COMMENTARY: Clinton: can he recover from failed speech?

c. 1998 Religion News Service (R. Albert Mohler Jr., a noted author and speaker, is president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky.) UNDATED _ The speech was a failure. Rather than dousing the flames of controversy, President Clinton’s address to the nation has ignited a wildfire, and the sparks are still flying. His […]

c. 1998 Religion News Service

(R. Albert Mohler Jr., a noted author and speaker, is president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky.)

UNDATED _ The speech was a failure. Rather than dousing the flames of controversy, President Clinton’s address to the nation has ignited a wildfire, and the sparks are still flying.


His statement is most remarkable for what it did not contain _ any sign of contrition. The president appeared angry and embarrassed, not humbled and remorseful. In the end, he blamed others for causing the situation, even though he pledged to”take complete responsibility for all my actions, both public and private.” The other missing element was honesty. He patronized the American people by his clever manipulation of words and phrases. Speaking of his earlier deposition, Clinton said while his answers were”legally accurate,”he”did not volunteer information.” He did not volunteer information?

He spoke directly to the American people in January and denied engaging in any sexual acts with Monica Lewinsky. Now, he admits he did”have a relationship with Ms. Lewinsky that was not appropriate.” At no point in the address did Clinton offer any real apology. He did speak of regret, but gave the impression he regretted the adulterous relationship only because he was caught. Evidently, the president believes that being chief executive means never having to say you’re sorry. He isn’t.

Adding insult to injury, having expressed”regret”concerning an unspecified”lapse in judgment,”Clinton then told the American people that it is none of our business.

Abraham Lincoln once criticized President Andrew Polk for an”open attempt to prove, by telling the truth, what he could not prove by telling the whole truth.”We do not yet know if Clinton’s most recent statements are true. We do know they are not the whole truth.

Taking the whole truth into account would force us to see that Clinton’s legal team is now arguing, against a possible charge of perjury, that Monica Lewinsky had sex with the president but that he had no sex with her. We would have to see that Clinton has, not once, but at least twice denied an adulterous sexual relationship _ only to retract the denial in a legal proceeding. We would have to acknowledge that the president of the United States, already facing a legal action over a sex scandal, allowed or enticed a young intern under his supervision to engage in sexual acts with him in the White House.

Contrary to Clinton’s angry assertion, this is not just his problem. It is ours as well. The independent counsel is responsible to bring a full report to the House of Representatives, and Congress will be responsible to deal with this matter appropriately. These issues mix legal and political considerations, but the bottom line issue is inescapably moral.

The American people are responsible for how we respond to this pattern of ethical violation, adultery, and lies. Just what do we expect of our leaders? What will we, should we, allow as acceptable conduct? Is the president of the United States above the law, and above the ethical standards we rightfully demand of business executives and members of the armed services?


As a Christian, I am appalled at the moral cowardice of so many ministers and theologians, who are ready to cover the president’s sin with a blanket pardon. We preach the forgiveness of sins, but only upon the basis of genuine confession and repentance _ neither of which was apparent in the president’s speech.

As a Southern Baptist, I feel a peculiar responsibility for this moral disaster. How can President Clinton claim to be a Southern Baptist and persist in this public display of serial sin? Only because the congregation which holds his membership has failed to exercise any semblance of church discipline. Southern Baptists will be watching the Immanuel Baptist Church in Little Rock to see if it musters the courage to make clear its own convictions.

Can Clinton recover? At the most fundamental level, this question is spiritual. I pray for the president and his family, that they might be healed spiritually and relationally. At another level this question is political and legal. We will have to wait for those processes to be resolved.

At every level, this question is deeply moral. And at this level I do not believe recovery is possible. Lincoln once remarked,”If you once forfeit the confidence of your fellow citizens, you can never regain their respect and esteem.”President Clinton isn’t even trying.

END MOHLER

Donate to Support Independent Journalism!

Donate Now!