With Barack Obama's Trinity Church and its recenlty retired minister Rev. Jeremiah Wright very much in the news lately, I came across an interesting, and generally very sympathetic, article on the church published in the Christian Century last May. Of particular interest:
TRINITY'S CRITICS SPEAK as though it is a political organization constantly advocating for social change, like Operation PUSH or the National Action Network. But it is neither more nor less than a church. "Trinity's activism is a write-your-elected-official activism, not one that mobilizes thousands to picket," Hopkins said. The only signs of politics that I saw in Trinity's packed worship bulletin the day I visited were a list of polling places in advance of an upcoming citywide election and a reminder to "boycott Wal-Mart." Not exactly the stuff of revolution.
There is no denying, however, that a strand of radical black political theology influences Trinity. James Cone, the pioneer of black liberation theology, is a much-admired figure at Trinity. Cone told me that when he's asked where his theology is institutionally embodied, he always mentions Trinity. Cone's groundbreaking 1969 book Black Theology and Black Power announced: "The time has come for white America to be silent and listen to black people.... All white men are responsible for white oppression.... Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man 'the devil.' ... Any advice from whites to blacks on how to deal with white oppression is automatically under suspicion as a clever device to further enslavement." Contending that the structures of a still-racist society need to be dismantled, Cone is impatient with claims that the race situation in America has improved. In a 2004 essay he wrote, "Black suffering is getting worse, not better.... White supremacy is so clever and evasive that we can hardly name it. It claims not to exist, even though black people are dying daily from its poison" (in Living Stones in the Household of God).
Wright agrees. When I asked him whether white Americans are right to maintain that the racial situation has improved since the days when Africentric Christianity was born, Wright pointed to the racist remarks by radio host Don Imus: "And you say things have improved?"
I was a liberal at Princeton in the 60's when this was the usual fare. That Obama's mentor and advisor--and the guy he sends his kids to listen to every Sunday--still talks this way 40 years larer is disgusting. It's not enough for anyone to "disavow" this crap now. Why was Obama supporting it before his presidential run?
Yeah, Obama is the guy to heal the rift between white and black America.
Right.
But more to the point.
Is it really possible for a politician these days to pick a religious faith which we can't nitpick and criticize? Every faith has its loonies.
Make no mistake, I'm no advocate of Christianity, or of such extreme strands of Black Liberation Theology specifically. However, it seems that almost every faith can be attacked from some angle.
The Catholics for abortion, feminism, gay rights, etc. Baptists for racism, sexism, gay rights, etc.
Mormons for racism, polygamy, homophobia, etc.
Mormonism
Just about every religious faith has some tenets that the general public and especially the readership of this blog will find troublesome. There are divisive figures in every religion.
Does Minister Wright's viewpoint frighten and offend me, a middle class white male, a little? Yes, sure. But not especially more than figures in other faiths.
While certainly "cherry picking" words out of a single sermon, I have never read a Bible verse or heard another sermon suggesting "God Damn America." Seems a bit over the top, and certainly not likely to heal racial rifts.
Politics is of course about perception, and even "cherry picked" words can be troublesome to those vying for political office. Obama has, like it or not, had a perception problem unwittingly laid on his lap, and how he chooses to handle it will be a test of his political skills.
It appears Obama agrees. He said "I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue."
At the same time, he will likey still win the primary, assuming HRC's Machine can't get her coronated in Denver as she is trying.
Net result - President McCain !
What an EXCELLENT and EXCEPTIONAL job by the Circular Firing Squad !!!!
That is a pretty incredible statement. A crude joke by a radio host that was widely condemened by people of all races and which led to him being suspendied means that there has been no improvement in the racial situation in 40 years.
And Obama goes to this man for advice?
...
Did Sen. McCain belong to Hagee's church? Does he go to Hagee for spitirual advice? Does he call Hagee a mentor?
Or are you just grasping for something parallel to Obama's relatinship with Rev. Wright?
How about McCain's "spiritual guide" Rod Parsley? The U.S. was founded to destroy Islam--got a defense of that one?
And, unlike the other candidates mentioned above, he financially supported this church and sent his children there to learn conspiracy theories and the evils of Jews and Israel and whites, etc.
And, now he says he never heard this stuff. In 20 years, he never heard this stuff? He wants to be President and he didn't know what was going on in his own church for 20 years? The guy has these sermons on DVD's for sale, for God's sakes!
And, shades of Gary Hart, Obama now says he never personally heard one of these sermons expressing these viewpoints. Uh oh. Back to a question of judgement, He didn't see what happened to Gary Hart when he threw down the gauntlet to the Press to "catch me"?
About his judgement, he and his wife send their kids to this church and they don't even know what it being taught? At a minimum, he had to know of Wright's honoring of Farrakhan. And, he sends his kids to this guy's church to learn this crap?
If the issue is who presidential candidates look to for advice and support, how is questioning McCain's choice a fallacy? It's perfectly fair to examine who Obama looks to for spiritual advice. It's also perfectly fair to look at who McCain seeks support from. It's interesting that Conspirators have been harping on Wright, yet there's nary a peep about a man that says Jews brought the Holocaust on themselves.
About 20 years relationship, financial support for, exposing his kids to, etc.
I am not finding all this closeness in fact that McCain is alledged to have with this guy. It seems to be growing exponentially every time someone posts on it. McCain is not particularly religious. It, in reality, is hard to imagine him seeking any advice from a religious figure, let alone the parties mentioned above. If you can't see the difference between making nice while accepting an endorsement and a strong 20 year relationship, one in which he exposed his kids to the pastor's conspiracy theories and racism, then I can't help you.
Maybe you would care to quote from a sermon that (1) Obama and his children heard Wright deliver and (2) which taught "conspiracy theories and the evils of jews and Israel and whites?
If you cannot, I think this just typical slander that passes for comment on this blog.
Christopher Cooke,
Where have you been? I said, the guy has these rants for sale on DVD's. It's all over the internet. Even ABC covered it. And, as i said, Obama has thrown down the gauntlet to the press just like Gary Hart did. It probably won't be too long before someone will say that Obama was in the church during one of these sermons. Or, are we supposed to presume that in 20 years Obama never noticed his pastor's support for Farrakhan? In 20 years this guy never make any of these remarks in the presence of Obama? Obama said this guy has been his spiritual advisor for 20 years. If he didn't know what Wright stood for and believed, it puts his judgement and acumen in serious question. This is a no win for Obama. Either he knew what Wright believed or he was around this man and in his church for 20 years and never noticed.
So you're saying that someone McCain has called his "spiritual guide" actually isn't? "Spiritual guide" seems far beyond "making nice while accepting an endorsement."
So you don't have anything except "it probably won't be too long." Got it.
It probably won't be too long... until we find out that McCain is a Manchurian Candidate for the Viet Cong
It probably won't be too long... until we find out that McCain's wife is actually a Martian
Hey, this game is fun!
You are being silly. I clearly drew a comparison to Gary Hart and "probably won't be too long" was a minor point. It was a foolish thing for Obama to say. Please read and respond to my last 2 sentences.
What don't you get about the Rev. Wright selling tapes of these sermons on his web site? He made no attempt to cover anything up. Wright gave an award to Farrakhan. Obama knew that because he has commented on it. If you are saying there is no way to prove that Obama knew about all or any of Wright's statements in a 20 year relationship, then that alone says a lot negative about Obama's acumen.
This is a typical "guilt by association" smear that has no substance unless you have evidence that the politician agrees with, or condones, the hateful views or criminal conduct of the "guilty person."
It sounds to me like McCain is just another Republican candidate who had to build a base of support among right-wing Christians. Right-wing Christians with stupid ideas vote, and McCain has courted their votes by backing off on his "agents of intolerance" line and cozying up to Hagee and McCain's "spiritual guide," Parsley. Then he tries to put on another hat and cozy up to Wall Street and moderate voters. Votes are votes.
Make sense?
If Obama identifies Wright as a mentor and significant influence, it's reasonable to ask Obama about Wright's loony ideas. It's also reasonable to Obama how he vets those he chooses as significant influences, and how he filters out their loony ideas. For example, would he choose David Duke as an advisor if he thought Duke had good ideas on long term flood control on the Mississippi?
Christopher Cooke,
You really need to go do a tiny bit of research. The DVD's are copies of the Rev. Wright's sermons that he gave in the church. You seem to be holding to the idea that the Rev. said all this stuff in a clandestine manner so Obama couldn't really know what the Rev was saying. If that is your defense for Obama, that won't fly. And, if Obama, in 20 years, never knew what the Rev. was saying in the church, such as he won't say "God Bless America, but rather, God Damn America", then I can hardly wait for Obama to sit down with Akmadinajad (sp?) or Kim Il Jong and tell us how much they really, really, love America.
joeblow,
Thank you for setting the record straight. It didn't sound like McCain. He is is not in trouble with the Christian Right for having too close a relationship with them.
Sure does. The skill is in how close the politician gets to the loon. McCain hasn't portrayed his relationship to the loon to be nearly as close as Obama has to his loon. Obama is having trouble breaking away. McCain still hasn't been caught in the web. McCain is a more skillful player.
To people who are not inclined to trust Obama anyway, this association is clear proof of whatever bad qualities they believe he has. It's true that the association is much closer than many of the other examples like McCain-Hagee, and that it is the result of Obama's choice.
But I don't really buy the argument that Obama is obligated to apply a political or cultural purity test to his pastor. Those who say "well you can't choose your uncle" imply that if it were up to them, they would rather not be related to their racist relatives. That's a pretty cold point of view. Why is it so hard to believe that Obama admired many things about Wright without condoning his wacky political outlook?
Most years, I'd have said that a candidate with a wife on the verge of public mental breakdown, an America-hating spiritual adviser and a bedbug crazy foreign policy adviser who wants to invade Israel would be unelectable. Matter of fact, I'm down for a couple of lunches if McCain loses.
But I got hit with a cluebat this week. Americans vote their pocketbooks first, last and always, and come November they're going to be worried about their jobs and houses and anybody breathing and not a Republican can win.
Except McCain isn't doing nearly the rejecting and distancing that Obama has been doing. So maybe some folks are more skillful at trying to make this an "issue" for Obama than the folks opposing McCain; or maybe middle America is (or some folks think it is) scared more by radical-intolerant black preachers than radical-intolerant white ones.
The question is not how many folks on a right-wing libertarian blog think this is a problem for Obama, but rather how many folks who really would be "swing" voters would count this as a significant issue comparted to, say, the economy, Iraq war policies, etc. At the end of the day, I wonder.
So, I just laugh at all these militant anti-white Churches like Trinity. Guess what guys, as long as your savior is a pale-faced white guy, all your condemnations of white people are utterly meaningless. The joke is on the Reverend Wrights and Jessee Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the world. If the white man is the devil, then the devil is your beloved lord and savior.
Even though he's a nutjob, Farrakhan at least has the common sense to cast aside the foreign religion forced upon his ancestors by their slavemasters.
Okay, feel free to flame away at me. I preemptively stand by my comments.
Scott Rasmussen's national tracking poll shows Obama's 8 point lead over Clinton has vanished last night as he fell into a tie with Clinton while his favorable/unfavorable ratio fell to Clintonesque depths of 50 to 49%.
Obama may be in serious trouble.
I don't even know where to start with your comment. Should I start with the fact that many (most?) of the principal movers in the abolitionist movement in the US (and worldwide) were Christians?
Should I ask why you approvingly cite Farrakhan for rejecting the "slave religion" when the religion he picked (Islam) permits slavery **right now** in Africa?
Should I ask who, other than maybe the KKK, would possibly claim Jesus was a pale-faced caucasian?
I'm tempted to go on but I am now starting the think your yanking my chain with a satirical post, so I'm signing off.
Carolina,
Let us hope so. Let us also hope that Bruce M picks up a real history book sometime if his post is not satirical. I can understand spouting such factually and historically incorrect nonsense if a person is in college. But, libraries are free and there is no excuse for remaining so ignorant once one is out of college.
McCain isn't doing as much rejecting because he didn't position himself as close to his loon as Obama positioned himself to his loon. And I would never discount the efforts to push a candidate closer to their respective loon. Some have tried to push McCain, and it hasn't worked. With Obama, he has put himself so close that only a little push is needed. The Wright clips portray Obama as a black candidate along the lines of Jackson and Sharpton rather than as the unicolor candidate who transcends race.
I'm not sure anyone is scared of the preachers. It seems they are more an object of ridicule, and if that ridicule rubs off on the candidate, he is finished. That's why they are in play.
The clips of Wright preaching will be used against Obama just as the clip of Howard Dean giving a war hoop was used against him. Once people start laughing at a candidate, there is nowhere to go. I'll be interested to see if Wright shows up on Saturday Night Live tonight.
To answer the main question, liberation theology is both a political and a religious entity and has merged both into one entity.
Someone should really write these rules down somewhere. I don't want any of the people going after Wright to get offended when someone brings up questions about a conservative politician's faith.
It’s one thing to have a fringe theological belief like “end time” or the anti Christ, but quite another to have a fringe political belief. The former need not affect policy, but the latter does. With liberation theology the preacher becomes the politician, and politician becomes the preacher. The conservatives have some wiggle room, BHO doesn’t.
Carolina:
Many (most?) of the principal movers in the abolitionist movement in the US (and worldwide) were Christians
So? Many/most of the southern slaveholders were Christians. Just goes to show how religion can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean.
Should I ask why you approvingly cite Farrakhan for rejecting the "slave religion" when the religion he picked (Islam) permits slavery **right now** in Africa?
I don't approve of Islam any more than I approve of Christianity. In fact, if I had two buttons, one which would wipe Islam off the planet and one that would wipe Christianity off the planet and could only push one, I'd push the "Islam" button. I simply said I respect Farrakhan for not perpetuating the worship of the religion that was forced on his enslaved ancestors by their tormentors and kidnappers.
Should I ask who, other than maybe the KKK, would possibly claim Jesus was a pale-faced caucasian?
Sure, factually speaking Jesus of Nazareth, like all middle-eastern people living at his time and place had a darker shade of skin. But all the pictures, paintings, and sculptures of Jesus, in white churches and african american churches alike, depict Jesus as being as white as possible, often with rosy cheeks. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe Trinity Church has depictions of a black Jesus. Maybe Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson believe Jesus and his father were as black as they are. Somehow I doubt it. Whatever shade skin color Jesus actually had, he certainly was not African.
If Christianity had not been forced upon the African slaves by their cruel white masters, no contemporary African American would be a Christian. African American Christianity is the last remaining scar of slavery.
Well, Huckabee is pretty much the embodiment of that concept. But let's look at another political/religious movement, Christian Reconstructionism. This is who McCain is courting in the form of Hagee and Parsley.
I'm all for bringing up the ideas that politicians and their chosen spiritual leader(s) believe in. By all means, let's get it all out there. But until the MSM started attacking Obama's pastor, I had always assumed we weren't allowed to do that in polite company. Any reason those rules have changed?
If Christian Reconstructionism really includes theonomy then you have a point. McCain has less of a problem because he’s not as close to those preachers as BHO. As I said, the conservatives have more wiggle room. Liberation theology goes further into the political domain than theonomy. Huckabee is out of the picture. Had he come as close to getting the nomination as BHO his theology would have become as issue.
“But until the MSM started attacking Obama's pastor, I had always assumed we weren't allowed to do that in polite company.”
And well they should. He attacks all of us, which includes the MSM. When you make declarative assertions of fact like the US government created the AIDS virus, you go beyond mere theology.
The rules haven't changed at all. Wright has just provided great theater. There are tapes of him whipping up the crowd like Elmer Gantry and spouting nonsense. TV editors everywhere are speeding through them to get 30 seconds to put on the air. I wonder if the Church is still filling orders for the DVDs?
Now Obama is saying he didn't know Wright was a loon. So, it becomes a question of what did he know and when did he know it? All the stories of Harvard Law Review fade away with a good 30 second spot of Wright hooping and hollerin'.
"the only colors that should matter are red, white and blue."
Bobby Jindal quoted by Time Magazine
"I oppose set-asides and quotas. An insightful man got it right 40 years ago: people should not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Bobby Jindal quoted in the 2003 Times-Picayune
The Democrat's solution to an economic downturn -- cancel
the Bush tax cuts. Bobby Jindal's solution to LA's anemic economy, thus far, offer businesses tax breaks.
To those who believe that "social justice" can only be achieved by a non-white male president, be careful what you wish for, Jindal might be the first such person.
Christian Reconstructionism is pretty much the same as Dominionism. All civil law should be derived from the Bible. I'm only familiar with Catholic Liberation theory, so I can't say much about the views of Obama's pastor. If they are batsh*t insane, by all means, bring them out. I would also expect people to start talking about the views of luminaries like Hagee, and the influence of the Christian right on conservative politics. Namely things like starting a war with Islam (over 1 billion people) in order to bring about Armageddon, aka, the end of the world.
Is Huckabee still being tossed around as a possible VP candidate? McCain has the Hagee and Parsley backing, but a lot of the Religious Right is still uncomfortable with him. Not that he hasn't been trying to make inroads with the millenialists.
Elliot123:
I guess it makes for good entertainment. If people really want to go down the road of questioning others' religious beliefs, I say bring it on. I'm an atheist and I think the spectacle would be quite entertaining. Just be careful what you are asking for.
I'm not sure what religious belief is being questioned. People are questioning Wright's assertion that the US government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color, blacks have made no social progress in the last forty years, the US brought 911 on itself, and Fahrakin(sp) is an insightful social critic. Those aren't religious beliefs. I hope we haven't arived at the point where anything said by a loony minister is considered a religious belief.
Wright really isn't the issue. Loony ministers are a dime a dozen. The issue is that Wright has been successfully hung around Obama's neck, and Obama did most of it himself.
Uh, PC didn't you watch any of the debates or other interviews with Romney, Huckabee et al? You never heard them grill Romney on the LDS Church? Never? You would have had to have your head in a bucket full of water not to have heard the MSM grilling the Republican candidates about their religions. They never asked the Democrats those questions, though, or whether they believed in the Bible's creation version of creation. I watched them pull that stunt in the Republican debates. Fred Thompson (whom I really admired for this) told them to go to hell. The others tried to answer.
You weren't around for JFK, I presume?
According to the campaign, McCain met Parsley for the first< time three weeks ago, when the pastor served as an introductory speaker at a February 26 rally in Cincinnati.
McCain praised most of the leaders in attendance, saying of Parsley: “I am very honored today to have one of the truly great leaders in America, a moral compass, a spiritual guide…thank you for your leadership and your guidance. I am very grateful you are here.” (Coincidence note: This was the same event of the infamous Bill Cunningham remarks)
A number of blogs and magazines (inc. here, here, and here) are citing the “spiritual guide” line to make the case that Parsley is an important influence for the Arizona Senator. International publications are also picking up on the endorsement–a headline in the Tehran Times this morning screams, “McCain advisor: Destroy Islam.”
A campaign official disputes that argument, adding that any comparison between the Wright and Parsley situations is “totally absurd.” The official notes that Rev. Wright married Obama, baptized his children and has served as his spiritual adviser for 20 years, whereas McCain received Parsley’s endorsement at one event and has never attended his service.
My Bold added for emphasis, not the author of this news article.
Now, do you understand the difference?
Is it sad when our only hope to avoid another republican president in full policy-failure regalia is a tanking economy driving voters to vote their wallet?
Thanks. I appreciate saving bold for the important stuff. But could you explain how you did it?
I don't have to, nor do I claim to, speak for all African Americans. I'm clearly not speaking for any of them since not one seems to recognize their continued worship of Master's White God as being a remnant of their former abduction and enslavement. All religious people are deluded, African American Christians are merely deluded on multiple levels. Particularly the ones like Rev. Wright who run a "United Church of [white] Christ" which preaches anti-white messages. I can't be the only one who sees the pathetic irony in this, though I may be the only one with the gall to point out such a politically incorrect realization.
I am sorry you consider me deluded because I do not share your faith and worship at the altar of atheism. But I have better things to do than deal with your smug arrogance.
Kevin,
Ditto what Dave N said and my apologies for starting it, although I have no idea how I managed to do that,
</b>
I checked the source html to make sure there was only one unmatched bold tag and then started my previous post with the close tag above.