As of Thursday night, Donald Trump’s approval rating stands at 39.3 percent. As anemic as that looks, it would be even worse if not for the support of the religious right. At last report, well over 70 percent of white evangelicals approved of Trump’s job performance. Not only does this track closely with the 81 percent support Trump received from white evangelicals in November, it is more than double what the nation as a whole feels about the Donald.
At first glance, it appeared that the biggest reason for this implausibly high support was a sustained effort to bully those evangelicals who are having second thoughts about Trump into silence. But a prominent fundie intellectual may have revealed another explanation. He suggests that Trump is but a preliminary step to getting one of their own in the White House–Mike Pence.
Steve Turley is one of the more respected writers and academics in the conservative Christian world. His blog and podcast, “Turley Talks,” is very influential among social conservatives with an intellectual bent. He claims that Trump’s election is a sign that “a new conservative age” is about to begin.
On the latest edition of his weekly podcast, Turley had a warning for conservative Christians who are still never-Trumpers–their approach is all wrong. Watch here.
Turley spent most of his broadcast discussing the fallout over several prominent evangelical luminaries, including Ralph Reed, Michele Bachmann, and Paula White, paying a visit to Trump in the Oval Office and praying over him. He recalled that a number of evangelicals, such as Russell Moore and Albert Mohler, as well as editorial writers at The Christian Post, think that the pro-Trump evangelicals are endangering their witness by getting so close to Trump, given his “obvious moral failings” in the past and present.
This hits a personal nerve with Turley, who is an open and unashamed Trump supporter. He believed such criticism was viewed through an “individualist” lens, which emphasizes the motivations and actions of individuals and how they affect the social and cultural realms. However, he believes that Trump should be viewed through a “holist” lens, which looks at events in light of “larger cultural and social structures” with whom someone is intertwined.
Turley argues that we look at evangelicals who support Trump with a holist view, contending that those who back him are contradicting the “larger cultural allegiances” that they supposedly uphold. But he wondered what would happen if we looked at Trump with a holist view. He then recalled Trump’s vow to use the power of his office to “protect Christians and the Christian church.” As Turley saw it, Trump was fulfilling what Christianity sees as “the fundamental role of the state–the protection and preservation of the Christian faith.”
Seen in this light, Trump was acting in his “redemptive role as civil magistrate” by pledging to protect Christians, while those who were praying over him were exercising their duty to “implore God’s blessing over him.” He recalled that Newt Gingrich argued in his recent book, “Understanding Trump,” that despite Trump’s shortcomings, he understands “civic nationalism” is what it takes to preserve “Christian-inspired Western civilization.” Any president who understands this concept is perfectly fine with Turley, especially if one of the other options is “a morally approved choir boy secularized globalist.”
However, Turley believes that there may be another option–a “morally upstanding evangelical” who also supports civic nationalism. From where he is sitting, “we’re already seeing that person emerge”–Pence. However, Trump is “an indispensable part” of the “trajectory” that will get Pence in office.
This is breathtaking on several accounts. For one thing, Turley seems to think that expecting that our presidents uphold basic standards is not the same as expecting him to be a choir boy. Does he expect us to simply ignore that Trump found it acceptable to plaster a private cell phone on social media? Or mock the disabled? Or condone violence from his supporters? Or degrade women? Any one of those would be disqualifying–or at least, should be.
Turley also seems to forget that Donald Trump Jr.’s decision to solicit Kremlin-flavored “opposition research” on Hillary says a lot about the kind of environment his father fostered in his campaign and in the White House. Even if you buy the angle that this was just the act of novices to the political world, you still have Paul Manafort attending that meeting. Manafort’s career dates back to Gerald Ford. He was the one person in that room who either knew or should have known this was inappropriate at best and illegal at worst. And because of his failure to stop this nonsense, the entire Trump-Pence ticket is irrevocably tainted, and any Pence presidency would be illegitimate from the first day. Apparently Turley didn’t take that into account when plotting his trajectory.
It would be easy to just dismiss this as typical religious right agitprop. But Turley’s day job is serving as the theology, Greek, and rhetoric/debate teacher at Tall Oaks Classical Christian School in Bear, Delaware; a suburb of Wilmington. Is he telling his students that they should brush aside Trump’s egregious actions on the campaign trail and in office just because he is protecting the church? And should they ignore Trump’s outrages just because he may be paving the way for one of their own to get into the White House? It certainly looks like it.
Unless I’m very wrong, Turley is effectively telling the audience that the ends justify the means. That is, as long as Trump is supposedly protecting them and helping them build a “Christian nation,” whatever outrages we see from the White House are a lot of fuss over nothing. I know of quite a few staunch conservatives, many of whom have kids of their own, who would disagree in the strongest terms.
No cause is so important that basic standards have to be thrown out the window in order to further it. If Turley seriously thinks that we have to ignore Trump’s outrages because of some supposed greater good, he’s one of the last people who should be influencing our kids. Let Turley know what you think of his short-sighted spiel on Facebook and on Twitter.
(featured image courtesy Turley’s Facebook)
