Ann Coulter's column today argues that Obama is not a Muslim; rather, he "is obviously an atheist." The gist of the argument is "The only evidence for Obama's Christianity is that he faithfully attended the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's Trinity United Church of Christ for 20 years....Attending Wright's church is the conscious, calculated decision to immerse yourself in hate-filled demagoguery and call it "Christianity.'"
I disagree with both the facts and the conclusion. Coulter is accurate in calling Jeremiah Wright "a racist nut." However, that does not prove that Wright (and by extension Obama, to whatever extent Obama believes in Wright's theology) is not a Christian. Some practitioners of "liberation theology" (including the black liberation theology variant) may simply be Marxists looking for some broadly-appealing rhetoric to add to their political program. Other practitioners, however, may be sincerely and otherwise-orthodox Christians who truly believe in both Christianity and Marxism, and in the liberation theology fusion of the two. For example, liberation theology was popular among many Catholics in Latin America from the late 1960s until 1984, when it was condemned by the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. I think it is implausible to believe that, pre-1984, the many Latin American American bishops, priests, nuns, and Catholic lay people who embraced liberation theology were all closet atheists. It seems much more reasonable to conclude that at least some of them were orthodox Catholics who, until 1984, could consider liberation theology to be one legitimate way of expressing the Catholic faith.
Similarly, I would suggest that many of the pastors in slave states in antebellum America who taught that slavery was legitimate because of the slaves' inherent racial inferiority were also sincere Christians, albeit grossly mistaken in their teachings on this matter.
Ergo, belief in the racist, Marxist philosophy of black liberation theology is not necessarily incompatible with being a Christian who has orthodox beliefs on most matters of Christian doctrine (e.g., the trinity, the resurrection, virgin birth, and so on).
Second, the record of President Obama's Christianity is not limited to his record of attendance at Reverend Wright's nut-house. For example, this year, the President spoke at a prayer breakfast on Easter Sunday, on what the resurrection means to him personally. His remarks about "the Easter celebration of our risen Savior...and what lesson I take from Christ's sacrifice" were entirely straightforward statements of orthodox Christianity. I doubt that any normal Christian, of whatever denomination, could theologically disagree with a single word President Obama said.
Obama tells a story in Audacity of Hope. His daughter asked him, "What happens after we die." And his response was that she shouldn't worry about it. But then he wondered whether he should have told her the "truth", and his "truth" is that he doesn't know what happens after death.
Certainly that's not an orthodox position, and it strikes me as more an atheist position than a Christian one. Wouldn't you say so, too? An orthodox Christian position would include some assertion of life after death.
And it's more likely to be closer to his true personal belief than some remarks he makes for public consumption at a prayer breakfast.
[DK: That's an interesting point. I guess I'd say that your interpretation is not implausible, although to be precise, "don't know" is more agnostic than atheist. On the other hand, Obama's words to his daughter are not inconsistent with the feelings of many sincere Christians for whom their general faith still leaves them with lots of uncertainty, especially about things as murky as the afterlife"“as opposed to more straightforward topics such as standards of ethical behavior during earthly life.]
Quote
Why use "Liberation Theology" to describe Obama (a term heavily promoted by Beck) when Obama himself doesn't use it to describe his views? What positive substance are you adding to our public civil debate by using loaded terms like this?
[DK: By Wright's description, Trinity United's teachings are explicitly founded on the black liberation theology teachings of that theology's founder, James Cone. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/03/20/31079/obamas-church-pushes-controversial.html. As I acknowledged in the post, it's uncertain exactly how much of Trinity's teachings that Obama accepted, but it seems to me unlikely that someone would spends 20 years in a single church, especially a church based on a personality cult around one long-term pastor, while not agreeing with most of what was preached from the pulpit.]
Quote
A. Nonnimous: Certainly that's not an orthodox position, and it strikes me as more an atheist position than a Christian one. Wouldn't you say so, too? An orthodox Christian position would include some assertion of life after death.
That response doesn't reveal anything about his religion. Not claiming certainty in your beliefs reveals, if anything, rationality.
Quote
Did you know that I am a Martian? No, seriously! I claim to be a Martian. I even wear this little helmet thinger with antennae strapped to it, don't you see?
What's that you say, I'm not a Martian because I act like a New Yorker? and that I've likely never ever left the Bronx?
Doesn't matter. I say I'm a Martian, so you've no choice but believe me.
Now, grok me!
Quote
A. Nonnimous: he doesn't know what happens after death.
No person knows, just as no person has ever known, what happens (with respect to the formerly living) after death.
Quote
It's not like every black church features rhetoric akin to Rev. Wright's, but he's hardly a unique creature, ever. And of course there are plenty of white fire and brimstone preachers, as well. Last year a pastor in Arizona made headlines by admitting that he regularly prays for Obama's death. Is everyone who attends one of these churches to be cast out of the big tent of Christianity? Somehow I think Coulter is applying a special rule for Obama only.
Quote
Kopel: Coulter is accurate in calling Jeremiah Wright "a racist nut."
A remarkably unrestrained assertion. You have a chance to win me to that position, but I would like to see some examples in full context to bolster it. I was unhappy with the coverage during the campaign, because in the little snippets that played over and over you couldn't tell whether Wright was condemning America unrestrainedly, or in historical context. If it's the latter, then your own comment may be over the line. It's hard, for me anyway, to find fault with a black person who condemns the Constitution as it originally was. I don't have any confidence that the media coverage of Wright provides enough information to know what he believes, or what he may have been referencing with his various notorious quotations.
Quote
Stephen Lathrop: A remarkably unrestrained assertion.
Read Full Article »