The Wall Street Journal took on the challenging task Thursday of reporting on and explaining the faith of 2008 Republican Vice Presidential candidate and Alaska governor Sarah Palin and how it might impact her public policy views. Needless to say, despite the Journal’s good efforts, more journalistic work remains to be done.
The article starts out with a short description of Palin’s place of worship for more than twenty years:
At the Pentecostal church where Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin worshipped for more than two decades, congregants speak in tongues and are part of a faith that believes humanity is in its “end times” — the days preceding a world-ending cataclysm bringing Christian redemption and the second coming of Jesus.
The Rev. Ed Kalnins, pastor of the Pentecostal church, Wasilla Assembly of God, says he has told church members that God put President George W. Bush in office and that America is locked in a “holy war” with terrorists.
Maria Comella, a spokeswoman for the campaign said that her time at this church for twenty years is not relevant and that she would not “get into that.” Apparently, the important thing is where Palin worships today, according to the campaign. Right. Exactly what is the McCain-Palin campaign trying to keep reporters from finding out? One way or another reporters have a job of helping the public better understand what Palin believes in her heart and how twenty years at this church impacts her perspectives on public policy.
Fortunately, there is some public material out there and the WSJ was able to dig some of it up and provide some outside commentary on the subject matter:
“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right also for this country,” Gov. Palin said, in a video of the talk posted on the church’s Web site. Pray “that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God. That’s what we have to make sure we’re praying for: that there is a plan and that plan is God’s plan.”
David Gushee, a Christian ethicist at Mercer University in Atlanta, says he is troubled that a public official might presume that government action could be God’s intent. “I would never think it is appropriate to describe the actions of the United States military or the strategies of our commanders as a plan from God,” Mr. Gushee says.
That commentary from Mr. Gushee is all nice and good, but is it really all that remarkable in today’s political climate? Perhaps Palin is just more honest in public about she feels spiritually. Remember here what Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama wrote in a note he thought would remain private:
Lord,
Protect my family and me. Forgive me my sins and help me guard against pride and despair.
Give me the wisdom to do what is right and just.
And make me an instrument of your will.
Go ahead and comment away on the difference between asking God to make one an instrument of His will and asking others to pray to God that the country’s leaders would send people out on a task from God, or that the plan is God’s plan. Of course, what matters significantly is the perspective and setting from which that person makes that public statement or puts that private prayer into writing. What also matters significantly is that person’s religious faith. Either way, it would help to put her statement into a bigger context and compare it to what other people have said in front of groups of faith.
A reader of ours submitted an excellent comment, noting that the article spent plenty of time on Palin’s old church and little on her current church. The reader noted the article’s interesting summary of the denomination’s beliefs:
The Wasilla Assembly of God and its parent denomination — the three-million member General Council of the Assemblies of God — espouse core beliefs not widely ascribed to by major Christian factions. Many members pray in undecipherable sounds or “tongues.” The denomination’s Web site says some scholars believe that the “end times” foreshadowing the end of the world was confirmed in 1948, with the founding of the state of Israel, marking the Jews’ return to the Holy Land, fulfilling a Biblical prophecy. The Assemblies of God is part of a Pentecostal movement that numbers 80 million people world-wide.
The reader pointed to the official Assemblies of God Web site that has a list of sixteen fundamental truths. Many of these fundamental truths are certainly ascribed to by most major Christian denominations (or factions if you want it that way). Of course there are some that make the denomination distinct. In addition, “some scholars” will say anything. A better and more thorough description of the denomination is needed along with some solid journalism into religion’s role in Sarah Palin’s life.
P.S. Mark Silk’s excellent Spiritual Politics blog notes that a recent poll shows McCain’s support among white evangelicals up from 57 percent this past weekend to sixty-six percent.
 | Posted at 9:01 am |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (20) |
September 5, 2008, at 12:04 pm
The end times are theologically interesting to me. There is one section of the Quran (17:100-104) that is translated in vastly different ways. One way is:
http://www.templemount.org/quranland.html As an aside, this part of the Quran is a classic example of how translations differ. I have no idea what the Arabic really says nor why it’s translated so differently. But it’s an illustration that the Quran might be saying the same thing. Hindus are looking for the Kalki Avatar. Buddhists expect Maitreya. Some Muslims expect Imam Mahdi. And many from all religions think we’re in an end times. So I don’t find that at all strange or unacceptable
But there’s a critical point: to what extent does your belief in the end times influence your policies? That is the critical question to any politician with those beliefs.
“And now for something completely different”: I personally prefer Obama’s prayer, but, and this might shock some on the right, I don’t see an issue with Palin’s prayer. She’s asking that people pray for the troops and that is very appropriate. She’s asking that people pray that our leaders are guided by God and that is also just fine. So maybe I misread that statement and maybe you did, but it sure read differently to me.
The journalistic point you made is very interesting though. The Palin campaign is refusing to have anything to do with the media - no interviews etc. Obama went into the metaphorical lion’s den the other day when he was interviewed on Fox by O’Reilly. If Palin is really of the stature to be a national leader, she needs to be open about her background and answer the same kind of questions Obama answered about his pastor. The media might be biased and all that, but if you’re going to play in the big leagues where you’re dealing with enemies of the US, you need to be able to withstand the relatively minor media attacks. Obama was willing to be interviewed by someone who he knew was going to attack him. Why isn’t Palin?
September 5, 2008, at 12:05 pm
This Christian ethicist should try reading his Bible more.
“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.”
- Rom. 13:1
“Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by Him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.”
- 1 Pet. 2:13-14
Two thousand years of Christian thought agree that governments (yes, both good and evil ones) are used to further God’s will.
Personally, I think God operates on a much more “micro” level than we tend to think. While we obsess with “macro” issues about nations and parties and economies and politics, God is more interested in individuals and their response to Him and to each other.
September 5, 2008, at 12:25 pm
After that post, I went back and read the full article. This statement at the end really was something else:
To say that any president is ruling by divine right and blessing and to oppose him is to oppose God is something I’d expect to read in a treatise from the middle ages about the Holy Wars, an al Quaeda manifesto or from a historical treatise about how the Chinese believed the “mantle of heaven” was on their rulers but not from someone living in America where God has laid out another pattern of life.
September 5, 2008, at 1:54 pm
““Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right also for this country,†Gov. Palin said, in a video of the talk posted on the church’s Web site. Pray “that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God. That’s what we have to make sure we’re praying for: that there is a plan and that plan is God’s plan.—
Skipping over the fact that this quote has been chopped up in many places (including the AP) to make it look worse, the fact is that prayers along these lines are completely and totally standard in every Catholic church I’ve ever attended (can’t speak for any other denomination). Trying to make this some sort of “OMG! Rising Theocracy!” moment really, really reinforces the title of this blog…
September 5, 2008, at 2:10 pm
That’s what we have to make sure we’re praying for: that there is a plan and that plan is God’s plan.â€
Well, if I were going to war, I’d sure as heck want my leaders to have a plan, preferably one in line with God’s will. Anyway, it’s quite traditional to claim divine approval of our plans - some research would almost certainly unearth relevant American quotes from World Wars I and II -, so perhaps Gov. Palin is less hubristic (is that a word?) than some others have been over time.
One suspects that Mr. Gushee is not so negative about government action in other areas of life, but let that pass.
Perhaps it’s the reporting, but the theology expressed here is so incomplete. Mr. Kalnins’ statements hint at what Catholics would call “just war theory”, but only hint. The end times thing is a perfectly respectable theological concept, based on the notion that the Incarnation and coming of the Holy Spirit initiated “the end times”, which could be thousands of years long. IOW, “the end times” is a theological concept and not just a calendar thing. But all we get is a rather cliched hint that somehow belief that the world will end translates into policies to help the process along. Perhaps I’m reading that in, but the allegation has been made. Didn’t someone make it in the wake of John Hagee’s endorsement of Sen. McCain.
I do agree with Jerry about claiming God’s hand in Pres. Bush’s elections. As much as I admire and love Pope Benedict, and hold an opinion that he is God’s man for this time, I would hesitate to state that opinion as a belief. How much more reticent should we be about politicians? Time tells on these things; we should hold our opinions lightly. But come to think of it, didn’t that Catholic priest in Chicago makes such claims for Sen. Obama when speaking at Trinity UCC? How many Democratic candidates in how many black Baptist churches have been acclaimed as God’s candidate in how many Sunday morning political rallies masquerading as Divine Worship? Which is not to say it’s right; but stones, glass houses, and all that.
A big missing piece in the story is why the Palins changed churches after 20 years. That is a HUGE thing in that small a town, I promise you. Possibly, it was a personal matter (bad blood, new preacher, whatever). but she also changed theological traditions. Possibly, it’s not as intense in Alaska, but in Texas a “Bible Church” not only doesn’t have tongues speaking going on, they have an elaborate theology against it. Think: Dallas Theological Seminary”. Think: “deceived by the devil” heresy. To top it off, she’s still going to an Assemblies church in Juneau. What are her personal beliefs? Did they change? I don’t really believe that’s relevant to her fitness for office, but if you are going to pry around in her religion, then at least get the facts.
And when is someone going to get to the real religious issue in this campaign: apparently, the very Baptist Cindy McCain is chair of a large beer distributing company. What’s with that? You have to know my aunt and uncle had to become Episcopalians when he got a job driving a beer truck. Of course, that was in 1955.
September 5, 2008, at 3:13 pm
Sarah Palin and her family haven’t belonged to that church since 2002. Why not look at the church she does belong to:
My question would be whether she joined that church as a teenager on her own initiative or with her parents.
I also wonder how hard it is to change churches in the small town where you have lived all your life.
September 5, 2008, at 4:06 pm
FWIW, Dave Gushee has always been critical of all things Republican. I love the guy, and he’s a hero of mine. But I know there is a prism through which he - like all of us - interpret these things. Al Mohler would be another case. I am always interested in hearing them quoted about both candidates regarding the same issue, and see how they respond. If Dave Gushee said the same thing about some of Obama’s statements, I would be impressed (though if anyone would be consistent in such a polarizing environment, it would be Dr. Gushee).
September 5, 2008, at 4:40 pm
It seems silly to quote Dave Gushee on this. There are Christians who would have different opinions. What does he really add to the article? It wasn’t a full fledged discussion about how God interacts with the world - that looked like a snipe to me.
September 5, 2008, at 5:21 pm
FW Ken wrote:
After all the talk about Obama’s ex-pastor and Biden’s status at the Communion rail, it’s a little late in the day for the media to discover, relative to Palin, the part of the Constitution that says there shall be no religious test for office in the USA.
September 5, 2008, at 6:59 pm
Here’s the AP article on Palin’s religious background:
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/v-print/story/671401.html
September 5, 2008, at 7:40 pm
Let’s see… it is supposed to be shocking that Mrs. Palin refers to “God’s will” in connection with the troops.
Remember the shocked liberal reaction when Mayor Nagin asserted the he knew “what God wants” for New Orleans? Of course not, because it didn’t happen.
“Oh, THAT liberal media!”
September 5, 2008, at 9:44 pm
Didn’t Michael Moore and the chairman of the Dem Party say that God sent Hurricane Gustav to break up the Republican Convention (comments I am sure will not be remembered by the MSM beyond a few hours, unlike comments on God and current events Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell that the MSM feels are ridiculous so repeats them years after.
As for any ridicule of “low-class” Protestants who are into tongues and faith-healing (if Palin is) —Well, the last few pope’s have strongly endorsed the charismatic movement in the Catholic Church and it too includes speaking in tongues, faith-healing, and being slain in the spirit (I know, I was the celebrant of such services for the charismatics in my parish church for a number of years).
It seems that the selection of a “back country” religious woman is really bringing out the snobbery and elitism (cultural ignorance, really) of so many Northeast liberals. They apparently don’t even know that there is probably a healing-service involving tongues and being slain in the spirit in at least one or two Catholic and mainstream Protestant churches in their very areas.
September 5, 2008, at 9:51 pm
An error I have now heard twice in a week-“ascribed to” used for “subscribed to”.
To ascribe(to) is to make an assertion of origin, responsibility, causation, or authorship.
The frequency and size of hurricanes in recent years has been, whether mistakenly or not, ascribed to global warming. The foul rumor that Palin’s husband’s partner’s divorce was due to an affair with Palin has been ascribed to Andrew Sullivan.
To subscribe(to) is to state publicly that one agrees with or believes. It literally means write under. By writing their names under the last line of the Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers literally “subscribed” to its statements. People who sign a petition “subscribe” to the appeal written above. And then by extension: Those who enter the Catholic Church make a broad statement indication that they subscribe to all its teachings. (Back in the good old days they actually made me put my signature to a very specific statement after saying it aloud with my hand on a Bible.) And so, the sentence should be “Many of these fundamental truths are certainly subscribed to by most Christian denominations.”
I subscribe to the view that the careful use of language is very important. I will cheerfully admit and correct any errors which are correctly ascribed to me.
Susan Peterson
September 6, 2008, at 12:53 am
Well, it’s the government that can’t impose a religious test, of course. You and me - and the media - can apply any damn fool criteria we like when we choose for whom to vote.
There is one interesting aspect of comparing Sen. Obama’s 20 years at Trinity UCC and Gov. Palin’s 20 years in an Assembly of God. Sen. Obama left Trinity during his presidential campaign at a time when his church membership became controversial. As noted, Gov. Palin changed churches 6 years ago; yet that’s got to be a BIG thing when the mayor of a small town makes that kind of change. Was it politically motivated, if on a less grand scale than Sen. Obama’s change?
September 6, 2008, at 2:36 am
Lincoln once was asked if he felt God was on the side of the North. Lincoln’s response? The proper question was whether the North was on the side of God. Very different take.
In Scripture we are urged to pray for our leaders, our nation, and our government. Remember, many of the New Testament writers were persecuted and even killed for their beliefs. Yet they recognized governments were instituted by God (as will all God’s blessings, not all are used wisely by humans). The tradition used to be that a General Prayer was prayed every Sunday. The General prayer was a litany of things we asked God’s blessings for: leaders, police, soldiers protecting us, all those traveling by land and sea (“air” would be penciled in until new hymnals would update that portion of the GP), all those who are sick, etc.
In reading the WSJ piece I wondered if the comments of Palin’s pastor would become an issue as Dr. J. Wrights were in the primaries.
Time magazine came in my mailbox today with Sarah on the front cover. Unfortunately, the reporter turned every stone to find everyone in Wasilla who had nits and bones to pick with VP Sarah. There was disparagement of Sarah’s faith as well.
September 6, 2008, at 6:49 am
Citizen Grim wrote:
Even if God’s will is at work in all government actions, it doesn’t follow that God approves of and sees as good all government actions — after all, as you yourself point out, God’s will might well be at work in evil governments whose actions are evil. And what David Gushee has a problem with, I would wager, is not the presumption that God’s will is at work in the government actions you personally favor. Rather, he seems to have a problem with the presumption that God approves of and sees as good the government actions you personally favor — with ‘presume’ intended that you never consider the alternative, that God hates what you are doing.
September 6, 2008, at 11:18 am
Ack. Instead of “with ‘presume’ intended that you never consider the alternative, that God hates what you are doing”, it ought to say “with ‘presume’ intended to indicate that you never consider the alternative, that God hates what you are doing.”
September 6, 2008, at 1:05 pm
Huh. Interesting interpretation, and it’s an interpretation that secular folk seem to be taking. If I were to translate religious-speak into secular-speak, I’d say she was hoping that the government would be guided to do good. It’s super-simplified, but I think that’s the gist of it.
September 6, 2008, at 2:18 pm
Deacon John M. Bresnahan wrote:
For once the Deacon and I are on the same page, at least as this comment applies to reporters. This wasn’t the story they were prepared to write, and the spinning of their wheels has thrown up lots of mud, mostly on themselves.
September 6, 2008, at 3:20 pm
I would hope that there would be a little context as to political leaders’ comments with regard to God’s will during war.
FDR’s D-Day speech is a good primer for reporters who will be investigating Sarah Palin’s comments on that video and elsewhere:
By contrast, and in theological CONTEXT, I think her comments are quite tame, and understandable, in a religious setting. Think the MSM will “get” that context? No, me, neither.
I also find it troubling to learn that TIME magazine has jumped on the “GET PALIN” bandwagon of the MSM. From the “Will McCain dump her from the ticket?” chattering of the CNN ‘commentators’ before she even gave her acceptance speech to the US Weekly rag’s thrashing of her family, it’s been a return to gutter politics in America not seen since the 1800s. (No, it’s not new.)