BrotherRog

Contrary to what most conservative Christians claim, secularism - humanism - atheism is not the greatest threat to authentic Christianity, Civil religion is! Civil Religion: (by BrotherRog) Key Person or Founder, Date, Location: The "founding fathers" and head leaders of one's nation. Key Writitings: Chartering documents such as constitutions; famous speeches and letters, etc. Often included are idealized myths describing the creation of one's nation. Who is God: A generic concept of God is embraced. This God is usually Deistic and has a special love for one's particular nation. In extreme forms, one's nation is equated to being God. Who is Jesus: Jesus is not a part of this religion but references and allusions to some of His sayings is sometimes employed. Who is the Holy Spirit: The Holy Spirit is not a part of this religion. How to be Saved: Salvation is typically understood as acheiving a certain level of material wealth, success, and status - "the good life." This is generally said to be attained via rugged individualism and "pulling one's self up by one's bootstraps." What Happens After Death: Death is usually denied but those who die serving one's nation - especially in the military - are honored and venerated on special holidays. People who die such deaths are remembered and it is assumed that God has a special place for them. Other Beliefs or Practices: National anthems, pledges of allegiance, and vague blessings are shared at public events. The hymns and prayers of other religions are often co-opted and altered as well. Flags, national birds, crests, etc. are the primary symbols. Blindly supporting the policies of the current national leaders is expected. Dissent is discouraged.

Check out the following link for a fantastic article from Pax Christi: http://www.paxchristiusa.org/the_cpv/mar_a...c_pv_story3.asp

This email alert is also posted on website: http://www.cmep.org/Alerts/2004May19.htm As the President spoke yesterday to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Israeli government decided to send more troops to Gaza to bolster their largest military operation there in years. Israeli troops sealed the Rafah refugee camp and sent in armored bulldozers reinforced by helicopter gunships for what the army called a large-scale operation to root our militants and smuggled weapons. It was just a month ago that Prime Minister Sharon promised President Bush that Israel would withdraw all of its troops and settlements from Gaza – a promise that elicited significant diplomatic concessions from President Bush. (for text of the speech: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0040518-1.html) In the past few days, Secretary of State Powell has been meeting with Palestinian and Arabs officials to try to convince them that the President’s “road map” is alive and that his commitment to Sharon has not prejudged Israeli-Palestinian negotiations on settlements, refugees and borders. And on Saturday, peace groups organized tens of thousands of people in Israel for the first major public demonstration in two years to press for Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. But the photos, broadcast worldwide, of Israel’s bulldozers destroying Palestinian homes could demolish whatever credibility Powell might have hoped to muster. Ziad Asali, President of the American Task Force on Palestine, lamented, “Pictures of innocent Palestinian families standing helplessly beside demolished homes and in turn broadcast into the living rooms of hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslim will only fan the flames of extremism. The United States has a vested moral and political interest in working to put an immediate halt to the suffering of innocent civilians. Once more, the credibility of policies articulated by the administration is at stake in the Middle East.” ACTION: This action is simple, will cost you about a nickel and take less than a minute. Call the White House. The White House will be tabulating calls to the “comments line” (202-456-1111) about the Israeli-Palestinian situation and the President’s speech to AIPAC. Your call should be short and to the point: Sample: I’m calling to protest Israel’s demolition of Palestinian homes in Gaza and appeal to the President to demand that the Israeli government stop this destruction immediately. The President needs to call Prime Minister Sharon and tell him to live up to his promise to withdraw troops and settlements from Gaza.

For more info on origins of Christian Zionism see also: http://www.rca.org/images/mission/mideast/...tianzionism.pdf http://www.christchurch-virginiawater.co.u...phdcontents.htm http://www.virginiawater.co.uk/christchurc...es/history.html

Challenging Christian Zionism For Christians committed to justice and peace, the challenge of Zionism can be daunting. Many Christians support Israeli actions and policies, believing that Jews' status as the "chosen people" of the Hebrew scriptures entitles them to use any means necessary - no matter how violent or oppressive - to occupy the holy lands. Those who question this position may fear being labeled anti-Semitic, but cannot square Zionist theology with God's concern for the poor and oppressed of all nations, the teachings of Jesus, the inclusive nature of the early church, or the present-day oppression of Palestinian Christians. A new Web site called "Challenging Christian Zionism: Christians Committed to Biblical Justice" is intended as a clearinghouse of information about Christian Zionism and to foster education on this very divisive issue. Articles include: "Christian Zionism: An Historical Analysis and Critique," "The Evangelical-Jewish Alliance," and "Whose Promised Land: Israel and Biblical Prophecy." Visit: [bwww.christianzionism.org Read Sojourners magazine articles on this topic: Short Fuse to Apocalypse? A look at the political and theological roots of Christian Zionism. http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=magaz...&article=030710 Not a Monolithic Bloc: Many U.S. evangelicals seek an 'even-handed' Middle East policy. http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=magaz...article=030710b How Christian is Zionism? What the Bible says about Israel and the things that make for peace. http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=magaz...article=030710c

From a mass emai I received today: Attached and copied below, you will find “An Open Letter to the Rev. Bill Hinson” written by The Rev. Gary Keene, Assistant to Bishop Mary Ann Swenson and pastor of Holliston UMC. The letter was written by Gary in response to actions by Bill Hinson (president of the Confession Movement) during the recently completed General Conference. It was sent to several national publications, both ecumenical and United Methodist, and it may be printed soon in one or more major periodicals. After receiving a copy of Gary’s letter on Tuesday morning, Mary and Louis (after conferring with several of you on the MFSA Cal-Pac Steering Committee) took immediate action on your behalf to contact Gary to assure him of MFSA’s support in his efforts to “speak the truth”. Louis has talked with Gary several times in the last few days and we fully expect these very productive conversations to continue. As visible evidence of MFSA support for Gary’s decision to write about and publish his reactions to Hinson’s all too obvious campaign to further fracture the UMC, we have asked Gary (on your behalf) to accept our invitation to be the speaker at our 2004 Mildred Hutchinson Award Luncheon on Saturday, June 19. He has accepted this invitation! (Good thing that, thanks to Theresa, we are going to be at Redlands First UMC where we can accommodate an overflow crowd!) Friends, this is only the first of several emails that will be coming your way over the next few days as, together, we continue the process begun last Friday of debriefing what really happened in Pittsburgh. Recognizing that words and/or written reports alone are a very inadequate substitute for having actually been an “on the spot” witness to what may well have been one of the most important General Conferences in recent history, we will continue this ‘debriefing” effort. We hope others of you will contribute to this effort. There is no question but that what we do here in the Western Jurisdiction, individually and collectively, over the coming months and years will have a profound effect upon our denomination The entire church will be watching us as well as those United Methodists on the extreme right within our denomination who have already proclaimed that they will launch a grass-roots campaign to dispatch teams of "renewal" ministers - clergy and lay - throughout the country to bring about a split in the UMC; this despite the overwhelming vote in Pittsburgh against efforts at fracturing the church. Peace be with you all. But also remember the words Dr. James Forbes, Jr. taught us to sing (in rap tempo) in Pittsburgh: Pardon Me! I don’t mean to be uncouth. But I just want to know the truth. Tell me what time it is? (everyone claps twice) NO TIME FOR FOOLISHNESS! Mary T. Larson mlarson@telfords.com --------------------------------------------------------------- An Open Letter to the Rev. Bill Hinson Dear Rev. Hinson, I write to you as a fellow baptized Christian and ordained elder. I write to you as pastor to pastor, and as one present at General Conference in Pittsburgh, and present at your press conference there. I write to you as one disappointed, surprised, ashamed, and angered at your words and actions as a United Methodist pastor. Jesus said, “To whom much has been given, much shall be expected.” You have been given the tremendous gift, burden and opportunity of significant leadership in our church, first as pastor of the largest church in the denomination, and now as president of the Confessing Movement. To use the pulpit of nationally visible leadership to preach division of the church is disappointing; to claim that the response to your remarks was “surprising” to you is disingenuous at least. And to claim you “only speak for yourself” but then turn around and say you expect the board of the Confessing Movement to support you, reveals the hypocrisy of your words. The underlying tactics of pre-releasing your speech to the press only confirms your premeditation: you spoke for effect, and you got it. Do not pretend it was not intentional. You have further used the gift of leadership to speak other untruths, not of perspective, but of reality: you claim the church is broken over the issue of homosexuality, and that the church in the West desires to be separate. You have put your words in the mouths of others, and then falsely claimed those as the basis for your own. First, “The West” is not the source of contention on the issue of homosexuality: it is a broad strata of Christians within the church, only some of whom are not kept silent by the threatened loss of career opportunities and other punitive tactics employed by the majority to silence them. By your own accounting, “we” have garnered 300 votes to do things “our way,” a number which far exceeds the votes of the Western Jurisdiction. This is not an issue of the West, but of the whole church and its future. Secondly, neither “the West” nor others have introduced division to the dialogue, you have: those who support the abolition of sexually- based prejudice have stayed at the table of Christian conferencing for 30 years—and will continue to do so. Why? Because although homosexuality is the point of disagreement today, it is only a contemporary symptom of a malaise as old as our faith. From the beginning, faithful people have disagreed about who is in and who is out: tax collectors and prostitutes, Jews, Greeks, Gentiles and slaves, circumcised and uncircumcised, non-whites and women, even youth and laity in terms of voting rights within the church. For a time, each of these exclusions was successful: even as you trumpet the success of the church in maintaining “incompatibility,” so it was that racism and sexism were successful in their time. That time is coming to an end, and rightfully, justly so. Justice also demands that you be called to account for claiming equitable pain on both sides of this issue, that we should “end this cycle of pain we are inflicting on each other.” Tell me Rev. Hinson, what “pain” do you feel because of the sexual orientation of others, and where is that on the spectrum that is anchored on the other end by Matthew Shepherd’s body crucified on a fence rail? There is no pain for heterosexuals in any of this; instead we enjoy the benefit of fatuous complacency under girded by current laws. This persistent lament that homosexual relationships “threaten” us reveals a shallow faith: true faith can be neither given nor taken away. Therefore it needs no defense, and cannot be threatened. To put it plainly: sexual behavior is secondary to faith in God. As president of the Confessing Movement, you are perpetuating the human immaturity of needing to draw boundaries to your own benefit. In contrast, God sent Christ as the emblem of reconciliation, not division. This divisive attitude is most evident and most shocking in your statement that, you have “no desire to be the chaplain to an increasingly godless society. Rather our desire is to be faithful to the Word of God.” This is an almost inconceivable repudiation of the purpose of every baptized Christian, and thereby the mission of the church. Rev. Hinson, would you simply close the doors and preach to the choir? Or is that not what has already happened? Could it be that this very attitude has so pervaded our church that it is the cause of our general decline? Do you imagine that others cannot see and sense this “dark heart of judgment” that contradicts the very purpose of God’s incarnation, thus rendering false your every claim to be compassionate? Compassion yes, but judgment first: is that the story Jesus told about the prodigal son? Finally and most damning, the division you are simultaneously claiming and creating is ultimately not about the well-being or continuity of the church: it is a vicious distraction aimed at rendering the church silent and irrelevant on the issues of the day. The church is called to be a voice of truth for the powerless to the powerful; a witness of compassion amidst the sin of petty judgment and exclusion. The call of the people of God is to testify to a different way of being in the world, not to mimic its political machinations. The more you emphasize homosexuality and division, the more the church forfeits its authority to speak to poverty and injustice. Insofar as you participate in this and give leadership to it, either you have sold out, or you have been duped: which is it? General Conference will come again, and we will all be at the table. In the meantime, I ask you this: how are you using your leadership to help the church move into God’s future, instead of anchoring it in the cloistered, ossified, punitive, divisive and declining past you now represent? Sincerely, Rev. Gary M. Keene California-Pacific Annual Conference

Challenging Christian Zionism For Christians committed to justice and peace, the challenge of Zionism can be daunting. Many Christians support Israeli actions and policies, believing that Jews' status as the "chosen people" of the Hebrew scriptures entitles them to use any means necessary - no matter how violent or oppressive - to occupy the holy lands. Those who question this position may fear being labeled anti-Semitic, but cannot square Zionist theology with God's concern for the poor and oppressed of all nations, the teachings of Jesus, the inclusive nature of the early church, or the present-day oppression of Palestinian Christians. A new Web site called "Challenging Christian Zionism: Christians Committed to Biblical Justice" is intended as a clearinghouse of information about Christian Zionism and to foster education on this very divisive issue. Articles include: "Christian Zionism: An Historical Analysis and Critique," "The Evangelical-Jewish Alliance," and "Whose Promised Land: Israel and Biblical Prophecy." Visit: http://www.christianzionism.org Read Sojourners magazine articles on this topic: Short Fuse to Apocalypse? A look at the political and theological roots of Christian Zionism. http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=magaz...&article=030710 Not a Monolithic Bloc: Many U.S. evangelicals seek an 'even-handed' Middle East policy. http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=magaz...article=030710b How Christian is Zionism? What the Bible says about Israel and the things that make for peace. http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=magaz...article=030710c

PBS will broadcast an encore of "The Jesus Factor" on Thursday, May 20, at 9 p.m. (check local listings). The documentary examines the depth and impact of President Bush's evangelical faith in his personal and political journey. You can also now access the companion Web site, including transcripts, and streaming video of the entire documentary at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jesus/ Get the full Wallis interview at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sh...ews/wallis.html

I've heard that Sen. Joe Biden is trying hard to get Sen. John McCain (Republican) to agree to serve as VP with Kerry. IMO, this would help unite our extremely polarized country as nothing else could. It would also help bring in more Republican voters. I do wish we could have more female presidents and vps, however, I frankly don't think Hillary has much of a chance. There are simply way too many people who can't stand Bill Clinton (or anything associated with him); i.e. they wouldn't be voting for the Republican challenger, they'd be voting against Bill. The only way that it might work out is if Hillary divorces Bill before running, but some would still oppose her as 1) they'd say she got divorced out of political convenience and 2) there are many conservatives who oppose divorce all together (they may even be divorced themselves, but they don't want to see this in a national leader. Perhaps if Bill were to die of natural causes or in an accident, she'd have a chance, but even then, some would claim that his death was another "slick Willie scheme."

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition By H. N. Arendt Online Journal Contributing Writer May 17, 2004—Four years after a judicial coup d'état, torture photos show an America that has sunk to medieval levels of depravity. Meanwhile the corporate media either refuses to get to the heart of the matter or actually makes excuses for the bums in the White House who have ruined America. The truth the mainstream media cannot acknowledge (because they are complicit in creating it) is that, as a nation, we have become religiously insane. The correct historical analogy is not Vietnam or Nazi Germany, and not even the Crusades (because the Muslims had better tech than the Christians then.) The correct historical analogy is Catholic Spain in the full flush of intolerance, awash in American treasure, with its long-fought Moorish foe finally kicked out of Europe, and its long hated Jewish minority kicked out of Iberia. Like the Catholic Hapsburgs, who thought they could conquer all of Christendom in the name of the pope and for the private profit of their royal line, America has decided it is strong enough and rich enough and righteous enough to conquer the planet in the name of Pat Robertson for the private profit of the Carlyle Group. Like the Spanish, who enriched themselves by looting New World gold and silver, America has decided to help itself to Middle East oil, black gold. As the militarily and technologically superior Spanish enslaved the native American peoples and extirpated their religion and culture, America has rushed to privatize, "democratize", and crony-ize Iraq; and they have sent in fundamentalist "missionaries" to convert these "heathens". And, now, we are seeing the dark side of evangelism. As the Spanish mercilessly used the Inquisition against everyone they declared heretic, Americans mercilessly torture anyone we declare to be a "terrorist". Same witchhunt, same sadists, different name for the victims. Ashrcroft's TIPS and Poindexter's TIA are just high-tech versions of the denunciations, thought crimes, and demonization of "otherness" that wracked Europe for 400 years. .......................... ......In the end, America is going out like a Monty Python skit. Despite the evidence of torture, murder, constitutional evisceration, aggressive warfare, and so forth, America still doesn't expect the Spanish Inquisition. That's why we're going to get it. And, unlike the skit, America will not get the comfy chair. For full article see: http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/05...1704arendt.html

From a recent email: "We Face a Fork in the Road" James Wallerstedt Published on Common Dreams, May 14, 2004 Last month, Americans again had the opportunity to watch our President stare into the teleprompter and confirm our secret fears that the nation is heading down a dark and dangerous path. George Bush and those that run Washington alongside him seem to have a natural fondness for enemies, as well as some talent for attracting new ones. Disturbingly, President Bush has recently made it clear that he sees his administration as being "on a mission for God." There is evidence of an "end times" interpretation of events within the White House, whereby unconditionally backing Israel will lead to Armageddon, which will lead to the Second Coming of Christ. Meanwhile, a respected and growing segment of our Christian community - including Rev. Bill Moyers and Jimmy Carter - are speaking out against such fundamentalist interpretations (which the latter calls "foolish"), as they are clearly formulas for pitting intolerant Christian and Jewish elements of society against radical Islam; in a potential, worldwide, dead-end "Crusade." Many, therefore, will likely interpret the phrase from the President's recent speech, "We will finish the job of the fallen," to mean; at the end of our present course, we, too, will be fallen. Our national goodwill will be all but destroyed, our military assets will be useless against a dispersed and vigorous "enemy," damage to our national economy will be nearly total (in a recent NY Times article, former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin indicates that the American economy may right now be heading down the same path as...Argentina). During the last presidential campaign, when asked to name his "favorite philosopher" in history George Bush answered, "Jesus." Yet, if we look at the policies of his administration, we find the very opposite of the qualities that Jesus counselled: arrogance versus humility strengthening the strong while weakening the weak selfishness and materialism versus selflessness and a spiritual approach to life an inclination toward revenge instead of forgiveness a tendency toward competition versus cooperation disrespect rather than a deep-seated love for nature a tendency toward secretiveness and subterfuge versus honesty and openness It's not for nothing that Jesus advised, "By their fruits shall ye know them." He and many other sage voices of history have counselled paying close attention to what people actually do, versus listening only to their words. George Bush and his administration talk a good game; patriotism, Christianity. Yet, they are busy doing just about everything imaginable to contradict the fundamental teachings both of the Founding Fathers and the founder of their supposed faith. "Leave no Child Behind" is poised to leave all American children behind. The "Clear Skies Initiative" threatens to pollute our skies forever. The "liberation" of Iraq is a hated occupation. "Compassionate conservatism" is busy giving away the store to an already over-privileged elite. Right down the line, there's the stark contrast between what's being said and what's being done. Here's what Walter Cronkite recently said about the situation, "One sometimes gets the impression that this administration believes that how it runs the government is its own business and no one else's. The tight control of information, as well as the dissemination of misleading information and outright falsehoods, conjures up a disturbing image of a very different kind of society. Democracies are not well-run nor long-preserved with secrecy and lies." Okay, so Bush seems not to be following very well in the footsteps of his favorite philosopher. Yet, we might ask, how does the Bush administration stack up against that other pillar of loyalty continually evoked, national patriotism? Well, let's consider what the Founding Fathers might have said... Given that they tended to identify with Masonry rather than Christianity, that probably would have positioned them, right from the start, among the misguided. They were against secrecy in government. They believed in the separation of church and state; in freedom of speech and association; in habeus corpus and freedom from arbitrary search and arrest. Benjamin Franklin once said, "Those who are willing to forsake their civil liberties for security, deserve neither." All that would have put them at odds with the likes of George Bush, Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft, Don Rumsfeld and various neo-con members of the present administration. For those of us who take seriously the symbols of God and flag, the following should be considered; the greatest crimes of history have always been committed in the name either of the state, or religion, or both. Hitler carried out his own evangelical programs for "the glory of the Fatherland," whilst Nazi storm-troopers wore belt buckles which proclaimed, "Gott mit Uns" ("God with us"). In the aftermath of WWII, good-hearted Germans asked themselves how they might have avoided being duped by such appeals to their patriotism and religious loyalty. The President's favorite philosopher gave us a clue, long ago; "By their fruits shall ye know them." America, today, spends more on armaments and military than all the other nations of the world, combined. We refuse to join treaties to protect human rights and the environment that nearly all other nations endorse. UNDP indicates that but a small fraction of our present military expenditures could solve all the worst problems of human misery and poverty, on a global basis. Yet, our administration seems rather uninterested in this prospect. Identifying and pursuing enemies, instead, has captured their interest (terrorists versus communists, this time around). Just imagine what GWB's favorite philosopher might have said about these priorities. Humanity confronts a fork in the road, today - one which must be approached by drawing upon the best of our collective values and history. Where I part company with fundamentalists and fanatics of all stripes - political and religious - has to do with the idea that we can throw away all the most cherished values taught by the founders of our creeds, while claiming to be acting in their name. James Wallerstedt is author of the forthcoming novel, "White Paper"

1. try thefund.org 2. see if your local congregation has any scholarships available, likewise, check-out other neighboring churches from your denomination; as well as the regional synod/conference (etc), and national level offices for your denomination. 3. be sure to inquire what scholarships and/or financial aide you may qualify for at the seminary. 4. try to earn high grades at seminary, this may allow you to receive a Deans List scholarship, etc. 5. ask this question of the financial aide officers at the seminary, they have loads of info.

Well, at least this surreal saga had a happy ending! UMC.org update ( http://www.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=17&mid=4698 )

What struck me as odd was that Bill Heidenger and the other conservatives aligned with the Good News movement are here encouraging a church split while for years, the Good News organization has had statements on their publications and letters, etc. stating "please don't leave this great church, etc.." Not sure what to make of this change of face. Heck, the conservatives even got their way on the homosexuality issue at General Conference, what beef should they have with the progressives?

A depressing, frustrating, and consternating development.. umc.org i.e. seems a group of conservative UMs intend to pursue splitting this denomination.

I came out as closest to Barth, but then I changed my answer to the last question, and came closest to Wesley. Of course I actually idenitfy myself with Wesley, Borg, Cobb Jr.; Jim Wallis/Ron Sider; with a mix of liberation theologians as well.

If you were a theologian, which one would you be? Answer six multiple-choice questions and find out with which famous theologian you most strongly identify: weblink

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20031222&s=lifton | Posted December 4, 2003 American Apocalypse by Robert Jay Lifton Robert Jay Lifton's new book Superpower Syndrome: America's Apocalyptic Confrontation With the World, just released by Nation Books. The apocalyptic imagination has spawned a new kind of violence at the beginning of the twenty-first century. We can, in fact, speak of a worldwide epidemic of violence aimed at massive destruction in the service of various visions of purification and renewal. In particular, we are experiencing what could be called an apocalyptic face-off between Islamist forces, overtly visionary in their willingness to kill and die for their religion, and American forces claiming to be restrained and reasonable but no less visionary in their projection of a cleansing warmaking and military power. Both sides are energized by versions of intense idealism; both see themselves as embarked on a mission of combating evil in order to redeem and renew the world; and both are ready to release untold levels of violence to achieve that purpose. The war on Iraq--a country with longstanding aspirations toward weapons of mass destruction but with no evident stockpiles of them and no apparent connection to the assaults of September 11--was a manifestation of that American visionary projection. The religious fanaticism of Osama bin Laden and other Islamist zealots has, by now, a certain familiarity to us as to others elsewhere, for their violent demands for spiritual purification are aimed as much at fellow Muslims as at American "infidels." Their fierce attacks on the defilement that they believe they see everywhere in contemporary life resemble those of past movements and sects from all parts of the world; such sects, with end-of-the-world prophecies and programmatic violence in the service of bringing those prophecies about, flourished in Europe from the eleventh through the sixteenth centuries. Similar sects like the fanatical Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo, which released sarin gas into the Tokyo subways in 1995, have existed, even proliferated, in our own time. The American apocalyptic entity is less familiar to us. Even if its urges to power and domination seem historically recognizable, it nonetheless represents a new constellation of forces bound up with what I've come to think of as "superpower syndrome." By that term I mean a national mindset--put forward strongly by a tight-knit leadership group--that takes on a sense of omnipotence, of unique standing in the world that grants it the right to hold sway over all other nations. The American superpower status derives from our emergence from World War II as uniquely powerful in every respect, still more so as the only superpower from the end of the cold war in the early 1990s. .................... see link above for rest of article...

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20031222&s=stam Bush's Religious Language by Juan Stam George W. Bush began to take part in a Bible study group in 1985, after two decades of binge drinking. For two years he studied the Scriptures and put his heavy drinking behind him. In that same process, he succeeded in refocusing his life, which had been diffused and confused, into a coherent cosmic vision--or ideology--which corresponded to the mentality of the conservative evangelicals of his country. When Bush decided to run for office, political strategist Karl Rove helped him make the link with the evangelical sector. While other candidates were discussing polemical themes, Rove advised him that it was much better for him to simply speak about his faith. Bush presented himself as "a man with Jesus in his heart." When a reporter asked him who his favorite philosopher was, Bush replied: "Christ, because he changed my heart." That corresponded perfectly to the extreme individualism of fundamentalism, and it constituted what in the metalanguage of evangelical code words is called "personal witness." Politically, Bush's discourse has been very effective, but theologically the results have been more problematic, as evident in particular in three areas. Manicheism This ancient heresy divides all of reality in two: Absolute Good and Absolute Evil. The Christian church rejected Manicheism as heretical many centuries ago. But on the day after 9/11, the President first stated the position he would continue to maintain: "This will be a monumental struggle of good versus evil, but good will prevail." Later Bush defined his enemies as the "axis of evil," a term that is theologically and morally loaded. Given that state of sublime innocence in his own country, like Adam and Eve in paradise, Bush can muster only one explanation for the terrorists' hatred of his nation: "There are people who hate freedom." In other words, they are so evil that they abhor the good because it is good. (But if the terrorists hate freedom, why have they not attacked Canada, which in some respects is more democratic than the United States? Why is there not the same hatred for Switzerland, Holland or Costa Rica?) Messianism When Bush, then Governor of Texas, decided to seek the presidency, he described his decision in terms evangelicals would understand as a divine mandate: He had been "called," a phrase that evoked the prophetic commissions of the Hebrew scriptures. He summoned to the governor's mansion all the leading pastors of the region to carry out a ritual of "laying on of hands," a practice that corresponds above all to ministerial ordination. He told the pastors that he had been called (obviously, by God) to be the presidential candidate. This language of divine calling has been frequent in his declarations and at a much accelerated rhythm since September 11, 2001. In his State of the Union address the following year, Bush reaffirmed that "history has called America and our allies to action." Soon after the 9/11 attacks, speaking to a joint session of Congress, he proudly declared that "the advance of human freedom--the great achievement of our time and the great hope of every time--now depends on us." As he declared in his 2003 State of the Union address, the nation must go forth to "confound the designs of evil men," because "our calling, as a blessed country, is to make the world better." "Once again," Bush announced as war preparation was building up, "this nation and our friends are all that stand between a world at peace and a world of chaos and constant alarm. Once again, we are called to defend the safety of our people and the hopes of all mankind. And we accept this responsibility...and we go forward with confidence, because this call of history has come to the right country." Bush does not seem to have much hesitation in identifying God with his own project. In a speech in September 2002, Bush cited a Christological text in reference to his war project: "And the light [America] has shone in the darkness [the enemies of America], and the darkness will not overcome it [America shall conquer its enemies]." When he appeared in a flight suit aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, he said to the troops: "And wherever you go, you carry a message of hope--a message that is ancient and ever new. In the words of the prophet Isaiah, 'To the captives, come out! to those who are in darkness, be free!'" Manipulation of Prayer True prayer does not pretend to tell God what we want Him to do but rather asks that God tell us what He wishes us to do. We do not pray in order to enlist God in our ranks but to examine ourselves, to change and to do God's will. Therefore, the confession of sin and repentance are crucial moments in prayer and worship. Prayer has played a role without precedent in the Bush presidency and in the propaganda of the evangelicals who support him. Photos of Bush at prayer are common. Great publicity was given to the fact that during a prime-time news conference shortly before his speech giving the ultimatum to Saddam Hussein, Bush asked his advisers to leave him alone for ten minutes. In evangelical symbolism, that meant that a man of prayer was going to commune with God, somewhat like Moses on Mount Sinai. It is remarkable how closely Bush's discourse coincides with that of the false prophets of the Old Testament. While the true prophets proclaimed the sovereignty of Yahweh, the God of justice and love who judges nations and persons, the false prophets served Baal, who could be manipulated by the powerful. Karl Marx concluded that religion is "the opium of the people." But Marx never knew committed Christians like Camilo Torres of Colombia, Oscar Arnulfo Romero of El Salvador, Frank Pais of Cuba, Ernesto Cardenal of Nicaragua, Dietrich Bonhoeffer of Germany or Martin Luther King Jr. of the United States. How paradoxical, and how sad, that the President of the United States, with his heretical manipulation of religious language, insists on proving Karl Marx right. Juan Stam, a Costa Rican pastor and theologian, taught at the Latin American Biblical Seminary and the National University of Costa Rica. Translated by Thomas E. Ambrogi. A longer version (available at www.servicioskoinonia.org/logos) appeared in Signos de Vida.

The War Audit Todd Kranock, a member of the Pax Christi USA Young Adult Forum, recently wrote an article for the BBC on God and war (the article was co-written by two of his colleagues at the University of Bradford in the Peace Studies Dept). The assignment was to assess God and war, the role of religion in war and conflict. It is an excellent piece and can be found at the link below (once on the page, scroll down to GW Bush's photo and click on the "War Audit" link): news.bbc.uk

From an email from Pax Christi USA: 'The Passion' of the Americans By William Rivers Pitt of truthout | Perspective The television airwaves have been filled for the last several days with a lot of back-and-forth about Mel Gibson's new film, 'The Passion of The Christ.' A great deal of debate centers around whether Gibson has fashioned a broadside against Jewish people in the manner of the medieval, anti-Semitic passion plays of old. There are plenty of rabbis arguing with Christian ministers on just about any channel you might choose to watch, so I'm going to leave that question to them for the time being. My question is much simpler: Why would Mel Gibson make a movie about people in the ancient Middle East and cast it with so many white people? To look at the central actors in this film, you'd think Jesus did his work near Manchester, New Hampshire instead of the Holy Land. The answer to that question lies within the United States, the prime market for this film. There are millions of Christians in America, some 25% of whom would characterize themselves as evangelical. It stands to reason that this film would do very well here, especially given the controversy that has surrounded the content. The whiteness of the cast, however, speaks to a decidedly un-Christian truth that lies near the heart of this republic. Simply put, nailing a white Jesus Christ to the cross on film will generate a far more emotional response from the American viewing public than the crucifixion of a savior who actually looks like he is from the Middle East. First, let's dispense with the idea that the white people who were cast to play the most emotive characters - Jesus, Judas, and Mary Magdalene - have anything to do with historical accuracy. In truth, the region where Jesus was born was, and remains, populated by brown-skinned people. The fact of Christ's non-whiteness is borne out in the historical record, and in biblical scripture. Right off the bat, the Book of Matthew describes Mary and Joseph fleeing to Egypt to escape the wrath of Herod. Egypt is in Africa, and is populated by brown-skinned people. For my money, this would be the last place on earth I would go to hide a white baby from an angry King. The earliest renditions of Jesus, painted by the first Christians called Essenes in the catacombs of Rome, depict a person with brown skin. During the time of Roman Emperor Justinian II, a gold coin featuring an image of Jesus was minted. This coin, which today can be seen in the British Museum, depicts a man with demonstrably non-white features and tightly curled hair. Finally, there is the Book of Revelations, which bears out the crafting of the Essenes and the Roman coin-makers by describing Jesus as having hair like wool, feet the color of burnt brass, and who resembled jasper and sardine stones. Jasper and sardine stones are both brown, as is burnt brass. The Jesus most familiar to Americans, the Jesus featured in Gibson's film, looks like the front man for an alternative rock band out of Minnesota. Judas in this film is a shorter version of the same phenomenon. White skin, long straight brown hair, decidedly European features - this is not the Jesus that preached revolution against the Empire long ago. This is the Jesus fashioned by Michelangelo five centuries ago, who used his white cousin as the model for the savior. The ugly truth which never even occurs to most Americans is that Jesus looked a lot more like an Iraqi, like an Afghani, like a Palestinian, like an Arab, than any of the paintings which grace the walls of American churches from sea to shining sea. This was an uncomfortable fact before September 11. After the attack, it became almost a moral imperative to put as much distance between Americans and people from the Middle East as possible. Now, to suggest that Jesus shared a genealogical heritage and physical similarity to the people sitting in dog cages down in Guantanamo is to dance along the edge of treason. George W. Bush calls himself Christian. If you believe him, he is on armchair-to-armchair relations with the Almighty, enjoying regular conversations with He Is What He Is on everything from tax policy to invasion plans. Bush serves a unique dual role as both the Commander in Chief and as high priest to the evangelical wing of American Christianity. When Bush did his little flight-suit strut across the aircraft carrier last May, he proclaimed victory in biblical verse and sent a signal to those Christians who see him as more than a man. Bush, that day, quoted Isaiah's passage from the Servant Songs about captives coming out and slaves being free. This is the same passage, as described in Luke chapter 4, which Jesus used to announce his coming as the Son of God. "Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing," said Jesus. Bush's use of this incredibly loaded passage speaks as much to his messianic fantasies as it does to his status as Christian-in-Chief. Yet this is the same man who invades countries without cause and consigns tens of thousands of innocents to explosive, burning death. This is the same man who pushes tax policies that further enrich the wealthy while stripping funds and services from the neediest in this nation. This is the man who speaks the language of vengeance, of fear, of violence. This is the man whose entire moral existence flies in the face of Christ's words from Luke, chapter 12, verse 15: "Take care to guard against all greed, for though one may be rich, one's life does not consist of possessions." Sadly, the skewed moral compass of George W. Bush is shared by too many Americans who would call themselves Christian. Possibly the most important words ever spoken by Jesus can be found in Matthew, chapter 5, verses 38-45. "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,'" said Christ. "But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well; and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to him who begs from you, and do not refuse him who would borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust." It is these words that condemn both Bush and the hands-off moral attitude of too many American Christians. Certainly, Jesus was no fool. In Luke, chapter 11, verse 21, he said, "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace." Self-protection, for person and nation, is both moral and intelligent. But vengeance, violence and hatred are not Christian. Mercy, love and generosity are the hallmarks of the teachings of Jesus. If you are to call yourself Christian, you must be for the poor and the weak, and against empire and vengeance. Period. These simple attributes are all too absent in the American soul and spirit. Gibson's white Jesus is but one example of how far we have strayed. It is a safe bet that, had Gibson chosen a brown-skinned actor to portray Jesus, his film would not find a connection in this country. Millions of Americans try to live by the teachings of Jesus, and do so with success, but find themselves at odds with those who carry the banner of Christianity. This is a travesty. Too many so-called Christians are blind to history, blind to the actions of our nation, blind to the hypocrisy of our so-called leaders, and the world bleeds because of it. Too many so-called Christians are people who would slaughter the savior to protect their power and position. Were Jesus alive today, he would probably nail himself to the cross to get away from all these people who act like barbarians in His name. * William Rivers Pitt is the senior editor and lead writer for truthout. He is a New York Times and international bestselling author of two books.

A reminder about "the powers that be" that are behind all of the fiascos which George Jr. and company have gotten us engaged in over the past few years... 1. www.PNAC.InfoExposing the Project for the New American Century An effort to investigate, analyze, and expose the Project for the New American Century, and its plan for a "unipolar" world..... www.pnac.info 2. The Plan:Were Neo-Conservatives’ 1998 Memos a Blueprint for Iraq War? ABC News March 10 — Years before George W. Bush entered the White House, and years before the Sept. 11 attacks set the direction of his presidency, a group of influential neo-conservatives hatched a plan to get Saddam Hussein out of power.... 3.Sojo.net The Project for a New American Empire Who are these guys? And why do they think they can rule the world? by Duane Shank A British magazine called them "the weird men behind George W. Bush's war." Their Project has led to countless conspiracy theories. Their principles are now the governing foreign and military policy of the Bush administration—a plan combining U.S. military forces based around the world with a doctrine of pre-emptive war and the development of new nuclear weapons. Who are they, the creators of the "Project for the New American Century"? What is the "Project," and why is it cause for concern? The people behind it are now prominent players in the Bush administration (see "Powers That Be," at left), and some of them—most notably, Vice-President Richard Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld—are household names. And their plan is for nothing less than securing U.S. global domination for decades to come—and that's according to their own testimony. The roots of the Project—both ideological and the people identified with it—are in the Reagan administration. Combining an aggressive foreign policy with a then-unprecedented military buildup, they helped lead the invasions of Panama and Grenada, counter-insurgency wars in Central America, the Cold War showdown with the Soviet Union, and the arming of Iraq as a counter to radical Islamists in Iran. In 1989, the Soviet Union finally imploded—and with it ended the bipolar world that had existed since World War II. The United States remained as the lone superpower. Neoconservative intellectuals, inside and outside the administration of George Bush I, began plotting how to continue that situation into the future. After the first Gulf war, Paul Wolfowitz, then undersecretary of defense for policy, drafted a defense planning document that laid out the core ideas of what was to become the Project for the New American Century's vision. It was a strategy of maintaining and strengthening unchallenged U.S. military superiority against a potential future superpower rival and against unrest around the world, through pre-emption rather than containment and unilateral military action rather than multilateral internationalism. Bush Sr. administration officials rejected it as too radical.......... .............But there is an alternative to empire and endless war. The plan of the Project for the New American Century must be countered with a vision that insists militarization and pre-emptive war is not the path to real security. We must advance the vision of a world where international institutions are strengthened rather than destroyed, where global poverty is seriously addressed, where all countries, including the United States, are disarming their weapons of mass destruction, and where human rights are taken seriously. People of faith and goodwill in this country and around the world stood up by the millions to oppose the war against Iraq. We must now continue that opposition—through doing justice, loving compassion, and walking with God in the struggle. Duane Shank is issues and policy adviser for Sojourners. -------------------------------- in Pax Christi, not pax Americana, BrotherRog

I don't know if Thursday's PBS program will mention this or not, but George Jr. is the first (and hopefully only) U.S. president to refuse to meet with Methodist Bishops - in the history of our nation! What makes this even more disouraging is that George Jr. is (at least on paper) a United Methodist. Clearly, this is a maverik individual who eshews authority other than his.

PBS program Thursday night focuses on "The Jesus Factor," President Bush Thursday, April 29, at 9 P.M., the Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, president of The Interfaith Alliance, will be one of the featured sources on FRONTLINE®, the award-winning investigative program of the Public Broadcasting Service. Dr. Gaddy was interviewed by PBS in the chapel at the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church in Washington, D.C., across the street from the offices of The Interfaith Alliance. Excerpts of that interview are used in the program and he is highlighted in the press release from FRONTLINE®. According to a news release from PBS: “How George W. Bush became a born-again Christian--and the impact that decision has had on his political career--is the focus of the FRONTLINE® report “The Jesus Factor,” airing Thursday, April 29, at 9 P.M. on PBS (check local listings). "In 'The Jesus Factor,' viewers hear from numerous evangelical Christians who say President Bush understands the 'heart and soul' of their beliefs and that his post-9/11 speeches comforted a grieving nation. FRONTLINE also speaks to those who feel the president has taken his rhetoric--and his religion--too far. "If we turn religion into a tool for advancing political strategy, we treat it as anything other than a sacred part of life from which we draw values and strength," says Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, president of The Interfaith Alliance. "Any time that religion has identified itself with a particular political movement or a particular government, religion has been harmed by that." To Check Local Listings Read the complete press release visit Interfaith Alliance www.interfaithalliance.org

PBS program Thursday night focuses on "The Jesus Factor," President Bush Thursday, April 29, at 9 P.M., the Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, president of The Interfaith Alliance, will be one of the featured sources on FRONTLINE®, the award-winning investigative program of the Public Broadcasting Service. Dr. Gaddy was interviewed by PBS in the chapel at the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church in Washington, D.C., across the street from the offices of The Interfaith Alliance. Excerpts of that interview are used in the program and he is highlighted in the press release from FRONTLINE®. According to a news release from PBS: “How George W. Bush became a born-again Christian--and the impact that decision has had on his political career--is the focus of the FRONTLINE® report “The Jesus Factor,” airing Thursday, April 29, at 9 P.M. on PBS (check local listings). "In 'The Jesus Factor,' viewers hear from numerous evangelical Christians who say President Bush understands the 'heart and soul' of their beliefs and that his post-9/11 speeches comforted a grieving nation. FRONTLINE also speaks to those who feel the president has taken his rhetoric--and his religion--too far. "If we turn religion into a tool for advancing political strategy, we treat it as anything other than a sacred part of life from which we draw values and strength," says Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, president of The Interfaith Alliance. "Any time that religion has identified itself with a particular political movement or a particular government, religion has been harmed by that." To Check Local Listings Read the complete press release visit Interfaith Alliance