Forget the Mueller Report – Franklin Graham Prays to Protect Trump from His "Enemies"

Yesterday was the special day of prayer that Franklin Graham and many other conservative Christian pastors held so believers could pray to protect President Donald Trump from “his enemies.” True to his word, Rev. Graham further politicized his religious mission in a four-minute Facebook video thanking his followers for joining him in praying to protect President Trump. His video’s point was, you guessed it, a prayer to protect Trump from his enemies.

Conversation-stoppers are a common but always unethical debate method. We might argue about politics. But for a believer to argue about God, well, that’s something else. Graham’s purpose in giving this “prayer,” which was really a crass political speech, was to stop discussion of President Trump’s presidency or policies, supposedly under God’s mantle. The way Graham did this, although extraordinarily unethical, was nevertheless quite clever.

We all know, of course, that President Trump causes controversy. We all know that he faces opposition and impeachment threats because the Mueller Report documents lots of suspicious behavior. The proper way to defend President Trump would be to point out merits of his policies and to present evidence that he had not done wrong. Graham, it seems, had no tools to accomplish either purpose. So, instead, he submerged his political purpose under what pretended to be a standard Christian prayer. He denied that he was doing anything political: “this isn’t politics; this isn’t endorsement; this is a prayer, praying for our commander in chief, Donald J. Trump. He is the President of the United States and God commands us to do that.” But his prayer was political and it was an endorsement.

A Standard Christian Prayer?

Most of what Rev. Graham prayed about sounded like what many pastors would say if they wanted to pray for the nation’s leaders. He began by referring to a biblical commandment: "Our Heavenly Father, You tell us in your Word, the scripture, the Bible, that we are to pray for those in authority. And that's why we are coming to you today." (Graham presumably referred to 1 Timothy 2:2.)

Painting a thick coat of paint, Graham claimed that God himself called on him to hold a day of prayer for Trump: “The Lord laid it in my heart that we needed to pray for him.” Graham claimed heavenly authority, not political wisdom. Graham prayed further: “we ask that you give him wisdom.” That bit sounds fine; we should all want our leaders to be wise.

Graham continued: “We ask that You would lead and guide the president.” Concluding, Graham said, consistent with evangelical theology, that “Only God can change the human heart.” None of that surprised me. Thousands of pastors of different political and religious perspectives could say the same thing.

But Graham Became Political

But, despite having promised not to be political, Graham quickly sided with Trump’s political priorities: he asked for God to give Trump “Wisdom to deal with the problems we have at the border. Wisdom to deal with the trade issues, our trading partners, other nations.“ Those are not biblical points; they are political controversies. Not everyone agrees that the United States even has a major border problem. Is illegal immigration a serious problem, or is it simply a panicky thing that Fox News and talk radio drummed up? When Graham assumed that there was a big border problem that we need to solve, he was already siding with one contentious political position over another. That is, he assumed that the border is a problem, when many people think that it isn't. That’s not prayer; it’s politics. We should figure out how big a problem we have with the border by reporting, statistics, and evaluation. It is not something that Graham should assume in what he pretends is a nonpolitical prayer. Similarly, plenty of economists, including many Trump administration economists, disagree that trade was a problem until Trump made it into one. The nation should handle the issue by fact-gathering and analysis, not by giving an arrogant political speech impersonating a prayer.

The hot issue in American politics right now is, of course, the Mueller Report, which contains a lot of information that makes the president look bad. In a representative democracy, the way to handle controversy is to discuss things. It is not democracy when we pray to shut down  the debate. And, yet, Graham prayed that “We also ask that you would protect him from his enemies.” The only enemies I know of are those who would like to vote against Trump or to hold him responsible for what they believe to be well-proven misconduct. Should a pastor pray to protect Trump against the consequences of his actions? Dubious. 

And, contrary to his promise to make this a prayer, not a political speech, Graham prayed this: “We ask for your favor on the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump. Indeed, just to make sure we didn’t miss the point, Graham pointed out that Trump won the election, but “It has been very difficult for his enemies to accept that.”

Enemies? Twice in his four-minute allegedly non-political prayer video, Graham called people who disagree with Trump’s presidency or policies “enemies.” He didn’t call them the loyal opposition. He did not call them people who held different opinions. He didn’t even call them misguided souls. He called them enemies. That is completely political and it is the kind of political talk that no free people should ever listen to.

Let’s think about speech delivery. Graham’s voice took on a reverent tone when he started to pray. He leaned over and folded his hands. He did not speak like a political speaker. He spoke quietly with his eyes closed. Sneaky.

Debate-Stoppers

I began this post by talking about conversation-stoppers – debate-stoppers. People can debate about global warming, trade policy, limits on presidential authority, or Supreme Court appointments. If we work at it, we can even talk reasonably about abortion. None of that interested Graham. He prayed. He claimed that God had instructed him to pray for the president. He called for a special day of prayer, not to debate about the best policies, but to protect President Trump from his “enemies.” Graham prayed to pit Americans against one another, to crush rational dialogue, to imply that Donald Trump’s controversial policies were the only policies that God could endorse.

Magna Carta, British Museum

The Magna Carta referred to the king of England like this: “John, by the grace of God King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, and Count of Anjou,” as if God himself had appointed John to be king. Yet the Magna Carta limited the King's power! 

In the United States, we don’t have kings, and people who disagree with the president, who vote against him, or who present evidence that he has done wrong do not thereby become enemies. Graham’s purpose in giving this prayer – no, let's call it what it is, this obnoxious, divisive political speech masquerading as a prayer – was neither to praise nor obey God, but to defend Trump by condemning his political opponents.

It is always dangerous for political people to pretend that God fights on their side.

See my earlier post about Graham's special day of prayer, in which I show how Graham called on the Divine Right of (Only Republican) Presidents. Also, VP Mike Pence mixed religion and politics.

P.S.: Graham prayed for Trump’s son Barron, but not for daughters Ivanka or Tiffany. Does he have something against women?

P.P.S. An article I wrote a few years ago complained about another kind of debate-stopper, in which conservatives use fake Founding Fathers quotations to support gun rights. The idea is that liberals might argue with the NRA, but who would argue with Thomas Jefferson? But the quotations were not real. (The article is behind a paywall, but your local library can probably find a copy on a database.) Graham’s prayer did something similar: you might argue with a conservative economist, but who would argue with God? So Graham pretended that he was speaking for God.

Mueller Quietly Established His Credibility and Re-Focused the Agenda, Part 3: And We're Not Listening to His Warnings

The Atlantic’s David A. Graham tells us that we are missing the point of Special Counsel Robert A. Mueller’s rhetoric. In his May 29, 2019 speech, Mueller began and ended by warning us that Russia attacked our democracy by interfering in the 2016 election and that they are likely to do so again. Everybody, including me, paid attention to Mueller’s strong hints about whether Trump committed obstruction of justice. But that was not Mueller’s main point!

Every good debater knows how important it is to emphasize your main points. Every speech teacher tells students to state their main point in the speech’s introduction and to repeat it in the conclusion. However, every communication professor also knows that communication is not complete until the receivers have heard and interpreted the message for themselves. Mueller emphasized the danger of Russian interference. Most receivers only heard his comments about obstruction of justice.

Robert Mueller III, FBI photo

After a couple preliminary comments, Mueller told us his main point: “Let me begin where the appointment order begins: and that is interference in the 2016 presidential election.” He continued to remind us that the grand jury had indicted “Russian intelligence officers who are part of the Russian military” who hacked into the Clinton campaign’s computers. When they did so, “they stole private information, and then released that information through fake online identities and through the organization Wikileaks.” He emphasized that “The releases were designed in time to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate.” He also pointed out that “a private Russian entity engaged in a social media operation or Russian citizens posed as Americans in order to interfere in the election.” So, Mueller made his point about Russian interference and made it a substantial portion of his speech.

Then, and only then, Mueller talked about the obstruction issue. Noting how important it was to understand Russian interference in the investigation, Mueller said that “When the subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable.”

He concluded his speech by returning to the Russian interference: “I will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictment – that there were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election. That allegation deserves the attention of every American. Thank you.”

Mr. Trump and his supporters are mostly interested in preserving his presidency, and therefore they attack the obstruction issue with every bit of ammunition they have. Trump’s opponents are mostly interested in ending his presidency. But Mueller began and ended his speech by talking about Russian interference. And what are we doing about the interference? Not much.

The House of Representatives has passed legislation to approve election security. The Republican-controlled Senate has not even brought the issue up for debate. Is this because they think they benefit from the Russian interference? Is it because they are willing to sell out our country to win the next election? Or do they have some innocent motive? The Senate leadership won’t say.

In any case, those are the more important questions. The country has survived having bad presidents in the past. That’s not the main issue. The main issue is whether we are going to let another country stomp on our democracy. And, yet, we are hardly talking about that. Whether Trump committed obstruction of justice dominates the news. The Senate’s refusal to protect our elections has become a trivial story. Why?

Mueller tried to warn us. He made Russian interference the first and last points of his speech. In what psychologists call the primacy and recency effects, that should have called our attention to Russian interference.

Anyone who follows social media can see that foreign bots are still active on social media and they are almost all pro-Trump. Unfortunately, we are all interested in the horserace aspects of the presidential campaign. If the president committed obstruction of justice, a very serious crime, this will surely affect his ability to continue in office. It is our interpretation as listeners that the obstruction of justice issue is more important. But Mueller tried to redirect us toward protecting our democracy against the foreign cyber-attack. Is anyone listening?

Franklin Graham Prays for the Divine Right of (Republican) Presidents: Religion Becomes a Political Tool

In a Facebook post last Sunday, Rev. Franklin Graham called for a “special day of prayer for the president, Donald J. Trump.” Let’s look at Graham’s clever pro-Trump persuasive techniques, which use religion to short-circuit rational dialogue.

On the one hand, Graham’s idea seems wonderful! It is good for religious people to pray for their leaders: that their leaders may be inspired to wisdom, judgment, and integrity. I several times attended a very conservative church in rural South Carolina where the pastor prayed for “Brother Barack and Sister Nikki,” meaning Democratic President Obama and Republican Governor Haley. That’s fine.

On the other hand, Franklin Graham is doing something else: he uses religious faith for partisan purposes that do not appear to be particularly religious. Although I think Christianity is good, religious people too often use religion to justify evil deeds. The Christian Church (of which I am a member) has in the past endorsed the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition, shielded sexual abusers, and (today’s key point!) endorsed the divine right of kings. Graham seems to endorse the divine right of kings, uh, I mean, the divine right of presidents. But only Republican presidents. And with an apocalyptic flourish.

Let’s look at Graham’s Facebook post: “President Trump’s enemies continue to try everything to destroy him, his family, and the presidency. In the history of our country, no president has been attacked as he is. I believe the only hope for him, and this nation, is God.” Not political opponents (that would sound cynical), but “enemies.” Just as King David had enemies. In the context of current events, the enemies surely must be Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the people who act on his report about Russian interference in the 2016 campaign. Who else could the enemies be? Mueller, let us recall, recently suggested that Congress should investigate whether Trump obstructed justice, which would be a serious crime.

If I wanted to quibble, I would point out that President Trump and Rev. Graham himself repeatedly spewed terrible vitriol against President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and that Clinton was investigated repeatedly at great expense without criminal charges being filed. Graham and Trump both raised outrageously false charges about whether Obama was even born in the United States. That makes it hard to believe Graham’s claim that “no president has been attacked as he is.” The difference, of course, is that no actual evidence ever arose against Obama, whereas the Special Counsel has documented  quite a bit of seemingly dishonest and unpatriotic conduct by the Trump campaign. So, Graham’s call for prayer is purely partisan, but is it religious? The answer is yes, it is, but…

Unlike liberal Christians, who often focus on Gospel morality, conservative Christians sometimes stress what they believe to be the imminent end times when Christ will return and shake up the world. This views the world as a struggle between supernatural forces: the true flock led by Jesus, and their enemies. Graham begins his argument with apocalyptic imagery: “This is a critical time for America. We’re on the edge of a precipice. Time is short.” Any evangelical Christian will instantly tie that language to the Bible’s apocalyptic imagery, which emphasizes that “time is short:”

“Rejoice then, you heavens/and those who dwell in them! / But woe to the earth and the sea, / for the devil has come down to you /with great wrath, / because he knows that his time is short!” (Revelation 12:12)

or

“I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, that even those who have wives be as though they had none.” (1 Corinthians 7:29)

And so forth. People have been saying that the end is near, has been near for 2,000 years. Graham knows that the Bible says this and so do his conservative Christian followers.  And what about “enemies?” The Bible’s imagery connects the apocalypse with powerful enemies, e.g., “Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, ‘Come up here!” And they went up to heaven in a cloud while their enemies watched them.” (Revelation 11:12)

So, think about Graham’s reference to the president’s enemies. Graham (like many conservative Christians) makes Trump into apocalyptic figure and Trump’s enemies therefore serve the darkness. Do not for one moment doubt that this is exactly what Graham means. Graham’s moral “precipice” marks whether we will enter the apocalypse on the right path. Graham wants us to think that this is the path on which Trump leads us.

But next, Graham jumped to a genuinely Christian attitude: “We need to ask God to protect, strengthen, encourage, and guide the President.” That sounds fine. Then we see Graham’s call to action: “On June 2, we ask that pastors would lead their congregations in praying for the President, that Sunday schools and other groups would join together and pray, and that individuals and families across the country would have a special focus on praying for the President that day.”

Again, that sounds fine. I’ll be glad to pray like that. But look at the context: Graham did not ask the nation to pray for the President to be wise. He asked for Trump to be protected from his “enemies:” to be protected from the Mueller report. But fundamental to Christianity is repentance: when we do wrong, we should strive to do better next time.

Let’s recall the divine right of kings: citing the same Bible passages (especially Paul’s first letter to Timothy (2:1-2), that Graham often cites, Medieval kings claimed that they had a divine right to rule, that no matter whether their rule was wise or unwise, they were in place because God put them there. In the United States, however, there is no tradition of the divine right of presidents.

Let us contrast this with what Rev. Graham said about President Barack Obama several years ago. His endorsement of prayer was lukewarm: “interceding for those in authority is not an option; it is a biblical command that we are to obey.” To pray for Obama was a grim duty. Graham continued: “Understand that the Apostle Paul is writing this instruction to his protégé Timothy a time when the vile Emperor Nero was at the helm of the vast Roman Empire…. Nevertheless, the aged apostle, who would soon be martyred during Nero’s reign of terror, instructs Timothy to make prayer for the rulers of his day.”

So, Graham used apocalyptic language to call for a “special day of prayer” to defend President Trump against his “enemies” who use law enforcement agencies to uncover alleged wrongdoing. Yet, earlier, he compared President Obama (who, unlike Nero, did not persecute Christians, arrest them for attending church, throw them to lions, or burn their houses of worship) to the Emperor Nero.

Religion is very powerful. It makes sense that conservatives like the old-time things; that’s what makes them conservative. Christianity is, for the most part, America’s old-time religion. But to use religion’s power to reach non-religious political goals represents the same moral corruption as the divine right of kings centuries ago.

Conservatives have thus far not even tried to refute the facts in the Mueller report, but they are not without weapons to defend President Trump. Attorney General William Barr General reset the agenda by misrepresenting the report’s conclusions and content. Trump attacked Mueller and his “18 Angry Democrats.” Fox News host Sean Hannity attributed the Russia investigation not to Trump’s conduct, but to a “Deep State” based on “lie after lie after lie.” The plain facts in Mueller’s report refute all that nonsense. But Graham takes it another step. By lifting Trump into the role of apocalyptic leader, Franklin Graham short-circuits rational dialogue by claiming, questionably but powerfully, that Trump is fighting for God, that God is on Trump’s side, and that the solution to the Russia investigation is not to uncover facts, but to pray to protect Trump against his “enemies.” How do you refute God?

When religion and government become too close, the inevitable result is to corrupt both. It is one thing to rule the nation with religious principles in mind. It is another thing to use those religious principles to undo the constitutional separation of church and state. So, at church services tomorrow, I intend to pray silently for Trump to rule with wisdom. In my unworthy opinion, that will be something new for him. I will not pray to protect him from his political opponents. I will, instead, pray for truth to emerge so that truth, and not a corrupt view of religion, can determine the president’s fate.

Neither the Bible nor the United States Constitution teaches that there is a divine right of presidents (or, especially, a divine right of Republican presidents). 

A comment for Christian leaders: when people like Rev. Graham associate Christianity with controversial and often morally questionable political causes, they don’t just corrupt the government; they also drive many good people away from Christianity. Being a Christian does not require me to oppress immigrants (much the opposite, I think) or to give tax cuts to billionaires.

The Scripture quotations contained herein are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright 1989 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U. S. A., and are used by permission. All rights reserved. 

See my follow-up post.