user: Write a title for this article:

Why do so many American politicians -- from Bill Clinton to Mark Sanford -- use religious language when they make public confessions of marital infidelity? Are they truly penitent or just pandering? How can we tell the difference?

The sad spectacle of South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford continues to dominate the headlines as further revelations add one bizarre twist after another to the governor's tale of adultery, deceit, and the consequences of sin. With every passing day, pressure mounts for the governor to resign. As the revelations unfold, his leadership credibility is further destroyed. The people of South Carolina now look to their governor's mansion with a sense of dread and embarrassment.

Governor Sanford's admission of adultery came only after he was ambushed by the media after returning from a liaison in Argentina. In a rambling confession, the governor admitted to an ongoing relationship and an extramarital affair. While the media quickly turned to ask questions about money and the affairs of state, many others immediately thought of the governor's wife and four sons and the horrible pain and embarrassment they were now forced to bear.

In his original statement, Governor Sanford seemed to acknowledge the evil of his actions and, using biblical language, he appeared to understand the sinfulness of his adultery and betrayal. Yet, his statement was rambling and disconnected and, upon reflection, his words raised more questions than they answered. How did this affair happen? Was the relationship really over?

When Governor Sanford addressed his cabinet just a few days after his confession, he offered an apology to his colleagues and promised to "carry on" as governor. "I wanted generally to apologize to every one of you all, for letting you down," he said. Of course, "letting you down" hardly covers the behavior that brought the governor to this admission. The governor violated his marital vows, engaged in an elaborate and sickening correspondence with his mistress, abandoned his responsibility as husband and father, and forfeited his right to lead the state which twice had elected him governor.

When speaking to the Cabinet, Governor Sanford referred to the biblical story of King David. The governor spoke of "the way in which he fell mightily -- he fell in very, very significant ways --- but then picked up the pieces and built from there." The governor also suggested that remaining in office would set a good example for his four boys, teaching them to persevere after a fall. The great shame is that the governor did not have his four boys in mind as he committed adultery.

Naturally, questions emerged related to the extent and duration of the extramarital affair. The governor's initial statement was unclear about several key issues. The days following would render the situation even more unclear.

Most recently, in a lengthy interview granted to the Associated Press, Governor Sanford added what the wire service called "explosive details" that made the picture all the more troubling. In the first place, the governor admitted to having "crossed the lines" with other women. "There were a handful of instances wherein I crossed the lines that I shouldn't have crossed as a married man, but never crossed the ultimate line," said the governor.

But the most troubling words from the governor concerned the nature of his relationship with Maria Belen Chapur, the woman with whom he had the affair. "This was a whole lot more than a simple affair, this was a love story," he said. He added: "A forbidden one, a tragic one, but a love story at the end of the day."

Speaking, not of his wife, but of his mistress, Governor Sanford declared that he would go to his grave "knowing that I had met my soul mate."

Immediately following the governor's first admission, it seemed that he might survive politically and remain in office. The nation found itself once again in a debate about the relationship between personal virtue and public responsibility. This is a question that is particularly vexing to Christian conservatives, who must simultaneously understand that all are sinners in need of redemption and, at the same time, affirm that some sins disqualify individuals from public service and influence.

America's recent political history indicates that some politicians can survive revelations of adultery. While Christians should be less concerned about the political consequences and more concerned about the spiritual consequences, it is fair to observe that those politicians who survive more often than not do so when the adulterous relationship is clearly over and in the more distant past and when the politician has given himself in a demonstrable way to the priority of rebuilding his marriage and reestablishing credibility with his family.

Put simply, Governor Sanford's most recent comments point to a worst-case scenario. His words make clear that his heart is still inclined toward his mistress, and not his wife. With tragic candor, the governor has spoken of trying to fall back in love with his wife. He refers to his mistress, not his wife, as his soul mate, and speaks wistfully of the affair as "a love story at the end of the day."

Governor Sanford may cite King David, and he may even suffer the illusion that his response is similar to that of Israel's King. Nevertheless, the difference is clear. David's adultery was mixed even with murder, but his own acknowledgment of sin came in a flood of contrition, remorse, broken heartedness, and humility. David acknowledged the reality of his sin, expressed his hatred of the sin, and became a model for us all of repentance. Governor Sanford, on the other hand, demonstrates the audacity to speak wistfully of his sin, longingly of his lover, and romantically of his descent into unfaithfulness.

Governor Sanford is no King David, and the people of South Carolina -- as well as the watching world -- now observe the sad spectacle of a man who, while admitting to wrongdoing, shows no genuine repentance. As the Christian church has long recognized, true repentance is reflected in the "detestation of sin." This is a far cry from what we've heard from Governor Sanford.

If the governor is really serious about demonstrating character to his four sons, he should resign his office and give himself unreservedly to his wife and family. He must show his sons -- and all who have eyes to see -- how a man is led by the grace and mercy of God to hate his sin, rather than to love it. Until then, the governor must be understood to indulge himself in wistfulness for his affair and in a desperate determination to maintain his office. His remaining days in office are like a Greek tragedy unfolding into farce. The whole picture is just unspeakably sad.

By R. Albert Mohler Jr. | July 2, 2009; 2:04 PM ET Share This: Technorati | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook Previous: A Convenient Love | Next: Real Humility, Beyond the Sound Bites

"David's adultery was mixed even with murder, but his own acknowledgment of sin came in a flood of contrition, remorse, broken heartedness, and humility. David acknowledged the reality of his sin, expressed his hatred of the sin, and became a model for us all of repentance."

How exactly did David do it? David remained the King of Israel for many years to come and died of old age. Bat-Sheeva became one of his wives, Solomon their son became the next King of Israel. The only thing that has been denied is for David to build the Temple.

Posted by: Viewpoint21st | July 5, 2009 2:17 AM Report Offensive Comment

The Tanakh David bears no resemblance to the NT Christ with respect to redaction and everything else.

Posted by: Farnaz1Mansouri1 | July 5, 2009 1:22 AM Report Offensive Comment

It would appear based on many experts to include those who are also readers of the Tanakh that David was either "the charismatic leader of a band of outlaws who captures Jerusalem and makes it his capital" or was "a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation with said magnified reputation being carried out by the writers of the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings.

The exact same thing happened to Jesus, the simple preacher man, whose magnified reputation was carried out by the likes of P, M, M, L and J.

Posted by: ccnl1 | July 5, 2009 12:45 AM Report Offensive Comment

The Bible does not need you to "correct" it. If you think you can "correct" the Tanakh, then please do provide Islamic "corrections" of the NT.

You think Christians are fools? I think not. They are well aware that Islam holds that both the NT and the OT were "corrupted" and corrected in the Quoran.

You take on the Tanakh, because you think you won't be questioned by the Christians, but mess with the NT, tell them that the NT scribes got it all wrong, received a corrupted version, and all hell will break loose as you know.

Hello, hell, now, is coming from a different quarter.

Of course, according to the Quoran, anyone who believes Jesus was the Son of God is damned forever. Believe JESUS WAS THE SON OF GOD and you are DAMNED, says the Quoran.

WHAT cowards you are. If you want to understand the significance of David, read the Tanakh.

We look forward to your postings on the Quoranic corrections to the "corrupted" NT.

In the meantime, if you want your own book to underwrite a religion, write one. The Tanakh was written by Jews for Jews. Your supersessionist ideology is apalling; in this day and age increasingly dangerous.

Posted by: Farnaz1Mansouri1 | July 4, 2009 8:40 PM Report Offensive Comment

DAvid, like the rest of the Tanakh, is not meant for literalists. On this, CCNL1, a great authority on D. Wolpe, the latter an authority on Maimonides is aware. Further, David is not to be read in isolation but in combination with the Talmud, Rashi, at the very least.

To deal with him as UKBA or CCNL1 does would lead us to discussions of Muhammad's poligyny, the ventures of Jesus on the water (and under), etc.

David is a figure contained in a divine mystery, replete with the uncanny. If we accept the Documentary Hypothesis, we see anticipation of David in Genesis. A Torah scholar, giant killer, a man of great appetites, ambitions, competing loyalties, etc., his stature is enormous, and his continued relation with an abstract deity uncanny. David is not a Christian. He does not anticipate an afterlife. He does to himself what he can to save his son. When that fails, he has finished.

David does not pander to the masses, like Sanford, or the prime minister of Tunisia. He does not resort to the Q Gospel in the Sky to justify himself. He does not compare himself to MOses when he acts impulsively. Indeed, he asks sorrows for the loss of contact with the divine that Moses had.

David is a figure in a divine epic, a history. I do not we can say the same for Sanford.

He would do better to seek someone to cast out demons for him. After all, he is a Christian. Failing that, he can continue to behave as he does, be a philanderer, like Muhammed.

Posted by: Farnaz1Mansouri1 | July 4, 2009 8:27 PM Report Offensive Comment

King David?? Not so fast - Part II)

"Baruch Halpern has pictured David as a lifelong vassal of Achish, the Philistine king of Gath;[42] Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman have identified as the oldest and most reliable section of Samuel those chapters which describe David as the charismatic leader of a band of outlaws who captures Jerusalem and makes it his capital.[43]

Steven McKenzie, Associate Professor of the Hebrew Bible at Rhodes College, Memphis, Tennessee, USA and author of King David: A Biography, argues that the Biblical version of David was conceived by spin doctors. He states the belief that David actually came from a wealthy family and was "ambitious and ruthless": "The vigor with which the apology in the Bible asserts David's innocence against Saul strongly suggests that he was in fact involved in a plot against him."

The story with Goliath was probably part of the propaganda in David's favour. McKenzie's view is that David was a tyrant who murdered his political opponents, including his own sons.[39]"

Posted by: ccnl1 | July 4, 2009 12:46 PM Report Offensive Comment

King David?? Not so fast!!!

" And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation."

"The interpretation of the archeological evidence on the extent and nature of Judah and Jerusalem in the 10th century BC is a matter of fierce debate. Israel Finkelstein and Ze'ev Herzog of Tel Aviv University do not believe the archeological record supports the view that Israel at that time was a major state, but rather was a small tribal kingdom, although both Finkelstein and Silberman do accept that David and Solomon were real kings of Judah about the 10th century BCE[29].

Finkelstein says in his The Bible Unearthed (2001): "[O]n the basis of archaeological surveys, Judah remained relatively empty of permanent population, quite isolated and very marginal right up to and past the presumed time of David and Solomon, with no major urban centers and with no pronounced hierarchy of hamlets, villages and towns."[30]

According to Ze'ev Herzog "the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom".[31] On the other is William Dever, in his

What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It?, holds that the archaeological and anthropological evidence supports the broad biblical account of a Judean state in the 10th century BC.[32]"

Posted by: ccnl1 | July 4, 2009 12:37 PM Report Offensive Comment

David(as) did NOT commit adultery. Rather, the rabbinical scribes of the Bible heeped this major crime upon him due to their own hypocricy and rebelliousness to David's rule. Sanford is nothing like David.â

And donât forget about our beloved Aaron whom they accused of committing idolatry. The same Aaron, who was with Moses and also his spokesman when they both confronted Pharaoh to let the Israelites go free, was supposed to have build the golden calf for the now freed Hebrews to worship. This lie about Aaron was born out of political and religious conflict between the two kingdoms: the Northern Kingdom and the southern kingdom of Judah. The story as recorded in the bible was more likely a fabrication by the Northern Kingdom priests to discredit the priestly family in Jerusalem of the southern kingdom lead by the descendants of Aaron.

Posted by: ukba | July 4, 2009 12:24 PM Report Offensive Comment

"The governor violated his marital vows..."

He could have avoided that violation if he and his wife had used the vows that my wife and I wrote for our wedding.

We agreed that we'd stay together for as long as both of us wanted to.

Since then we've enjoyed 35 years of happy, affair-free married life.

So much for the swearing of oaths and the taking of vows.

Posted by: norriehoyt | July 4, 2009 11:03 AM Report Offensive Comment

David(as) did NOT commit adultery. Rather, the rabbinical scribes of the Bible heeped this major crime upon him due to their own hypocricy and rebelliousness to David's rule. Sanford is nothing like David.

Posted by: Usama1 | July 4, 2009 9:57 AM Report Offensive Comment

Although hilarious, the comparison to David is also disgusting. David, as a prophet, figures in mystery and the uncanny. He is a unique figure, quite unlike the sorrowful dummy, Sanford, and his history is elaborated for that reason. One does not know why David was beloved of God, but he was. Perhaps, some insight is available as we consider his huge struggles with his own desires, ambitions, passions to serve his people and the deity, how they fluctuate, combine and compete.

He is not meant to be a model. He is meant to be a tragic figure of enormous power and greatness.

Rather than defile the Tanakh with his opportunistic pandering, Sanford should seek someone to cast out his demons, crib a bit from NT nonsense. After all, he is a Christian.

Posted by: Farnaz1Mansouri1 | July 3, 2009 3:58 PM Report Offensive Comment

The Southern Baptists are merely Talibans in western dress. Mohler and his Old Testament nonsense is irrelevant to modern America.

Go away Mullah, go away. Mark Sanford and Bill Clinton have done NOTHING to you. Get a life. A nice simple one in the hills of Tora Bora awaits you.

Posted by: B2O2 | July 3, 2009 1:34 PM Report Offensive Comment

This op-ed is surprisingly uninteresting for being published in the Post. And so long... a more interesting subject might be on the intersection of faith and politics.

Because Sanford does profess to be a Christian, and because his platform has been built on supposed family values and respect for the taxpayers, I think his career in politics is pretty much shot. Brand expert John Tantillo would say that irreversible damage has been done to his personal brand... He did a post on his marketing blog, declaring Michael Jackson last week's brand winner: "You know a brand is strong when people would rather that none of the scandal had ever happened to it."--and naming Sanford the week's brand loser, pointing out that in personal political brands (rather than celebrity brands), there is less room for error.. Full post.

Posted by: elo8 | July 3, 2009 11:02 AM Report Offensive Comment

You stupid liberals! If you knew the Word of God you would know that the traditional, conservative method of handling this kind of situation is to bring the concubine into your household as Junior Wife. More: http://www.roblimo.com/node/802

Posted by: roblimo | July 3, 2009 10:49 AM Report Offensive Comment

Without full-throated repentence, there is no forgiveness from God and one of the consequences of repeated unrepentent sin is temporary estrangement from the Holy Spirit, who grieves awaiting repentence, so He can be your counselor once again. Ergo, that voice that told the Gov. that God wants him to keep his lofty position was his own narcissistic voice. And, so far as "trying" to start loving his wife again, if it doesn't come naturally it ain't love - it's merely a perverse sense of obligation after getting caught. Once he repents fully, the schoolboy crush will dissipate, his love for his wife will return (assuming it was ever there and not a mere union of co-dependent careerists) and the voice he hears will again be that of God, the Holy Spirit. Absent that, he has and is nothing of value to himself, his family or SC.

Posted by: BennyFactor | July 3, 2009 5:40 AM Report Offensive Comment

There is something truly adolescent about Christianity. This is not meant to be condescending, but just think about it -- as objectively as you can.

Christianity has absurd ideas about sex, unfathomably rigid roles based on gender, believe they have a right to harm others in the name of their gang but look for forgiveness when caught red-handed, are incomprehsibly beligerant in groups yet fairly timid as individuals, do what they're told if they think there's a payoff (heaven), and refuse to believe reasoned evidence that conflicts with what their beliefs.

Then, think about how you acted as a teenager, or if you have had them, how your own teenagers act/ed.

Then why be surprised, if someone insists on following such a belief system, when they act like a teenager???

Posted by: ethanquern | July 3, 2009 5:31 AM Report Offensive Comment

David may have repented, but he seemed mostly sorry that he had been caught and that the child of his adultery died.

At any rate, he didnât have to divorce any of his current wives, and he continued to have sex with Bathsheba (we know this because the next king, Solomon, was Bathshebaâs son).

Perhaps Gov. Sanford simply longs for the day when a man could commit adultery, murder, have multiple wives, and still be considered a âman after Godâs own heartâ.

Posted by: hgillette | July 3, 2009 3:13 AM Report Offensive Comment

Of course, this has whole brouhaha has disturbed a lot of us (me included). I will never forget the cry my mother let out when she found a condom in the pocket of my father's pants which she was mending.

She had had a hysterectomy two years before.

We are talking tragedies here, people.

Posted by: owascolg | July 3, 2009 2:48 AM Report Offensive Comment

King David was a man of God's heart? Well then, off you go guys and emulate him by "taking" wives and concubines (I suppose they weren't asked, especially not the "young woman" who had to warm him when he was old) and kill people left and right!

"David's sins were only against God"? Not really. Taking lives and others' wives and forcing women to bed with him - I'd call that pretty heavy sins, against people. I'd call it tyranny, murder, bigami and rape.

Oh, the fundamental Christians understand that that was the custom a long time ago, and we can't do that today? You are quite right. That goes for denying women and gays their human rights, too.

Posted by: asoders22 | July 3, 2009 2:19 AM Report Offensive Comment

Well, if Sanford really wants to follow the King David line, all he has to do is wait for his eldest son to rise up and lead a rebellion against him, after which his right hand henchman who does all his dirty work will vanquish him. While mourning his son's loss, said henchman will then threaten a coup if he doesn't show a public face of gratitude and celebration rather than mourning at said son's demise. His lifelong dream of building a temple to God as a legacy will be denied him, he'll plot an ill-advised census (for gerrymandering?) which God will take offense at, causing Him to bring down a plague on South Carolina that will kill 70,000 people, and end his days shivering under warm blankets, despite having a young woman under them next to him (again, not his wife). His final act will be to wreak vengeance on all his old enemies, including aforementioned right-hand henchman, so as to consolidate the political future of his heir.

That is, if he wants to follow the Davidic parallel to its sad and senile end.

Posted by: treetopflyer | July 3, 2009 2:00 AM Report Offensive Comment

Gov. Sanford wants to have his cake and eat it, too -- and will, if those closest to him allow him to get away with it. Since being unmasked, he's been daring everyone in a position to remove him to either put up or shut up; crazy as a fox in that approach, but it seems to be working.

It wouldn't with me. Were it in my power, Sanford would have been bounced out of the Governor's Office so fast it would make your head spin. But it's not in my power. I'm not even a citizen of South Carolina. As far as a lout like Sanford is concerned, his comings, goings, doings, wheelings & dealings are none of my business and most South Carolinians probably agree with him, even as they wring their hands over his lies and transgressions -- especially the way he betrayed his wonderful, loyal wife. Her managerial skills made him Governor of South Carolina. When you realize how central she was to his success in electoral politics, and observe how he has repaid her, one can only wonder how badly he has abused his political office, first-and-foremost a position of trust. It's all of a piece. His conduct in high office cannot be much different than his conduct towards his wife, or any better.

That puts the onus of removing him on the people of South Carolina, where it truly belongs. But the handful of political power-people in South Carolina who can remove him seem to lack the nerve. So, in this bizarre poker game (marked by blatant hypocrisy, unseemly lust, spousal betrayal, faux Christianity and false piety), Sanford seems to have almost bluffed his way to winning the jackpot; unless, of course, another player holding a stronger hand calls his bluff ... .

Posted by: hogsmile | July 3, 2009 1:29 AM Report Offensive Comment

Rev. Mohler's point about contrition is quite apt, actually. We cannot really understand King David's sins for many reasons, one being that his sins are only against God and not any particular person under his reign, a point made by Hobbes in Leviathan. Remember all with kings are made slaves to those kings, according to Samuel. Thus, the sin of which King David is guilty is committed only against God. Uriah was killed in battle. Having tried to win an argument with Hobbes on this point in my mind and failed miserably, it really becomes apparent that all the flaws of the Kings boil down to their relationship not with their servants, but most of all, with God, to whom they owe the greatest allegiance. Hence, the repentance is only with respect to God, not Uriah. That Nathan feels differently does not change the overall reality, which is that the King is responsible to God and the people are responsible to the King. In this sense, David's repentance is genuine, such that it is accepted by God, who alone knows the heart. This is one reason Sanford's stance is absurd. Sanford is not a King.

Posted by: Martial | July 3, 2009 12:27 AM Report Offensive Comment

Mr. Mohler, We know that David was a man after God's own heart. (I Sam. 13) On the other hand, God in his infinite wisdom lets us know in I Kings 2 that David, on his deathbed (long after the episode with Bathsheba, perhaps between 20-30 years later), ordered Solomon to murder Joab, his trusted general who had been his right-hand man for over 30 years, and who had carried out David's command of placing Bathsheba's husband/soldier Uriah in the heat of the battle so that he might be killed. David's reasoning is that Joab had killed two of the generals of the army that opposed his rise to the throne of the consolidated kingdom 33 years before. Solomon had no problem going along with the plan because Joab had aligned himself with Solomon's brother. Could it be, though, that David was destroying one of the few witnesses to his darkest chapter? The only other human who apparently knew what had happened with Uriah was the prophet Nathan, who was squarely in Solomon's camp in I Kings. Bottom line: David, Mark Sanford, Jon Meacham, and the rest of the world . . . we are all sinners. Examples of sin, such as David's, point us to the need of a Savior, a perfect Savior without blemish, born of a virgin, conceived by the Holy Ghost, and therefore sinless, who died to pay the price for our sin, and for the sins of the whole world, even of the democrats. By rising again, He proved God the Father accepted the sacrifice; the veil in the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom, proving that man could now enjoy a relationship with God through Jesus Christ, "that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."

Posted by: EliPeyton | July 3, 2009 12:03 AM Report Offensive Comment

thank you. thank you. thank you.

finally, someone gets it...i'm somewhat embarrassed to admit that i have been watching this train wreck with fascination...puzzled by the fact that this man has shown absolutely no sense of shame or contrition regarding this mess...and, that he would publicly refer to his "soul mate", throwing the betrayed wife the bone of "trying to fall back in love"...it is absolutely astounding, and, i can think of no greater insult to his wife.

it is refreshing to hear, from a christian standpoint, someone calling him on his behavior, not whitewashing it with "forgiveness"...as he has not been shy about referencing the bible, and, with this, i cringe every time.

he seems clueless to his arrogance and has no concept of the trust and respect he has carelessly tossed away.

Posted by: jazzgrrrl25 | July 3, 2009 12:02 AM Report Offensive Comment

King David? Is that the same guy of the Charles HestonÂ´s movies? Do they still race chariots in South Carolina? I must see that!!!

What a bunch of ignorant people all these Evangelical Christians... they are like the tribal people of Afghanistan...

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 11:27 PM Report Offensive Comment

Dear Maria: Thank you for making Governor Sanford happy. And thank you for making possible for us to be treated with some free entertainment courtesy of the religious nuts of our country. Without you all this circus in which a bunch of religious nuts (yes dear Maria... we do have our own Taleban here in the United States...), without you dear Maria all this circus in which a bunch of religious nuts - I was saying - stone in public one of their own wouldnÂ´t ever happen. Now Maria it would be great if you could arrange from time to time (lets say every four to six months) to have a fellow Argentine lady, or a Chilean lady, or a Paraguayan lady (nationality is not really important... we are very open-minded in that respect) enter in a similar relationship with another right-wing nut, preferable a US Senator or State Governor or TV Evangelist or even The Greatest of Them All, Rush L!!!, that would be very much appreciated.

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 11:22 PM Report Offensive Comment

Interesting that Mr. Sanford mentioned King David.

I've read that a influential group of Christian conservative politicians subscribe to a theology where, like the biblical, morally flawed David figure, as elected office holders they consider themselves to be God's "chosen", sent to guide the flock. They therefore consider their personal moral boo boos to be irrelevant to their divinely assigned task of continuing in power.

It really works out quite well for them.

Posted by: minneapolis1 | July 2, 2009 10:37 PM Report Offensive Comment

He should continue as a governor because he was doing a good job at it. Who cares about his affair, I can care less. Then, if he found his soul-mate he should go after her or bring her here, divorce (YES DIVORCE) his wife and bring some glamour to his life.

Posted by: Piccolina | July 2, 2009 9:26 PM --------------------------------------

Give me a frigging break. HE WAS DOING A GOOD JOB? By refusing to accept and use the stimulus money to pull sinking SC out of the mud he put her in. That's what you call a GOOD JOB. And the HIGH COURT in SC has the same opinion.

You need to see a good doctor, a Neurologist most likely will tell you that you miss one important part...........BRAIN

Posted by: mackiejw | July 2, 2009 10:16 PM Report Offensive Comment

The world is a completely different place, morally, spiritually, and intellectually. Whereas none then could have conceived of a world without slaves, none today (at least in America anyways) can conceive of a society with them. Because it is impossible for us to think as the ancients did, it is foolish for Governor Sanford to have imagined himself as some sort of King David. Whether foolishness suffices as a cause for resignation remains to be seen. What is definite is that, were adultery sufficient cause to disown a man or woman or political office, Congress would likely lose half its membership. Reverend Mohler and I have a different standard for fidelity than was present in the Old Testament. Neither of us would approve of polygamy, concubines, or harlots.

Posted by: Martial | July 2, 2009 9:56 PM Report Offensive Comment

Fake Christian... neo-fascist conservative with a liberal penis.

Posted by: kkrimmer | July 2, 2009 9:30 PM Report Offensive Comment

Oh please come on seriously? do you still believe in "sin" and "repentance" and all those old fashioned words? Certainly we live in another world, that guilty-based morality doesn't solve the problem of humanity and a good example of its failure is the behavior of governor Sanford who was a ferviant devoted christian but a human being at last. I kind of wish for all those republicans who condemned Clinton for his mistake to "fall from heaven" so they would understand. Now this one did. He should continue as a governor because he was doing a good job at it. Who cares about his affair, I can care less. Then, if he found his soul-mate he should go after her or bring her here, divorce (YES DIVORCE) his wife and bring some glamour to his life.

Posted by: Piccolina | July 2, 2009 9:26 PM Report Offensive Comment

I just hope that when he dies and he is sitting in hell with Bill Clinton, John Edwards, and Gary Hart that they can establish a better bipartisan relationship.

People get a life political party has nothing to do with these guys egos and inability to cope with life.

Posted by: staterighter | July 2, 2009 9:13 PM Report Offensive Comment

First of all, Sanford was not "ambushed" by the media.He was met in a public place by a reporter who immediately identified herself. So stop this crap about a public official being kneecapped. In the second place, Sanford is the powerless governor of a state where all the power resides in the legislature. Don't you know that? Lastly, if Mark Sanford had a shred of integrity or decency, he would flee to Argentina to be with his "soul mate" and leave his wife and four boys with all his valuables. Of course, the Argentine bimbo at that point would have no need for him. Even though he alleges to be a "fiscal conservative". Now, ain't that rich?

Posted by: tytyman | July 2, 2009 9:11 PM Report Offensive Comment

Somebody please apply the 25th amendment to Governor Sanford. He will never notice that it's not part of the SC constitution, he's too far gone.

Posted by: Bluefish2012 | July 2, 2009 9:10 PM Report Offensive Comment

I am not sympathetic to Governor Mark Sanford's political views. Nor would I recommend his hypocrisy and past sanctimonious behavior as a role model to other politicians. Obviously he is in deep emotional turmoil, which he is going to have to work out for himself, perhaps with the help of those close to him. But so far he has not demonstrated that he is incapable of carrying out the duties that the people of South Carolina elected him to do, nor has he been found guilty of any crimes and misdemeanors. Thus, unless he feels he can no longer carry out those duties, there are no reasons for him to resign.

Posted by: raymondw1 | July 2, 2009 8:48 PM Report Offensive Comment

2 Samuel 5:13..."After he left Hebron, David took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem, and more sons and daughters were born to him." I guess Argentina will have to do....

Posted by: tbrucia | July 2, 2009 8:47 PM Report Offensive Comment

God forgives Christians for their sin, but ultimately they pay for the consequence of their sin, and others close to them suffer too because of the sin. To be "truly" repentant the "sinner" must turn away from the sin "completely". Christians should not try to play games with God, because God will not be mocked. The key is "true" "repentance."

Posted by: opinion48 | July 2, 2009 8:09 PM Report Offensive Comment

(sings) The most beautiful sound I ever heard: Maria, Maria, Maria, Maria . . . All the beautiful sounds of the world in a single word . . Maria, Maria, Maria, Maria . . . Maria! I've just met a girl named Maria, And suddenly that name Will never be the same To me. Maria! I've just kissed a girl named Maria, And suddenly I've found How wonderful a sound Can be! Maria! Say it loud and there's music playing, Say it soft and it's almost like praying.

Guv. Sanford has the emotional maturity of a 16 year old.

You can only laugh at this guy's press conferences.

He is like a Harlequin novel come to life!

Posted by: captn_ahab | July 2, 2009 7:54 PM Report Offensive Comment

I love it when the fundamentalist ayatollahs of right wing seminaries eat their young.

Posted by: medogsbstfrnd | July 2, 2009 7:47 PM Report Offensive Comment

Please, people, get a sense of humor. This man Sanford is almost as entertaining and dazzlingly vulgar and tacky as the Palin family! The Confessions of Saint Sanford! Please don't make him resign now!!! You must admit that these fallen "Christians," who would tell the rest of us what is moral and what isn't, become highly entertaining when they break their own rules and then try to explain their downfalls. Keep on keepin' on, guvnor!

Posted by: eslinda | July 2, 2009 7:46 PM Report Offensive Comment

Sanford's analogy with King David, which is patently absurd, is a means to manipulate the public and get out of resignation. Sanford needs to permanently remove himself from public office. Rev. Bookburn - Radio Volta

Posted by: revbookburn | July 2, 2009 6:54 PM Report Offensive Comment

Governor Sanford did not sin. His afterlife will be no different than that of Mohler as worm food. He broke agreements with his wife when he cavorted with a mistress (and other women). He broke his contract with the people of South Carolina when he disappeared without trace for five days. He should have had the character to break up with his wife prior to falling into bed with Maria. He should have spoken about his love and failing marriage to the people of SC and then visited Argentina. But it is Sanford's life and it is his story. He should write it anyway he chooses. If there is a God He will definitely judge Mohler much more harshly than He will ever judge a fallen Sanford or Clinton. If there is an afterlife I fear for Mohler. Stones will be thrown at him at regular intervals.

Posted by: indiamerican | July 2, 2009 6:44 PM Report Offensive Comment

Seems to me he has to keep himself in the public eye so reassure his mistress that although he can't be with her, she can see him on TV.

The media would do well to end all interviews in order for him to make up his mind where he wants to be.

Now he is writing a book? Didn't William Faulkner turn to writing bedause he was spurned by his "soul mate" and wanted to get her attention?

If Mrs. Sanford takes him back, it will be because she feels sorry for him and what he is going through. Good luck with that.

Posted by: disunion | July 2, 2009 6:14 PM Report Offensive Comment

King David was King of the Jews and a man after god's own heart. Years ago, Billy James Hargis in Tulsa compared himself to King David too. God is evil and so are all three "mortals".

Isaiah 45:7, Lam 3:38, Amos 3:6

Posted by: icn2u | July 2, 2009 5:46 PM Report Offensive Comment

Well, if respectable at all, it's more respectable to be in love when you commit adultery than just wanting to fool around. And even though I don't trust a man who cheats, I don't really see how the rest of us should be entitled to know everything about this love story and what they were writing to each other (or even want to know). It concerns him, his wife and his lover.

But since I know, I wonder why he is not marrying this soul mate. Either that, or he should have backed off in the first place and tried to rekindle feelings for his wife.

Posted by: asoders22 | July 2, 2009 5:43 PM Report Offensive Comment

If a firefighter employed by a public entity cheated on his wife (and they do... that thing about their long hoses is not joke!) should that firefighter be expelled from the firefighting unit?

And what about the Catholic priests that have mistresses by the hundreds?

And what about Dick Cheney that almost killed his hunting buddy because he (Dick Cheney) though his hundting buddy had an affair with one of DickÂ´s mistresses?

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 5:34 PM Report Offensive Comment

If a firefighter employed by a public entity cheated on his wife (and they do... that thing about their long hoses is not joke!) should that firefighter be expelled from the firefighting unit?

And what about the Catholic priests that have mistresses by the hundreds?

And what about Dick Cheney that almost killed his hunting buddy because he (Dick Cheney) though his hundting buddy had an affair with one of DickÂ´s mistresses?

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 5:32 PM Report Offensive Comment

Those who are asking for the GovernorÂ´s resignation are those who would like to cheat on their respective wives but are so ugly and inept when it comes to talking to a nice looking girl that not even a 90 year old cow would listen to them.

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 5:25 PM Report Offensive Comment

First of all, it's kind of refreshing to have a politician, essentially say he is in love with his mistress. I appreciate the candor.

As to the state of South Carolina, well, the entertainment value alone should justify his staying in office. I only wish he'd dump the wife, and bring the hottie from Argentina up here. It would be a hoot.

As to his four kids, I doubt he's a great father anyway, not making sure his kids could contact him on father's day. He'd probably be a better step-father to the hottie's two kids.

Gov., go with your heart. Someone is calling you down yonder. And please, put the Bible away for a while, and enjoy.

Posted by: santafe2 | July 2, 2009 5:22 PM Report Offensive Comment

Governor... you love that girl? Then be with her and tell everyone else my heart and my bed are off-limits. I am not a Republican (nor a Democrat), I do not belong to any Church, but I am human as you are and I have been in love also. If a God really exists, that God gave us a heart and the capacity to love with passion. Do what your heart tells you to do and not what the CNN newsperson is selling to her/his audience to satisfy the advertisers.

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 5:20 PM Report Offensive Comment

I just love the tolerance of all you "open minded" liberals. You castigate Dr. Mohler, but are guilty of what you accuse him of. Get the beam out of your eye before you go after Mohler's speck in his.

Posted by: bhaynes129 | July 2, 2009 5:16 PM Report Offensive Comment

Nah, Sanford can't repent - puhlease, people - this is a story of true love.

What he can do is resign.

Posted by: Ruffles1 | July 2, 2009 5:11 PM Report Offensive Comment

If we want to see Christian cheating on wives at its best we need to look no further that the Cruzades. Husband will scream from the bottom of his castle all around wall: "...Honey... I am leaving... I am going on a Cruzade... You honey take care of the kids... the castle... the pigs... the chicken...I will be back from the Holy Sepulcre in ten years..." and out he goes to pillage and rape... for ten years! In the name of Jesus!!!

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 5:08 PM Report Offensive Comment

"You know, they refused Jesus too...(Albert Mohler) said, you're not him..."

Posted by: maxim678504 | July 2, 2009 5:04 PM Report Offensive Comment

DidnÂ´t George Washington use to cheat?

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 5:04 PM Report Offensive Comment

I have to honestly admitt it: religious people and their posts, op-eds, editorials, etc give me free comic relief.

Otherwise I would have to pay to hear some stand-up comedian and you religious people, particularly the American Talibaners of the Evangelical Christian Church(es) are funnier.

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 5:00 PM Report Offensive Comment

Now... here we are... Third Millenium (for the religious nuts)... and a Governor of South Carolina is judged by what a certain Kind David did when the human race and the racoon looked very much alike.

Would someone please tell these religious nuts that (counting from the time good Joseph became a "cornutto") is the year of 2009...

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 4:56 PM Report Offensive Comment

Mr Mohler should resign. His heart is not functioning so he should resign and regenerate. Sanford is a human and a man who fell in love with a woman to whom he is not married. That's not sufficient cause for him to resign the governorship. If he's performing the job competently, he should stay on until his term expires. To condemn someone for human behaviour is moralistic, unrealistic, and says more about the state of the condemner than the one the condemner would condemn. Get off your prudish soapbox Mohler and come down to earth.

Posted by: aguy7 | July 2, 2009 4:56 PM Report Offensive Comment

Lets assume Tiger Woods drives his ball into the woods and someone says: "...you see... Sam Snead would never grab his driver that way..." I am sure everyone around would scream right away: "Sam Snead... that is pre-historic!!!!"

Now... here we are... Third Millenium (for the religious nuts)... and a Governor of South Carolina is judged by what a certain Kind David did when the human race and the racoon looked very much alike.

Would someone please tell these religious nuts that (counting from the time Joseph became a "cornutto") is the year of 2009...

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 4:53 PM Report Offensive Comment

I am much less concerned about Sanford's conflicted personal than I am about his association with "the Family et al", the pseudo-Christian group headed by Douglas Coe that believes anything that a member of their "fellowship" (which focuses on recruiting influencial & wealthy corporate & political leaders) does is OK as long as they says it's for Jesus. This group has very odd beliefs, such as claiming the members replace Jews as God's "chosen people" and supporting dictators who killed thousands of their own people, such as Suharto. Apparently he was doing God's work. This is a secretive group that gives ease to our political representatives in an address in Washington called "C street." This group has a long association with right wing groups that formed to oppose and ultimately defeat FDR's social reforms. Why isn't the media covering the association of BOTH Sandford and that other hypocrite, Ensign, to this scary "Fellowship." It's important for people to know that their legislators associate with theocrats with a political & economic agenda that is antithetical to the most basic democratic principles. Nothing frightens me more than a secretive organizating giving support & sustenance to the egos that hold the strings of our future in their idiot hands.

Oh, BTY, the "spiritual advice" coming from his "advisors" in this bunch of crazies is that Sanford should imagine putting a bullet into the head of his lover. Not surprising, seeing how misogyny usually accompanies authoritarian economic & political fundamentalism, but really, do we want men to conquer their passions by imagining more directing even more violence at women!

I'm betting Sanford's anguish is more a conflict over his ambition vs. love than faith vs. passion!

Posted by: Karyn1 | July 2, 2009 4:50 PM Report Offensive Comment

Is South Carolina full name The Christian Thoecratic State of South Carolina?

Or is it: The American Equivalent to the Islamic Taleban of South Carolina?

The Governor is in love with someone who happens to be other than his wife... so what? I am sure 99% of South Carolinians cheated on their spouses at least once.

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 4:42 PM Report Offensive Comment

David became a "model...of repentence". But he also got to keep the dead soldier's wife. Nice work if you can get it.

Posted by: newageblues | July 2, 2009 4:39 PM Report Offensive Comment

antypasa, if you see nothing wrong with an extramarital affair based on love, then you should see nothing wrong with homosexuality based on love, either.

On another note, perhaps Sanford should be excused for taking a strictly business trip to deliver his own stimulus package to an economically distressed Argentinian..., perhaps.

Posted by: TalkingHead1 | July 2, 2009 4:37 PM Report Offensive Comment

Please DO NOT, DO NOT resign. I do not believe in any of the religious cr@p you do believe but I believe you - as a Governor - must be judged by what you do at work and not in bed. If they wanted to elect a Saint they could have voted in the Vatican.

Posted by: luispanagi | July 2, 2009 4:37 PM Report Offensive Comment

A big part of the problem is people like Albert Mohler Jr. and organizations like The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

Tell me Mr. Mohler why are you using Bill Clinton's affair to assuage Gov Sanford's and every other republicans' immoral conduct? Bill Clinton did not drag Hillary and Chelsea into the mud the way Sanford is doing to his wife and kids!!! At least Clinton chose to save his family!!!! Isn't love for traditional "family" one of the pillars of a moral society you self-righteous religious type love to preach to democrats ??? So why are you putting Sanford in the same class as Clinton?? Sanford's conduct is far more egregious than Bill Clinton's but because Sanford is a republican, the republican religion politicians are minimizing it.

Mr Mohler, you & Southern Baptist disgust me! You are so arrogant you can't see the harm to the Body of Christ that you and your organization are doing!!!! I am so thankful that the God of the Universe. Yes that one! The God of Abraham, Issac & Jacob is no respecter of man; otherwise, He would be like you Mr. Mohler & your lukewarm organization behaving as though the only righteous people on the planet exist ONLY in the Republican party!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You and the rest of your self-righteous bunch need to get pass Clinton's affair it is no longer good political cover nor a good excuse for your political party's behavior.

Posted by: SteelWheel25 | July 2, 2009 4:32 PM Report Offensive Comment

Sanford should resign. Not because he committed a sin in adultery, that's a private matter between him and God. He should resign because he is the chief law enforcement officer of South Carolina and is ultimately responsible for upholding South Carolina's law. In South Carolina, it is illegal, punishable by fine and/or prison, to have sex with someone other than your spouse when you are married. Sanford broke the law and he used public funds to assist himself in doing so. for that, he should be removed from office, either voluntarily or by impeachment.

Posted by: adifferentpointofview | July 2, 2009 4:32 PM Report Offensive Comment

What a bunch of malarky. The man fell in love, and his letters are really quite touching. Falling in love happens--even to Christians! And when it does the force of the emotion overwhelms even the most moralizing souls. As Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin...."

Posted by: antypasa | July 2, 2009 4:27 PM Report Offensive Comment

(sings) The most beautiful sound I ever heard: Maria, Maria, Maria, Maria . . . All the beautiful sounds of the world in a single word . . Maria, Maria, Maria, Maria . . . Maria! I've just met a girl named Maria, And suddenly that name Will never be the same To me. Maria! I've just kissed a girl named Maria, And suddenly I've found How wonderful a sound Can be! Maria! Say it loud and there's music playing, Say it soft and it's almost like praying.

Just ROFL at this immature excuse for a Governor!!!!!

Posted by: captn_ahab | July 2, 2009 4:04 PM Report Offensive Comment

It is a continuing danger to have real or contrived scandals used to overturn elections. Sanfordâs affairs are not a legitimate public issue. Of course, he is answerable to his wife and family â and his own conscience.

My view on this is not confined to wayward Republicans. Last yearâs scandal with New York Governor Eliot Spitzer should have remained private. Like Sanford now, Spitzerâs responsibility was to his wife and family.

Two decades ago, through an odd chain of events, I became the press secretary for Arizona Governor Evan Mecham. He was impeached and removed from office, but for all the wrong reasons. His public image was that of a racist, which he was not. The state legislature accused Mecham of a number of crimes, none of which were ever proven.

I have begun compiling and posting old letters, speeches, articles and other documents regarding the impeachment of Even Mecham. Although that was 20 years ago, I believe this fairly recent history is important to study before any more legitimate elections are overturned by scandal and media frenzy.

The web site is at: http://www.kensmith.us

Posted by: kensmith1 | July 2, 2009 4:00 PM Report Offensive Comment

Mr. Mohler is entitled to his perspective. However, I've read the Governor's correspondence with his mistress and struggle to find anything that could be described as "sickening" (juvenile perhaps, but not sickening). Sometimes I wonder if significant parts of the US Christian movement find sex itself repulsive. It would certainly explain a great deal.

Posted by: LeprechaunAngst | July 2, 2009 3:59 PM Report Offensive Comment

Romantic love is a relatively recent phenomenon in human history. Arranged marriages have been the norm throughout most of the race's lifespan on the planet, and are still the norm in parts of Asia and, I believe, Africa. For Americans in particular "love" is usually equated with "feeling," and therein lies the snare in Gov. Sanford's case. The Marriage Encounter movement has it right: Love is not a feeling but a decision. Of course that's much easier said than done - I'm divorced and remarried myself. But the ideal should still remain that we honor our vows -- and if we cannot, then we should not slink off to play out of sight and expect our family and friends, and in this case, the entire State of South Carolina, to forgive & forget if we just belly up to the mike, shed a few tears and say. "I'm sorry. Can't we all just go on?" John Patrick Grace - Huntington, WV

Posted by: publishersplace | July 2, 2009 3:57 PM Report Offensive Comment

Anyone familiar with the story of David should understand that the king had a man murdered so he could marry that man's wife. Bathsheba was not David's only wife, either. For his sin, his most beloved son with Bathseba was killed. But David is in the lineage of Christ.

So, no, Sanford is no David, but we should all hope he doesn't do anything more to try to draw the parallels.

Posted by: Xlnt | July 2, 2009 3:56 PM Report Offensive Comment

Aren't we all going to love the moment when Righteous Al Mohler has to admit to an affair but refuses to leave his post at the Seminary?

Posted by: clsvail | July 2, 2009 3:42 PM Report Offensive Comment

I don't have a dog in the fight about Sanford resigning. That's up to the people of S.Carolina.

I only want Republicans to stop living as if they were the only moral people in the world. I want them to judge others by the same standards they judge themselves; that people make errors in their personal lives and they can learn and recover from them. All too often Republicans like Mark Sanford in particular, preach and wail when Democrats fall from grace but offer a forgiving hand when it's a Republican. We saw the same hypocrisy when Mrs. Palin's teenaged daughter became pregnant out of wedlock. Unforgivable for a young black woman, to be embraced and forgiven in a white, Republican family.

The problem is if the Republicans actually decided to make personal, sexual choices off limits they would have to extend that to gays, lesbians, and abortion rights. This they cannot do. Now they straddle a terrible dilemma; how do they excuse the sexual peccadillos of Mark Sanford and but not a Democrat, gay, lesbian, or woman who wants to choose an abortion.

There is only one way I know of, you claim you alone are forgiven by God because everyone else is Godless. La Coulter herself has already made this leap. Republicans must press forward, embrace prosperity Christianity, and try to make America into a religious state. In this state God shows his grace by showering the Godly with wealth and power. Whatever one must do to achieve God's grace is acceptable. Falls from grace are forgivable. Personal lives of the Godless can be regulated because they are Godless.

Posted by: arancia12 | July 2, 2009 3:41 PM Report Offensive Comment

No need to even repent, Sanford, just resign and disappear from the public. Or, emigrate to Argentina.

Posted by: TalkingHead1 | July 2, 2009 3:31 PM Report Offensive Comment

Whatever Gov. Sanford does, he should do it off stage. My heart goes out to anyone in his state of pain and confusion both spiritually and personally, but he should not be trying to run a government while he deals with those issues.

Posted by: gshpc | July 2, 2009 3:29 PM Report Offensive Comment

First, MZBond, hearts are powerful, and God says that and He loves our hearts. But he holds the mind and the discipline of choice above the heart. We choose with our mind, or we are lost. Thank you Dr. Mohler for a very insightful and articulate summary. Your words echo my thoughts on this that I could not articulate as well. Blessings.

Posted by: Bert12 | July 2, 2009 3:06 PM Report Offensive Comment

God is in our hearts, we must follow our hearts. Mark Sanford should not feign from his wife. He should divorce her and be with his true love.

Posted by: mzbond | July 2, 2009 2:46 PM Report Offensive Comment

Title:

assistant: A Governor, a King, and the Tragedy of Adultery