Upon the death of George H.W. Bush, a lifelong Episcopalian, I recall how many of my ordained colleagues ridiculed, mocked, and otherwise hated him because he was a Republican. Episcopal clergy, despite the considerable trappings of privilege, still see themselves as "radical", so Bush was their enemy. So much for that "respect the dignity of every human being" business that's in the Baptismal Covenant.
If I sometimes seem cynical about my profession, and I hope it's just a healthy skepticism born of long experience, it's because of that attitude. For me, its nadir was achieved when a colleague who was in charge of a ministry that was financially supported by the Bush family would mutter about their horribleness. He kept the money, though; even the money that was used for his salary.
But here's my wonderment: Bush, who was by all accounts a decent man, was excoriated by clergy. In retrospect, did the over-the-top criticism and vitriol against Republicans in office lead us to the current occupant of The White House?
If Bush=Hitler, then everyone does and no one does. If a decent Christian is regarded in such a manner by the clergy of his own church, does this not render impotent their criticism, hatred, and acrimony of any other politician who doesn't match their transient expectations?
Here's the note Bush left for Clinton on the Oval Office desk on Bush's last day, and Clinton's first day, as President. Jeez, what a monster this guy was, right, colleagues?
