The Birther Issue: Church and State in Ironic Quibble

The undying issue of Obama’s birth location and his qualification for the Presidency is receiving a new spurt of energy by some who want Chief Justice Roberts to be impeached if he swears Obama in at the Inaugural ceremony this month. Like a trick birthday candle, the “birther” flame won’t go out.

Here is a twist on the question of Obama's qualification for being President.

Much of the impulse to oust the President sprouts from the belief that he is a Muslim in disguise, even the Anti-Christ. In the spirit of keeping politics and religion connected, Christian security guards have a problem in logical consistency to explain. Let's consider an analogous qualification matter. If Obama’s birth circumstances discredit his leadership presumptions, why does not Jesus’ birth circumstance—a human claiming to be the Son of God—discredit biblical claims about this “human” Jewish Messiah? Are not such birthers practicing interpretive inconsistency?

In order to see if this analogy fits, I asked my brother, an immigration attorney, if being born outside the U.S. by a real American woman meets the "qualification" standard for the Presidency. He replied that if we assume a child is born outside the U.S. boundaries by a U.S. citizen mother, the child would be a "citizen" but not a "natural born" one.

Well then, if Obama (born elsewhere) is not a real American because his birth father was from another country—Kenya—(his mother's "natural" human citizenship not counting), then similar logic would require us to deny that Jesus was a real human because his mother Mary's insemination came from another world—God’s incarnating Spirit—,with Mary's biological contribution irrelevant to the child's genuine "status." You might respond that baby Jesus was born within the boundaries of this world, making him native or “natural born.” This might meet the legal (theological) requirement, but the idea of seeking comfort from a “legal” Jesus just doesn’t quite do it for me. (Nor does Arnold Schwarzenegger for President appeal to me.)

My point is that Christian purists would be advised not to present their theological resumes when applying for work as political commentators. As Birthers they must either adjust their theology or edit the Constitution. Treating logic as a handmaiden or a sidecar is not impressive.

The Political Birthers and Religious Birthers are in a state of similar logical unsettlement, but for different reasons. Yes, if Obama was born elsewhere than in the U.S., he is not a natural born, gold star American. But this conclusion stands on a probably incorrect assumption of fact. Analogously, if Jesus came from elsewhere (heaven), fathered by God the Holy Spirit, he was not a human like the rest of us. But this is not what the Religious Birthers conclude from their allegation. The whole scene is confounding. Reading politics from a theological podium dilutes the meaning of theological concepts; and making political pronouncements while wearing a theological robe invites irrelevance. The crossover, in either direction, results in mere quibbling, at the risk of demonstrating theological hypocrisy in one case or political naiveté in the other.

In denying that Obama was born in the U.S. (Hawaii), lacking evidential confirmation the Political Birthers are befuddled. Obama was either born in the U.S. or he was not. Solid fact can clear this up. Whether Obama is properly our President waits only for fact to be established and accepted.

Regarding the other baby, Scripture says Jesus came from heaven to be born on earth (of the Holy Spirit and Mary). The Bible presents Jesus as a human with dual citizenship, which is equally befuddling. Whether Jesus is our proper Lord, despite being a biological baby born on earth like the rest of us, also waits only on establishing where he was really born and what that means.

I see a way out of this inconsistent plotting of logic for both Christians and patriots. The Obama birth issue dissolves with a legitimate Hawaii certificate. And if you are happy with post-event official stamps, you may point to how the Church devised a birth “certificate” (a doctrinal stance) for Jesus at the Council of Chalcedon. But for the religious community this requires “afterthoughts,” which in Obama’s case amounts to forgery.

As long as we focus on where these two men were born, our thinking will remain in a logic fuddle. The solution is to think about who they are, not where they were born. Facts aside, we are not likely to change the Constitution, for its formula is sufficient to validate a Presidential candidate. In reality, our Founders intended to assure our President would be a true American in loyalty and spirit. The Political Birthers are convinced Obama is not a true American in spirit, so they imagine their own facts. Un-tethered imagination invites befuddlement.

Spiritual Birthers are just as prone to befuddlement if they view Jesus’ birth account as an imaginative pageant in Bethlehem. How a human actually can be God is difficult to capture in imaginable terms. (Mathew and Luke made a strong effort.) The Spiritual Birthers count the Bible as their “Constitution,” but the Bible seems to claim the unbelievable as fact—Jesus as both human and divine. If it makes sense for a natural born Jesus to be the Messiah, why cannot a supposed Muslim be a natural born American? Logic employed as a play toy becomes only a dodge that avoids encountering the core meaning of an issue.

The claim that Obama’s Hawaiian birth certificate is a forgery has been rejected by the Federal Third Circuit Court of Appeals (Berg v. Obama) as frivolous. If Chief Justice Roberts proceeds with the Inauguration, the political issue is settled (unless impeachment is called up, which is unlikely). The Jesus case actually can be resolved by theological explication, unless the editing gloss of church dogma tastes better to you. I’ll spare you the gourmet theological soup for now, but playground logic needs to be yellow flagged for the sake of real understanding in both the political and theological arenas. Schoolyard quibbling does not lead to enlightenment.

Doug Good