometimes thought it an irritant that the path to power should be in self-advertising. It is not a skill attractive to good people. More over the skills needed to be a campaigner are not the same as those of a ruler(I thought Daddy Bush was a VERY good President-but he was an awful campaigner and I thought the reverse of Clinton).
    I believe I read somewhere that in time gone by that was recognised, and a lot of would-be politicians simply let their manager run it and kept an aristocratic sneer at the whole distasteful business.
    My disappointment was that Rummy went. He was a good SecDev and there was no particular reason for him to leave other then popular whim.
    Such things are unfortunatly not new.
    There was one famous Roman General who was cited by the Senate for petty corruption. Rather then defend himself he angrily retired to his villa. When he died he was buried outside Rome as he directed. On his tombstone was carved,"my ungrateful country shall not have my bones".

    Sir Jason

    ReplyDelete
  2. "One essay said he ran a bad campaign ..."

    Interesting, Jason. MY perception was that Santorum was by far the most visible campaigner. Casey had a name (his father is a former PA governor) and a huge early lead in the polls, and he was virtually non-existant in live public forums...it was almost as if he knew he could only blow it by saying anything, so he disappeared. Santorum was everywhere, on TV, talkshows, public debates that Casey skipped, and everywhere he spoke his honest viewpoints, based on his 12 years of experience serving in the Senate. I think people just preferred a new guy with no message to an experienced leader with a message they didnt'want to hear.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Interesting, Jason. MY perception was that Santorum was by far the most visible campaigner. Casey had a name (his father is a former PA governor) and a huge early lead in the polls, and he was virtually non-existant in live public forums...it was almost as if he knew he could only blow it by saying anything, so he disappeared. Santorum was everywhere, on TV, talkshows, public debates that Casey skipped, and everywhere he spoke his honest viewpoints, based on his 12 years of experience serving in the Senate. I think people just preferred a new guy with no message to an experienced leader with a message they didnt'want to hear.

    3:00 PM
    ___________________________
    I am of course telling secondhand, and I don't remember what the essay said.

    Sir Jason

    ReplyDelete