When Leaders Are Exposed as Uncouth and Unrefined

It saddens me, as I am sure many others are, to listen to our Dear Leader so uncouth and unrefined, so careless and inarticulate, in public pronouncements about subjects that require deliberate circumspection and careful preparation.  Stray and confused words that many of us still believe are so diametrically alien to what he holds dear and valuable in his heart.  But why utter them?

After a while, one is hard-pressed to even listen to him speak in public, which most times have become excruciatingly painful and grating to one’s social sensibilities and perceived rectitude.

It seems like a curse has been injected in our midst, after having been blest with a very rare opportunity to choose a leader that for once could make the country move forward after countless years of wallowing in the ugly morass of its own making.  His unabashed and transparent records had enlightened enough of us to anoint him as our leader.

 It seems like we have been dealt with a two-faced coin, though fused as one but estranged by a dichotomy of extremes.  A flawed leader no doubt, but with a great harbinger of a promise to bring peace and prosperity to a troubled nation. 

 But added to boot and to bedevil, a speaking style that is so out of this world.  A worrisome style not only of enunciation but of a convoluted manner of weaving words and ideas that run counter to the reservoir of social niceties and moral rectitude which we assume as in possession of our high elected public officials.

The economic and political gains, both domestically and globally. have been noteworthy by the reckoning of many.   But the heated rhetoric from his detractors have gone off the rails.  One has not before been witness to such venom and ferocity from some sectors of our society.

From all this radioactivity, where can we find shelter?  Can we take refuge in the argument that we ought to judge based on results rather than the dizzyingly vacuous and unkind words of a president who in public speeches appears to sleepwalk?

Maybe we can by finding cause in an obtuse way, with another person who was also such a controversial and divisive personality.  His life and claims as  judged by a slew of temporal judges from Annas, Caiphas, Herod to Judas and the rest of the people themselves had been  condemned as blasphemous and worthy of execution. 

Christ justified and redeemed all that he did in life and more by a result that proved most everybody wrong, including those most close to him.  He rose from the dead.

What is in store for us?

In life, the belief is that nothing comes in neat bundles. Everything comes as a pesky menagerie of good and bad. Asking us to take the good with the bad, or vice-versa.

Apart from being just pure bluster, I cannot see how this particular wishful statement of his could stand on its own. To me, this is yet another haphazard attempt on his part to portray his good intentions, which I personally do not doubt.

But how could anybody wishing and consigning himself to hell, have any direct part or hand in helping other people gain paradise? Ill-will and ill intentions could not produce goodness. Barren land cannot grow anything good.

Thus, a statement that could never be or happen. Delivered simply for effect.

Unless, by hell he meant taking on the sufferings of his people, and thus could be a “living hell” as we are wont to hear said by people. Thus, simply as hyperbole.

Sad to note that the president is of our generation, though age-wise we are a bit older, but I am hard-pressed to understand where he is coming from with his ideas and the ways he represents them.

Even his manner of speaking is quite different from ours. And we grant that he too was educated similarly with us having gone to Jesuit schools.

Rummaging through his rambling statements on Theology, one concept stands out for me as reminiscent of our early years in school.

In our representation of a God, we no doubt invests that Being with human or earthly qualities, like having feelings (so, can be insulted or mocked), having a body and a face, etc. And we understand that doing that reduces and limits God.

That we ought to go back to the reverence and regard the old Jews had. That the Yahweh was so limitless and incomprehensible that even the act of giving Him a name was not only limiting, but also irreverent. So he was referred to as the one with no name or as the one that could not be named.

Sadly, even the Church hierarchy of today has temporalized many of the more mysterious and mystical doctrines and beliefs of the Church. The many grandiose church buildings and elaborate rituals would appear to make the Kingdom of Christ one that is temporal and of this world.

So he does in his own peculiar ways come up with profound ideas that truly challenge and make us think twice about certain concepts we hold regarding our religion. He just needs to articulate them better, more precisely, and more importantly, in such a way as not to be misunderstood.