I’m a Christian.
But there are few things that make my skin crawl quite like the smug, preening religious left. (Yes, smug and preening). PJ O’Rourke referred to them as “World Council of Churches types who have sanctimony like other people have halitosis”.
I’ve attacked them in the past; “religious” groups lining up with gun control groups, my own Presbyterians (at least at the hopeless national “General Assembly” level) joining with Hamas in attacking Israel and, here in Minnesota this session, the idea of the “Moral Budget” – groups of left-leaning Christian denominations who are pestering the government to do their work for them.
King Banaian, a member of an ELCA church, has had enough, too, and tells ’em all about it:
A and Bishop B (and W, X, Y, and Z, in the case of this letter) want to compel nonbeliever C to do for poor D what they won’t ask believers F, G, H &c. to do by the offering plate. They do so under the guise that “a budget is a moral document”.And my budget is, in fact, a statement of the morals of my own family. My church’s budget is a statement of the morals of my church. The government is not a church, or a family. The government’s budget is not a statement of the entire society’s morals. It is a compulsion of the majority upon the minority.
Where, dear bishops, is that compulsion a “moral statement” directed in the Bible?
I recall only that when the rich man heard he could not enter the kingdom of heaven without sacrificing all his earthly possessions, “he went away sad, because he had great wealth” … and Christ let him go. The bishops are not so inclined.
When the Bush Administration took the opposite tack that these disgraceful packs of hamsters are taking – by inviting faith-based organizations to lend their expertise to government social program efforts – the left responded with a zillion dim “reality-based community” japes and a whole lot of nothing else very smart.
So what do we call the opposite – when churches demand government to step in and do their work for them?
The “frogs begging for storks” community?
Read King’s entire, infuriating piece.
I am a refugee from the ELCA. It is an extremely liberal organization. It’s predecessor chruches said “give to the church. we will retain a 10% admin fee and use the rest for good causes”. The new left wing church says “raise taxes hugely. Then have the gov’t retain a 33% admin fee and they will spend on causes that may or may not be worthwhile”.
For once I agree with anti-Christian bigots. Perhaps we should yank their tax exempt status. If they like high taxes, no one is stopping them from paying property tax and also no longer allowing their donors to deduct theie contributions.
Oh, and don’t forget that the ELCA voted to “study” a boycott of Jew-made goods coming from the mideast. You know your church has a problem with they have the Jerusalem Post and Simon Wiesenthal condemning you on the same day.
“So what do we call the opposite – when churches demand government to step in and do their work for them?”
THEOLOGICAL EXTORTIONISTS !!!!!!!!!
“Chuck Says, For once I agree with anti-Christian bigots. Perhaps we should yank their tax exempt status. If they like high taxes, no one is stopping them from paying property tax and also no longer allowing their donors to deduct theie contributions.”
I couldn’t agree more !!!
Thank heavens I’m a Tibetan Buddhist.
A former ELCA Lutheran myself, I still can’t attend a baptism (of infants) w/o a sermon on why abortion is “sometimes necessary”, or-
A Memorial Day Service where the Baptist preacher rails against Haliburton
Oh, did I mention those Liberation Theology abortionists in the Catholic Church?
I swear, if I ever have to attend a service again, I’m bringing a boombox/iPod woofer with my ’80s Death Metal tunes just in case I have to put up w/:
“And on the 8th Day, the Lord said: ‘Go forth and liquidate the Kulaks’…”
So, on the day I stand before the Lord and he asks me, “Did you give to the poor?” I can say, “I paid my taxes; ask the government what they did with them.”
I’m now an ELCA refugee, too. Theres a nice little WELS church close to home I’ll be checking out. They actuall believe the *GASP!* marriage is the union of one man and one woman!
Kermit, I am looking at either Missouri Synod or WELS. The stereotype is the corrupte televsion preacher getting huge sums of money from nieve old folks. Well, in the case of the ELCA, if you go to a conservative rural congergation, the paster says “uff-da” and makes an Ole and Lena joke, so the old folks think it is still 1950 and glady drop large cash into the plate. They don’t know that their church pays for abortions (up to and including partial birth abortions), that some of that money goes to support neo-Nazi groups in the mideast (Hanson is/was a huge fan of Arafat), or that this church partnered with MoveOn.org in 2004, even linking to them on their homepage during the fall of 2004. Yes, I am bitter as my parents give thousands a year to this church. They even give money in my name, thinking that I will become active in it. I take the tax deduction and use that tax savings to give money to right wing causes.
Mitch deplored: ““religious” groups lining up with gun control groups”
Hahaha! Yeah, cause Jesus H. Christ would totally have been a gun nut.
“Let him who is without sin fire the first round.”
Clown,
What was The Christ’s stance on weapons?
Come to the WELS, guys.
I know this is an over generalization, but all the WELS churches I’ve been a member of are the same:
Many (most?) members and pastors are conservative politically, but we remain focused only on The Word and Christ. Politics never comes up in the puplit and only rarely in certain Bible studies at which point we discuss those topics which have a basis in morals/faith (aborition), but not in matters which are purely political (taxes, guns).
Sometimes, as a conservative, I selfishly wish my church would do more for conservative political issues, but that isn’t the role of the church and therefore I’ll gladly take a church that only focuses on The Word and stays silent on political issues.
What was The Christ’s stance on weapons?
The Disciples were armed. Peter cut off a soldier’s ear in the Garden of Gethsemane and was rebuked for doing so.
But he was packing first century heat.
“was rebuked for doing so.”
He was told to sheath the sword. Clearly Jesus was for concealed carry.
Interesting that the Roman Empire would allow subdued peoples to carry weapons, but it’s modern day liberals who won’t trust us with arms.
“and he that hath none, let him sell his cloak, and buy a sword…” – Jesus
Nothing sinful or un-Christian about gun ownership and personal self-defense.
Isn’t Angry Clown judging Christians like a homo judging the Miss USA contestants?
Well his understanding is pretty slim.
That’s HE who is without sin, not HIM.
Geez, what do they teach in the law schools these days?
.