Some blacks are more valued than others

Remember how one of the bedrock principles upon which Barack Obama's church runs is that middle-class blacks should not abandon the city for the suburbs and the pursuit of "middleclassness"?. From the Trinity UCC webpage touting the "Black Value System":

So, while it is permissible to chase ‘middleclassness’ with all our might, we must avoid the third separation method – the psychological entrapment of Black ‘middleclassness.’ If we avoid this snare, we will also diminish our ‘voluntary’ contributions to methods A and B. And more importantly, Black people no longer will be deprived of their birthright: the leadership, resourcefulness and example of their own talented persons.”

Well, well, well, it appears that under Trinity's Black Value System, some blacks are more valued than others. Via Steve Sailer, we learn that the recently retired Rev. Jeremiah Wright is about to move into a 10,000+ sq. ft. McMansion-on-steroids in a gated suburban community, bought for him by the church.

From the report, a professor says this isn't unusual:

“This is about how these kinds of churches work,” notes Walsh. “These pastors who made big successful churches are real valuable commodities. Is it morally wrong? Well, Protestants don’t have the idea that their religious leaders should live modestly or aesthetically. We’re not talking Buddhist monks or Catholic priests here. There’s no tradition that says they have to live poor.”

Wow. For Rev. Wright, fish don't burn in the kitchen, beans don't burn on the grill. Who knew that kind of thing was even possible in the U.S. of KKK-A.? See, Barack's not even president yet, and already things are changing for the better. Keep hope alive!

UPDATE: David Kuo cites this post as being unkind and stones-casting. Well ... yeah, it does take a smarty-pants attitude toward Rev. Wright's egregious hypocrisy in the case of his monster-mansion in the burbs. I took a smarty-pants attitude years ago toward Mansion Murphy (also known as the RC Bishop of Long Island) and his expensive luxury renovation of the bishop's residence, which required him to kick out a small community of nuns to accomodate his desire to live in grand style. Some things are best addressed with nuance and care; I tried to do that in my Sunday DMN column with regard to Wright and race (after firing off some heated rounds first). And some things are best dealt with satirically. Or so it seems to this polemicist.

Seriously, does David really believe that the only way to talk about political and cultural controversies is in a style that "alienat[es] no one, by casting no stones"? Does this post by David excoriating the charlatan Benny Hinn for flying his Gulfstream jet to Uganda to fleece the poor -- a post that I completely endorse, by the way -- qualify as one that alienates no one and casts no stones? Excerpt:

My only thought is that if Mr. Hinn takes so much a single Ugandan schilling from the desperately poor and sick people longing, begging, for a miracle it will make him a spiritual predator, a spiritual terrorist.

Them's some pretty big stones you threw, David -- and more power to you. Benny Hinn deserved them. But if you were hoping not to alienate Hinn supporters, I'm afraid you're out of luck.

A few weeks back David called James Dobson a "self-appointed evangelical mullah," and compared him to suicide doctor Jack Kevorkian. I wouldn't agree with that particular judgment, but I definitely share many of David's concerns about the old-line religious right leadership, and I don't have a particular problem with David making it, and in those terms.

But come on, David, do you really think comparing Dobson to Iranian theocrats and to Dr. Kevorkian invites discussion, alienates no one and casts no stones?

Really?

Or by insisting that the Rev. Wright's hypocrisies be handled rhetorically with a kid-glove daintiness you aren't willing to extend to those preachers of which you disapprove on the political and cultural right, are you not indulging in the soft bigotry of low expectations?