26 October 2004

How the NYT makes Bush into a “theological moderate.”

By Jeff Sharlet

Laurie Goodstein at The New York Time tries to heal the wounds of the culture war — or, perhaps, ensure access to a second-term Bush administration — with a profoundly disingenuous piece of reporting that will please only those who bleat “can’t we all just get along?” as if it was spiritual wisdom.

In her lede she notes that “on Sundays when [Bush] goes to church in Washington” he “finds fellowship” in a “liberal” Episcopal church. No mention of the fact that most Sundays, Bush doesn’t go to church; and only a nod to the St. John’s Episcopal Lafayette Square’s status as a shrine to elite power, by virtue of the past presidents who’ve attended, as well as a space of theological moderation.

“No kidding — you fellas love Jesus, too?”

Goodstein’s right to note that Bush is no traditional Bible thumper. But, as if there are only two ways to believe in God — the “wrong,” fundamentalist way, and the “right,” moderate way — Goodstein goes on to find evidence of the President’s own “moderation” in the fact that he “has managed to convince the most traditionalist believers of almost every stripe — Christian fundamentalists and evangelicals, Catholics, Jews, Muslims and even Sikhs — that his beliefs are just like theirs.” How? By insisting that they all worship the same God.

Some might say that when the world’s most powerful man, known for his religious fervor and his military quick draw, tells you that you believe in the same God he does, it’s an act of theological imperialism best assented to and justified with the kind of pseudo-Unitarianism all politicos resort to at one time or another. Others will note the increasing popularity of Bush’s brand of universalism among the most conservative of evangelicals, who proslytize Muslims, for instance, with that same line — my God is your God — and a good-natured promise that you can keep being Muslim or Hindu or whatever and “follow Jesus.”

And then there are the Jews. “‘The only Jews he doesn’t seem to like,’ said another rabbi, who spoke on the condition of anonymity [note to the Jewish press: Find out who this man is.] ‘are the ones who aren’t religious, because he can’t understand them.'”

Let’s make that plain. A Bush-friendly rabbi says Bush does not like secular Jews.

The goyim who, in all good faith, misunderstand this as the equivalent of a church-goer disliking Christian backsliders, need to understand that Jewishness is not just a religion. Separating “good Jews” from “bad Jews” has always been the basis of genteel anti-Semitism.

Goodstein suggests that Bush does like gay people, though, since it took him “months to speak publicly” for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Such logic on Goodstein’s part should flummox pro- and anti-gay activists; it’s the equivalent of saying that Lincoln was soft on slavery because he didn’t outlaw it until well into the Civil War.

The only nuance Goodstein captures is in observing the ways in which Bush’s evangelical, conservative supporters twist themselves in pretzels to proclaim him their man on issues where he’s talked the talk, but not taken the Christian walk. But in making the case that although Bush governs Christian right in terms of broad strokes, he nimbly avoids the details that would truly take him out of the mainstream, Goodstein does both Bush supporters and opponents a disservice.

She makes light of what are, from the perspectives of evangelical, conservative supporters, real achievements, such as the “Mexico City policy,” also known as the “gag rule,” which forbids any organization that receives American aid from so much as mentioning abortion in foreign family planning work.

But on an issue where Bush truly has let believers down — faith-based initiatives, which, asAmy Sullivan documents, Bush has largely sacrificed on the altar of upper income tax cuts — Goodstein says only that Bush’s vision has “fallen short.” Read Sullivan — or look back to Bush’s first faith czar, John DiIuio, who quit in disgust — to find out how far.

It’s to Goodstein’s credit that she acknowledges the shortcomings of her own story. “Mr. Bush often says his faith is a private matter,” she concludes. “The White House refused any interviews for this article, and it is impossible to understand a person’s spiritual beliefs without his willingness to discuss it.”

But this apparent humility is a statement of stunning arrogance. Bush is willing to discuss his spiritual beliefs, and has done so in more depth — or, at least, at greater length — than any other modern president. He is simply not willing to discuss them with The New York Times.

The Times got snubbed, which should come as no surprise to Bush believers or opponents. But what are remarkable are the lengths to which Goodstein goes to maintain the Times‘ cultural authority, by declaring what it doesn’t know to be unknowable.

The phrase “cultural authority” deserves irony quotes. It’s as euphemistic as describing Bush’s blend of Calvinism, pietism, and magical thinking as “theologically moderate.”

What Goodstein’s article reveals, in fact, is the absurd haughtiness of a news organization determined to be the “paper of record” — which is to say, the leading rag of a country Bush believers and critics, liberal and conservative, all concede is now an empire. The tricky part is that the emperor isn’t cooperating. He’s not affirming the elitist civil religion the Times likes to believe is shared by all good men and women of affairs.

So what does the Times do? It takes the evangelical conservatives who’ve worked long and hard for their time to come and bundles them up with secular Jews; gays and lesbians; pro-choice activists who think Bush has done plenty to roll back Roe v. Wade; the poor churches who got bait-and-switched by Bush’s faith-based sweet talk; and everyone else who’s thinking that the Bush doctrine — “We create our own realities” — is unusual, and tells us that the regime is “theologically moderate.”

What’s Goodstein’s bizarre Episcopal lede all about? It’s saying to a nervous, angry country: Relax. Everything is under control. The President is really blue blood, establishment, traditional,one of us. Cultural authority will be maintained, facts — and Bush’s actual faith — be damned.

Jeff Sharlet is co-author of Killing the Buddha: A Heretic’s Bible, and editor of The Revealer.