The Republican Circus

We live in fun times.

My father had an old story: Two women were having a fierce argument over who among them was the greater person. In the end, one of them dropped the bucket she was holding, wagged a finger at the other one and screamed: “My son drowned in only five meters of water; your son drowned in fifteen meters of water.”

Terrible story, no doubt, but this sums up much the mood of the Republicans who are tearing into each other to be the Presidential candidate of the party. At the moment, the two lead candidates - Rick Perry, the Governor of Texas and Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts – are engaged in a fierce argument as to who among them is better suited to tear down the country. Their major theme is Obama’s health  care bill – a step  that would ensure that all Americans – like the citizens of the other developed countries including neighboring Canada – would have health care coverage, and that the insurance companies cannot deny coverage to a person for pre-existing illnesses.

The core of the Republican debate is that they would rather have uninsured people die than provide universal health care. And, under relentless attack from Perry, poor Romney is trying to live down his record of providing universal health care for the citizens of Massachusetts when he was Governor there a decade ago. Today 98% of the people of that state have coverage, an unpardonable crime in current Republican parlance. Texas under Perry is a model for the Republicans as that state has the largest number of uninsured people in the country. It is essentially a debate over how deep one can drown.

When he is not debating Mitt Romney, Perry is presiding over public prayer meetings beseeching the Almighty for rain in parched Texas. Much like the Elijah of the Old Testament, His Excellency the Governor seems to believe that God communicates with him directly on matters of rain and drought.  No spectacular outcome, however, has yet been reported.

There are other potential candidates, the Minnesotan lady Michele Bachmann for instance. Michele is, in fact, the current darling of the Tea party goers. There are no pretensions about this lady: she is a born again Christian. As a true Christian, she also believes that wives must submit themselves in obedience to their husbands in all matters. Imagine a possible scenario: President Bachmann in the Oval Office with the Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin as they are about to sign the Second Nuclear Disarmament Treaty. On second thoughts, Madame President puts her pen down, excuses herself, rushes into the master bedroom of the White House and gets Mr. Bachmann’s permission before proceeding further with the presidential signature.

And then there is Newt Gingrich. Newt married once… twice… thrice… Well, whatever be the state of his marital stability, he has stable views on politics. While educating his fellow Republicans, he is reported to have stated: "I think one of the great problems we have in the Republican Party is that we don't encourage you to be nasty. We encourage you to be neat, obedient, and loyal and faithful and all those Boy Scout words."

In short, while considering these presidential hopefuls, there is much to laugh about, but for the fact that, under the circumstances, one of these worthies stands a good chance of being the next President. 

Blessing of the Animals

At the Episcopal church near our house in Winchester it was announced at the worship service today that animals would be blessed next Sunday and that the parishioners are welcome to bring their pets, “large or small, real or stuffed for a special blessing.” (The priest, however, added that if anyone brought a pet snake, he will have to get a different priest to bless it!)

Blessing of the Animals is a regular Episcopalian practice but my evangelical upbringing and mindset could not easily accommodate the idea of God’s sanctuary being open to animals. God’s salvation is for God’s people, I knew.  Jesus came down from heaven “for us and for our salvation”. Animals are clearly outside God’s salvific plan.

Are they? As a child, I remember my visits to my maternal grandparents’ house in Punnavely in rural Kerala. They were faithful Anglicans and good Christians. My grandfather was a small farmer and regularly had one or two cows and goats. His whole life revolved around his farm including his cattle. And when a cow is due to give birth, he would worry over it just like any expectant parent. These worries would get reflected at the evening family prayer when he would earnestly pray for the animal. I could not fully comprehend the theological rationale behind this but strangely felt comfortable that my grandparents lived a life where all – their lives, their cattle, their neighbors – where seen as very much within the care and protection of God.  

In the most recent issue of New Vision, Most Rev. Dr. Philipose Mar Chrysostom, the Senior Metropolitan of the Mar Thoma Church, narrates an instance from his life. One day a man came to his house with a pregnant cow and wanted the bishop to pray for safe delivery. The bishop’s assistant tried to shoo the man away saying, bishops do not pray for animals. The bishop came out, admonished his assistant and said that he would pray for anyone and anything that is brought to him.

Life is sacred; not only human life but also animal life. Dr. M. M. Thomas, in his Biblical reflections on the book of Deuteronomy used to say that even when it was recognized that eating animal flesh is permitted, God’s people were prohibited from eating the meat with lifeblood on it. “But be sure you do not eat the blood, because the blood is the life, and you must not eat the life with the meat.” (Deuteronomy 12: 23).

Let everything that has breath praise the LORD. Praise the LORD. (Psalm 150: 6)