Posted on 08/22/2004 6:15:20 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
First impressions can be misleading.
Two weeks ago, a wild-eyed Alan Keyes stood in front of news cameras in a hot, crowded Arlington Heights banquet hall sweating profusely, yelling and shaking his fist as he enthusiastically accepted the Republican nomination to run for U.S. Senate in Illinois.
"I will promise you a battle like this nation has never seen," Keyes shouted with the passion of a preacher talking about spiritual combat with the forces of evil, thrusting his fist heavenward for emphasis. "The battle is for us, but I have confidence because the victory IS FOR GOD!"
A few days after he delivered the fiery speech that was replayed time and again on television newscasts across the nation, a decidedly different Alan Keyes is seated behind the desk of a spartan office in what was until recently the Jack Ryan for Senate headquarters on North Clinton in Chicago.
On this particular afternoon, the 54-year-old Maryland conservative, political pundit and two-time presidential hopeful is about to spend more than an hour, one-on-one with a reporter, in an interview about his personal faith.
He's in tie and shirtsleeves, leaning back casually in his chair. Two small, gold charms -- a crucifix and twin Ten Commandment tablets -- that usually dangle from a long gold chain are tucked into his breast pocket, the chain pulled across his chest at an angle giving him just the faintest air of a bishop.
"The boss and the rules," he'll quip later as he pulls the charms out of his pocket and allows them to fall on top of his silk tie.
Whether his mood is irascible or reflective, Keyes, a lifelong Roman Catholic, wears his faith on his sleeve as well as around his neck.
When asked to describe himself spiritually, Keyes is reasoned, sincerely thoughtful and significantly more reserved than that man behind the lectern on TV.
"Well, in the fullest sense, I describe myself as a Christian," he says. "I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, came amongst men in order to redeem us from original sin and to offer us a way to his father, which he offered us in his words and examples and exposed to us the truth: that God loves us as individuals and knows our weaknesses because Christ has experienced them.
"And therefore, with really infinite understanding and mercy, is ready to welcome us into his home if we are willing to turn around and accept his grace," he says.
How does he define what a Christian is?
"One of the essential characteristics of Christianity is that it is about faith. Christ often says, 'Your faith has saved you,' to people. And that means that your willingness to acknowledge in truth the authority of God and the mercy of God in the person of Jesus Christ, is the route to salvation," he says, without hesitation.
"We are transformed by our knowledge of Christ, and that's why there is going to be a manifestation in us of that change, which shows itself in the different way we start to relate to people."
Cradle Catholic
Born in a New York military hospital in 1950 while his father was serving in Korea, Keyes describes himself as an "Army brat." Along with his sister and three brothers, he was raised on military bases across the United States, and, for a time, in Italy.
His parents, Alison and Gerthina, both now deceased, were converts to Roman Catholicism.
Keyes says his first concept of what God is like is inextricably bound to Catholicism.
"My earliest idea that I remember was Jesus Christ, he was my idea of what God was like," he says. "When you grow up Catholic, I remember being encouraged to think of Jesus as your friend. Just a friend, like the friends you had on the playground, or in school. And I can remember that that was a part of my developing thought life when I was a child, having conversations with Jesus in my head, as if he were one of my playmates. . . . He was a child, just like me."
And now what does he think God is like?
"He's grown up," Keyes, who is married with three children, says, busting out in a belly laugh. "He's grown up. And I hope, I've grown up a bit. But I think that depth of it hasn't changed. We go through 'times.' We advance, we retreat, we struggle, we wrestle."
Keyes insists his faith has remained fairly constant throughout his life, though there were times when he says he felt more distant from his faith than he does today.
"I think the Bible is right [when] it says that you raise up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it," Keyes says, paraphrasing a passage from the 22nd chapter of the Biblical book of Proverbs. "That obviously implies -- doesn't it? -- a kind of gap. There's something in youth that somehow implies that people do depart from it a little bit. But if you raise them in the way they should go, then the roots take over again. And one returns."
When he was a doctoral student in the late 1970s at Harvard working on his dissertation about constitutional theory, Keyes says, he struggled a bit spiritually.
"When you're a graduate student, you go through your ups and downs and sometimes you hit really great lows. Some people, as a result of that, give up and they never reach their degree," he recalls. "At a moment of crisis for me -- I'll never forget -- I was feeling just that low, sort of thinking, 'I've been working at it and I'm never going to finish and it's just hopeless.'
"I called my mom, and that conversation, in which she really did nothing but listen to me and remind me that I'd gotten through different things in my life through faith -- sparked an experience I still remember," he says, his voice breaking with emotion. "And it transformed my sense of what my faith meant to me."
He received his Ph.D. in government from Harvard in 1979. He also earned his undergraduate degree from Harvard in 1972.
Keyes describes a mild crisis of faith that had grown alongside his intellectual pursuits.
"In American academics, it's difficult to be a person of faith. There's a certain kind of patronizing, a sense of, 'Oh, you'll grow out of it,' " he says.
"So you begin to push your faith into the background, and maybe not really want to show it and so forth and so on. You start to doubt whether or not you are being intellectually honest if you are relying on premises of faith."
It's a conundrum Keyes seems to have resolved with a vengeance.
The word became flesh
Keyes would never make himself out to be some sort of Biblical scholar, but when it comes to Scripture, he knows what he's talking about.
He reads Greek -- he travels with a laptop loaded with Bible software, including a copy of the Septuagint, the Greek version of Hebrew Scriptures -- and can wax eloquent at length about the etymology of certain words and how they correspond to theological principles.
"I try to read or think about some element of the Bible every day," he says, leaning back in his office chair, and propping his feet up on the desk.
When asked what portion of the Bible he most enjoys reading, he says, without hesitation, "Genesis."
"I often tell people that my greatest problem in the Bible is that in any serious way I've never been able to get past Genesis," he says, chuckling. "Now, I have read the whole Bible and I read other books, but what I mean is the book that I keep going back to over and over again is Genesis.
"For the longest time, I was really going back over and over again, thinking and writing about, the creation myths, because it seemed to me that there's an enormous depth of kind of philosophical implication," he says.
In addition to his Biblical studies, Keyes is a philosophy buff.
"People will think this is strange I suppose, but . . . there are books like Kant's Critique of Pure Reason and Hegel's Logic and things like that, and every once in a while I get hit by this mood and I have to wrestle with these books that are very abstract and that are kind of philosophy in the viewless realms where you are really dealing with concepts that have no corresponding material images or anything to go along with it," he says, excitedly. "You just have to go with pure concepts to think about things. And I think, in the sense of that kind of philosophical thinking, meditation and reasoning, Genesis is an enormously powerful experience."
This launches Keyes into a 20-minute discussion of what he describes as his latest "breakthrough" in examining a portion of Biblical text.
Specifically, the candidate says for four or five months he had been reading, re-reading and picking apart several dozen verses from the 4th, 5th and 6th chapters of Genesis, beginning with one of those "begat" passages.
So and so, son of so and so, begat so and so, father of so and so, who begat.. ..
These particular begat passages start with a descendant of Cain, the son of Adam and Eve who murders his brother Abel, and end with Noah -- the fellow with the ark.
With an almost childlike enthusiasm, Keyes recounts how he traced the lineage of Noah and the descendants of Cain, examined the ancient roots of certain words, and learned, according to his interpretation, that God's covenant with Noah after the flood included the institution of capital punishment for the first time.
"It's fascinating, don't you think?" Keyes asks, smiling broadly, when he's concluded an exegesis of the text that, at least in its methodology, would give any seminary professor or preacher a serious run for his money.
A boundless sorrow
Keyes could be a preacher, a Biblical scholar, or professional apologist for Christ. But instead, he's chosen to enter the secular political realm.
Why choose a field that can so often obfuscate faith?
It's a question, apparently, that moves Keyes to tears.
His eyes turn red, he stops talking for several minutes, stares at the ceiling, drums his fingers on the desk, and apologizes for his loss of composure.
After several attempts to begin speaking, only to have his voice crack with emotion, Keyes tries again to explain what he's feeling.
"I'm sorry, I'm getting a grip," he says, eyes red with tears. "When I was young, I encountered a problem, I guess. A challenge. And I guess it was an encounter that disillusioned me, yes, in the literal sense. And that was my first encounter with the reality -- intellectually and emotionally . . ." he pauses again, his voice trailing off for a few moments. " . . . Of what the slave experience meant to my ancestors. And I think I've been working that out ever since.''
When pressed to explain just what this "encounter" was, Keyes reveals that it was, in fact, an intellectual incident.
When he was about 15, he read Lerone Bennett's book Before the Mayflower: A History of the Negro in America, 1619-1964. And it broke his heart, he says.
"It's sorrow," he says, explaining why 40 years later he's still so emotional about something he read as a teenager. "It's not a sorrow for yourself, it's not a sorrow for individuals, it's a sorrow for the reality of our kind of sad experience . . . of life without God."
And it's that sorrow and outrage that in part has led him into politics, Keyes says.
"It's a problem of justice and to understand it and resolve it somehow is not an intellectual exercise. You have to meet the challenge of it in your own time and life. And at some level, that's what politics remains at its heart, in America," he explains.
"It's impossible to be a Christian and really live out your relationship with God apart from life and action," he says. "And that action requires that you kind of be aware of and sensitive to how in fact the injustice that was involved in slavery is like one of those difficult plants where you cut off what appears on the surface but the root is still there. And it springs up again in another place, in what seems like another form, but it is the same evil. It's the same root."
Christus victor?
So, what did he mean, exactly, back at that podium in Arlington Heights, when he exclaimed that "the victory is for God"?
Was he saying God is on his side -- the side of the righteous -- and not on that of his Democratic opponent, Barack Obama, a man who professes the same Christian faith?
"Well, professing is the operative word," Keyes says, in a moment of snarkiness conspicuously absent from the rest of the interview.
"I thought it was pretty clear. Maybe it wasn't," he says, reflecting on his acceptance speech a few days earlier. "What I meant by it was the victory is in God's hands for his will and decision. That's why I couldn't promise it to people. I might lose. I don't know. None of us knows.
"The notion that you can stand there and say, 'Rah! We're gonna win!' I know you're supposed to do that, but I find it very difficult to say stuff that I know, even if it's rhetorical, is not true," he says.
Keyes is puzzled by the idea that some people would be afraid of the notion of "God on our side."
"I rather want people to think God is on their side, because that means they know he's watching them, and that his rules still apply to what they do," he says, smiling. "I hope that's the result."
"I often tell people that my greatest problem in the Bible is that in any serious way I've never been able to get past Genesis. Now, I have read the whole Bible and I read other books, but what I mean is the book I keep going back to over and over again is Genesis."
http://www.suntimes.com/output/falsani/cst-nws-keyes22.html
I am a Reagan Republican since about 1965. I will be a Reagan Republican as long as I live. I am enthusiastic in supporting Dubya who is much closer to Reagan in ideas than was Bush the Elder. Keyes is a very fine part of the Reagan legacy to the GOP and to America, though there are differences in personality and style.
I am a Roman Catholic. Eternal Vigilance is an evangelical. I have not read this entire thread but I suspect, from knowing EV by internet that he is quite unlikely to have said anything with which I would disagree.
Abortion is the American Holocaust and has sliced, diced and hamburgerized more than forty million innocent babies in our nation since Herod Blackmun's decision in 1973. The opposition and policy militance of serious Christians of whatever persuasion and many others who are non-Christian against this slaughter will not recede or abate. Homosexuality is also an abomination and is not going to be accepted as normal by anyone genuinely Christian.
One thing that utterly angers the libertine set is that opposition to abortion and to homosexuality and, therefore, support for Western Civilization (not French, not Belgian, not Swedish for three examples but Western) are forces that can unify Christianity on a day-to-day practical and operational basis and then unite those Christians with others in defense of morality. Bank robbers don't like laws against bank robbery. Rapists don't like laws against rape. Muggers don't like laws against mugging. Frauds don't like laws against fraud.
There are those who do not like laws against abortion or against homosexuality. Guess who the people are who do not like those laws.
With Keyes, victory may be unlikely but, given the remarkable turn of events in Illinois this year, Lincoln probably would have been defeated too (as he was in his only Senate race). Lincoln may have lost but his loss did not prove slavery to be moral or acceptable. Lincoln is no favorite of mine. I far prefer Reagan. I think Keyes wrong on reparations but he has my vote and every one that I can influence.
Maybe that could be why you're having such a difficult time comprehending Keyes intentions.
Let's post the full quote:
"If I continue to look at Reagan's greatness in the times he was given, I will never give Bush his due for the issues he must deal with today.
I also said this in a previous post:
I will still vote for the President and try to get others to do the same.
Let me know if you need that broken down in anyway.
I think you've got it. And I'm a she. Now if only Robert can read all the sentences and not just those he can make me appear against Bush...
Well, sure comment. But people who know nothing about IL (as Condor pointed out) have no grounds to comment in ignorance. And there's a lot of uncalled for nastiness against Keyes on these threads. Yes, EV gets too hot-headed, but he speaks for himself here.
IL is a state where the outgoing Repub (CRIMINAL) governor refused to endorse any pubbie candidate. This was out of spite because he was being brought down for his illegal actions. This state is a mess, and if Keyes can shake things up here, all the better.
There are those, as you know, who have characterized any criticism of Keyes as the result of ignorance or malice. I think there are legitimate causes for concern. First, Keyes's reputation as a loose cannon. Second, the yawning chasm in the polls. Unless Keyes can significantly narrow the current difference, there is a real risk of his hurting Republicans in other statewide races.
This state is a mess, and if Keyes can shake things up here, all the better.
I'm cynical. Why, do you think, did the IL Republican Party select Keyes as the candidate rather than a lower profile in-state person? Is it possible that elements of the IL Republican Party would like to see the conservative wing get their "dream candidate", then crash and burn? I think this is more about controlling the future of the state party than it is about winning the November election.
I will never give Bush his due for the issues he must deal with today.
What part of this don't you understand?
I will still vote for the President. That's president George W. Bush for you Robert.
Thank goodness you have no ability to wipe out my posts entirely or many would believe I'm against the president.
It's hard to believe you're a republican the way you treat others' words. Liberals twists quotes to please their particular agenda.
I'm starting to understand how Rodney King felt.
Have you left to join the Keyes carnival?
"I will never give Bush his due for the issues he must deal with today." and "I will still vote for Bush."
Thanks for clarifying your somewhat less than enthusiastic support for our President in a time of war...
weak.
If you don't want those who disagree with you to comment on your posts, perhaps you shouldn't post them on public message boards.
Just a suggestion.
All you showed us was that Keyes put his foot in his own mouth and tried to backpedal when called on it.
I repeat;
He said;
"The battle is for us, but I have confidence because the victory IS FOR GOD!"
Why would his confidence be connected to the victory being for God if he didn't believe God was on his side?
Keye's explanation defies any normal interpretation of his statement.
Just how do you work that into an "attack" on President Bush by Alan Keyes?
You're kidding right?
Read his quote a few more times then get back to me.
Maybe I misread what Luis said, but I believe he was slamming Thad for his statement about not voting. Did I miss something?
I'm not offended, I enjoy watching the Keyes cult as they march headlong to the edge of a cliff, with blinders on, refusing to look towards the logic that would tell them they are marching off a cliff, following a proven loser. Logic and reason don't come to the Keyes cult very quickly.
will there be virgins?
Actually, no, pretty much the same core agreed with him then.
And a lot more, myself included, supported him UNTIL he made those comments.
By your logic, then, you were a Bustamante supporter.
Ssssh! You will bust their minds with logic and reason. Still haven't gotten an answer as to how bringing in a multiple loser candidate from another state into the race is a win-win. Keyes and his supporters are just grinding salt into the cornfield. But I guess if you point it out you are hell bound!
If not, they are evil fornicators and are all going to hell! Amazing, somehow putting Alan up once again for nationwide ridicule and another devastating blowout loss is a good thing for Republicans?
Welcome to bizzaro world.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.