A Divine American Leadership?

Russel D. Moore wrote a pespective piece in the Baptist Press entitled: Nancy Pelosi is my Prayer Partner. The point that I want to comment on is Moore's claim that:

The news networks tell us that the new majority in the United States House and Senate is the result of a "wave" of Democratic Party voters. From a human and historical vantage point, that's true. But as those who believe in the providence of God, it is also true that "there is no authority except from God, and those that exist are instituted by God" (Romans 13:1). For whatever reason, on Election Day God decided that Nancy Pelosi will be sitting behind President Bush at next year's State of the Union address. And God decided that outgoing Speaker Dennis Hastert would not be seated there.

He says further that Christians can be critical of their leaders, that Christians should not acquiesce to their government, and that Christians should respect those leaders they politically differ from. But, and here is where this blog comes in, What does it mean/do to believe and act as if your leadership is somehow devinely linked?

A key effect of acting like American political leadership is divinly installed is that ultimately, whatever the leadership does and for whatever reasons and even if it is evil (as Moore says Pelosi's stance on abortion is), these leaders are still tight with God. This creates a tension for folks like Moore. How is that God installed someone in office that does evil works? What kind of God is that? And why should anyone praise and pray to this God that puts evildoers in office?

Moore doesn't account for these problems, which points to a broader problem of the Baptist sect that I have encountered before--there is a theological sloppiness that haunts their beliefs. It bugs me. Work it out! Think it out! Don't be complacent with blatantly contradictory positions. They don't help your cause.

But more than that, the belief that the political leadership is somehow linked with God is a mode of interpretation with deep historical roots. Moore, like a good trooper, taps into this discourse. He keeps it alive and performs it for us, an audience that is not familiar with this kind of interpretation. So, a second effect of Moore's claim that our political leadership is divine is to thrust an alternative interpretation of events onto the scene. In other words, Moore challenges the dominance of modern 'secular' politics by making the claim that the political leadership is linked to God.

Thirdly, what about the leadership of other countries? Are they also divinly inspired? Is Kim Jong Ill also annointed by God? Is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran also divinely inspired? To follow Moore's logic, one might think so. But who knows? As a mentioned above, there is a certainly a bit of sloppiness to his case.