By now you have probably already watched the toe-curlingly, excruciatingly embarrassing car crash of an interview between Fox News host Lauren Green and her guest, the author and religious scholar Reza Aslan:
Every website, commenter and pundit has already said their piece, most to the tune of “what do you expect from Fox News, they are the unabashed mouthpiece of the religious, fundamentalist Christian right wing in America”. After awhile, watching and reading the variations-on-a-theme commentary became tiresome.
Until I discovered Glenn Beck’s alternative analysis on Reza Aslan and his book, “Zealot”:
Apparently, Aslan is a phony Muslim and a phony scholar. His true identity – of course – is that of a radical progressive. This is made clear by the fact that Beck sticks the logos of various liberal groups (and, of course, archvillain George Soros) tenuously associated with Aslan on his rotating blackboard:
Reza Aslan + Liberal Organisation Logos = Evil, apparently
Oh no! MediaMatters! The Center for American Progress! Beck has torn apart Reza Aslan’s shadowy liberal secret life in only nine minutes.
Because of course in Glenn Beck Land it is impossible to be a Muslim, a scholar and a liberal all at the same time. To acknowledge that fact would be to undermine his entire fear mongering, super profitable worldview.
Another story from the Vatican, reported by The Telegraph, which is certainly very welcome in the wake of the recent back-slapping self congratulation fests that we have had to endure lately, including the Bilderberg 2013 Meeting and the G8 summit in Loch Earne.
Pope Francis has apparently summoned and met with the Vatican’s ambassadors around the world en masse, and warned them to live humbly and unostentatiously when going about their ambassadorial duties.
He also urges them, when making recommendations to the Vatican for future potential promotees to Bishop, to consider the pastoral abilities of the candidates above all.
The Telegraph reports some details of the Pope’s address:
“There is always a risk … of giving in to that sort of ‘bourgeoisie of the spirit and life’ which drives one to recline, to seek out a comfortable and tranquil life,” he told ambassadors gathered at the Vatican from all over the world.
“Giving in to such a worldly spirit exposes us pastors in particular to ridicule. We would perhaps be applauded by some, but those who seem to approve of us would criticise us behind our backs,” he added.
The Pope said he was keen to meet the ambassadors as a group so he could speak to them about the key role they play in advising the Vatican on local candidates they believe would make good bishops.
“Be careful that the candidates are pastors who are close to the people … are mild-mannered, patient and merciful; that they love poverty … (and lead) simple and austere lives,” he said.
Beware of those who have a “princely psychology” and above all “be careful that they are not ambitious, that they do not seek the episcopate,” he added.
The new Pope is certainly leading from the front on this particular issue. Another day, another sign from Pope Francis that real, lasting, positive change is on the way.
The leader of Exodus International, Alan Chambers, has published a seemingly very sincere and heartfelt apology for the pain and suffering that his organisation caused to those who came to seek “help” for their homosexual orientation:
And then there is the trauma that I have caused. There were several years that I conveniently omitted my ongoing same-sex attractions. I was afraid to share them as readily and easily as I do today. They brought me tremendous shame and I hid them in the hopes they would go away. Looking back, it seems so odd that I thought I could do something to make them stop. Today, however, I accept these feelings as parts of my life that will likely always be there. The days of feeling shame over being human in that way are long over, and I feel free simply accepting myself as my wife and family does. As my friends do. As God does.
Never in a million years would I intentionally hurt another person. Yet, here I sit having hurt so many by failing to acknowledge the pain some affiliated with Exodus International caused, and by failing to share the whole truth about my own story. My good intentions matter very little and fail to diminish the pain and hurt others have experienced on my watch. The good that we have done at Exodus is overshadowed by all of this.
On a very personal note, he continues:
Please know that I am deeply sorry. I am sorry for the pain and hurt many of you have experienced. I am sorry that some of you spent years working through the shame and guilt you felt when your attractions didn’t change. I am sorry we promoted sexual orientation change efforts and reparative theories about sexual orientation that stigmatized parents. I am sorry that there were times I didn’t stand up to people publicly “on my side” who called you names like sodomite—or worse. I am sorry that I, knowing some of you so well, failed to share publicly that the gay and lesbian people I know were every bit as capable of being amazing parents as the straight people that I know. I am sorry that when I celebrated a person coming to Christ and surrendering their sexuality to Him that I callously celebrated the end of relationships that broke your heart. I am sorry that I have communicated that you and your families are less than me and mine.
This is a rare, almost unprecedented volte-face from a Christian organisation that was until recently so stridently anti-gay. As is often the case with those most vociferously outspoken against homosexuality, the leader of the organisation himself admits to having same-sex attractions of his own. We see this time and time again with the many (usually Republican/Conservative Party) politicians who seem to spend every waking moment condemning homosexuality as an abomination, before being caught in a compromising position which rather undermines their legitimacy to talk about the subject.
I think this deserves credit as a genuine example of repentance and public admission of shameful behaviour. It is not up to me to forgive him but I find it rather heartening.
The other interesting thing is that he hasn’t actually changed his mind about what the Bible says about gay sex. He still thinks it’s condemned. But he will no longer condemn it himself: “I cannot apologise for my deeply held biblical beliefs about the boundaries I see in scripture surrounding sex, but I will exercise my beliefs with great care and respect for those who do not share them. I cannot apologise for my beliefs about marriage. But I do not have any desire to fight you on your beliefs or the rights that you seek.”
Something like this must be what ought to be meant by the hideous cant phrase about hating the sin, but loving the sinner.
Andrew Sullivan celebrates what he calls an “unconditional surrender in the culture war”:
It’s very rare that one side in a culture war actively renounces its past positions and embraces a new one. That’s particularly true on the Christianist right, where absolutes hold sway, regardless of doubt or charity. So today is a banner day for those of us who have long fought for the equal dignity of homosexuals as children of the same God as heterosexuals, and deserving of no less love and support.
And with regard to the statement itself, he continues:
That’s an enormous statement given the recent past and, to me, a sign of God’s grace. That’s why when I say “unconditional surrender,” I hope Exodus won’t regard that as some kind of victory lap. It isn’t. It just springs from a deep appreciation of their grace-filled decision to re-examine their conduct as Christians and see where the world may have led them astray. Anyone in the public sphere who openly and candidly comes to terms with an error of judgment, and owns it, and even seeks forgiveness for it, is contributing to a more humane, honest conversation and dialogue.
This statement and change of heart from Exodus International is very welcome news indeed. May it spur other people, groups and denominations within the Church to also re-examine their consciences, and seek to welcome and love rather than try to “heal”.
An excellent comedy video from NonStampCollector, successfully (and rather wittily) debunking “young Earth” theories and denial of evolution.
I believe that the creator of this series of videos (which I highly recommend – very amusing) is an atheist. I, of course, am Roman Catholic. That doesn’t make his critiques of biblical literalism and fundamentalism any less funny or pertinent.
And the “tornado through a junkyard” analogy is priceless.
Today saw the installation of Justin Welby as 105th Archbishop of Canterbury.
The service was moving, with many elements incorporated to reflect the international diversity of the worldwide Anglican communion. Although myself a Roman Catholic, I wish the new Archbishop of Canterbury the best and pray for him as he seeks to tackle the many challenges facing his church.
I was, however, momentarily distracted from the beauty of the service by this image of a protester in Canterbury, shown on the BBC News website here.
We’ll let the misspelling of the word “privatise” go.
But both Pope Francis and Archbishop Welby can hang up their hats and go home, because this lady clearly has such a direct line to the Lord that she is able to tell us God’s political stance on any issue of the day. With such an ability we should probably make her a Lord Spiritual so she can sit in the House of Lords and meddle in British lawmaking with the others.
Christ would “NOT” privatise the NHS? Really? What does He think about Clinical Commissioning Groups? Is it okay with Him if private firms perform non-clinical work for NHS hospitals (such as cleaning or catering), or must this be owned and managed by the state too? And I have a feeling I know her answer, but does our Lord support the renationalisation of the railways in Britain?
Why does the left have such a monopoly, a stranglehold on the idea of compassion in our country?
Why is it that to speak out against the state taking such a large, meddling role in all of our lives marks one out as a mean-spirited and cruel person, indifferent to the needs of others?
And why do we all buy in to the idea that in order to be charitable and compassionate, we must funnel our efforts to help our neighbours, the less fortunate and the downtrodden through an inefficient state bureaucracy?
If the counterargument is that people would be selfish and insufficiently generous without the heavy hand of government coercion and taxation to take wealth and redistribute to those in need, what does this say about the leftist’s view of human nature?
Did it ever occur to this protester that perhaps it is directly because the state plays such a large part in everything that we do, from cradle to grave, that the church to which she belongs is withering and shrinking by the year?
To a great extent, aside from the divine aspect, has the British welfare state not done away with the purpose of church, of knowing your neighbour, of being part of a community, altogether?
I ask these questions because the answers to these issues of how best to act charitably, to help your neighbour and provide for those in need seem to be self-evident to so many on the left. Of course, they say, we must give more to the government so that they can give back to us according to our need. Certainly the newly-installed Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, seems to subscribe to this mindset, from what we know of his recent remarks.
Semi-Partisan Politics 