In the news today I read that a California religious group is demanding the Terminator "come clean and fully repent" of his past peccadillos, which have been widely reported and discussed in the news in the past few days. My question is "why?" Why have they latched so resolutely onto this stray article of dirty laundry? This, from my admittedly detatched vantage point, seems a stupid request.
What’s the point? First of all, it was nearly 30 years ago that he supposedly did the things he claimed to have done. I can't get worked up about the things our politicians did 30 years ago, especially if they don't really reveal anything telling about the person. So he was wild. He did some terrible things, but what bearing does it have? The real question is, “what kind of person is he now?” Christians, of all people, should have some concept of ‘redemption’ or a ‘putting behind’ of sin.
Secondly, Ahnold made the admissions in a ‘men’s magazine’. These are the sort of publications that fish for suggestive or euphemistic material. Now Ahnold was very explicit in his interview, but I know two things to be true:
1) Men exaggerate about their parties and sex lives.
2) Men’s magazines aren’t exactly good sources of reliable journalism. They are primarily for titillation, not information.
Thirdly, Ahnold is, by his own admission, not a Christian. He's an actor running for governator. So what sort of comment do they hope to get from him? A sincere and trembling recognition of his falling short of the Holy Perfection of God Almighty? Barring divine intervention, this seems a little unlikely. No, wait, it’s impossible. I think what they seem to want, and what they will probably get, is an empty, canned, buzzword-rich politi-statement about how he ‘has regrets about youthful indiscretions’ or some such nonsense. It’s not clear how this will make him a better governor.
As a follower of Christ who has wrestled with sin and confession, I can certainly appreciate the power of repentance. That 'coming clean' and exposing of sin can be harrowing but is ultimately rewarding beyond our imaginations, I think. Hawthorne was wise in his portrayal. But sincere repentance is NOT something you can demand. Especially not in the political arena. Especially not from a candidate who is in full spin mode. Especially in the absence real human relationship.
Most of all, their demand seems pointless because there is no basis for appeal either legally or spiritually. By this I mean he didn’t demonstrably transgress while in office. Moreover, he’s not a holy-spirit-filled Christian striving to become more like Christ. So what is his apology/confession/repentance other than another campaign tactic?
This is not to say the interview in Oui magazine doesn’t reflect poorly on the man. But let’s pray for him, rather than encourage meaningless lip service. Lord knows we got too much of that already.
I totally agree. The primary points being, as time progresses people change and why ask someone to adhere to a creed they don't even believe in. America is not Christian just as being Christian doesn't mean you're American... or fit for office. I can think of quite a few Christians who should never run for office. This is not to say we are to ignore the morals of the candidates, but this is kind of like trying to argue that Ceasar should have put a decree of apology out to justify his remaining in office. The public and the office have no conception! Good point Abe.
Posted by: mkrueger at August 31, 2003 02:52 AMThe family for whom my wife is nanny has two small (younger than 3 years) children. They are not believers, yet they are raising the children to tell the truth, be obedient, not hit each other, etc. I don't really understand why this is important to these people because they don't have any basis for it, except for some kind of social ethos, or communal expectation of morality. It seems like that's the case with Arnold. His past actions offended the national sensibility, or at least make people feel like they should be offended, if only for the sake of appearances.
Posted by: gosey at September 1, 2003 12:59 PMEven if being a Christian isn't the litmus test for someone running for office, character does matter for the same reason that character matters when you hire a plumber, electrician, or auto mechanic. You don't want someone there who's going to lie, cheat, and generally rip you off. In a sense, moral standards are necessary for societies to simply survive.
I do agree with Abe, though, that demanding true repentance is a bit of an oxymoron.
Posted by: maphet at September 3, 2003 08:57 AMSo maybe he is a cro-magnon sexist jerk, even to this day. Maybe he's even a nazi like his dad. Maybe he doesn't have the character a public official ought to. Voters ought to take his past actions into consideration, albeit with a grain of salt. I just don't see the point in demanding the apology.
Posted by: abe at September 3, 2003 10:26 AMwhat I was trying to say is that the social expectation of morality doesn't have anything absolute to back it up. The only reason it works as well as it does is because most peope choose to perpetuate it. It's kind of like a paper dollar: the reason we value it is because everyone else does, not because of some standard it represents.
Posted by: gosey at September 3, 2003 03:40 PMwell, religion does not guarantee a spared life. THe most important thing to heed or to ponder is that what is your behavior. Your behavior counts not the beliefs a person have.