Tragic Illiteracy
Yesterday, I said the Strib's unsigned editorial was a ripe specimen.
The flies circling this morning's effort can be seen for miles, in comparison.
It's about Pat Robertson's outburst the other day calling for the assassination of Hugo Chavez, which I condemned on Tuesday.
The left, naturally, is piling on; nothing excites the droogs of the left like an "out" conservative Christian getting uppity.
OK. I've buried Robertson. Now, I'm going to praise him.
No, not what he said - but the basic idea. Chavez is going to be a big, ugly thorn in America's side, sooner than later. Assassination - not such a good idea. But some sort of pressure on Venezuela's incipient dictator can only be a good thing.
Because while I'm not a huge Robertson fan (to say the least), I figure if the likes of the Strib Editorial Board are lining up against a guy, even a guy like Robertson deserves someone covering his six.
Given the absurdity of his more famous quotations, one can only hope that Pat Robertson's television viewers don't think he gets his ideas straight from the top, as it were. His declarations seem clearly to be born of his own mind. Indeed, the host of the Christian Broadcast Network's "The 700 Club" made the point quite tellingly on Monday in urging that U.S. agents assassinate Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
That's not a strategy the pacifist from Nazareth -- himself a victim of state-sponsored murder -- would likely endorse, and it ought to dismay Robertson's followers as readily as his detractors.
But first, can we record our dismay at the Strib's historical illiteracy? Jesus's crucifixion was ordered by a religious body, at least according to the Gospels (in which Pontius Pilate merely confirmed the sentence passed by the Sanhedrin).
Details, details:
Denominations may differ on the meaning of the Christian message, but few preachers embrace selective slaughter as a noble means to an honorable end.
But then, it seems unlikely Robertson was calling for a group of ministers to carry out the assassination, doesn't it?
Yet Robertson did just that on Monday: "If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him," he told his viewers, "I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war." That exhortation casts evangelism in a whole new light.
It says absolutely nothing about evangelism.
By the way, the Strib seems undecided on what it's trying to say:
Robertson's words were plainly foolish, but listeners should guard against making too much of them.
Huh?
What? To leave more room for the Strib to do it?
Posted by Mitch at
August 25, 2005 07:14 AM
| TrackBack
Good post, Mitch.
My thoughts have been that if Robertson were a Muslim and had SHOUTED every Sunday (or is it every day...when do Mulsims go to the mosque?) "death to ALL infidels" AND he wasn't a Christian but was anything else (except a Jew), then all would be peachy with all the newspapers, all the liberals...well, just all the people who "care".
People who "hate" Robertson and others like him don't know what the hell he says and have never watched or listened to him...I daresay even once.
Posted by: Colleen at August 25, 2005 08:51 AMForget the Imams, Colleen - George Effing Stefanopoulos could have his entire panel screaming for Chavez's head on a platter and nobody would notice. Unless there was a conservative on the panel - in which case that would be the lead on every story about the event.
Posted by: Brian Jones at August 25, 2005 09:39 AMFrom the Strib piece,
"That's not a strategy the pacifist from Nazareth -- himself a victim of state-sponsored murder -- would likely endorse"
Mitch responds,
"But first, can we record our dismay at the Strib's historical illiteracy? Jesus’ crucifixion was ordered by a religious body, at least according to the Gospels."
Historical illiteracy?
Jesus’ execution may have been ordered by a religious body but only Rome had the power and authority to carry it out.
Crucifixion was a Roman method. Not Jewish.
The understanding we have of poor Israel - the victim of oppressive autocratic Rome is naive to say the least. There was a complex sponsor / client relationship between Jewish religious / secular leaders and Rome and this relationship was as much a target for the Zealots, the Essenes and other Jewish revolutionaries as Rome itself.
In that respect Mitch, he was indeed a victim of state-sponsored murder.
Putting historical elaboration aside though, the point of the Stribs opinion piece, isn’t about how Jesus was killed. It is about Robertson and those like him. The point is summarized in this paragraph from the piece…
“More ominous than the substance of Monday's utterance is what it reveals about religious fundamentalism in this new century: In America and across the globe, movements meant to beckon believers back to their roots have been turned into political campaigns with the loosest of links to spiritual tradition.”
Posted by: Doug at August 25, 2005 10:18 AM"...but few preachers embrace selective slaughter as a noble means to an honorable end."
What, they'd prefer a general slaughter?
I'm sure this is actually intended to call (tacitly) for a stop to all killing everywhere, but that's even more risible.
"...he was indeed a victim of state-sponsored murder."
No, that was a state-sponsored execution, following due process of law; murder requires that the killing be unlawful. This says nothing about the propriety of the act; it is only a statement about semantics. But given the emotional loading of "murder", the semantics are important.
Posted by: Doug Sundseth at August 25, 2005 11:20 AMDental Plan the best dental plans on the web - http://www.bestdentalplans.biz
Posted by: Dental Plan at November 26, 2005 01:15 AMThanks for the special work and information! bad credit mortgage slot prednisone tegretol earn money craps mortgage calculator nasonex fha loan
Posted by: june at May 5, 2006 05:32 AM