religion | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

Actor Jim Caviezel walks the walk

You know Jim Caviezel, from The Passion of the Christ and many others, including one of my favorite movies–The Thin Red Line. I’ve been a fan of his for a long time, and not just because of his films. How can you not admire someone like this? (Via the Anchoress.)

Jim Caviezel, the star of the blockbuster film The Passion of the Christ, told an interviewer that he had been challenged by a friend who was not pro-life to live up to his professed pro-life convictions and adopt a disabled child.

The friend told Caviezel that if he did that, then he would change to the pro-life position. When Caviezel and his wife, Kerri, went to China to adopt not one, but eventually two orphans suffering from brain tumours, the friend reneged on the deal. Caviezel, however, said, “It didn’t matter to me because the joy that we had from (Bo) - he’s like our own.”

The couple’s first child, Bo, had been abandoned on a train, grew up in an orphanage until he was five and was diagnosed with a brain tumour. The Caviezels nursed Bo through his surgeries and he remains today at the centre of the family.

“We took the harder road,” the actor said. “That is what faith is to me; it’s action. It’s the Samaritan. It’s not the one who says he is; it’s the one who does - and does without bringing attention to himself. I’m saying this because I want to encourage other people.”

Go read the whole thing.

Speaking of Catholics, rumors are circulating that President Bush may convert to Catholicism. There aren’t a lot of specifics, but it’s an interesting rumor at the very least! Closet Catholic? I can relate to that–if he’s really a “closet Catholic” like I am, he’ll do it (I’ve just been lazy, to be honest).

On Wright’s “missing context” argument and “attacking the black church”

I think Reverend Wright has made the point a thousand times now–as has Barack Obama and his disciples–that we (the detractors) are taking things out of context. This is the most profoundly stupid argument I’ve heard, and it’s in fact yet another insult to imply such a thing.

Do they think we’re stupid? I thought so at first–that they thought we’d just accept that argument and not bother looking at “the context.” I don’t think so any more. Just what the hell sort of “context” are the apologists talking about? I heard the “context” that they want me to hear, I watched the Moyers interview (accurately called “Nerf Tee-Ball” by Jim Geraghty), I watched the “right-brained” speech at the NAACP and the “attack on the black church” speech and Q&A (accurately called a “horror show” by Baldilocks) and there’s nothing that makes “God damn America” sound like anything BUT “God damn America!” There’s nothing that makes what he said in the sound bites one bit more palatable.

I think some of the Obama/Wright apologists don’t even know what the hell “context” means. I actually think they heard this used as an excuse for some other faux pas somewhere, and thought it’d work in this case. I do not doubt at all any more that Wright and his apologists are that clueless and incapable of seeing how absurd the “context” argument is in this case. I can’t believe there’d be such a well-coordinated, synchronized blatant, nonsensical lie being pushed; it seems like it can only be blindness fueled by the echo chamber. It’s like proclaiming to the world that in fact, two plus two IS five, you dumbass right-wingers!

Of course, we’re all missing the point, the context, because we are racists, we’re evil, et cetera. Of course. If we only heard even more of what he says, we’d see that Reverend Jeremiah Wright is absolutely correct in everything he says. Why, it’s in the Bible! And how could we possibly miss it? It’s our own fault because we don’t like The Black Church™, which, of course, all teaches leftist liberation theology. They all say God damn America!

Baldilocks nails it, though - it’s actually not stupidity, it’s the megalomania and leftist orthodoxy of Wright and black liberation theology:

Megalomaniacs—a special species of narcissist–want the right to say and do anything they wish, but will deem any criticism of what they say and do as “unfair” (or “evil,” if they have some power over the critic). The criticism is never an honest difference of opinion or a mistake. And of course it is utterly impossible that the words, deeds and/or judgment of the narcissist are ever wrong. EVER. So it must be that those who oppose the narcissists words/deeds/judgment are willfully wrong and, therefore being unfair and unjust.

It is “unfair,” you see, to have a different opinion than Reverend Wright because, in his mind, any idea of his, especially one springing from his religion—a religion specially made for the self-indulgent–falls automatically in the realm of Good. Conversely, any opposing idea–specifically, opposing the idea that America is a whole-scale Oppressor, a Devil according to BLT - falls automatically under the rubric of the Enemy and will be judged as “unfair.”

Context. If you’ve seen “the context” and you disagree with Jeremiah Wright’s assessment of God, the world, and America, you are attacking the black church. You’re a hater.

Hater!

Jeremiah Wright is totally clueless.

BAH. I just watched that Bill Moyers/Jeremiah Wright shit on PBS. He has no idea what people are complaining about, and he has no comprehension of why we’d object to anything he says. He needs to get out of his echo chamber if he cares at all about why people are disgusted. I don’t think he does care about what anyone thinks, though - not that he’s obligated to, but if he cares about Barry’s Presidential run and is going to go on a media tour, he’d better get educated fast. He keeps saying “it’s theology,” and that’s it. He doesn’t seem to understand that we know, and the more we know, the more we’re repelled by it.

Bill Moyers…LOL. I’m thinking he only got the interview because he must have agreed to toss softballs. Even funnier, he showed longer clips from Wright’s sermons (”God damn America” and “America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” to be specific), as though it would make everything different. PUHLEEZE. These people - Wright, Moyers, Obama, and all Obama’s sycophants - must think everyone is farkin’ stupid. Maybe they aren’t intelligent enough to realize there was context without seeing it, but most adults are. Sorry, but the context in which those things were said didn’t change what I found offensive AT ALL. In fact, “in context,” he built his case for saying those things.

Whatever, dude. That interview was a fully loaded C-5 of F A I L. I really tried to give the benefit of the doubt and/or see the good in what he was saying, but there wasn’t much to work with.

UPDATE: These two videos have the context in which “America’s chickens are coming home to roost” and “God damn America” was said–this is what Moyers showed (actually, he may have showed a little less). You tell me–this makes it all okay? Not. Even. Close. I laugh at the sycophants who think this changes everything. WHAT it changes, I have no idea. I guess they think that because he invoked the name of God it’s all correct? LOL.

This one is Wright’s “chickens.”

This one is the “God Damn America” rant. It is to laugh. It’s still “God damn America,” but it’s the extended version.

BTW, I found the video thanks to one of Obama’s fluffers over at Digg, who dumped the links in the comments and actually said, “this is what Fox is afraid you’ll see.” HAHA. Riiiiiight.

UPDATE 2: More from Hugh Hewitt (transcripts + audio).

Jim Geraghty:

Permit me to propose a new rule: If your mentor of 20 years has ever declared the United States to be ‘the same as al-Qaeda, under a different color flag, calling on the name a different God to sanction and approve our murder and our mayhem!’ you are ineligible for the Presidency.

Quote of the year!

Bill Moyers, Jeremiah Wright, and Barack Obama (video)

Four clips from Bill Moyers’ interview with Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

For more: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/profile.html Bill Moyers interviews the Reverend Jeremiah Wright in his first broadcast interview with a journalist since he became embroiled in a controversy for his remarks and his relationship with Barack Obama. Wright, who retired in early 2008 as pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, where Senator Obama is a member, has been at the center of controversy for comments he made during sermons, which surfaced in the press in March. Watch BILL MOYERS JOURNAL on your local PBS station (check local listings.)

Take note of the third and fourth clips. “He says what he has to say as a politician. … He responded as a politician.” This, of course, is no surprise to me. It was and is patently obvious that Barack Obama merely says what “he has to say as a politician” in order to get votes. It has no bearing whatsoever on what he obviously believes.

By the way, Rev. Wright - we may not be experts in Black Liberation Theology and Dr. James Cone, but by now I think most serious people who have complaints HAVE done research into what it’s about. It isn’t just heresy, it’s hateful, anti-American, divisive, Marxist heresy. We don’t want a divisive President who’s full of hate and anti-American Marxist ideology, especially one who lies about it.

Tom Blumer reports on Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright at Pajamas Media in a piece called “What did Obama Know About Wright and When Did He Know It?”

Barack Obama has denied hearing hateful rhetoric from his pastor of 20 years. An ongoing PJM investigation finds that there is much evidence indicating that the junior senator from Illinois is not being entirely truthful.

“Not entirely truthful,” to say the least. Barack Obama is going to have to answer for it, whether he completely repudiates it or owns up to it. Pretending he “didn’t know” about the black liberation theology preached by Jeremiah Wright (and Otis Moss) isn’t going to cut it.

Snobama and the guy with all the clingy people

I was waiting for this.

Bitter Man to Invade America!

He must be coming to share his bitterness with us, although I presume he’ll be leaving his guns at home. The Anchoress, wallowing in bitterness, looks up to Pope Benedict with admiration here.

Pope Benedict XVI

Ignorant, bitter, nativist man uses God as a crutch

Here’s another ignorant, bitter nativist whom you should know.

Pope Benedict XVI Baptizes Italian Muslim Convert

Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.
–Matthew 28:19-20

Welcome to the family, Christian Magdi Allam.

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - A Muslim author and critic of Islamic fundamentalism who was baptized a Catholic by Pope Benedict said on Sunday Islam is “physiologically violent” and he is now in great danger because of his conversion.

“I realize what I am going up against but I will confront my fate with my head high, with my back straight and the interior strength of one who is certain about his faith,” said Magdi Allam.

In a surprise move on Saturday night, the pope baptized the 55-year-old, Egyptian-born Allam at an Easter eve service in St Peter’s Basilica that was broadcast around the world.

The conversion of Allam to Christianity — he took the name “Christian” for his baptism — was kept secret until the Vatican disclosed it in a statement less than an hour before it began.

Writing in Sunday’s edition of the leading Corriere della Sera, the newspaper of which he is a deputy director, Allam said: “… the root of evil is innate in an Islam that is physiologically violent and historically conflictual.”

Link to Google-translated version added.

AP: Italy’s most prominent Muslim, an iconoclastic writer who condemned Islamic extremism and defended Israel, converted to Catholicism Saturday in a baptism by the pope at a Vatican Easter service.

Commentary from Michael Ledeen at Pajamas Media: Magdi, Ayaan, Salman, and Us.

UPDATE: More video.

Barack Obama’s speech: Fine, if you’re from the Left, I guess

More platitudes:

Ironically, this quintessentially American – and yes, conservative – notion of self-help found frequent expression in Reverend Wright’s sermons. But what my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change.

Self-help is “quintessentially American” and conservative, but liberation theology or Marxism has little to nothing to do with “self-help.”

The profound mistake of Reverend Wright’s sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It’s that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country – a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old — is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know — what we have seen – is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope – the audacity to hope – for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

Is that the Reverend I see under the bus? Not quite, but if Barack Obama sees his basic theory as that our society is static, and that he’s wrong, why not seek out a pastor and theology that he sees as correct (as Oprah did years ago)?

In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination - and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past - are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds – by investing in our schools and our communities; by enforcing our civil rights laws and ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system; by providing this generation with ladders of opportunity that were unavailable for previous generations. It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that investing in the health, welfare, and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.

There you go. Do you believe that acknowledging the very real legacy of discrimination–racism, sexism, bigotry, whatever-phobia–is best addressed by investing in the health, welfare and education of all children in the ways that Barack Obama supports? Does he support, for example, school choice and/or private school vouchers? Does he support, for example, a flatter, fairer tax system, which undeniably allows the disadvantaged poor to keep more of their own money? Or does he believe that we must “take care of” the disadvantaged by spending more on failing schools and raising taxes on those who provide jobs (”reverse the tax cuts”) to Americans AND middle-class Americans (what about that “renounce the middle class” thing?) so we can fund more government programs?

In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world’s great religions demand – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother’s keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister’s keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.

I don’t want the government to be “my keeper.” I can be my own keeper, thank you very much, and how is “be your brother’s keeper” consistent with “self-help,” anyway? This isn’t a government with programs based on selective Christian principles, anyway, is it? And if it is, why does Barack Obama support government actions that are so decidedly un-Christian? (Opposing a ban on partial birth abortion, for example, just to start.) His particular strain of Christianity simply isn’t the Christianity that most Christians–or Jews, or atheists, or anyone else–subscribes, anyway. Nor is Mitt Romney’s religion what most Americans believe, either, but the difference is, Mitt Romney didn’t ask us to accept his beliefs as part of how he has governed or would govern. Joe Lieberman is an Orthodox Jew, but he hasn’t asked anyone to accept his beliefs as part of how America should be run, either. And yes, John McCain is a Christian, but he doesn’t say we must be “our brother’s keeper” as justification for how he would govern. He believes that we do what we do because of our traditionally American values. Duty, honor, country. Independence. And yes, equality.

Of course, I don’t believe that Barack Obama thinks we should live under a theocracy, anyway. He does, however, believe in a theology that insists on social change–even revolution–to bring up the “oppressed.” In my eyes, this isn’t theology; it’s political ideology that uses Christian language (very selectively!) to support its theses.

This is ALL almost beside the point, anyway. Politics isn’t a zero-sum game. There’s more going on in the world than the legacy of discrimination; we can’t be focused solely on navel-gazing when there are other very pressing issues in America and the world that affect every American–and affect the entire planet, for that matter. Both Hillary Clinton and especially Barack Obama have consistently failed to recognize them, as is evidenced by their Senate records and during the campaign in pandering to their core supporters with their socialist ideals. Barack Obama in particular has chosen to focus on what he sees are the problems with oppressive America (”mean America”), and talked about “change,” rather than embracing what is right with America and where there are problems, finding NEW solutions to old problems. In the end, the only “change” he represents is a cosmetic change, and a much further leftward change from right now–but it’s still the same old Jimmy Carter politics: God damn America, it’s wrong unless it’s “fixed.” Fixed the Chicago Way.

[Previous posts]

UPDATE:
Fausta makes an excellent point:

Obama could have disavowed the church but chose instead to essentially say that rejecting Jeremiah Wright means rejecting the entire black community.

TUCC and Jeremiah Wright aren’t the entire black community, of course.

Here are just two (more)–make that five more–from whom you can find a different point of view.

UPDATE 2: Karl at Protein Wisdom examines Barack Obama’s religion and whether it matters. Excellent analysis, much more thorough than just giving links, as I’ve done.

Why Barack Obama WAS at church while Wright ranted

Apparently, there’s at least one time that can be pinned down. Of course, it’s impossible for me to believe it was only once, but that’s beside the point, except for the fact that he claims he was “not there.” Also, “The story points out that Oprah herself stopped attending the “church” years ago, and has been a target of Wright’s wrath.” I wonder why Oprah left that church? Maybe it’s because she not only thought it was too inflammatory, but disagrees with the theology.

This is a church of liberation theology, black liberation theology, which is pure left wing. Liberation theology isn’t just for black churches; it’s big in Latin America as Catholic liberation theology as well. It’s politics for the “oppressed.” Here’s a very short introduction from a critical perspective, another introduction, and commentary from the Pope (then Cardinal Ratzinger) on liberation theology. More pertinent in this case: James Cone, in an interview with Bill Moyers.

Who subscribes to liberation theology? Leftists. Marxists. It isn’t just a few video clips from Jeremiah Wright; it is the ideology/religion of “the oppressed.” It is the ideology of Barack Obama.

For Obama to pretend that Wright is like a sometimes bumbling uncle, and that familial disagreement is really all there is in reference to the controversial videos that most of us have seen in the last few weeks, is disingenuous. Jeremiah Wright is not a singular voice, he voices the sentiments of those who founded Black Theology, and those who follow it, and his praxis explicates what he has been taught and what he believes.

Obama may disavow certain inflammatory remarks that Wright makes, but that is really a matter of adroit packaging because Obama believes in the same underlying theology that Wright does and has consistently repeated the same message - just purposefully packaged to make it more palatable to a broader base of potential voters.

It isn’t about the rhetoric of Jeremiah Wright, blaming “Europeans” (what he calls white people) or “God damn America,” it’s what drives that rhetoric–hard left ideology, just like the ideology of the ANSWER Coalition, Cindy Sheehan, et cetera.

Sorry, but I’ve never been a fan of the far left, whether it comes from a black man, a white woman, or a white man. Race doesn’t have a damn thing to do with it, in my eyes. It’s the ideology.

Barack Obama knew Reverend Wright’s “God damn America” rhetoric and ideology would be offensive to most Americans, yet he didn’t find it offensive enough to leave the church himself. It was offensive enough for Oprah Winfrey to leave years ago, but not enough for Barack Obama. Seeing how Obama’s political record is very left-wing, I’m not surprised. What Reverend Wright says is merely rhetoric–rhetoric that supports an ideology to which Obama subscribes. Pay attention to who says “Wright is right.” It’s people of all races who come from the Left and believe America to be “the oppressor.” Obama may not like the way Wright says what he does, but he must believe the ideology behind it. Why else would he stay?

[Previous posts]

UPDATE: Rod Dreher has more about Liberation Theology at BeliefNet. Via Karl at Leaning Straight Up, who has still more.

Must-reads regarding Obama and Jeremiah Wright

Two of my all-time favorite writers, both of whom happen to be black; one also having Kenyan roots in common with Obama.
Juliette Ochieng (Baldilocks):

Why did it take so long for the MSM and other observers to give this very important issue the scrutiny it deserves? There are two reasons.

1. The race-baiting of the Clintons coupled with the accusations of race baiting by Obama supporters, and,

2. The wild goose chases regarding Obama’s Kenyan Luo heritage, his visit there, his relationship to Raila Odinga, the mind-bogglingly distorted analyses of the origins of the conflict in that country, the ahistorical analyses of how mixed-raced persons have been identified in this country and the Obama-as-Muslim whisper campaign.

Yes! I’d really point to her #2, because the Stupid Campaign (check out her “some sort of Islam-Christianity death struggle” link for a prime example of how incredibly stupid it can be) has done nothing but make Obama’s critics look like a bunch of ignorant yahoos any time Obama’s past is brought up. Furthermore, I’ll admit I’ve held back on writing about Jeremiah Wright myself, because I don’t want to be associated with the Stupid Campaign, and I don’t want to be accused of race-baiting (Juliette’s reason #1). That’s been my mistake, because giving Obama a pass for this gives him tacit approval. I think of it like this–hesitating to comment on gender issues, because you don’t want to be branded a stereotypical angry feminist. Silence connotates approval.

Go read what she’s written.

Then, Michael Bowen (Cobb) breaks it down from his perspective as a black man. Really, nobody does this better than he does for us clueless white folks, and the comments at his blog are often as enlightening, even when you disagree with a commenter’s particular viewpoint.

OK. This is for you white dude. I want you to go back you highschool memories and think of your first crush. You can see her face, her blonde hair, her blue eyes, the way she walked, her voice and how a mere glance from her turned your insides to jelly. She never touched you, she never even spoke to you, but you spent so much time thinking about her. You loved her and hated her at the same time. There are still songs that take you back to the moment. One day she actually spoke to you and told you that you were lower than toad poop. You never forgave her, and you never will.

And especially this, in a separate post:

The problem is very simple. Pretty much all black church activism is liberal / black nationalist activism. The black church has bitten off more than it can chew, and every American who doesn’t understand the subtleties of that nexus and where it does and does not break is going to be perplexed and skeptical about how (and if) Obama can wriggle out of it. I say he can’t because Wright married the man, and Michelle Obama’s UCLA speech is the first 1 of this equation. 1 + 1 = 2. Michelle Obama + Jeremiah Wright = Unpatriotic. And don’t be surprised when Wright is labeled racist. There is no escape here, there is only confrontation. So how does one distinguish doing good for blacks from doing good for America when so much of the rhetoric of black self-help is unpatriotic? That’s the question Obama, of all people, somebody very fresh to the scene, is going to have to answer. Or else.

I’ve touched on this already:

Couple this America-loathing hate monger with Obama’s pal, the Weathermen terrorist William Ayers. Suddenly Michelle Obama’s saying this is the “first time” she’s ever been proud of America doesn’t seem so extraordinary. I find it impossible, inconceivable that Barack Obama would have such close ties to people with radically different ideas than he has, especially when he says he doesn’t think his church is controversial.

And I’ve written in many other comments (most recently here) that black theology isn’t what I have a problem with, in and of itself. (I do have a problem with its leftist bent, of course.)

“I would be puzzled that they would object or quibble with the bulk of a document [the Black Value System] that basically espouses profoundly conservative values of self-reliance and self-help.”

Who objects to that? Nobody I’ve seen who’s talking about Wright’s hateful rhetoric takes issue with THAT part of Black Liberation Theology. If they want to believe Jesus was black, I don’t care about that either. Good for them, if it makes them feel closer to Him. That is NOT the problem, and if Obama doesn’t understand people’s criticism, he’s as steeped in that garbage as Jeremiah Wright himself. It’s telling that he doesn’t consider it controversial, doesn’t understand how offensive it is. Just who does he think his voters (and potential voters) are? His big echo chamber? Maybe so, to a point. Not to THAT point, though.

Those values of self-reliance and self-help are no different from what Bill Cosby has said and for which he’s been eviscerated by victimologists. What *is* different, however, is what drives that quest for self-reliance. To someone like Jeremiah Wright or Malcolm X, it’s anger and hatred. To others, it’s confidence and independence from paternalism (i.e., the so-called “welfare-state”). There’s a stark difference. And worse, Jeremiah Wright says what he believes (God damn America!) is in the Bible. If you’ve watched the videos, you’ve seen him say “it’s in the Bible!” No, it isn’t, but Wright is preaching hatred as religion.

Finally, this isn’t from a black perspective, but Tom Maguire has some important further information, including a link to Obama’s wishy-washy defense at the Huffington Post. The Rolling Stone article to which Maguire links is already in my Obama dossier, waiting for an opportune moment, but I guess I forgot about it. (Rats!) Here’s a key quote:

“We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns and the training of professional KILLERS. . . . We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God. . . . We conducted radiation experiments on our own people. . . . We care nothing about human life if the ends justify the means!” The crowd whoops and amens as Wright builds to his climax: “And. And. And! GAWD! Has GOT! To be SICK! OF THIS SHIT!”

This is as openly radical a background as any significant American political figure has ever emerged from, as much Malcolm X as Martin Luther King Jr. Wright is not an incidental figure in Obama’s life, or his politics. The senator “affirmed” his Christian faith in this church; he uses Wright as a “sounding board” to “make sure I’m not losing myself in the hype and hoopla.” Both the title of Obama’s second book, The Audacity of Hope, and the theme for his keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in 2004 come from Wright’s sermons. “If you want to understand where Barack gets his feeling and rhetoric from,” says the Rev. Jim Wallis, a leader of the religious left, “just look at Jeremiah Wright.”

Yep. “America is a mean place!”

Again, that’s where you need to get Baldilocks’ and Cobb’s perspective, because they understand it. Maybe that’s why I haven’t said much until recently–because I’ve been waiting for those who are a better authority on the world’s Jeremiah Wrights than I am. Either way, the question remains: Is this the kind of man to bring “unity” and heal old racial wounds? I don’t say “no,” I say HELL NO. I say giving a national voice to an agent of hatred and divisiveness like Jeremiah Wright would make things worse, and make no mistake: he would have a voice with his protege in the White House. After all, isn’t that exactly what some people worried about with Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee? Frankly, I wouldn’t be too worried about either of them, because at least the Southern Baptist and Mormon churches aren’t screaming about how evil America is.

There’s more relevant material getting updates over at Hot Air, and also here, with Oprah! I found this from Juliette in the comments there, too:

One of the reasons that I had to shop around for a church was that I kept running into the type that provided, shall we say,information and programs that fell outside of the scope of what I think a church–and a pastor’s–purpose should be (the purpose being to impart the Word and let the Word do the work). I’m very glad that the Spirit led me to do that.

About Oprah: just this past Sunday, one of my fellow parishioners and I got to talking about Oprah “coincidentally.” Neither of us had watched her show for years, but my friend had tuned in on accident and had been shocked at the New Age-y, secular agenda which OW seemed to be promoting. Has anyone else noticed this?

Of course I mentioned her role in the Obama campaign and my friend, a black woman like me, but a life-long Democrat said something like this: “then they both bear watching.”

Something’s going on here.

Oy.

UPDATE: Another must-read, at Protein Wisdom (via Cobb’s comments–I told ya, read the comments there too!). Quick snip:

If we attempt to comprehend how Black Theology differs from traditional Christian Theology in a theological context it is that its focus is on black experience and its ‘gospel’ is in the liberation of the black oppressed. This has evolved today to the point that ‘praxis’ - the act of revolutionary liberation from oppression - has primacy. Traditional Christian Theology certainly offers liberation - focused on a liberation from sin - but it is also universal: “Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life.” (Rev. 22:17) - and “there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female” in Christ (Gal. 3:28).

Given that we live today in a post-Christian society it may be instructive to take a view that considers a political rationale as well. It seems perhaps reasonable to conclude that Black Theology is a mapping of identity politics* onto traditional Christian theology. In this way it can be explained as the engulfing of traditional Christian terminology and meaning with the mission of identity politics - and in this case the identity politics of black Americans. Those interested in the meaning of language as it relates to our culture have visited this kind of expedient adoption.

Given that slavery has been abolished, amendments to the constitution have been made, the Civil Rights movement has been almost universally embraced, legislative acts have been promulgated, broad entitlements have been granted, affirmative action has existed, and we have conducted a long term experiment with enhancing the experience of a large number of groups with political identity, it seems almost strange that Black Theology rhetoric is what it is.

Perhaps it is that the point of view is so entrenched in the focus on oppression as an experience of primacy that any party to it can never move - the act of liberation is perpetually frozen in the experience of self-imposed oppression.

To which Cobb simply says, “Bingo.”

UPDATE 2: Obama claims he’s never heard Wright say such inflammatory things. It is to laugh.

Mr. Wright said that in the phone conversation in which Mr. Obama disinvited him from a role in the announcement, Mr. Obama cited an article in Rolling Stone, “The Radical Roots of Barack Obama.”

According to the pastor, Mr. Obama then told him, “You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we’ve decided is that it’s best for you not to be out there in public.”

Also, yes he was there in the pews when Wright was ranting about Evil Amerikkka™. It’s in his book.

UPDATE 3: Richard Miniter wisely cools some of the lasered heat on Jeremiah Wright, and put the blame where it belongs. Pay attention:

Rev. Wright is a black Christian minister who sees Jesus a black man persecuted by white Roman society. It sounds like a clever way to get his flock to come to church, not an anti-white hatefest. It seems like a tool to get his followers to identify with Jesus. You are suffering and the Savior has suffered just like you, but he followed the word of God and he triumphed and you can too. I have heard similar sermons in white and black evangelical churches.
[...]
That root is not racism against white people, although it may sound like it is.

The root of it is a perpetual grudge against America. Where does this grudge come from? From the 1960s Left, who believed it and taught it. The hippies may have seemed happy, but they were also paranoid and given to cartoonish conspiracy theories. And the counter-culture survives in an intact and virulent form in only one place: the black inner-city.

The real scandal is the cynics who promoted these terrible views in the black community and sowed fears which continue to separate us.

So don’t blame Rev. Wright. He is simply the victim of ideological disease, doing the best that he can to help others in his somewhat incapacitated state.

I’ll have more on this later; my point very quickly is that people should not see this episode as an indictment of black America or black churches. It’s a very specific segment of black America that occupies the same ideological space as whites, Hispanics, and anyone else on the Angry Left.

And it is that segment from which Barack Obama emerged, no matter how much he lamely tries to disguise it with “just words.”

[Previous posts on this issue here.]

Obama’s Wright problem gets worse

More vile rhetoric from Jeremiah White, and new wishy-washy faux-disclaimers from Obama. Sorry, pal, that isn’t gonna cut it. FAIL. You could have left that church years ago if you disagreed.

Pissed off yet?

Defeat racism, kill a cracker! (Not a real quote, but close enough?)

Obama’s spiritual advisor Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Minister of Hate

Hell no, I won’t let it go. Obama and his apologists can try to weasel out of this all they want, but this isn’t going away. I’ll play this crap every day until November if that’s what it takes.

It isn’t just Fox News paying attention to it, libs, so you can put that idea to rest.

ANSWER THE QUESTIONS, BARACK OBAMA. Why is Reverend Jeremiah Wright your chosen spiritual mentor? If you disavow what he says, why did he baptise your children? Why did he perform your wedding ceremony? Why have you attended this church for 20 years? Why is Reverend Jeremiah White formally affiliated with your campaign?

If you disagree with him, are you a coward, afraid to speak up or choose a different spiritual mentor and church? Afraid to cut your ties to him?

If you agree, then why are you running for President of the “God damned” United States of America, a nation filled with and in servitude to predatory “white supremacists?” Are you just lying when you say he’s like “an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don’t agree with?”

Here’s a quote to ponder, from Barack Obama on Jeremiah White.

What I value most about Pastor Wright is not his day-to-day political advice. He’s much more of a sounding board for me to make sure that I am speaking as truthfully about what I believe as possible and that I’m not losing myself in some of the hype and hoopla and stress that’s involved in national politics…I don’t think my church is actually particularly controversial.

He doesn’t think that church is controversial. I don’t know about you, but that tells me all I need to know about where he stands.

I’ve found a church!

I’ve decided to start attending church. Where I live, most people go to church of some kind, and I want to be more involved in the community. Yeah, it’s a really liberal church that’s locally well-known for activism in liberal causes, but I’m still calling it mine because hey, I’m not responsible for what they say or believe. It really bothers me that they support abortion “rights,” divestment of Israel, say America is a thuggish imperialist nation of ugly “middle-class” values, and yeah, they even honored David Duke for his opposition to Zionism and the war on Islamic fascism, but *I* don’t believe that at all, so it’s okay. They talk about all this stuff from the pulpit and are activists in the community, but as long as they mention Jesus Christ and talk about getting a good education, it’s all good. Right? I go to church now!

Wrong.

Will someone please explain to me why Barack Obama gets a pass for belonging to an activist church that espouses beliefs that he claims he doesn’t share?

MADNESS. This ridiculous assertion that it’s the same as Rev. John Hagee endorsing John McCain is just mind-boggling, especially considering the fact that he simply endorsed the eventual Republican nominee. I’m sure John Hagee would have endorsed Mitt Romney if he had been the eventual nominee, as well. How stupid and/or dishonest do you have to be to equate the two? Barack Obama has gone to Trinity United Church of Christ for 20 years and calls Jeremiah Wright his “spiritual mentor.” If he doesn’t believe in the things for which Jeremiah White and the TUCC stand, why is that his church? It’s not like there aren’t others in the neighborhood.

Needless to say, there are “other churches” in my neighborhood, and I wouldn’t choose to attend a church that espoused views I find objectionable, as in the hypothetical one I described. Would you? I feel safe in assuming that no honest person would. Only if one were just picking a random church to say “I go to church” would he or she do so, and even then, that random church would surely be abandoned in favor of a less objectionable one some time in twenty years of attendance. If not, the only logical conclusion is that the person–namely, Barack Obama–follows the teachings of the church. Sure, cultural education, biblical education, and self-reliance are all good things, but they aren’t the only values of the TUCC. I have no problem with their emphasis on black culture, but the virulent hatred for all others, including American culture in the aggregate, is simply revolting.

It’s no wonder we hear Michelle Obama expressing disdain for the American experience. Isn’t it fair to question whether Barack Obama feels the same way, when his spiritual mentor, congregation, friends, wife, and late mother, are (or were, in his mother’s case) to varying degrees full of fear and loathing for America? And if he does share those beliefs, why would we want such a man to be President of the United States? Reverend Jeremiah Wright will tell you why, but I sure don’t see any reason to support Barack Obama for President of my beloved country any more than I would belong to a church that shared his political beliefs.