Wright or Wrong?
March 24th, 2008 at 05:38am Mitch Mulhall 171
Ordinarily, I don’t give a whole lot of credence to a presidential candidate’s religion. I didn’t do so with Mitt Romney, and I was prepared to do the same for everyone else in the race. Then I heard Barack Obama’s preacher, Reverend Dr. Jeremiah Wright, say things that polarize people on the basis of race. For example, Wright once said, referring to the injustice of slavery, “All of America’s wealth today could not adequately compensate for centuries of exploitation and humiliation.” He’s right. How do you analyze human indignity in monetary terms? Of course you can't. But exactly where is Wright taking this?
Barack Obama is no ordinary presidential candidate. I don’t know very much about the theology of Black Liberation, or separatism, but I intend to find out more. I know Reverend Wright’s critics accuse him of this thinking, and I know Barack Obama has been a member of Reverend Wright’s flock for about twenty years. Moreover, Reverend Wright is or has been a functionary in Obama’s campaign.
I know a little bit about meatier side of organized religion. I went to college at a private Christian University where I was expected to attend chapel daily, fulfill eighteen semester hours of required biblical studies, and adopt a church family and attend regularly, which meant twice on Sunday and again on Wednesday evening, all of which I dutifully obliged, except, of course, daily chapel... but I digress.
Choosing a congregation was no small order, for this was a west Texas community with no less than twenty different congregations to choose from. As a student, you could go for proximity to campus—a very popular criterion—or you could go for fashionable, doctrinally influential, or any number of other criteria, for the choices were as numerous as the variety of legumes in the Luby’s cafeteria line at Sunday lunch. Being a wee bit late to the religion party, I had formed no preferences about such matters, so, like the famished freshman who buys the cafeteria all-you-can-eat ticket after Sunday morning services, I piled my tray high with the near-infinite variety of spiritual offerings.
One thing I learned is this: if a preacher does not speak to you, you will not worship at his (yes, “his”) church. It’s similar to a familiar internet dynamic—if you’re honest with yourself, you will recognize that on balance you tend to read news sources, opinions, blogs, etc. that comport with the way you see the world. Right? The same is true in choosing a place to worship. That Barack Obama has been a member of Reverend Wright’s congregation for about twenty years speaks volumes to me.
What tips my scales toward the conclusion that something’s not quite right here was Obama’s use of the phrase “typical white American,” a reference to his Mr. Obama’s white grandmother. I do not recoil from a black man walking down the street. Does that make me an “atypical white American”? It may be unfortunate that Obama has to say anything about his beliefs, but I for one am troubled by the messages I’ve heard from Reverend Wright, and I intend to find out much more about this. On first blush, what I hear Wright saying is that we’re much farther away from achieving Martin Luther King’s dream than I ever would have imagined.
Cheers,
11 Comments Add your own
1. B Jon Traylor | March 24th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Well said Mitch. It certainly does make you think.
I believe in about 95% of what my pastor says, as he consistently backs up every statement or theory with scriptural fact. But honestly, there are a few highly conservative stances he takes (also backed up with scriptural fact) that I struggle with. He knows I struggle with namely one highly conservative stance -- which I won't go into here. However, I will say that one can choose not to condone the sin, but also very much love the sinner.
The particular fundamental disagreement I have with my pastor's teachings does not motivate me to leave the church and find another church, as so many choose to do. Instead, it allows me to search more deeply my own Faith. It simply makes me want to read, to study, to research more deeply into the subject.
I, though, must state that if my pastor were to have made remarks in the manner in which Rev. Wright did, in the highly insensitive way in which he made them, on subjects he chose to do so, I'd would seriously have gotten up and walked out -- and I don't care if he's the guy who officiated my wedding or whatever. Then, I would have called him personally and let him know that his remarks were portrayed in a manner that were unacceptable to me.
Yet it does make one wonder how often Rev. Wright made remarks like those during the twenty years that Obama and his family attended the church. Makes you wonder if attending that particular church was a social and/or politically motivated choice all those years.
I do believe that people choose a church for social and/or business reasons, all the while missing the true reason for attending church -- such a waste of time. But, I like you, could care less about a candidate's religion or church choice. The fact that he does believe in God and makes church a part of his life, though, is important.
Obama's speach condemning the words of his 'former' pastor and his views on race relations in America was perhaps the most brilliant and honest speach I've heard. I truly think that speach personified the true Obama. Even Clinton marveled publicly at his comments.
Obama will still get my vote. I don't think we should hold people, or candidates, accountable for the misguided or misspoken words of their pastor. This election isn't about blacks or whites or hispanics... its not about men versus women candidates. It is not about Southern Baptists or Orthodox Jews or black inner city churches, etc. It is not about any particular faction of our society. It is about us, our country, the issues facing this country and peoples within this country of all walks of life. It is about "We the People." Obama is joining of us 'we the peoples' together with a message that is insanely refreshing and warm and welcomed.
Oh, and by the way, I have eaten at that Luby's Cafeteria many times in the West Texas city you attended college in. And that restaurant is still there today!
Stay cool, and keep the comments rolling. Its good to be back in the saddle again. And oh yes, your knife and glass bowl are still in good hands, albeit still collecting dust. -- J
2. Mitch Mulhall | March 24th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Hi B. Jon,
Good to see your comments again...
[I don't think we should hold people, or candidates, accountable for the misguided or misspoken words of their pastor.]
I agree. I'm not suggesting anyone hold Senator Obama accountable for what Reverend Wright has said. What I am saying is that I intend to study the teachings of black liberation and separatism, the sermons and public speeches of Reverend Wright, and judge for myself the extent to which Reverend Wright supports separatism, whatever that entails. Reverend Wright's close association with the Obama campaign warrants this examination.
With respect to my point earlier regarding Obama's white grandmother, I got a chuckle from what Cristopher Hitchens wrote on the matter: "You often hear it said, of some political or other opportunist, that he would sell his own grandmother if it would suit his interests. But you seldom, if ever, see this notorious transaction actually being performed..."
Cheers,
3. Star Eagle | March 24th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
B. Jon, Back in the saddle again.. sweet! I am looking forward to that day again myself, literally that is.
Mitch, a couple of things jumped out at me. First, when you write, "On first blush, what I hear Wright saying is that we’re much farther away from achieving Martin Luther King’s dream than I ever would have imagined", I hate to tell you Mitch but we are "much further away... than I would have ever imagined".
Why do I say such a thing? I happened to be in NYC last Spring when Don Imus spoke badly of the Rutgers womans b-ball team. During the debate between his utterances and his quite profitable dismissal I was riding the subway four hours daily. Starting from my choice of stops in Bay Ridge-Sunset Park and through Manhattan I was riding with many of the Worlds migrated peoples all the way to the last stop past Jamaica Queens. As a matter of fact, often by that last stop my sorry white butt was the only one on the train at that point. But what mattered was what I saw during those rides, and that was, in essence, "hey, we are all just trying to get along here and we don't need some dumb white ****, talking his dumb white **** trash, stirring up trouble".
So why do you ask I even bring this up (again).
Because... of the reaction I got when I returned back to Colorado from quite a number of people (many, but certainly not all, who would be considered liberal) who savagely stood up for "poor-old" Don Imus.
Yeah.. right!
It was, shall we say.. eye opening.
And now, more eye opening is that I am spending some time in what is considered a liberal-progressive community here in Ithaca N.Y. (and it is), and yet, we are(still) dealing with bringing black and whites together in constructive-loving neighborhoods. The good news is we are aware, and we are making it happen.
As a matter-of -fact, one way of making it happen that was discussed and is now being worked out is doing an adopt a(black-white) church program.
Which brings me to the second point that jumped out Mitch. Again, when you write.. " if you’re honest with yourself, you will recognize that on balance you tend to read news sources, opinions, blogs, etc. that comport with the way you see the world. Right? The same is true in choosing a place to worship. That Barack Obama has been a member of Reverend Wright’s congregation for about twenty years speaks volumes to me".
Well, maybe you are right for most people Mitch, but as for me, at least on your first point, I choose to go to sources that differ with the way I see the world. Why? Simple really, why do I want to hear the same old song and dance. I want to hear something new, and besides, I want to know what others are thinking, for many reasons.
And as far as your second point at to Baracks choice of worship I would have to differ to B. Jon on that one as I could certainly see where Barack may have found comfort in the company of that particular congregation. He may have even agreed with much of Rev. Wright's tenets. And he may have stayed much like I stay on the Con-mans station and listen to him and his brethren, the blovatious trilogy of O'Smelly, loss of sanity Hannity and Rushblow (somebody) when I am back in the hood, just to get a clue as to what other people are thinking.
So in conclusion Mitch, I may be blowing smoke myself because I have not seen or heard any of this on any normal (unless you call THIS normal) newsfeed. It may be that Obama is, or will yet, twist in the wind (did I really write that) yet over this, but from the tidbits I am hearing others say about it (spin and spun), it seems the jury is still out. It was either a brilliant reply or... no matter how brilliant it may not hold back the tide.
And if that be the case Mitch, what might that tide be?
4. Mitch Mulhall | March 24th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Star Eagle,
If THIS is a normal newsfeed... it should be stipulated that Michael contends Obama's relationship to Reverend Wright amounts to "nothing." As much as I'd like it to amount to nothing, I disagree.
As for the tide... I'll have to give this some more thought, but my gut tells me to turn to the ideological differences between Dr. King and Malcolm X...
More later...
Cheers,
5. Hugh520 | March 29th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Mitch,
I'm more than inclined to agree with your thoughtful comments above. And yes, I can no more sit and listen to the moribund sermons of the Catholic church I was raised in, than I can listen to our president's dumbing down the world as if he's reading us "My Pet Goat."
We do pick our churches, and pastors. They're inseparable. You're right.
But, and here's the rub, the church will in time always fail us in some way. My pastor told us as much in a sermon that was pointing towards our inclination to shop around for the "perfect" church. He said the church will fail you -- that he himself would minister to us one way, when what we needed was something else. That he would fail us to.
I think in my other post I gave Pastor Wright a rather sweeping pardon -- perhaps he's not so deserving of one. Perhaps with his retrograde anger, he's failing in ministering to his own flock.
But I still admire Barack's honest dissent and his apparent refusal to "shop" for a new pastor, because that one would surely (one day) fail him to.
6. Mitch Mulhall | March 29th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Hugh,
[[T]he church will in time always fail us in some way.]
Then why worship?
I get your “grass-is-never-greener” proposition, but I think B. Jon said it best: “if my pastor were to have made remarks in the manner in which Rev. Wright did, in the highly insensitive way in which he made them, on subjects he chose to do so, I'd would seriously have gotten up and walked out -- and I don't care if he's the guy who officiated my wedding or whatever…”
Frankly, I don’t think Senator Obama attends the Trinity United Church of Christ because it fills his spiritual well. If he did, I think he would have taken a stand akin to B. Jon’s. Senator Obama has not denounced the teachings of Reverend Wright in any meaningful way, and his continued church membership is, at very least, tacit approval of Reverend Wright’s (now retired) teachings.
I have been studying separatism and synthesizing my notes into a post. Back in the day, I wasn’t politically astute enough to understand the 1984 candidacy of Jesse Jackson in even a pedestrian way, but the years have given me some perspective on this. I’m beginning to think Senator Obama is essentially the same candidate without the peculiar rhetorical style.
Cheers,
7. Hugh520 | March 30th, 2008 at 7:53 am
The reality is that we've heard such a tiny fraction of Wright's preaching. 20 years is a long time -- time enough to build up plenty of good will and a trove of sermons that may well have been worth hanging around for.
As for denouncing Wright's rhetoric, the Senator did in fact in his speech not once but several times.
8. Hugh520 | March 30th, 2008 at 8:01 am
...Before I know more, I don't want to rush to condemn the man. Maybe that sermon and some others (which are looping endlessly on various sites) wasn't worth sitting for, but perhaps many if not most of them were.
9. reckless G | March 30th, 2008 at 10:04 am
I think what most people are failing to see is that Rev. Wright was speaking a socio-political truth that the black community recognizes, while the white community refuses to acknowledge. There is (and certainly was in Wright’s time) anger and resentment in both communities. There was, and still is, injustice in America when it comes to race. As shocking as it is, the majority of blacks in this country still live in poverty and segregation. They are less educated, less healthy, less employed and are more often the target of the criminal justice system than whites. See Bill Moyer’s excellent program, which definitely proved to me “that we’re much farther away from achieving Martin Luther King’s dream than I ever would have imagined.”
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03282008/watch.html
Maybe we should look at this from a different angle. Perhaps Barack was influenced by his pastor, in a way that made him want to see America deal with these problems and become the just and equal society we only pretend that it is. Perhaps Barack is who he is because of sentiments that took root in his church. Maybe that is the reason he is running for president; so he can be part of the solution.
At the very least, this incident brought to light a topic that has been buried for decades. We are now talking openly about race relations, on talk shows, news programs, and blogs. We are now free to discuss the simmering resentments, anger, and hidden bigotry that does still exist just below the surface.
But as illustrated in this dialog, there is a danger that Rev. Wright will be dismissed as an angry intolerant separatist, and the truth of his message will be dismissed so that we can once again sweep unresolved issues of racism in America under the rug.
10. Star Eagle | March 30th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Well said G. I too think Obama to be above the fray in his head. The problem for him lies in the fact his feet remain on the ground and his body is exposed for all to thrash for what they are worth. Hopefully he can weather the storm as he certainly provides a somewhat fresh approach for a finalist in this horse race.
That said, how about the news that the bushman is pushing for expanded powers for the Federal Reserve! Hardly a surprise.
In my latest research I am finding it is time for the ghost of Andrew "Old Hickory" Jackson to reprise and kill the damn bank.
This movie is NOT on,
http://freedocumentaries.org/ (however many other informative ones are)
but find the video--Money Masters-- somewhere, and watch it for its exceptional presentation of the history of the worlds banking system and how our countries banking history fits into this equation.
This information on our countries economic foundation is crucial for our modern population to know. It is both informative and fascinating albeit a little rough as far as production goes. However, the knowledge gained is well worth the time expended.
Because only If we are informed with this knowledge, as well as an equal amount of intestinal fortitude, will the challenge to fix the present day problems with the Federal Reserve Bank be accomplished.
Without this knowledge we will be attempting to heal major trauma in our financial institutions armed with band-aids.
And of course the only way to fix this, is to fix that, first. And what is that? The political system!
This is why it is imperative to quit playing the dumber down game of politics as usual and, start to think about fixing what is so obviously broke.
This is why an increasing number of Americans are waking up to the fact that we are being taken for a ride on a rough road to oblivion if we don't get control of this country and "bust the bank".
Have you noticed the amount of time, money and energy put into this Presidential Election? Talk about American Idol, yeah right, nothing even comes close, not even the NFL with its Superbowl comes within being a pimple on a elephants ass compared to the production that Presidential politics has become.
And with all this Obviousman in your face, you don't think they might not pull the wool over you on 9/11.
Wake up.... and start looking at how big the forest really is, before it gets so dark and scary you can't find the way out.
11. reckless G | March 30th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
[Have you noticed the amount of time, money and energy put into this Presidential Election?]
This just came up in a conversation with my husband. He wanted to know why our election system is so long and expensive. I said, let's follow the money. Who benefits from a drawn out campaign season?
Our answer was the corporate media. That side of things certainly deserves more attention than any of us (except maybe Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn) have been giving it .
Kudos to you Star Eagle for your investigative research, and for turning us on to the information we all need to have if we're ever going to change our corrupt political system and rein in the military-industrial complex.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed