Back in early February, the Okie Gardener raised the issue of Barack Obama's church (read the original post here).
FYI: That February post continues to be one of our most popular "Google" hits.
Since that post, much has been written about the candidate and his church and his pastor. Today, the New York Times weighs in with what strikes me as a relatively thorough and fair discussion of Obama and his spiritual journey. I will be interested to see if the Gardener has any additional thoughts on the matter.
I am pasting an abridged version of the introductory graphs below, followed by the link to the story in full, but, first, this comment:
As a dedicated parishioner of a sincere and loving church that is not always in accord with my political views, I am not eager to hold a congregant responsible for everything his pastor says in the pulpit or in other public spaces.
Having said that, I am interested in Obama's religious views and his spiritual biography.
Excerpts from the Times article by Jodi Kantor:
Twenty years ago at Trinity, Mr. Obama, then a community organizer in poor Chicago neighborhoods, found the African-American community he had sought all his life, along with professional credibility as a community organizer and an education in how to inspire followers. He had sampled various faiths but adopted none until he met [Rev. Jeremiah A.] Wright Jr., a dynamic pastor who preached Afrocentric theology, dabbled in radical politics and delivered music-and-profanity-spiked sermons.
"Evidently, the pressures of Mr. Obama’s presidential run are placing a strain on the relationship between the star congregant and the man who led him from skeptic to self-described Christian."
Mr. Wright’s assertions of widespread white racism and his scorching remarks about American government have drawn criticism, and prompted the senator to cancel his delivery of the invocation when he formally announced his candidacy in February.
Mr. Obama, a Democratic presidential candidate who says he was only shielding his pastor from the spotlight, said he respected Mr. Wright’s work for the poor and his fight against injustice. But “we don’t agree on everything,” Mr. Obama said. “I’ve never had a thorough conversation with him about all aspects of politics.”
It is hard to imagine, though, how Mr. Obama can truly distance himself from Mr. Wright. The Christianity that Mr. Obama adopted at Trinity has infused not only his life, but also his campaign. He began his presidential announcement with the phrase “Giving all praise and honor to God,” a salutation common in the black church. He titled his second book, “The Audacity of Hope,” after one of Mr. Wright’s sermons, and often talks about biblical underdogs, the mutual interests of religious and secular America, and the centrality of faith in public life.
The full article here.
FYI: That February post continues to be one of our most popular "Google" hits.
Since that post, much has been written about the candidate and his church and his pastor. Today, the New York Times weighs in with what strikes me as a relatively thorough and fair discussion of Obama and his spiritual journey. I will be interested to see if the Gardener has any additional thoughts on the matter.
I am pasting an abridged version of the introductory graphs below, followed by the link to the story in full, but, first, this comment:
As a dedicated parishioner of a sincere and loving church that is not always in accord with my political views, I am not eager to hold a congregant responsible for everything his pastor says in the pulpit or in other public spaces.
Having said that, I am interested in Obama's religious views and his spiritual biography.
Excerpts from the Times article by Jodi Kantor:
Twenty years ago at Trinity, Mr. Obama, then a community organizer in poor Chicago neighborhoods, found the African-American community he had sought all his life, along with professional credibility as a community organizer and an education in how to inspire followers. He had sampled various faiths but adopted none until he met [Rev. Jeremiah A.] Wright Jr., a dynamic pastor who preached Afrocentric theology, dabbled in radical politics and delivered music-and-profanity-spiked sermons.
"Evidently, the pressures of Mr. Obama’s presidential run are placing a strain on the relationship between the star congregant and the man who led him from skeptic to self-described Christian."
Mr. Wright’s assertions of widespread white racism and his scorching remarks about American government have drawn criticism, and prompted the senator to cancel his delivery of the invocation when he formally announced his candidacy in February.
Mr. Obama, a Democratic presidential candidate who says he was only shielding his pastor from the spotlight, said he respected Mr. Wright’s work for the poor and his fight against injustice. But “we don’t agree on everything,” Mr. Obama said. “I’ve never had a thorough conversation with him about all aspects of politics.”
It is hard to imagine, though, how Mr. Obama can truly distance himself from Mr. Wright. The Christianity that Mr. Obama adopted at Trinity has infused not only his life, but also his campaign. He began his presidential announcement with the phrase “Giving all praise and honor to God,” a salutation common in the black church. He titled his second book, “The Audacity of Hope,” after one of Mr. Wright’s sermons, and often talks about biblical underdogs, the mutual interests of religious and secular America, and the centrality of faith in public life.
The full article here.
Category: America and the World
Posted by: an okie gardener
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a heroine of our times, gives a brief interview to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on her new book Defiant Infidel. Link from The Netherlands Post.
Category: General
Posted by: an okie gardener
Today (4/29) is the anniversary of the death of John Darby in 1882. Read more. He is the originator of the idea of the Rapture, that some time prior to Christ's return the Church will be removed from the world.
I am not a believer in the Rapture. To my mind, any new doctrine arising 1800 years after the apostles bears an immense burden of proof. The proof-texts and arguments offered by those who believe in it do not seem to me to meet that burden.
I am not a believer in the Rapture. To my mind, any new doctrine arising 1800 years after the apostles bears an immense burden of proof. The proof-texts and arguments offered by those who believe in it do not seem to me to meet that burden.
29/04: Man v Nature
Category: American Culture
Posted by: an okie gardener
At this weekend's OpinionJournal James Tabor offers his list of the five best first-person man versus nature books. Worth a look.
When I was a boy, one of the juvenile genres in our school and public library was heroic biographies. I devoured them all: in my imagination I trekked to the North and the South Pole, caught wild animals in Africa for zoos, and explored for ancient ruins in mountain and jungle. I suppose these books are no longer on the shelf, banned by the better angels of political correctness. Too bad. Boys need to dream, even grown-up boys.
When I was a boy, one of the juvenile genres in our school and public library was heroic biographies. I devoured them all: in my imagination I trekked to the North and the South Pole, caught wild animals in Africa for zoos, and explored for ancient ruins in mountain and jungle. I suppose these books are no longer on the shelf, banned by the better angels of political correctness. Too bad. Boys need to dream, even grown-up boys.
Category: Mainline Christianity
Posted by: an okie gardener
CONCORD – The Rev. V. Gene Robinson’s elevation as the Episcopal Church’s first openly gay bishop divided the Anglican community worldwide, but in New Hampshire he just wants to be one of the many gay couples uniting with his partner under a soon-to-be-signed civil unions law.
“My partner and I look forward to taking full advantage of the new law,” Robinson told The Associated Press on Thursday. Article here.
The world Anglican communion, especially the Third-World bishops will take this as a glove to the face.
“My partner and I look forward to taking full advantage of the new law,” Robinson told The Associated Press on Thursday. Article here.
The world Anglican communion, especially the Third-World bishops will take this as a glove to the face.
Gateway Pundit has the info on the recent lesbian wedding in Nigeria and the aftermath: the theatre bulldozed and the participants in hiding. According to the Sharia Law (Islamic Law) of that state in Nigeria these women face death by stoning. The Nigerian interpretation is not unique, homosexuals have been hanged in Iran.
I am not an advocate of same-sex practice, as readers of this blog know.
My point here is that in a rational world San Francisco would today be erupting in protests against Sharia Law, gay and lesbian activist groups would be holding vigils in Washington, and Rosie O'Donnell would be on television, along with Ellen Degeneres, condemning Islamic intolerance. But none of this will happen. The left is so locked in to hatred of Bush, and so committed to multiculturalism, that no response will be forthcoming. The groups that most naturally would lead the fight against Islamic jihad are silent. Perhaps some forms of liberalism indeed are a mental disease.
I am not an advocate of same-sex practice, as readers of this blog know.
My point here is that in a rational world San Francisco would today be erupting in protests against Sharia Law, gay and lesbian activist groups would be holding vigils in Washington, and Rosie O'Donnell would be on television, along with Ellen Degeneres, condemning Islamic intolerance. But none of this will happen. The left is so locked in to hatred of Bush, and so committed to multiculturalism, that no response will be forthcoming. The groups that most naturally would lead the fight against Islamic jihad are silent. Perhaps some forms of liberalism indeed are a mental disease.
27/04: Anti-dhimmitude in Europe?
Category: Religion & Public Policy
Posted by: an okie gardener
27/04: Religion of Peace update
Category: Religion & Public Policy
Posted by: an okie gardener
Honor killings. Family members killing women they feel have shamed the family. Common in Islamic countries and in Islamic communities in Europe. Article here.
Three cheers for multiculturalism. All cultures indeed are equally worthy. But wait, you say. Honor killings are a perversion of Islam. If so, why are we not seeing a massive effort to eradicate honor killings from Muslim communities? Why are we not seeing massive and popular discussion in Islamic forums on how to "de-patriarchalize" the Quran, a book explicitly addressed to men, with occasional references to their women? Stupid is as stupid does. A religion is as that religion does. Show me the practice, not some idealized version with little or no reflection in the real world.
Three cheers for multiculturalism. All cultures indeed are equally worthy. But wait, you say. Honor killings are a perversion of Islam. If so, why are we not seeing a massive effort to eradicate honor killings from Muslim communities? Why are we not seeing massive and popular discussion in Islamic forums on how to "de-patriarchalize" the Quran, a book explicitly addressed to men, with occasional references to their women? Stupid is as stupid does. A religion is as that religion does. Show me the practice, not some idealized version with little or no reflection in the real world.
27/04: Controlling the Weather
Category: General
Posted by: an okie gardener
Anyone but me concerned about China's recent and future attempts to control the weather? Stories here and here.
Chaos theory first was developed in regard to weather. Introduction to chaos theory here. The key idea is in the introduction to the article: (below)
Chaos theory first was developed in regard to weather. Introduction to chaos theory here. The key idea is in the introduction to the article: (below)
Two weeks later. The frenzied desire for satisfaction has been accomplished in the Don Imus affair.
Now what?
What did it all mean?
1. Timing is everything. If Imus had uttered the same infamous phrase one week later, it is likely that the forces that combined to bring about his public destruction would have been otherwise occupied. But Imus stumbled into a slow news cycle. America's powerful opinion-making and public-policy setting media elite were bored. Taking down Imus seemed a worthy and appealing thing to do at the moment. In the aftermath of the VA Tech massacre, Imus and his radio fiefdom seems much less consequential. But it matters little that the urgency of mid-April seems oddly dated and irrelevant; the deed is done. We are on to the next cause celebre with no remorse or regret.
2. The surreality of it all grows increasingly pungent with the passage of time. Eugene Robinson observed early on (April 10): "I can accept that Imus doesn't believe he is racist, but "nappy-headed hos" had to come from somewhere" (his full column from the Washington Post here).
Where did it come from? From some dark chamber in the black heart of Don Imus? This awful line of argument misses an obvious point made clumsily by Imus and others.
From where did the ugly remark emanate? The "nappy-headed hos" comment was a phrase borrowed from African American life, which had transmigrated from hip-hop culture to mainstream American pop culture. Imus, who makes his living synthesizing and exaggerating and lampooning American culture, threw the phrase out there with his usual recklessness. "Nappy-headed ho" was in Imus's repertoire because it had become as American as apple pie.
Unlike the atomic-bomb of contemporary speech, the n-word, "nappy-headed hos" originated with black America. And the argument is not merely that African Americans say "nappy" and "ho." Some incompetent Imus defenders conflated the import of the "n-word" and "nappy" and "ho" and proceeded to package them together as somehow comparable. True, for various reasons, individuals in the African American community have co-opted the derogatory n-word (used by whites to convey disrespect for blacks) for their own internal use; notwithstanding, the n-word remains the most potent vehicle to deliver egregious insult to black America.
The Salient Point: the difference is that "nappy" and "ho" are words still relatively unfamiliar to white America. In fact, they are words introduced to pop culture by black America. Even as Imus repeated the "slur," one had the sense that he really didn't quite understand what the words meant.
An anecdotal aside: Imus may be the first white person I ever heard utter "nappy."
Back to the Real Point: Castigating Don Imus for carelessly employing "nappy-headed ho" is tantamount to you spanking your children for picking up curse words that you regularly toss around at home.
Even now, we as a community are still wrestling with the meaning of the phrase. I have heard more than one random person take offense that Imus called the Rutgers players "whores." By that they mean prostitute. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the meaning of "ho." No fair reading of the incident leads to the conclusion that Imus meant to insinuate that the ladies in question accepted money for sex. "Ho" is a term of disparagement and degradation applied generically to women. While men are sometimes called "whores" in conversation, they are never called "hos." "Whores" and "hos," at least in this context, are completely different words conveying completely different ideas.
That doesn't get Imus off the hook--but it is a good place to segue into the fundamental hypocrisy and inconsistency of the disparate cultural forces that came together to bring him down.
Next time on Part II:
3. Keeping it Surreal. I will consider the tsunami of hypocrisy from all sides.
4. Imus picked the wrong friends. The conservative movement in American politics houses the true defenders of free speech. Imus's liberal buddies ran for cover in the face of politically protected opposition.
5. Why Imus's apology was cowardly, insincere and foolish. And, in a related matter, why I have not listened to Don Imus for ten years.
More to come...
Now what?
What did it all mean?
1. Timing is everything. If Imus had uttered the same infamous phrase one week later, it is likely that the forces that combined to bring about his public destruction would have been otherwise occupied. But Imus stumbled into a slow news cycle. America's powerful opinion-making and public-policy setting media elite were bored. Taking down Imus seemed a worthy and appealing thing to do at the moment. In the aftermath of the VA Tech massacre, Imus and his radio fiefdom seems much less consequential. But it matters little that the urgency of mid-April seems oddly dated and irrelevant; the deed is done. We are on to the next cause celebre with no remorse or regret.
2. The surreality of it all grows increasingly pungent with the passage of time. Eugene Robinson observed early on (April 10): "I can accept that Imus doesn't believe he is racist, but "nappy-headed hos" had to come from somewhere" (his full column from the Washington Post here).
Where did it come from? From some dark chamber in the black heart of Don Imus? This awful line of argument misses an obvious point made clumsily by Imus and others.
From where did the ugly remark emanate? The "nappy-headed hos" comment was a phrase borrowed from African American life, which had transmigrated from hip-hop culture to mainstream American pop culture. Imus, who makes his living synthesizing and exaggerating and lampooning American culture, threw the phrase out there with his usual recklessness. "Nappy-headed ho" was in Imus's repertoire because it had become as American as apple pie.
Unlike the atomic-bomb of contemporary speech, the n-word, "nappy-headed hos" originated with black America. And the argument is not merely that African Americans say "nappy" and "ho." Some incompetent Imus defenders conflated the import of the "n-word" and "nappy" and "ho" and proceeded to package them together as somehow comparable. True, for various reasons, individuals in the African American community have co-opted the derogatory n-word (used by whites to convey disrespect for blacks) for their own internal use; notwithstanding, the n-word remains the most potent vehicle to deliver egregious insult to black America.
The Salient Point: the difference is that "nappy" and "ho" are words still relatively unfamiliar to white America. In fact, they are words introduced to pop culture by black America. Even as Imus repeated the "slur," one had the sense that he really didn't quite understand what the words meant.
An anecdotal aside: Imus may be the first white person I ever heard utter "nappy."
Back to the Real Point: Castigating Don Imus for carelessly employing "nappy-headed ho" is tantamount to you spanking your children for picking up curse words that you regularly toss around at home.
Even now, we as a community are still wrestling with the meaning of the phrase. I have heard more than one random person take offense that Imus called the Rutgers players "whores." By that they mean prostitute. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the meaning of "ho." No fair reading of the incident leads to the conclusion that Imus meant to insinuate that the ladies in question accepted money for sex. "Ho" is a term of disparagement and degradation applied generically to women. While men are sometimes called "whores" in conversation, they are never called "hos." "Whores" and "hos," at least in this context, are completely different words conveying completely different ideas.
That doesn't get Imus off the hook--but it is a good place to segue into the fundamental hypocrisy and inconsistency of the disparate cultural forces that came together to bring him down.
Next time on Part II:
3. Keeping it Surreal. I will consider the tsunami of hypocrisy from all sides.
4. Imus picked the wrong friends. The conservative movement in American politics houses the true defenders of free speech. Imus's liberal buddies ran for cover in the face of politically protected opposition.
5. Why Imus's apology was cowardly, insincere and foolish. And, in a related matter, why I have not listened to Don Imus for ten years.
More to come...
