Nobody’s calling for shouting, raging or being incendiary, either. Are y’all responding to posts from some other thread, or what? Speaking with love is fine and dandy…but if you don’t try to speak to the same general audiences as those that profess to be Christian but have a far right agenda things like what just happened in Indiana keep getting repeated. Do you think the Governor signed that bill thinking he was getting just a few fringe votes out of the deal?
Moderate Christians speak out against all sorts of things-Why this hesitation against speaking out against those that would misrepresent Christianity?
Unless it’s because they profess to be Christians themselves, and you just don’t badmouth family.
Read my links - who is hesitating from speaking out on these issues? I am not, nor are others. I already provided links to two different organizations I support that have specifically commented on Phil Robertson (Sojourners and the PCUSA). I have also provided a quote from my minister on Phelps.
We are speaking - you just are not listening.
What - you want me to buy a seat at a Florida prayer breakfast so that I can speak right after Phil?
As for Indiana, the PCUSA is right now working on canceling our large conference in Indiana, and the Disciples of Christ have already moved theirs.
See - we are speaking out on this RIGHT NOW.
Are you deaf?
The bill’s been signed already.
Were you deaf? A supposed minority of right-wing Christians convinced the Gov that they speak for a large voting block, and your answer is to react too little and too late.
Edited to add: No I’m not expecting you personally to buy seats to a Florida prayer breakfast. But, then again, this thread isn’t all about you. What would have been nice is if some local church leaders had made an effort in that direction, or had attempted to convince them to get another speaker.
I have no idea about who are what attends the Florida bit.
As for Indiana, churches in Indiana and nationwide WERE against it. There were phone banks calling reps, etc. It still happened because enough people backed their state reps, and the Governor thinks that he is safe as well.
The Disciples of Christ stated their objections well in advance of the Bill passing:
Disciples of Christ:
So Christians WERE against it, and spoke out against it, and it sill passed. That is because there are OTHER Christians who were for it, and they held more sway with the legislature and the Governor.
That is politics - you don’t always win. Prop 8 (gays) passed in California, as did Prop 187 (immigrants). Multiple states, plus the US nationally, have religious freedom laws. It will be interesting (in a Bricker sort of way) to see how these start running up against the Free Exercise Clause:
So now we take the next step and cancel events in the state (which is in our power). Some churches in Indiana will celebrate, others will fight on. That is what we do.
But we are NOT silent. We are not quiet. We are not ignoring these issues because someone on the other side is Christian.
If you’re asking for particular, famous people, Desmond Tutu comes to mind, as does Jimmy Carter. Mister Rogers was also an ordained minister.
Or perhaps they figure that their times is better spent, on things like charity – helping those in need, lobbying for human rights, protesting discrimination, you know, rather than answering some dumbass trolls.
There are so many freaking denominations of Christianity. Not all of them agree on what’s what. And yes, when asked about such and such asshole, you’ll hear, “these buttnuggets don’t speak for everyone.” Yes, they’ll get air time, I imagine. But what would that accomplish? I suspect they’re not worried about PR at the moment. If that bothers you, well, too fucking bad.
Most people who well, don’t have a chip on their shoulder, and see things in terms of black and white, know damned well that Robertson doesn’t speak for every single fucking Christian and/or religious person out there. C’mon, we’re talking about some dumbass reality TV show star. If YOU think he speaks for every Christian in the US, that’s your problem.
What’s the phrase, “Speak the gospel at all times. If necessary, use words.”
Just to pile on to what others have said - moderate Christians do speak out, all the time. I don’t have a public forum like Robertson but I often criticize Christian right-wingers on Facebook or in other open forums including the Straight Dope. Here an example from actual Christian leaders:
On March 12th, conservative evangelical celebrity Franklin Graham posted a simple-minded and offensive observation on Facebook regarding police-on-minority violence. The tone can be surmised in his opening sentences: “Listen up – Blacks, Whites, Latinos, and everyone else. Most police shootings can be avoided. It comes down to respect for authority and obedience.” He received over 201,000 likes in the two weeks since the post.
In response, a coalition of thoughtful and moderate Christians responded in an open letter to Graham. In it they call his statement “crude, insensitive, and paternalistic.” They go on to say that
There is much more to the letter in the link above. It is signed by over 30 leaders of Christian charities, organizations, networks and churches.
This is just a recent example of how moderate Christians respond to this kind of thing, but frankly, we have to pick our battles. I don’t get worked up about Phil Robertson because I know the only people who take him seriously aren’t going to be persuaded otherwise. When it comes to other issues, I speak up loudly. I’m not sure what else you are looking for.
Will someone please tell me why moderate Christians, who are supposedly in the majority in this country, who are supposedly the “real” Christians in this country, don’t hold more sway in this country?
Who calls us the “real” Christians? The only time I hear language like that is from hard-core Bible literal type churches - when they claim to be “real” or “true” Christians.
As for sway - The Democratic party has plenty of self-identifying Christians, and that Party currently holds the Presidency.
Now the Republicans have MORE of the self-identifying Christians, and the deal made with the Moral Majority under Reagan still pays dividends for that party.
Sometimes we win, sometimes we lose.
Skammer, was the letter then put on Facebook, in attempt to reach the same wide general audience that Graham reached out to?
How does one define a “real Christian”? To me, that’s no more than a “true Scotsman” type thing. A real Christian is generally someone who believes that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, was crucified and rose from the dead after three days, and worship him accordingly. Other than that, the devil is in the details (no pun intended).
Yes it was.
Pretty sure the fire that’s intended to starve the wildfire for fuel is supposed to be controlled…
My take is that all Christians are real Christians but that, being sinners, all Christians will be unchristian from time to time. But that’s a nitpick. I agree with the underlying point: mainline Christians have ceded the field to those wearing their faith on their sleeves, praying on the street corner and pushing a political agenda wholly independent of the Gospel (i.e. anti-gay and anti-abortion).
Part of the difficulty is ideological, I think. I’d summarize the gospels as saying, “Love God and His creation, love thy neighbor as thyself, but don’t be a sanctimonious prick about it.” So a good Christian can’t launch rhetorical napalm on the late Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, because, well it’s unchristian.
Algher: I much prefer this sort of response…
…to this one:
Because moderate and liberal Christians have ceded a part of discourse to Christian conservative loudmouths. By repeated referring themselves as “Christian”, one theologically squirelly subset has damaged the brand. Many millennials have taken them at their word and thereby associate Christianity with, well, bigotry, intolerance, cultural drama and scientific ignorance. Now frankly, I part company with the OP regarding the Duck Dynasty clown: I’m not sure how much he matters. But the underlying topic and question is legitimate.
Basically, we need a couple of mainline equivalents of say, Bill Nye the Science Guy. The fact is that the media loves controversy. A handful of mainline or liberal Christian Reverends need to place themselves on every big reporter’s rollodex and provide standard replies to the bible pounders. Start off bland, more in sadness than in anger. Leave it to another reverend to ramp it up as appropriate.
I’d endorse the following.
A wildfire is an uncontrolled, wild, fire. Starting another wildfire under the same conditions that created the 1st uncontrolled wildfire doesn’t guarantee the 2nd fire will remained under control. just sayin’
wildfire
Noun
(plural wildfires)
1.A rapidly spreading fire, especially one occurring in a wildland area.
4.(figuratively) Something that acts quickly and uncontrollably.
wildfire
(ˈwaɪldˌfaɪə)
n
2.
a. a raging and uncontrollable fire
b. anything that is disseminated quickly (esp in the phrase spread like wildfire)
Here’s the thing though; Phil Robertson comes out and says something odd, hateful, crazy and definitely not in the mainstream of modern Christianity.
The Methodist bishop of Maine issues a statement saying something conciliatory and along the lines of how Robertson is misguided and that we don’t agree with him (meaning the Maine bishopric), and that he prays that Phil should come to a greater understanding of Christ’s love, etc…
Do you think that’ll even make the news?
And like Measure for Measure says, it’s unlikely that said bishop, if he said anything at all, would say anything inflammatory,particularly condemnatory, etc… It’ll be along the lines of praying for greater understanding, or finding Christ or whatever.
I also agree that mainstream Christianity is NOT the same thing as the denominations that drive the millenials out. Those people are just the ones in the spotlight because they say and do absurd and crazy stuff. Mainstream Christianity is so… boring and mainstream that it isn’t newsworthy. What I find fascinating is that when I was younger (1980s), the big divide was Catholics vs. Protestants, with the non-mainstream groups looked at as kooks, weirdos and cults.
Now it seems that it’s what used to be the kooks and cults vs. everyone else, with Catholics somehow having more in common with the Protestants than either of them do with the kooks, weirdos and cults.
I love the idea of a mainstream, Protestant “Bill Nye the Science Guy” type. Someone very theologically sound, very personable, not ancient, and not afraid to call out non-mainstream positions, in a very Christian way.
Hell, no! Do you know why? News shows don’t read statements to their viewers. Now, if the Methodist Bishop of Maine personally contacted a few media agencies and said, “I would like to go on the air to address this immediately, either in an interview or just to state my case.”, he might get somewhere with it. In fact, the right time to do it would have been before the breakfast took place-action is always better than reaction, and this is where the moderate Christians have fallen short in the past. It wouldn’t have been hard to show why Robertson was a bad choice to be a keynote speaker at a Christian breakfast, using past examples of his inane ramblings.
(post shortened)
If you wish to complain about an issue, or a Robertson, you’re free to do so.
But you keep demanding that someone else must complain about the issues you believe are a priority. Your priority.
If you want to show why Roberson was a bad choice, go right ahead. Maybe you could make a list of the issues that you demand other people complain about, and people could check with you before forming their own opinions and priorities? Or not.
He is making the case that mainstream Christians either agree with nutty fringe sentiment, or are complacent and therefore guilty of contributing to it’s consequences.
Which seems fair, and you all seem to be dodging. So go ahead and say yet again *you *don’t personally agree with Robertson.