Character Versus Personality

I recently finished a book by David F. Wells, The Courage to be Protestant. He calls this work an attempt at getting at the essence of his fifteen year project (and four previous books) to analyze the evangelical movement. Wells does a good job tracing the social trends which are pressuring the church to modernize its message. His thesis is that the direction in which evangelicals are moving, particularly the seeker sensitive and the emergent factions, is away from Biblical orthodoxy. He believes a return to historical reformation/protestant ways is the cure for this misdirection.

I was impressed by his analysis of the change in modern thinking away from what we used to call character, which is based on the virtues of a moral world, to a cult of personality which is driven by popularity or attractiveness without regard to morality. Wells notes that we used to speak of a person's morals, manners or reputation. Now we hear that they are fascinating, masterful or charismatic. One has only to remember how the media treated Bill Clinton during the Lewinski scandal to see how true this is.

The national infatuation with Barak Obama presents another example of personality trumping character. During the late stages of the presidential campaign a reporter opined that we didn't really know who Barak Obama was. If that reporter was ignorant, it was by choice or dereliction of his duty. Anyone who cared to look into the candidate's past could form a pretty solid picture of the real Barak Obama. His own writings and his life long relationships revealed a man who had consistently gravitated to men and ideas which were easily characterized. He had read and consorted with anarchists and socialists for most of his adult life. Yet in spite of this his good looks and soaring rhetoric carried half the country into his camp.

By contrast, as soon as Sarah Palin entered the presidential race, the main stream media fell all over themselves mocking her and finding fault in everything she said or did. What was her weakness? She was genuine, honest, simple and transparent. She displayed qualities that bemused or befuddled the political elite: love of country, commitment to family, concern for the weak and helpless, a determination to swim up the political stream. These attributes were so foreign to most liberal observers that they instantly declared her unfit for public office. How could anyone so provincial, so everyday American Mom be right for America?

Coincidentally, Sarah Palin is also attractive and well spoken in a down home, simple way. It was her character (in the old fashioned sense) and her support of traditional values that made her anathema to the liberal elite. I fear that Pete Hoekstra will face the same challenges as he runs for governor in Michigan. Here is a man of character who staunchly supports traditional values and conservative principles. He has worked tirelessly in Washington to provide decent, thoughtful representation for his constituents. He has always been a voice of common sense and restraint in a Beltway culture which seems to have lost its mind.

As Christians we are called to seek out leaders with strong moral character. Although the Bible does not specifically speak to our democratic processes and elective choices in the public sector, it is obvious that the qualities required of church leaders are equally important in secular positions. Our founding fathers recognized the importance of sound moral character, recommending that these qualities be sought in all who would lead. Pray that we all take a hint from David Wells and avoid the lure of personality and seek character in our elected leaders.