Reply
Tue 18 May, 2004 06:51 pm
Bush White House checked with rapture Christians before latest Israel move
The Jesus Landing Pad
by Rick Perlstein - The Village Voice
May 18th, 2004 10:00 AM
It was an e-mail we weren't meant to see. Not for our eyes were the notes that showed White House staffers taking two-hour meetings with Christian fundamentalists, where they passed off bogus social science on gay marriage as if it were holy writ and issued fiery warnings that "the Presidents [sic] Administration and current Government is engaged in cultural, economical, and social struggle on every level"?-this to a group whose representative in Israel believed herself to have been attacked by witchcraft unleashed by proximity to a volume of Harry Potter. Most of all, apparently, we're not supposed to know the National Security Council's top Middle East aide consults with apocalyptic Christians eager to ensure American policy on Israel conforms with their sectarian doomsday scenarios.
But now we know.
"Everything that you're discussing is information you're not supposed to have," barked Pentecostal minister Robert G. Upton when asked about the off-the-record briefing his delegation received on March 25. Details of that meeting appear in a confidential memo signed by Upton and obtained by the Voice.
The e-mailed meeting summary reveals NSC Near East and North African Affairs director Elliott Abrams sitting down with the Apostolic Congress and massaging their theological concerns. Claiming to be "the Christian Voice in the Nation's Capital," the members vociferously oppose the idea of a Palestinian state. They fear an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza might enable just that, and they object on the grounds that all of Old Testament Israel belongs to the Jews. Until Israel is intact and David's temple rebuilt, they believe, Christ won't come back to earth.
Abrams attempted to assuage their concerns by stating that "the Gaza Strip had no significant Biblical influence such as Joseph's tomb or Rachel's tomb and therefore is a piece of land that can be sacrificed for the cause of peace."
Three weeks after the confab, President George W. Bush reversed long-standing U.S. policy, endorsing Israeli sovereignty over parts of the West Bank in exchange for Israel's disengagement from the Gaza Strip.
In an interview with the Voice, Upton denied having written the document, though it was sent out from an e-mail account of one of his staffers and bears the organization's seal, which is nearly identical to the Great Seal of the United States. Its idiosyncratic grammar and punctuation tics also closely match those of texts on the Apostolic Congress's website, and Upton verified key details it recounted, including the number of participants in the meeting ("45 ministers including wives") and its conclusion "with a heart-moving send-off of the President in his Presidential helicopter."
Upton refused to confirm further details.
Affiliated with the United Pentecostal Church, the Apostolic Congress is part of an important and disciplined political constituency courted by recent Republican administrations. As a subset of the broader Christian Zionist movement, it has a lengthy history of opposition to any proposal that will not result in what it calls a "one-state solution" in Israel.
The White House's association with the congress, which has just posted a new staffer in Israel who may be running afoul of Israel's strict anti-missionary laws, also raises diplomatic concerns.
The staffer, Kim Hadassah Johnson, wrote in a report obtained by the Voice, "We are establishing the Meet the Need Fund in Israel?-'MNFI.' . . . The fund will be an Interest Free Loan Fund that will enable us to loan funds to new believers (others upon application) who need assistance. They will have the opportunity to repay the loan (although it will not be mandatory)." When that language was read to Moshe Fox, minister for public and interreligious affairs at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, he responded, "It sounds against the law which prohibits any kind of money or material [inducement] to make people convert to another religion. That's what it sounds like." (Fox's judgment was e-mailed to Johnson, who did not return a request for comment.)
The Apostolic Congress dates its origins to 1981, when, according to its website, "Brother Stan Wachtstetter was able to open the door to Apostolic Christians into the White House." Apostolics, a sect of Pentecostals, claim legitimacy as the heirs of the original church because they, as the 12 apostles supposedly did, baptize converts in the name of Jesus, not in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Ronald Reagan bore theological affinities with such Christians because of his belief that the world would end in a fiery Armageddon. Reagan himself referenced this belief explicitly a half-dozen times during his presidency.
While the language of apocalyptic Christianity is absent from George W. Bush's speeches, he has proven eager to work with apocalyptics?-a point of pride for Upton. "We're in constant contact with the White House," he boasts. "I'm briefed at least once a week via telephone briefings. . . . I was there about two weeks ago . . . At that time we met with the president."
Last spring, after President Bush announced his Road Map plan for peace in the Middle East, the Apostolic Congress co-sponsored an effort with the Jewish group Americans for a Safe Israel that placed billboards in 23 cities with a quotation from Genesis ("Unto thy offspring will I give this land") and the message, "Pray that President Bush Honors God's Covenant with Israel. Call the White House with this message." It then provided the White House phone number and the Apostolic Congress's Web address.
In the interview with the Voice, Pastor Upton claimed personal responsibility for directing 50,000 postcards to the White House opposing the Road Map, which aims to create a Palestinian state. "I'm in total disagreement with any form of Palestinian state," Upton said. "Within a two-week period, getting 50,000 postcards saying the exact same thing from places all over the country, that resonated with the White House. That really caused [President Bush] to backpedal on the Road Map."
When I sought to confirm Upton's account of the meeting with the White House, I was directed to National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones, whose initial response upon being read a list of the names of White House staffers present was a curt, "You know half the people you just mentioned are Jewish?"
When asked for comment on top White House staffers meeting with representatives of an organization that may be breaking Israeli law, Jones responded, "Why would the White House comment on that?"
When asked whose job it is in the administration to study the Bible to discern what parts of Israel were or weren't acceptable sacrifices for peace, Jones said that his previous statements had been off-the-record.
When Pastor Upton was asked to explain why the group's website describes the Apostolic Congress as "the Christian Voice in the nation's capital," instead of simply a Christian voice in the nation's capital, he responded, "There has been a real lack of leadership in having someone emerge as a Christian voice, someone who doesn't speak for the right, someone who doesn't speak for the left, but someone who speaks for the people, and someone who speaks from a theocratical perspective."
When his words were repeated back to him to make sure he had said a "theocratical" perspective, not a "theological" perspective, he said, "Exactly. Exactly. We want to know what God would have us say or what God would have us do in every issue."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Middle East was not the only issue discussed at the March 25 meeting. James Wilkinson, deputy national security advisor for communications, spoke first and is characterized as stating that the 9-11 Commission "is portraying those who have given their all to protect this nation as 'weak on terrorism,' " that "99 percent of all the men and women protecting us in this fight against terrorism are career citizens," and offered the example of Frances Town-send, deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism, "who sacrificed Christmas to do a 'security video' conference."
Tim Goeglein, deputy director of public liaison and the White House's point man with evangelical Christians, moderated, and he also spoke on the issue of same-sex marriage. According to the memo, he asked the rhetorical questions: "What will happen to our country if that actually happens? What do those pushing such hope to gain?" His answer: "They want to change America." How so? He quoted the research of Hoover Institute senior fellow Stanley Kurtz, who holds that since gay marriage was legalized in Scandinavia, marriage itself has virtually ceased to exist. (In fact, since Sweden instituted a registered-partnership law for same-sex couples in the mid '90s, there has been no overall change in the marriage and divorce rates there.)
It is Matt Schlapp, White House political director and Karl Rove's chief lieutenant, who was paraphrased as stating "that the Presidents Administration and current Government is engaged in cultural, economical, and social struggle on every level."
Also present at the meeting was Kristen Silverberg, deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy. (None of the participants responded to interview requests.)
The meeting was closed by Goeglein, who was asked, "What can we do to assist in this fight for these issues and our nations [sic] foundation and values?" and who reportedly responded, "Pray, pray, pray, pray."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Apostolic Congress's representative in Israel, Kim Johnson, is ethnically Jewish, keeps kosher, and holds herself to the sumptuary standards of Orthodox Jewish women, so as to better blend in to her surroundings.
In one letter home obtained by the Voice she notes that many of the Apostolic Christians she works with in Israel are Filipino women "married to Jewish men?-who on occasion accompany their wives to meetings. We are planning to start a fellowship with this select group where we can meet for dinners and get to know one another. Please Pray for the timing and formation of such." Elsewhere she talks of a discussion with someone "on the pitfalls and aggravations of Christians who missionize Jews." She works often among the Jewish poor?-the kind of people who might be interested in interest-free loans?-and is thrilled to "meet the outcasts of this Land?-how wonderful because they are in the in-casts for His Kingdom."
An ecstatic figure who from her own reports appears to operate at the edge of sanity ("Two of the three nights in my apartment I have been attacked by a hair raising spirit of fear," she writes, noting the sublet contained a Harry Potter book; "at this time I am associating it with witchcraft"), Johnson has also met with Knesset member Gila Gamliel. (Gamliel did not respond to interview requests.) She also boasted of an imminent meeting with a "Knesset leader."
"At this point and for all future mails it is important for me to note that this country has very stiff anti-missionary laws," she warns the followers back home. [D]iscretion is required in all mails. This is particularly important to understand when people write mails or ask about organization efforts regarding such."
Her boss, Pastor Upton, displays a photograph on the Apostolic Congress website of a meeting between himself and Beny Elon, Prime Minister Sharon's tourism minister, famous in Israel for his advocacy of the expulsion of Palestinians from Israeli-controlled lands.
His spokesman in the U.S., Ronn Torassian, affirmed that "Minister Elon knows Mr. Upton well," but when asked whether he is aware that Mr. Upton's staffer may be breaking Israel's anti-missionary laws, snapped: "It's not something he's interested in discussing with The Village Voice."
In addition to its work in Israel, the Apostolic Congress is part of the increasingly Christian public face of pro-Israel activities in the United States. Don Wagner, author of the book Anxious for Armageddon, has been studying Christian Zionism for 15 years, and believes that the current hard-line pro-Israel movement in the U.S. is "predominantly gentile." Often, devotees work in concert with Jewish groups like Americans for a Safe Israel, or AFSI, which set up a mostly Christian Committee for a One-State Solution as the sponsor of last year's billboard campaign. The committee's board included, in addition to Upton, such evangelical luminaries as Gary Bauer and E.E. "Ed" McAteer of the Religious Roundtable.
AFSI's executive director, Helen Freedman, confirms the increasingly Christian cast of her coalition. "We have many good Jews, of course," she says, "but they're in the minority." She adds, "The liberal Jew is unable to believe the Arab when he says his goal is to Islamize the West. . . . But I believe it. And evangelical Christians believe it."
Of Jews who might otherwise support her group's view of Jews' divine right to Israel, she laments, "They're embarrassed about quoting the Bible, about referring to the Covenant, about talking about the Promised Land."
Pastor Upton is not embarrassed, and Helen Freedman is proud of her association with him. She is wistful when asked if she, like Upton, has been able to finagle a meeting with the president. "Pastor Upton is the head of a whole Apostolic Congress," she laments. "It's a nationwide group of evangelicals."
Upton has something Freedman covets: a voting bloc.
She laughs off concerns that, for Christian Zionists, actual Jews living in Israel serve as mere props for their end-time scenario: "We have a different conception of what [the end of the world] will be like . . . Whoever is right will rejoice, and whoever was wrong will say, 'Whoops!' "
She's not worried, either, about evangelical anti-Semitism: "I don't think it exists," she says. She does say, however, that it would concern her if she learned the Apostolic Congress had a representative in Israel trying to win converts: "If we discovered that people were trying to convert Jews to Christianity, we would be very upset."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kim Johnson doesn't call it converting Jews to Christianity. She calls it "Circumcision of the Heart"?-a spiritual circumcision Jews must undergo because, she writes in paraphrase of Jeremiah, chapter 9, "God will destroy all the uncircumcised nations along with the House of Israel, because the House of Israel is uncircumcised in the heart . . . t is through the Gospel . . . that men's hearts are circumcised."
Apostolics believe that only 144,000 Jews who have not, prior to the Second Coming of Christ, acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah will be saved in the end times. Though even for those who do not believe in this literal interpretation of the Bible?-or for anyone who lives in Israel, or who cares about Israel, or whose security might be affected by a widespread conflagration in the Middle East, which is everyone?-the scriptural prophecies of the Christian Zionists should be the least of their worries.
Instead, we should be worried about self-fulfilling prophecies. "Biblically," stated one South Carolina minister in support of the anti-Road Map billboard campaign, "there's always going to be a war."
Don Wagner, an evangelical, worries that in the Republican Party, people who believe this "are dominating the discourse now, in an election year." He calls the attempt to yoke Scripture to current events "a modern heresy, with cultish proportions.
"I mean, it's appalling," he rails on. "And it also shows how marginalized mainstream Christian thinking, and the majority of evangelical thought, have become."
It demonstrates, he says, "the absolute convergence of the neoconservatives with the Christian Zionists and the pro-Israel lobby, driving U.S. Mideast policy."
The problem is not that George W. Bush is discussing policy with people who press right-wing solutions to achieve peace in the Middle East, or with devout Christians. It is that he is discussing policy with Christians who might not care about peace at all?-at least until the rapture.
The Jewish pro-Israel lobby, in the interests of peace for those living in the present, might want to consider a disengagement.
BBB
That's a wonderful piece of journalism. Thank you very kindly for finding and posting it.
It proves to me that religious zelots are more dangerous to the freedoms of the US citizens than commies or nazis.
I agree rabel22. Here's a piece of The Apostolic Congress web site:
http://www.apostoliccongress.com/about.html
Quote:In 1981, early in the Reagan Administration, Brother Stan Wachtstetter was able to open the door for Apostolic Christians into the White House. Brother Stan was a Liaison for Apostolic Pastors for several years, and then he took a sabbatical from the political scene and began to Pastor. Brother Wachtstetter will always remain a close political advisor to our Executive Board.
Pastor Robert G. Upton is currently the Executive Director for The Apostolic Congress. Pastor Upton has always had a keen interest in the world of politics, but it was not until he attended a White House briefing in June 2000 that he realized his vision of touching world leaders with prayer for our nation.
Today, as a direct result of Pastor Upton and his team, Christians are affecting policy in Washington, and bringing about real change in America.
Apostolic Congress Purpose Statement
The Apostolic Congress is a Spirit-filled, purpose driven movement representing, by collective voice, the heartbeat of the Apostolic Community on a national front in a viable and systematic manner. The Apostolic Congress provides a consciousness to the political structure of our nation, by meetings, dialogues and on-going communication. The Apostolic Congress shall lift up a spiritual shield of protection for our Nation and Leaders through persistent prayer.
Apostolic Congress Mission
The Apostolic Congress informs Christians in America about issues such as Abortion and family values. The Apostolic Congress is very much a Pro-Life and Pro-Family organization.
We also keep Americas Christian leaders informed about their role with the current Administration through regular White House briefings. The Apostolic Congress also SUPPORTS the Sovereign nation of Israel. We work very close with the Embassy of Israel in Washington DC. In Addition, we also have a close working relationship with many organizations in Washington. Such as The Policy Institute for Religion & State, The Christian Coalition, as well as many other Pro-Life and Pro-Family groups.
Looks like they could use a good professional writer for their web site.
http://www.apostoliccongress.com/fsguestbook.html
Here's an interesting entry on their guestbook:
Quote:Name: David
Email:
HomePage:
Where are
you from: USA
Comments: Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: I saw the article in Village Voice at
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0420/perlstein.php. I am not expert at all on Christian theology or your organization (the Apostolic Congress), but as an Orthodox Jew I consider myself expert on authentic traditional Jewish theology. I wanted to draw your attention to a number of websites that your organization may not be familiar with. These websites describe the authentic unadulterated view of the Jewish religion towards Zionism, which is an abomination, a godless and idolatrous, man-made aberration. I believe you would benefit greatly from studying this information because it is urgent for the world to know that Judaism and Zionism are not synonymous. The websites are:
www.jewsagainstzionism.com, www.nkusa.org, www.jewsnotzionists.org.
May 18, 2004 23:54:02 (GMT Time)
Quote:It was an e-mail we weren't meant to see.
Let's see the full email rather than the VV's excerpts and interpretations.
Quote:In one letter home obtained by the Voice
Let's see that full letter instead of bits and pieces of it.
The headline says it all. I wonder what the writer's definition of 'Rapture Christian' is? He is surely not one of those bigoted, prejudiced left wingnuts who believes anyone who adheres to the Christian faith is a disciple of Satan?
But of course he is absolutely correct. I have no doubt that the entire Bush administration are conducting midnight cult rituals including virgin sacrifice and eating live chickens.
And any of you who believe any of this garbage, I have some nice swampland to sell you.
I would love to go back into the archives and see how many of the A2K anti-Christian people who bash GWB for his Christian faith even raised an eyebrow when Bill Clinton invited a plethora of Christian ministers, including Billy Graham, to the White House for consultation and prayer?
foxfyre
Would you please come down from your eagle's perch from where all christianity looks divine and perfect. Or get some glasses.
Your first paragraph is just silly. Stop being silly. It describes no one here, and likely no one on earth.
There are many very different versions of Christianity. Some, for example in Africa, you wouldn't possibly even recognize as part of the family, as they have included aspects of previous faith elements as well such as ancestor worship.
There are versions in America which hold the Pope to be the anti-Christ.
You may (or may not, I don't know) hold that the version of which you are a member represents the one true faith, but such a simplistic and exclusionary notion has not a whole lot of intellectual or emotional maturity behind it. It's a poverty of faith.
If you are going to argue that such versions of Christianity exist in the US such as this piece portrays, then you are simply ill-informed.
If you are going to argue that this piece misrepresents such versions, then you show some evidence which is more compelling than what is quoted above, or available on many websites easily accessible.
If you are going to argue that representatives of these versions have to access to the White House, then you'll have to provide evidence contradicting the evidence of this piece.
If you are going to argue that Bush himself holds to a different version, then that's fine. But the point is whether or not these people are consequential in the development of internal and external policy. If you say they are inconsequential, then you have an evidentiary battle.
If you are going to argue, and you do, that Bush's Christianity and Clinton's Christianity are both Christian, therefore exactly the same, you've got another evidentiary battle.
If you are going to argue that any version of Christianity or any religious belief is benign in a democratic leader, then you are simply being a fool.
There's only one religion in the world that people can bash and trash with impunity, and that's Christianity. "Rapture Christians, " "Fundies," "religious zealots," all are Christians and all are fair game for attack. Anyone who lives a strictly religious life is an object of derision if they are of the Christian religion. But replace "Christian" with "Muslim" and everything becomes all right. Maybe some people need to reexamine their prejudices.
Would anyone agree that Christianity today is less violent and disruptive than Islam today?
I dislike the belief systems of fundamentalist, my-way-or-the-highway, true believers of every stripe. And that includes "rapture Christians", who apparently believe that at any given moment they will be swept up into heaven while the rest of us burn in hell down here.
And the Israeli Jews, who they support now, had better convert en masse to Christianity to make this all happen. It's too much...
I think anyone who doesn't adhere to fundamentalist rapture Christian beliefs has Satan's social security number tattoed on his/her butt. At the very least you are all the spawn of Mao Tse Tung, Lenin, Stalin, Idi Amin, and all the other great athiests who have wrecked havoc on the world. Ridiculous?
Well, that makes about as much sense as those of you who think anybody espousing any kind of faith in God or, God forbid!, any kind of Christian belief is the epitome of the very worst that Christianity can produce.
Tarantulas
Foolish post. Uncareful thinking. Not one sentence of it is true or coherent.
Quote:There's only one religion in the world that people can bash and trash with impunity, and that's Christianity.
Please tell me what the situation is in India, in Burma, in Melanesia, among the Haida Gwai. What is criticized above are versions of Christianity, not Christianity, and that is specified. And if you are looking for some exemption for all forms of christianity or all forms of faith from criticism...tough luck, you don't get it.
Quote:"Rapture Christians, " "Fundies," "religious zealots," all are Christians and all are fair game for attack.
Of course they are fair game for criticism. Why shouldn't they be? Where they involve themselves in the polity, they immediately lay themselves open for exactly the same study and criticism as any political group...the fact they have a faith is irrelevant.
Quote:Anyone who lives a strictly religious life is an object of derision if they are of the Christian religion.
That's just false, and it is clearly false to anyone who reads or studies the issues for more than two minutes. How many 'attacks' on Hutterites do you see here? Their traditionalist communities live far more strictly religious lives than the folks noted in the piece above.
Quote:But replace "Christian" with "Muslim" and everything becomes all right. Maybe some people need to reexamine their prejudices.
That last sentence epitomizes what you continually get wrong. And it is really stupid of you to keep getting it wrong. Religious 'zealots' or zealots of any stripe are frequently targetted here, and elsewhere. But Christian zealots get no pass, nor should they. The opposite is the case...they should be addressed more criticially because they are involved in our polity and whirling dervishes are not.
McGentrix wrote:Would anyone agree that Christianity today is less violent and disruptive than Islam today?
You set this question up to produce a generalization. That's not terribly helpful, and may worse in consequence. If you asked, "Are more modern acts of violence perpetrated by radical Islamists than radical Christians?" the answer would surely be yes. If you asked whether that "has always been so?" the answer would be no. If you asked "Are Christian nations or Muslim nations more disruptive?" the answer would not be clear.
Foxfyre wrote:I think anyone who doesn't adhere to fundamentalist rapture Christian beliefs has Satan's social security number tattoed on his/her butt. At the very least you are all the spawn of Mao Tse Tung, Lenin, Stalin, Idi Amin, and all the other great athiests who have wrecked havoc on the world. Ridiculous?
That makes about as much sense as those of you who think anybody espousing any kind of faith in God or, God forbid!, any kind of Christian belief is the epitome of the very worst that Christianity can produce.
Fox
What exactly are you talking about? Nobody here has made a claim such as your second paragraph implies.
Blatham writes:
Quote:Religious 'zealots' or zealots of any stripe are frequently targetted here, and elsewhere. But Christian zealots get no pass, nor should they
.
I don't have time to do it, but I would guess a cursory review of the active threads in the A2K political and spirituality/religion forums would find numerous scathing, as well as insulting, hurtful, and insensitive, remarks directed at Christianity and/or Christians and/or George Bush
because he is perceived as being Christian.
By comparison I think that same cursory review would find conservatives slamming Islamic fundamentalism that adovcates terrorism and murder, but any criticism of Islam from the left will generally be infrequent or at least much milder and will often be mentioned in conjunction with the 'equal' evils of Christianity and/or the
greater evils of the current administration. . .
Or the left will point out that Islamic fundamentalism does not represent the rank and file Moslem. They usually cannot bring themselves to make the same observation about Christianity however.
blatham writes:
Quote:What exactly are you talking about? Nobody here has made a claim such as your second paragraph implies
Look how the writer of the piece that is the thesis of this thread looks at it. And how it is supported by others from the 'left' who see something so terribly sinister in the fact that the president is a professed Christian and relate that to the most extreme examples of fundamentalist Christianity. (Which is absolutely laughable to anybody who knows anything about Methodist doctrine and/or practice.)
You have to read my whole post Doglover to get the gist of it. It sorta goes along with my (spirituality & religion forum) rants against 'proof texting' that is so popular with some.