Settings
About Us
Categories
Search
Archives
Links
Miscellany
Much of the time, ‘Christianism’ is just a label applied to any conservative who expresses his religious views in a way that displeases Andrew Sullivan. Then there’s stuff like this.
H/T: Huffington Post
Tom posted this at 1:02 PM HKT on Thursday, October 30th, 2008 as Audacity of Hype, Faith
Christopher Hitchens here writes about how terrible it is that McCain and Palin are railing against some of the billions of dollars the federal government spends on research. In the midst of which, we get this:
We never get a chance to ask her in detail about these things, but she is known to favor the teaching of creationism in schools (smuggling this crazy idea through customs in the innocent disguise of “teaching the argument,” as if there was an argument), and so it is at least probable that she believes all creatures from humans to fruit flies were created just as they are now.
A. All the recent stories have been that Palin is the only one of the four major candidates frequently having discussions with the media. It seems that lots of people get to ask her questions these days.
B. It doesn’t require a federal research grant to search the interwebs and find that Palin actually doesn’t promote the teaching of creationism. Hitchens has no excuse for peddling lies, though the irony of doing it in this particular column made it worth my time to read this. Flippin’ Wikipedia even got this one right.
C. I don’t think that Sarah Palin has said whether she’s a creationist or not, so the last line of speculation is largely baseless. I actually like that she doesn’t talk about that, since it’s a complete non-issue what our politicians think about the vast majority of scientific issues.
For someone so concerned about science and research, this was a remarkably fact-free tirade.
Hitchens then proceeds to a lengthy paragraph of unhinged and unsupported speculation about Palin as a religious fanatic. There’s not too much actually connecting Palin personally to religious fanaticism (and, by any historical or global standard, Pentecostals are some pretty mild religious fanatics), though I’m not sure it’s a terribly American past time to begrudge politicians their peculiar theological beliefs. It’s interesting for Hitchens, who hates all religion, and who understands the finer points of Christian theology about as well as a hammer understands a wine glass, to involve himself in such a discussion.
Apollo posted this at 5:17 PM HKT on Monday, October 27th, 2008 as Faith, Hitch-slapped!
I’m tired of the Bristol Palin pregnancy story. But I did see two commentaries about it that deserve more attention. First up (H/T) is a piece that discusses the evangelicals reaction, which is much different than how lefties think evangelicals react:
For what the Left sees as hypocrisy, most folks who are not Obama voters just see as falling short. As, of course, we, as humans, all do.
Bristol Palin’s journey is a human story. She tried to be good. She fell short. Instead of aborting the baby she will carry it to term and marry the father. To socially conservative America, there is nothing tragic about this.
You see, to many of the voters Barack Obama has not yet seemed to reach and who have thus far been ambivalent about McCain, this is exactly how these things are supposed to go. Their reality has not been shaken, the scales have not fallen from their eyes.
Sarah Palin did nothing “wrong.” And Bristol Palin did nothing other than sin, which we all do. She is now managing her sin as prescribed by tradition. To the traditionalist the situation is not ideal, no, but it is not a disaster.
This is a human story. The more the left attacks, attempts to expose “hypocrisy”, the more the personal will very much become the political. Unfortunately it will become political in a way that leads all those hard working Bubbas, all those church-going single mommas, right out to the polls to vote for that war hero and and those women they now identify with, Sarah and Bristol Palin.
What’s more concerning is the second take. David Frum essentially asks, why didn’t the McCain campaign handle this better?
Many conservatives, including my friends at the Corner, are outraged that the pregnancy of Bristol Palin has drawn swifter and more ferocious media attention than the adultery and (probable) out-of-wedlock fatherhood of John Edwards. They blame media bias, and probably they are right. Sexual adventuring or embarrassment involving Republican politicians is usually covered much more eagerly than that involving Democrats.
Question though: Is media bias a new or surprising fact about American politics? Wasn’t the reaction to the Palin pregnancy foreseeable? If so, why wasn’t it foreseen?
Thoughts to consider.
Hubbard posted this at 1:31 PM HKT on Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008 as Audacity of Hype, Excruciatingly Correct Behavior, Faith
I’m normally not a fan of Gospel music, but this one (NSFW) (H/T) had me in stitches.
Hubbard posted this at 4:50 PM HKT on Monday, August 18th, 2008 as Faith, Humor, Pop Culture Is Filth
About a week ago, a student at Central Florida University attended Catholic mass was given Eucharist — i.e., a communion wafer — and did not eat it immediately as one is supposed to do and, indeed, took it home with him over the objections of the church. In addition to being physically grabbed by some of the other parishioners and igniting a media and campus firestorm, he has apparently received death threats.
Though other Christain denominations also ‘take communion,’ few believe it to be as literally true as Catholics do; indeed, they believe the wafer is literally changed into the body of Christ through during the mass and that consuming it is a vital and necessary act of communion with God. Though it still looks and tastes like a bread wafer it is, for all intents and purposes to them, Jesus’ body and holy beyond measure.
It’s unclear why the kid did it. In this article, he alternately claims to have been trying to show it to a friend to explain Catholicism to him — which is something like explaining Islam to someone by ripping the best pages out of a Koran and showing them to him…only worse — and then then seems to have been protesting the pubic university’s funding of religious institutions.
Predictably, the professional hysterics at the Catholic League launched a campaign of manufactured outrage as soon as they got wind of it. Equally predictably, biologist and atheist apologist Professor PZ Myers — whom this blog has linked to approvingly before — was outraged by the outrage, especially (and quite rightfully) by the death threats. Less predictably, Myers went on to write this, which I can only imagine would make Richard Dawkins blush for shame:
I have an idea. Can anyone out there score me some consecrated communion wafers? There’s no way I can personally get them — my local churches have stakes prepared for me, I’m sure — but if any of you would be willing to do what it takes to get me some, or even one, and mail it to me, I’ll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare. I won’t be tempted to hold it hostage (no, not even if I have a choice between returning the Eucharist and watching Bill Donohue kick the pope in the balls, which would apparently be a more humane act than desecrating a goddamned cracker), but will instead treat it with profound disrespect and heinous cracker abuse, all photographed and presented here on the web. I shall do so joyfully and with laughter in my heart. If you can smuggle some out from under the armed guards and grim nuns hovering over your local communion ceremony, just write to me and I’ll send you my home address.
Tom posted this at 1:16 PM HKT on Friday, July 11th, 2008 as Excruciatingly Correct Behavior, Faith, Science!, The Past Is Never Dead--It Isn't Even Past
…to not notice that you’re on the cover of your church’s magazine along with Louis Farrakhan? I can understand not reading every page of every issue, but if they put you on the cover I think you’re obliged to at least know about what’s inside.
Of course, I’m an old fashioned type who thinks that you should probably share the beliefs of the church you join, so perhaps I’m not seeing this through the correct lens.
Apollo posted this at 10:14 PM HKT on Thursday, May 15th, 2008 as Audacity of Hype, Faith
Your plate is fuller than a Melmac platter at a Methodist Potluck.
Hubbard posted this at 2:42 PM HKT on Wednesday, April 30th, 2008 as Amer-I-Can!, Faith, Ourselves
Reading through the transcript of Jeremiah Wright’s speech today, I kept thinking back to Obama, in his 21st Century Gettysburg Address, calling Wright a “Biblical scholar.”
The exchange that really gets me comes when someone asks him about the “America’s chickens have come home to roost” routine.
WRIGHT: Have you heard the whole sermon? Have you heard the whole sermon?
MODERATOR: I heard most of it.
WRIGHT: No, no, the whole sermon, yes or no? No, you haven’t heard the whole sermon? That nullifies that question.
Well, let me try to respond in a non-bombastic way. If you heard the whole sermon, first of all, you heard that I was quoting the ambassador from Iraq. That’s number one.
But, number two, to quote the Bible, “Be not deceived. God is not mocked. For whatsoever you sow, that you also shall reap.” Jesus said, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
You cannot do terrorism on other people and expect it never to come back on you. Those are biblical principles, not Jeremiah Wright bombastic, divisive principles.
It’s hard to think of a more cut and dry perversion of the Golden Rule than this. To take Christ’s command and twist it into a justification for a terrorist attack (or any attack) shows so little understanding of Christian principles, and so little respect for the meaning of words, that I can’t think of an appropriate way to describe it. These aren’t the words of a scholar, they’re the words of a sycophant willing to twist the words of Christ to his own purpose. This is “gays caused 9/11″ stuff.
And his excerpt from Galatians (”Be not decieved…” Gal 6:7) is nothing more than a thoughtless twisting of Biblical words to suit his own needs. For a man who goes ape poo if people only listen to “snippets” of his sermons rather than the whole thing, it’s notable that he just cuts and pastes small Biblical sayings, completely out of context, to support his point.
Look, I can do it too, from the very same chapter no less: Galatians 6:15-16- “Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is a new creation. Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule, even to the Israel of God.”
See, America and Europe follow that rule while the Muslims don’t, thus we’re entitled to peace and mercy and they’re entitled to the root end of a mushroom cloud. Mohammed’s circumcised chickenssssss ………. have come home to roost! Maybe now our secular messiah will call me a Biblical scholar too.
Jeremiah Wright is disgusting not simply because he’s a racist and hates America, but because he is a perverter of Christianity. I’m reminded here of nothing so much as mid-19th century southerners using scripture to say that there’s a divine imperative to enslave blacks. The Bible is a dangerous weapon; a heart bereft of love and charity can do terrible things with its words.
Apollo posted this at 8:01 PM HKT on Monday, April 28th, 2008 as Audacity of Hype, Faith
George Washinton, that is.
Freedom is not only a gift, but also a summons to personal responsibility. Americans know this from experience – almost every town in this country has its monuments honoring those who sacrificed their lives in defense of freedom, both at home and abroad. The preservation of freedom calls for the cultivation of virtue, self-discipline, sacrifice for the common good and a sense of responsibility towards the less fortunate. It also demands the courage to engage in civic life and to bring one’s deepest beliefs and values to reasoned public debate. In a word, freedom is ever new. It is a challenge held out to each generation, and it must constantly be won over for the cause of good (cf. Spe Salvi, 24). Few have understood this as clearly as the late Pope John Paul II. In reflecting on the spiritual victory of freedom over totalitarianism in his native Poland and in eastern Europe, he reminded us that history shows, time and again, that “in a world without truth, freedom loses its foundation”, and a democracy without values can lose its very soul (cf. Centesimus Annus, 46). Those prophetic words in some sense echo the conviction of President Washington, expressed in his Farewell Address, that religion and morality represent “indispensable supports” of political prosperity.
It’s a good speech (H/T). And here’s the relevant section of Washington’s Farewell Address:
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
I think Benedict not only managed to slip in an oblique critique of patriotism (which one might expect from a German Pope) but also furthered the theme of his papacy: demonstrating that faith and reason are complements. I concur with the Anchoress:
John Paul made you feel; Benedict makes you think. If you’re looking for catharsis and “feelings” you wont’ get them. Just the truth delivered at 160 wpm.
Hubbard posted this at 3:46 PM HKT on Wednesday, April 16th, 2008 as Faith, The Past Is Never Dead--It Isn't Even Past
Today is 04/07/08. When Dorothy asked me what the date was and I told her, it reminded me of a Bible verse song I learned as a kid. One of the delights of having grown up in the church I grew up in is that I have dozens of Bible verses unconsciously memorized and I can only recall them if I sing them to a tune.
Anyhow, 1 John 4:7-8, two of the sensitive fellow’s best:
Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
A nice things about John is he’s the easiest apostle to pick out in Catholic iconography because he never has a beard. Even with Peter you’ve got to check the hands for keys or a sword. But John’s always obvious at first glance, as easy to spot as Christ himself.
Apollo posted this at 7:31 PM HKT on Monday, April 7th, 2008 as Faith, Ourselves
Some Jews seem upset that the answer is yes. Hatred knows no harsher form than praying for the salvation of others.
Apollo posted this at 1:18 AM HKT on Saturday, March 22nd, 2008 as Faith
You guys remember when Christian ministers around the country gathered in meetings to support Jerry Fallwell after his remarks that the gays caused 9/11? Neither do I.
Here in Austin, of all places, some stand behind Wright.
Donald-Mims, who has heard Wright preach numerous times, said black pastors may love America but still feel compelled to jolt people awake to the country’s problems.
Instead of preaching what she calls “sunshine theology,” pastors use a “prophetic” voice that challenges their flock.
Uh-huh.
Jesus, too, used harsh language at times, Donald-Mims said, but “prophetic speech is not hate speech.”
Ah yes, the Sermon on the Mount:
“God damn Rome! That’s in the Torah, for killing innocent people. They sacked Carthage, they massacred the Gauls, they overthrew their own Republic and gave us this so-called Principate. Now Tiberius is doing to us what he does to little boys. We know what’s going on at Capri, where Tiberius is ridin’ dirty.” Then the Lord did thrust his hips back and forth. “These treason trials are just the Julians’ chickens coming home to roost.”
At least that’s what it says in my translation.
Apollo posted this at 12:33 PM HKT on Friday, March 21st, 2008 as Faith, Race
Alas, I cannot give a more considered response right now as I have to get on the road. But I do want to say that this searing, nuanced, gut-wrenching, loyal, and deeply, deeply Christian speech is the most honest speech on race in America in my adult lifetime. It is a speech we have all been waiting for for a generation. Its ability to embrace both the legitimate fears and resentments of whites and the understandable anger and dashed hopes of many blacks was, in my view, unique in recent American history.
And it was a reflection of faith – deep, hopeful, transcending faith in the promises of the Gospels. And it was about America – its unique promise, its historic purpose, and our duty to take up the burden to perfect this union – today, in our time, in our way.
I have never felt more convinced that this man’s candidacy – not this man, his candidacy – and what he can bring us to achieve – is an historic opportunity. This was a testing; and he did not merely pass it by uttering safe bromides. He addressed the intimate, painful love he has for an imperfect and sometimes embittered man. And how that love enables him to see that man’s faults and pain as well as his promise. This is what my faith is about. It is what the Gospels are about. This is a candidate who does not merely speak as a Christian. He acts like a Christian.
Bill Clinton once said that everything bad in America can be rectified by what is good in America. He was right – and Obama takes that to a new level. And does it with the deepest darkest wound in this country’s history.
I love this country. I don’t remember loving it or hoping more from it than today.
Jamie posted this at 1:44 PM HKT on Tuesday, March 18th, 2008 as Audacity of Hype, Faith, Race, What Ever Happened to Andrew Sullivan?
Some time ago, when Reverend Wright was on the Hannity & Colmes shoutfest, this exchange happened:
WRIGHT: Do you know liberation theology, sir? Do you know liberation theology?
HANNITY: I studied theology; I went to a seminary. And I studied Latin.
WRIGHT: Do you know black liberation theology?
HANNITY: I’m very aware of what you’re calling black liberation, but let me get my question out.
(CROSSTALK)
WRIGHT: I said, do you know black theology?
HANNITY: Reverend, I’m going to give you a chance to answer my question.
WRIGHT: How many of Cone’s books have you read? How many of Cone’s book have you read?
HANNITY: Reverend, Reverend?
(CROSSTALK)
WRIGHT: How many books of Cone’s have you head?
HANNITY: I’m going to ask you this question…
WRIGHT: How many books of Dwight Hopkins have you read?
HANNITY: You’re very angry and defensive. I’m just trying to ask a question here.
So the Asia Times’s Spengler dug up some of Cone’s quotes:
Apparently, Jesus is no longer Jewish.
So is Black Liberation theology in favor of deicide? Sure sounds suspicious.
Hmm. This is a world away from the finest American speech in history, which coincidentally deals quite well with theology, Lincoln’s Second Inaugural:
Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. “Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.”
Some more about Reverend Wright, from the website of Trinity comes this:
Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness.” Classic methodology on control of captives teaches that captors must be able to identify the “talented tenth” of those subjugated, especially those who show promise of providing the kind of leadership that might threaten the captor’s control.
8. Those so identified [with the middle class] are separated from the rest of the people by:
- Killing them off directly, and/or fostering a social system that encourages them to kill off one another.
- Placing them in concentration camps, and/or structuring an economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons.
- Seducing them into a socioeconomic class system which, while training them to earn more dollars, hypnotizes them into believing they are better than others and teaches them to think in terms of “we” and “they” instead of “us.”
- So, while it is permissible to chase “middleclassness” with all our might, we must avoid the third separation method – the psychological entrapment of Black “middleclassness.” If we avoid this snare, we will also diminish our “voluntary” contributions to methods A and B. And more importantly, Black people no longer will be deprived of their birthright: the leadership, resourcefulness and example of their own talented persons.
I think it’s fair to say that Trinity United Church of Christ is at least a touch peculiar, if not outright heretical. In 2006, Obama gave this church $22,500 (h/t). If John McCain had given Jerry Falwell $22,500, I think we’d be right to ask how much of Falwell’s work he believed in.
If Obama does believe this garbage, he shouldn’t be president.
If he doesn’t believe in it, why is he throwing so much money into it? Can we trust him with taxpayer dollars if he’s so careless with his own?
I’d like to know what kind of man Barack Obama is, and I don’t think these issues are distractions.
Hubbard posted this at 1:36 PM HKT on Monday, March 17th, 2008 as Audacity of Hype, Faith
Check out this weaseling by Obama:
Let me repeat what I’ve said earlier. All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country.
Let me paraphrase: “Whatever it is that he said that bothers you, obviously I’m against it.” Nothing specific, no reference to concrete things Wright said. Just a statement that, if you were offended by something Wright said, then Obama was too.
No way he should be able to distance himself from this hate monger. For more than twenty years Obama has gone to this church; he says that Wright personally led him to Christ. There is not enough credulity on this planet to allow anyone to believe that Wright only talked like this on Sundays when Obama was not there.
Two important things that have come up in these soundbites from Wright. One, he likes to rant about Israeli treatment of Palestinians; how does Obama feel about that? Two, he believes that the government created the AIDS virus and unleashed it on the black community; does Obama agree or disagree with this theory?
There’s also this from the press release:
When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church.
Leadership: “But all of my friends were staying!”™
Apollo posted this at 5:49 PM HKT on Friday, March 14th, 2008 as Audacity of Hype, Faith