|
Letters
September 11, 2009
|
Dear
Editor,
Art Seaman calls my reference to
Obama as Mugabe Lite "repugnant." I stand by what
I said. What is truly repugnant is the eight years of venom,
blind hate, and false witness to which George W Bush has been
subjected. History will vindicate Bush, although it may take
as long as it took to vindicate the equally maligned Ulysses
Grant, a man who was far ahead of his time in his equitable
treatment of blacks and Native Americans. History will not
be kind to Obama, as Michelle Malkin (a woman of color) has
abundantly documented in her new book Culture of Corruption.
Obama makes Bill Clinton look like George Washington. Thank
goodness that at least Obama is not a womanizer.
The question is, Is it always wrong to "speak evil of
a ruler of your people" (Exod 22:28; Acts 23:5)? My doctoral
adviser, David Adams (a MO Synod Lutheran), suggested that
this teaching may not apply to US presidents, because we are
ruled, not by a king, but by a Constitution, while the President
is merely one of us, elected by our will. The US President
is neither our king (melek) nor even our prince (nasi', the
term used in Exodus). Plus, we will recall that God's prophets
had harsh words for their kings, although it is risky to claim
equivalence with Jeremiah or his comrades. At most, we can
apply the words of Jesus (Mt 5:22), that we are in deep you-know-what
if we call anyone reqa ("Emptyhead!") or moros ("Fool!").
Yet even Jesus referred to Herod as "that fox."
(Luke 13:32) God alone knows if the words we speak are on
the mark or over the line.
Tom Hobson
Concordia Seminary, St Louis MO |
|
|
