UPDATE: 9/26/07 – Paul Kengor goes deeper into Mrs. Clinton’s relationship with one-time spiritual adviser Jean Houston, as well as her views on abortion and homosexuality in an interview today on the blog.
My friend and colleague at Grove City College, Paul Kengor, has released another book about the religious views of a public figure - this time Hillary Clinton. When asked why Hillary, he replied: “Because I’m interested in the faith of public figures—in their religious upbringing, their spiritual journey, and how their faith affects their public life and the policies they advocate, for better or worse, and whether I agree or disagree with their politics.” Just reading through the press information on the book, I anticipate an interesting read. Here are some things one will explore in the new book:
- How Hillary acquired her racial sensitivities and concern for civil rights at the conservative church of her youth and how that church served (in her words) as her “second home.”
- How Mrs. Clinton’s faith ebbed during her college years and during her involvement in radical politics in the 1960s and 1970s, before she and Bill decided to “get back to church” in the early 1980s, and how their choice of churches raised suspicions in Arkansas over political motivations. God and Hillary Rodham Clinton includes new information on Bill’s choice of the one of 60 Baptist churches in Little Rock that televised Sunday services. Bill found a seat in the choir, directly behind the minister and in full camera range for the voters of Arkansas.
- How Bill Clinton’s pro-life pastor in Arkansas helped him come to a pro-choice position on abortion, and how the abortion issue has haunted both of Clintons as pro-choice Christians, and caused a permanent separation between them and pro-life Christians. There is no issue closer to Mrs. Clinton’s heart than abortion rights—to which she holds a nearly religious devotion—so much so that it has become a kind of political theology to the senator, equipped with its own set of apologetics.
- On the abortion issue, Kengor has provided unprecedented information on Mrs. Clinton and the root causes of her position. Interviewed several times for this book is Mrs. Clinton’s close friend and one-time OB-GYN, William F. Harrison, the nationally known Fayetteville, Arkansas abortion doctor. Harrison was very candid, and provided telling insights into Hillary’s sudden deep devotion to the cause of abortion rights by the time of Roe v. Wade, a marked moment on her political-religious path from Park Ridge Methodist to the White House.
- How the First Lady did indeed participate in strange moments of imaginary conversation with a deceased Eleanor Roosevelt from the solarium atop the White House. The woman who arranged these sessions and became very close to Hillary—Jean Houston—compared Hillary to Joan of Arc. Houston was widely known for her work delving into altered consciousness, the spirit world, and psychic experiences, and who in the 1960s had reportedly conducted experiments with LSD. According to one source, Houston seemed to believe that the embattled First Lady was going through a kind of female crucifixion, and that she was arguably the most pivotal woman in all of human history.
- How Mrs. Clinton is a strong advocate of prayer in public schools. Quoting her husband, she notes that “nothing in the First Amendment converts our public schools into religion-free zones, or requires all religious expression to be left behind at the schoolhouse door…. [R]eligion is too important in our history and our heritage for us to keep it out of our schools.”
- How Hillary, a self-described “old-fashioned Methodist,” endorses John Wesley’s credo that “the world is my parish.” Hillary cites Jesus Christ as the chief motivation in her government-based healthcare ministry to children. “We know so well what Jesus said to his disciples, holding a small child in his arms, that whoever welcomes one such child in my name, welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me, welcomes not me, but the one who sends me,” says Hillary. “Take the image we have of Jesus—of Jesus as the Shepherd. Taking that face and transposing it onto the face of every child we see, then we would ask ourselves, ‘Would I turn that child away from the health care that child needs?’”
- How Senator Clinton’s faith is responsible for her position that marriage should be restricted to a man and a woman.
Looks like a good read heading into the political season.
Addendum: Click the link for additional posts and information regarding abortion and mental health.
Addendum 2: The Washington Post columnist, Michael Gerson, covers this issue this morning.
Don,
As long as you’re hanging around, would you mind answering the question I posed to you at the beginning?
Remember, there will ALWAYS be people “in the wings” on any site you go on the world wide web who will want to hear what you are saying. There is an audience for almost all voices out there.
jayhuck – are you referring to the question about abortion and the death penalty? He did answer it:
Warren,
I guess it was simply an issue of not having it answered to my satisfaction.
I need to take Jag’s suggestion and just let sleeping dogs lie I suppose
Jayhuck,
I know it sounds like a contradiction to be for the death penalty and against abortion – my thought is that at least with the death penalty there are many people making the decision and the person is given many chances to state their case. With an abortion, there is no voice for the victim. They are at the mercy of someone who does not want them to live with no chance of being able to defend themselves. Also, they are innocent whereas often the death penalty recipient is not. When a death penalty is carried out, it is done in a way that causes the least amount of pain to the individual – with a baby, that is not even considered and the procedure is horrific. I am not referring to any religious aspect of this – just my own observations and thoughts for whatever they are worth.
Ann,
I appreciate the thoughts – and I do understand a little bit about how others view the issue. My point is that, innocent or not, life is still a sacred thing. I think many people who call themselves pro-life will talk about the inherent sanctity of life – which – to me anyway – doesn’t have anything to do with whether someone is innocent or not. Perhaps, those who want to support abortion and the death penalty then shouldn’t call themselves pro-life – because, in reality, they are not. They should probably just call themselves Anti-Abortion. Those churches I know that stand up to both abortion AND the death penalty – THEY are the people who are truly – in all sense of the word – Pro-Life!
Ann–
That was very well said. I am personally against the death penalty but I think you presented a reasonable picture of how someone could be for it and vehemently against abortion at the same time.
My reasons for being against aren’t all that lofty. 1) I have a general distrust of the judicial system so don’t have faith that they always come to the right judgements. 2) For the guilty, the death penalty ends everything–including their chance to respond to the gospel. (LOL! Can anyone spell E-V-A-N-G-E-L-I-C-A-L?)
Ann,
Perhaps, those who want to support abortion and the death penalty then shouldn’t call themselves pro-life
Let me rephrase that just a bit – what I should have said is “those who want to support the death penalty BUT not abortion….” I’m really having a hard time being accurate this evening
I’d like to blame it on the leftover turkey, but I think the problem existed prior to Thanksgiving 
Eddy,
1) I have a general distrust of the judicial system so don’t have faith that they always come to the right judgements. 2) For the guilty, the death penalty ends everything–including their chance to respond to the gospel.
I would have to agree with you on all counts!!!!! I think DNA testing has shown us just how injustice our justice system can be at times. Not that I want the system done away with – but I think its good to acknowledge its flaws when we are talking about ending the life of another human being.
Eddy,
1) I have a general distrust of the judicial system so don’t have faith that they always come to the right judgements. 2) For the guilty, the death penalty ends everything–including their chance to respond to the gospel.
I would have to agree with you on all counts!!!!! I think DNA testing has shown us just how unjust our justice system can be at times. Not that I want the system done away with – but I think its good to acknowledge its flaws when we are talking about ending the life of another human being.
Jayhuck,
I believe the death penalty was instituted by God in Genesis 9:6 “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” It is for this reason that most if not all cultures have had death penalty’s within their judicial systems. Yes there have been problems within each of them but whether we like it or not it was instituted by God. Even though there are problems within our own system of justice, I believe that the one in America is the best in the world. Because of that I do not have a problem with the death penalty for those who are according to God’s word, worthy of death.
Don
Jayhuck,
The previous post was an Old Testament passage but it predated the Old Covenant, the Mosaic, I’m guessing by about 900 years. So it was not just for Israel, it was for all mankind.
Let me give you some New Testament passages that show it has not been abolished. In Romans 13:1-7 the Apostle Paul deals with the believers heart attitude toward the civil authority. In verse one he says, “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established.” Paul goes on to say in verse four; “For he is God’s servant, to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.”
Under Roman law the death penalty was implemented by various ways, whether it was decapitation, crucifixion or other means, it was a part of Roman civil authority. When Paul was appearing before Festus in Acts 25:10, 11 he made this statement. “I am now standing before Ceasar’s court, where I ought to be tried. I have not done any wrong to the Jews, as you yourself know very well. If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving of death, I do not refuse to die. But if the charges brought against me by these Jews are not true, no one has the right to hand me over to them. I appeal to Ceasar!” In that statement Paul not only honored the God ordained institution of civil government, he also honored their God ordained authority to put to death those worthy of death.
Don
Don,
“Yes there have been problems within each of them but whether we like it or not it was instituted by God. ”
They were not instituted by God – If anything, God in Christ told us that they are morally wrong. Roman Law and the teachings of Christ were often opposed to each other.
Don – A statement from the governing body of my church – note the paragraph that discusses how Christ himself prevented the execution of a woman – and remember that Roman Law and Christ’s teachings were often completely opposed to each other:
“WHEREAS Orthodox Christians should be called to go beyond the political, social, and legal issues raised by capital punishment and recognize and address the deeper moral, ethical, and religious questions of the supreme value of human life in a manner consistent with our opposition to abortion and mercy killing, and in all such questions involving life and death the Church must always champion life; and
WHEREAS in an effort to further the respect for all human life and to witness to the redemptive nature of the Gospel of Jesus Christ who Himself prevented the legal execution of a woman (John 8:3-11) and realizing that premature death resulting from the application of the death penalty can prevent the rehabilitation, reconciliation, and redemption of the offender; and
WHEREAS, while we recognize the necessity to punish those guilty of violent crime, we also recognize that there is no humane way to execute a human being;
BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Ninth All-American Council of the Orthodox Church in America supports the abolition of the death penalty in this and all countries and does urge our elected and appointed officials in those states where prisoners are still executed to introduce and support appropriate legislation aimed at abolishing the death penalty;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Council requests all governors of states where the death penalty is still in force to halt all further executions according to the power of their office, but that legislative provisions be made for life imprisonment without possibility of parole for those subject to the death penalty;
FINALLY, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Ninth All-American Council of the Orthodox church in America supports and encourages religious bodies, organizations and human rights groups which seek the abolition of the death penalty.”
Jayhuck,
What part of Genesis 9:6 do you not understand? What part of Romans 13:4 do you not understand? It does not matter what your church says, God’s word says He instituted it.
Let’s look at another passage. Paul wrote in 1 timothy 1:8-11: “But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.” Paul writes that laws that deal with murderers and manslayers i.e., capital punishment are sound doctrine and according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God. So don’t tell me what your church says, because God’s word says something different; and as Romans 3:4 says, “…let God be true and every man a liar;” The interesting part in all of this is that God’s word prophesies that the time would come when people in the church would not hold up sound doctrine. Check out 2 Timothy 3:16-4:4. The interesting thing in all this Jayhuck is the fact the more you or your church deny what the word of God says, the more you fulfill it.
Don
Don,
God’s word doesn’t say anything of the sort. Genesis 9:6 is part of the old Mosaic law that doesn’t apply anymore – It is not “the commandments of Christ in the Gospels”. If you’re going to use that passage in Genesis, what about the book of Leviticus that talks about not wearing certain types of fibers, or not eating certain types of foods, or animal sacrifice and how necessary it is? Do you still abide by all these things?
Romans 13:4 and the verses around it are talking about the purpose of a civil government and it upholding social order – it doesn’t say anything about killing people. In one verse it says “to execute wrath on him who practices evil”, but in that instance the word execute means “to carry out”. In the following verse Paul goes on to say that the Church and state are distinct, and if the state is forcing people to do evil, it is better to follow the word of God. I see absolutely nothing about killing people in any of these passages.
As for 1 Timothy 1:8-11, those verses are talking about how the law is good. “it is good because God gave it (Rom. 7:16). It was 1) A schoolmaster for God’s chosen people to confront and control their sin until the Incarnation of His Son FULFILLED THE LAW and 2) A Guide to lead all people to Christ”
Don, the fact is that you seem to be stuck in Old Testament law and can’t seem to accept the teachings and commandments of Christ – of forgiveness and redemption. We fundamentally disagree and I don’t think it would be productive to continue this conversation – You may if you like, but I think I’m going to lay my pen down
God bless
Jayhuck,
No problem, Be it resolved!
Don