Wayne Grudem Calls on Republicans to Dump Trump without Denouncing Trump
Note: There’s a video and audio version of this article below! Goes for 15 minutes.
Here I am, in the middle of Texas, among good Christian people, where American flags and “Vote Trump” signs are plentiful. As I sit here beside the beautiful Brazos River, I just now read prominent evangelical theologian Wayne Grudem’s article titled Trump’s Legacy is at Stake. The article is, on my reading, a call for the Republicans to dump Trump without denouncing him.
Grudem Flips on Trump - Yes, But It’s Complicated!
A bit of backstory. As Courtney Friesen put it, “Grudem argued that voting for Trump was ‘a morally good choice.’ Then, two days after the revelation of the now-infamous Access Hollywood tape that exposed Trump boasting about sexual assault, on Oct. 9, Grudem retracted this opinion, calling on Trump to withdraw. A mere 10 days later, by which time it was clear that Trump would not exit the race, Grudem retracted his retraction.” So Grudem has been a big pro-Trumper and apologist!
Given that Grudem is a very, very influential figure among white conservative evangelical churches, I have long wondered what Grudem’s position was on whether Trump won the 2020 election, and whether he’d call out the anti-democratic actions and attempted coup in the aftermath. Well, now we know!
Grudem argues that:
(1) Trump has a good legacy of political achievements, but Trump is simply unelectable as president.
(2) Yes, the Democrats did interfere in the election, probably not enough to really make a difference, but good lawyers were unable to prove any serious meddling, and claiming the election was stolen turns off independent voters.
(3) Trump did too little too late to stop the riot at the capitol on January 6.
(4) Trump endorses weak candidates who tarnish the brand.
(5) Trump is plagued by repeated legal accusations, most of which are “pernicious misuse of the courts as weapons against political opponents,” yet these will be a factor against Trump winning.
(6) Trump’s age and character are ongoing concerns.
(7) If Trump is the Republican nominee, the election will be about him rather than about policies.
(8) Trump should receive a presidential pardon from the next Republican president.
On a sympathetic reading of Grudem’s article, I’d say that he is trying to genuinely speak into the deep red and religious Republican constituency and urge them to move on from Trump without causing a rupture in the Republican party over Trump. Grudem argues that Trump was a good president and a political martyr, but he is unelectable, so they need a new presidential candidate.
Therefore, the reasons for rejecting Trump are about electoral expediency rather than moral deficiency or defending democracy.
Two Things Grudem Gets Right
I have to say that I actually agree with Grudem on two things here - just hear me out!
First, I think Trump’s legacy is better than people realize.
Trump gave a great speech on democracy and freedom in Poland early on in his presidency. The US economy was better under Trump than under either Obama or Biden. Trump did not start new wars, but he defeated ISIS. His administration even initiated efforts to get homosexuality de-criminalized in Africa and the Middle East. He took a tough line on China which I agree with. His administration helped craft peace agreements in the Balkans and between Israel and its neighbors. Plus, no disastrous withdrawal from Kabul on his watch. Of course, there was also the rampant xenophobia and an attempted coup, which kind of sullies all those things, but credit where credit is due.
If you are morally appalled by me saying that Trump did anything good, remember something. Once upon a time, people said that President George W. Bush was the worst, most evil president ever. In hindsight, he was a decent man, who listened to some very bad advice on Iraq, hurricanes, and housing loans. A critique of Trump will be more penetrating and stinging if it is genuinely fair and even-handed.
Second, I think the idea of a pardon for Trump is a good idea.
No, not because it will teach the justice department a lesson not to use lawfare against politicians. A Trump pardon is a good idea for the same reason that President Ford’s pardon of President Nixon was a good idea. Rather than a protracted legal case that sucks oxygen away from the big national issues that need to be addressed, a pardon admits wrongdoing, draws a line under it, and allows the nation to move on.
But No Defense of Democracy
That said, I do have a major point of contention with Grudem’s article.
Grudem fails to address the elephant in the room. Trump conspired to overturn the election evidenced by his phone call to the Secretary of State in Georgia and he tried to coerce his own VP, Mike Pence, against certifying the election result. Trump engaged in conspiracy to subvert the election as even some of his former attorneys have admitted. It is no mistake that Pence and the phone call to Georgia are not mentioned by Grudem!
At the end of the day, Grudem’s article is about expediency and the path to white Christian power, rather than about doing what is right before God and his fellow citizens. Grudem wants to dump Trump as the Republican nominee, not because of his crimes and attack on democracy, but because Trump is no longer a viable gateway to the presidency. It’s about power not principles.
I wish Grudem had written an article titled, “Russell Moore and Liz Cheney were right and we all need to repent of our idolatrous worship of the orange Jesus.” Instead we got an apology for Trump, one that even Grudem seems to be tired of making. Grudem wrote that “having to defend Trump again and again for another year produces in me a great feeling of weariness.” For my mind, Grudem should be feeling not weariness but an acute sense of betrayal by Trump and self-loathing for defending what was indefensible, immoral, undemocratic, and unChristian because of a belief that his political tribe MUST be in charge.
Grudem wants to turn his people off Trump on terms that they can accept, I get that, call it realpolitik if you like. However, it is the terms he proposes - we must win no matter what - that is the problem, Trump is merely the symptom. Grudem accepts that Trump’s inaction in stopping the January 6 riot was a dereliction of presidential duty - though he fails to mention that Trump actually incited the riot even if he did not direct it. So Grudem knows that Trump is a bad hombre, but I have to ask, has Grudem reached the point of saying, “We must never support Trump as a presidential candidate no matter what?” No, he hasn’t! In fact, Grudem says in the article that he will support the Republican party no matter what: “I speak personally as a lifelong Republican, one who will support any Republican candidate because the policies supported by Republicans are more consistent with the overall teachings of the Bible regarding governments and laws than the policies of the Democrats, in my opinion.”
What that means is that if Trump does again become the Republican nominee, Grudem will again get behind him, will again retract his call to abandon Trump, and will again tell his American Christian friends that they must get behind Trump, knowing full well, even more so than last time, where it might lead! Why? Because it is about the path to white evangelical power and he will mount the horse he is given to ride there even if it’s Trump.
Grudem vs. Grudem
I recently re-read parts of Grudem’s book Politics according to the Bible. I disagree with a lot of stuff in that book, but to his credit, Grudem gave a good biblical and Baptist defence of democracy, he is genuinely commendable on that point. The question I have is whether Grudem still believes in democracy because democracy only works if the loser concedes, if there is a peaceful transition of power, and if we conduct our debates by means of persuasion rather than with angry mobs. You can agree with Grudem’s case for democracy, or you can accept Grudem’s terms for keeping White evangelical civil religion hegemonic - but you can’t do both!
What American evangelical supporters of democracy need to do now is to argue against Grudem’s terms, argue with passion, ardor, and conviction. They need to argue that the Republican party is not anointed by Jesus, that ends do not justify the means, keeping your tribe in political power is not worth soiling your soul over, presidents come and go and are poor substitutes for Jesus, losing with principles is better than winning by deviancy, and liberal democracy is better than Christian theocracy.
To all the paid subscribers out there. Read Grudem’s article, then leave me a question below and I’ll answer them in a private video made early next week.
You can pre-order Michael F. Bird and N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Powers: Christian Political Witness in an Age of Totalitarian Terror and Dysfunctional Democracies (April 2024).
Here’s my questions after reading the Grudem article
Why do so many Christian leaders - who preach a gospel of salvation and transformation through the grace and mercy of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit ALSO believe that societal improvement can come through coercive laws enacted by immoral leaders?
Why do such Christians have trouble distinguishing between the relative levels of immorality and moral danger between Trump and Biden? Because their answer to the charge that Trump is immoral and dangerous is simply to say that Biden is also immoral and dangerous so that issue is canceled out of consideration. Why is Joe Biden’s sincere and observant Catholic faith completely dismissed while Trump’s obviously performative and rarely observant Protestant faith assumed to be genuine?
Why do so many Christian leaders believe that even if America could be threatened/coerced through laws to eliminate all abortion, sexual immortality and coddling of irresponsible poor people while rewarding the responsible citizens with freedom of worship, child education, gun ownership and low taxation that a better, more godly society would be the result? The Pharisees were not practicing abortion, sexual immorality or coddling of the poor and Jesus didn’t seek to think this made them admirable or godly leaders. They had pretty good control over the education of their children and how they worshipped. But this didn’t produce a people who recognized the Messiah when he came.
Why do so many Christian leaders have trouble accepting that you can’t get the results of the cross without the way of the cross? Grudem wrote a long article that included terms like “Bible”, “Christian”, “Evangelical” and “law” but did not once mention Christ or the cross. Apparently Jesus and the cross have nothing to do with Christian political engagement. How does Grudem’s pragmatic political assessment in any way reflect Christian virtue or the foolishness of the cross, or the sacrificial love for God and neighbor demonstrated therein?
Why the phrase “insufficient care for factual accuracy”? Grudem has no problem condemning many sins, but he can’t bring himself to name the sin of “lying”?
It is worth a conversation whether the economy was better under Trump and how much credit he deserves. Barrons did an 11 point survey in June 2023 with this conclusion “But how much credit or criticism does the president really deserve? The answer will be central to the 2024 presidential campaign, which has already kicked off and might well become a showdown between the current and immediate past residents of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. So, with former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden touting their respective economic records, Barron’s took a look at how various aspects of the economy fared under each administration.
The economic record, for both, is mixed. Trump inherited a healthy economy from former President Barack Obama that was eight years past the 2007-09 economic downturn, and steadily expanding. In the period under study, job growth chugged along and inflation was tame. But wages were flat, and increases in the gross domestic product and job creation were more or less a continuation of trends that began in the Obama years, rather than a direct result of any changes that Trump made. Trump had one major legislative victory in his early years: a suite of tax cuts on companies and individuals passed in 2017. The measures helped boost the stock market and fueled investment and demand, but also drove up the size of the U.S. debt.
Biden took office as the economy was still recovering from the Covid pandemic shutdowns, and the steady flow of stimulus aid passed under both his watch and Trump’s fueled a major spending boom. That helped job growth soar to record levels in each of the past two years, but also drove up inflation and forced the Federal Reserve to begin rapidly tightening monetary policy—steps that could spark a recession in the months ahead.” --