How Wrong Was Rev. Wright? (by Troy Jackson)
On a Sunday when Americans flooded houses of worship seeking words of comfort, hope, and healing, Rev. Jeremiah Wright of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago dared to forgo the singing of "God Bless America." Instead, Senator Barack Obama's pastor claimed the prophetic biblical message of the hour ought to call us to proclaim, "God Damn America."
The words remain jarring and infuriating. Wright's comments seem at best incomplete and untimely. At worst, they imply that God is vindictive, vengeful, and bloodthirsty, even during a time of tragedy--that the judgment of God is appropriately meted out through the tragic deaths of innocent people through terrorist acts of hatred and evil.
On Sept. 15, 2001, Rev. Wright was wrong. His words failed to connect with the pastoral needs of a nation in mourning.
Throughout his career, however, Rev. Wright has been "right" more often than not. He has followed in the traditions of Hebrew Testament prophets, challenging his nation to live up to its own creeds of justice and opportunity for all - including African Americans, other minorities, and the poor.
Wright is in good company. When his provocative language is read alongside the vitriolic words of many Hebrew Testament prophets, Wright's words ring true. The prophets connected their nation's injustice and neglect of the poor with the destruction of Israel, often using vitriolic language. The prophet Amos once described the wealthy women of Samaria as "fat cows." Isaiah referred to once faithful Israel as a prostitute.
Not only are most of Rev. Wright's words biblically correct; they are also historically accurate. The U.S. has participated in many acts of evil. From slavery to Jim Crow segregation, from sexism to the internment of Japanese during World War II, from environmental disasters to the neglect of the poor, America has a record on par with that of Hebrew Testament Israel.
When it comes to foreign policy, the U.S. did financially invest in South Africa during the days of apartheid, used the CIA to enact coups against democratically elected leaders in Iran and Guatemala in the 1950s, and remains the only nation to use nuclear weapons. Perhaps these domestic and foreign policy actions prove that Rev. Wright was right.
But this is only a part of the picture. While the U.S. is far from perfect, the nation has made significant progress regarding rights for minorities and women. The U.S. has often been a force for good in the world, from helping to rebuild Japan and Western Europe after World War II to the vast amounts of private and government funds offered to deal with global crises like the HIV-AIDS and malaria crises in Africa. Rev. Wright was not entirely right.
On March 18, Barack Obama used his speech about race to appropriately distance himself from the most vitriolic of his pastor's rhetoric. He has also removed Rev. Wright from a position on his campaign's spiritual advisory committee.
In the Hebrew Testament, prophets were as a rule not insiders in the royal palace. Jeremiah's words of prophetic judgment became so disruptive to the King threw the prophet into jail. Just over 40 years ago, Martin Luther King, Jr. gave up his access to President Lyndon Baines Johnson to prophetically speak out against the war in Vietnam. Put simply, prophets and presidents don't mix.
Thankfully, Senator Obama was careful not to condemn the entire prophetic ministry of Rev. Wright. Our nation desperately needs the prophetic voice he has embodied over decades of public ministry. And no matter who our next president is, he or she would be well served to consider the words of Rev. Wright, for he has been more right than wrong.
Troy Jackson is senior pastor of University Christian Church in Cincinnati, a graduate of Princeton Theological Seminary, and earned his Ph.D. in United States history from the University of Kentucky. His book Becoming King: Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Making of a National Leader (The University Press of Kentucky, 2008) will be available in the fall. Troy is a participant in Sojourners' "Windchangers" grassroots organizing pilot project in Ohio to work on the Vote Out Poverty Campaign.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
This is an interesting time to have this conversation. Last month we celebrated the 40 year anniversary of the Poor People's Campaign and in April we will honor the 40 year anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy. Obama clearly carries the mantle of all these important anniversaries.
What is truly sad is that Rev. Wright is a tremendous Christian and an awesome church leader. Working in one of the poorest neighborhoods in America, he built a powerhouse church that fully lives up to what the Hebrew Prophet Micah proclaimed ,"what does the lord require of us but to do justice, seek mercy, and walk humbly with our God?"
The smears against Obama and Wright are sickening. A few months ago, the smear was that Obama was a Muslim and that his middlde name was Hussein. That didn't work, so now they are accusing him of being a [real] Christian.
Obama should be plauded for how deeply serious he take his faith.
On the other hand, today we also honor the five year anniversary of the Iraq War. It was started by United Methodist Men (I am a layleader in a small methodist church). If anything, our nation should be freaking out about Cheney's and Bush's religon and not Obama's.
Posted by: MikeOles3 | March 19, 2008 12:59 PM
Excellent analysis Troy! One of the things that seems to be missing from this firestorm about Wright's comments is the question of whether he is right about some of it. Certainly some of his comments were extreme and inflammatory, but does the fact that he is criticizing America necessarily make him wrong?
Posted by: Mike Clawson | March 19, 2008 1:11 PM
How is Wright any different from Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson? Substitute abortion and homosexual marriage for segregation and sexism, and ask yourself if there would still be post after post here defending Jeremiah Wright.
Posted by: Peter R | March 19, 2008 1:14 PM
I simply cannot believe that anyone would defend "Rev." Wright. It's becoming clear to me that I am not part of religious left. Which is fine, since they aren't concerned about gay rights, anyway. Every other marginalized group, sure, but gays are still not invited to the table. Can you imagine what would have happened if Obama gave a speech about Bishop Gene Robinson?
Posted by: Ashpenaz | March 19, 2008 1:21 PM
Peter
I am at a loss to comprehend what you are saying.
Do you really mean to imply that there wouldn't be huge numbers of people who would defend Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, who have in fact made comments like those you mention, and were always defended by many in the Church?
A Christian can understand James Dobson's position against Gay Marriage for instance, yet not agree with all that he says on the issue. We find agreement in the midst of disagreeing on many topics.
So to answer your question of how Wright is any different I would say He isn't any different at all.
Sometimes He is correct and sometimes he isn't, and sometimes we may be wrong in our assessment of just when either is true.
Posted by: wayne | March 19, 2008 1:27 PM
Norm Lowry, 55-year-old White Republican says:
I think Mr. Obama’s speech is masterful; the need for it, sad.
Prior to six years ago, the issues of Racism or of Opposing the Conventional Viewpoints (touted by the media & our leaders) were issues that I pushed to the background, as they were issues I simply did not wish to face or that I hoped would "just go away". Six years ago, I voraciously began to reread the Bible & to search the "public record" (rather than to just accept the common belief). I was amazed by what I found. It now seems, to me, that we live in a society that loves to believe the "lie", because it will help us to maintain our fairly comfortable lifestyles, without having to suffer, due to "telling the truth". The 'comfortable' world is not a place I am willing to live in, any longer, if I have to continue to sell my soul
to live in it.
Mr. Obama seems a fitting candidate for President, due to his willingness to face the Racial Issue (paternalism, in all forms). It
would seem that he scares America, especially the extremists of both political parties. If we banish Paternalism, the extremists lose control of the masses. Though my first choice for President remains Ron Paul (whom I consider to have a more realistic, balanced viewpoint of Constitutional equity & will lose), I am involved in campaigning for Mr. Obama, who has a monstrous chance of winning, if he is not killed (either through public opinion or physically). Mr. Obama is clearly a threat to 'business as usual', in the arena of Racism.
Mr. Obama's speech seemed "masterful", in that it seems that our Loving God's Holy Spirit spoke, when he opened his mouth. This was a very tough issue & required great sensitivity, to have any chance of truly being heard, at a deep level.
The need for Mr. Obama's speech seems sad, in that the opinions of his Pastor seem to be 'right on', according to the Public Record (though not conventional, media touted belief). The perceived "Moral Threat" (as stated by the media & leaders of both political parties) seems merely to be a statement of 'fear of losing control'.
I applaud both Mr. Obama & his Pastor.
Posted by: Norm Lowry | March 19, 2008 1:31 PM
Here is what a friend said when I sent Wallis's column about Obama's speech to him, followed by my reply to his comments:
Thanks for the article. I agree with some of what he said. However, it pisses me off that people continue to tell black people that we should not be angry about the things we and our ancestors have endured and continue to endure. How can we honestly say that racism, past and present should not make us angry. Those who consider Rev. Wright's sermons to be "incendiary" are those who deny the reality of how a majority of black people really feel. I believe Barak Obama agrees with Wright also. He knows the game of politics requires him to denounce Rev. Wright for the sake of not angering white America.
Wallis says it is hard to deny the things Wright says, but "it's rather the angry tone of Wright's comments that provides the offense and the controversy." Give me a break!! What provides the controversy is that a black man has the nerve to tell America the truth about itself. White denial of the ugly facts of white supremacy is what makes it necessary to continue to feel the way Wright feels. Wallis continually refers to black "rhetoric" about race. It is not victimization or rhetoric, it is truthful, honest reflection on the black experience. Wallis claims to understand the pain felt by blacks. He would feel more comfortable if it was spoken about in a less "controversial" manner. This reminds me of Dr. King's words about moderate whites in his Letter From the Birghmingham Jail. He said:
"I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action'; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."
Indeed there are forces at work trying to make race an issue in this election. They don't have to work very hard. America has tried for 232 years to avoid the issue of race. Pretending that those who are angry about race are from the old generation is to show how out of touch one is with black Americans, young and old.
Most white people never hear how black people really feel about race because it has traditionally not been spoken about honestly in earshot of whites. Mr. Wallis needs to be a fly on the wall in the black barbershops, and black hair salons, black churches, black pool halls, and on the corners of any neighborhoods occupied by black people. He would see it is not rhetoric, nor is it rare or "incendiary" to blacks. We call it "THE TRUTH."
It is impossible to "heal the wounds of race" by expressing feelings that are clearly dishonest. It is shameful that Barak Obama has to pretend to not be a black person as Wallis says. To speak openly and honestly about race and be black is what we call "keeping it real." Barak can't keep it real and hope to be elected. We know this and accept that he has to do what he must to win the election. We wink, and say we feel you Barak. But we know how you really feel.
(My reply)
I really appreciate your observations, Reggie. Good as Wallis's intentions are, he proves once again how impossible it is for a white person to be inside a black person's skin, to know or understand the black experience.
This part of your reply is what I consider to be a major point Obama was trying to make: "Indeed there are forces at work trying to make race an issue in this election. They don't have to work very hard. America has tried for 232 years to avoid the issue of race. Pretending that those who are angry about race are from the old generation is to show how out of touch one is with black Americans, young and old." And that it's time to confront and deal with that.
Obama is walking a real tightrope here. He's trying to explain black anger and is acknowledging that it's justified. As the same time he's trying to do that without ticking off non-blacks. He knows that in ticking them off (you know the typical dismissive response: "Get over it!"), he loses them -- I'm not talking about losing them as voters, but losing them as an audience. So if he turns them off to the point that they stop listening, if they feel he's attacking them, what has he accomplished? He's right back at the static place where everyone who really cares has been for decades. I see Obama as gifted not just as an orator, but in building bridges, solving problems and, yes, unifying. To me this country needs someone who can do that more than anything else.
Right now Obama has to make a decision. Does he really want to become president or is it more important at this point to defend Rev. Wright and make sure everyone understands him and blacks' anger. Which will enable him to do more to affect change in the American psyche and conditions about racism and discrimination? I see him as a healer. In order to do that effectively, he not only has to try to help whites understand the African-American experience and legacy in this country, but to help blacks understand that he can't just chop off the monster's head.
Although I might be attributing something to him that's not among his ambitions or intentions, I see his calling as far higher than just serving as 44th president of the United States and that being president is but one necessary step in that calling. I think he has the potential to be a healing force in not only the racial fissures in this country, but in other divides that are polarizing people in the U.S. and in our country's alienation with other countries and cultures. Maybe it's a totally impossible feat, but I sure hope he and others like him, including you, don't give up trying. I'm hoping that not only African Americans but all Americans who truly care about people -- as opposed to their own self interests, bottom line profits, politics over the good of the country, etc. -- will unite behind him, understanding that he might not do or say exactly what everyone wishes he would do or say, and will work to give him the space, time and power to do what I think will be great things for all of us.
Janell
Posted by: Janell R. Carter | March 19, 2008 1:32 PM
Do you really mean to imply that there wouldn't be huge numbers of people who would defend Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, who have in fact made comments like those you mention, and were always defended by many in the Church?
I'm merely pointing out the delicious irony of Sojo ("the Monologue of the Religious Right is over!") is bending over backward to defend a guy whose rhetoric differs from that of Falwell and Robertson in only one respect: his list of American sins is more in line with lefty priorities.
Posted by: Peter R | March 19, 2008 1:35 PM
I am in agreement with most of your statements concerning Rev Wright, a man who has been true to his prophetic ministry. My only point of concern is your statement that he got it wrong on Sept 15th because he "did not connect to the pastoral needs of a nation in mourning." When we examine his context; a predominantly African American congregation that has experienced the brunt of the ills of America's policies, his sermon (not a speech addressed to the nation but a particular group of people) spoke to their hurts, their pain, their injuries. His message was (and is) then followed up by ministries that foster healing, liberation, and most importantly a deeper love for Christ. The uproar seems to be his usage of the words "God Damn America” when one engages in exegesis and not eisegesis it becomes more evident that those words were not spoken as a whole sale condemnation of America but instead the specific policies and practices of an America that has fallen short of its potential to be a true beam of light in a darkened world. Ultimately, I believe all can agree that the 911 attacks was a travesty and murder is never justified, but I believe the point of that particular statement (not the sermon when taken in its entirety) is that when you are unjust in many of you practices you will experience some injustice. This is not because God ordained it but because of the choices we make as a nation set up a situation for such travesties to occur. I also have to disagree when you point to the good things America has done abroad at least with the examples that you listed. In each of those cases it has been a matter of national economic interest to help rebuild Western Europe less we allow the “scourge” of communism to spread. America has also been slow to respond to the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa, in fact monies did not really begin to flow until the disease began to affect more than gay men and drug users on our shores. This of course does not even include the fact that Africa nations could more readily deal with HIV/AIDS if debts were forgiven. We have made great strides in the advancement of minorities but as this presidential race has proven we are far from where we need to be or could be with honest dialogue. Sexism and racism is not dead in this county and continues to motivate/influence most of our institutions. This is more than evident as one observes the confluences of forces working to disparage a woman and a black man running for the highest office in the nation vices focusing on the problems in education, health care, unemployment, the war, economy and the like.
Posted by: Kim | March 19, 2008 2:06 PM
I do not find Rev Wright's comments offensive. I have been struggling, as a 70+ adult, about this country's ongoing violence since its inception.
The Native people were wiped out by the invaders and occupiers from Western Europe. Africans were brutally enslaved, unknown many perished on the ships that brought them here in subhuman conditions, families were torn apart and today, the remnants of that sordid trade in human flesh exists only too sadly in our prisons, our ghettos, our domestic violence and,yes, crime in the streets.
My family came here from Quebec, Canada in the late 1800's and I learned as a child about ethnic intolerance.. we Franco Americans were the "blacks" of Maine. We were said to be ignorant, dirty, etc,etc.I could hide my accent but had no need to change my skin color, and so, by giving up our language, we assimilated into this brutal culture. Not so our black brothers and sisters.
Today is the 5th anniversary of the US terrorist attack on Iraq. If that is not a racist war, as well as a war for the resources of a sovereign nation, then I was wrongfully arrested on its eve.I mourn the destruction of yet another people by this violent country. How can I not agree with Rev Wrught???
Posted by: Suzanne Hedrick | March 19, 2008 2:10 PM
Troy makes the obvious point that some things Rev. Wright has said are wrong and some are right. Just like some things about America are good and some are bad. I’d wager the average American Christian would agree with the vast majority of things Rev. Wright has said in his sermons. Those things just aren’t being played on the news.
If Wright were just some random preacher I don’t think anyone would really care. What shocks people aren’t his exact words (there are plenty of crack pots all over the Internet), but that he is the spiritual mentor of the man who could be the next president of the United States and is, in temperament, tact, and beliefs about America, so much the opposite of the Barak Obama the public has come to know and like. His commentary on Hillary Clinton made him look like a buffoon. He’s the antithesis of Obama’s statesmanship.
As to the specific charges Rev. Wright makes, he’s right to be upset about the legal segregation of the past and the discrimination black people have endured. He is right to be upset about poverty and crime in the black community. He’s right to fight for social justice and strong communities. However, his comments, along with Michelle Obama’s comments about this being the first time she’s proud of her country, give me the sense Wright doesn’t see many positives in American society at all. Leaving aside the theologically inaccurate belief that God “damns” nations of people rather than individuals, he seems to believe that American society, lock, stock, and barrel, is one rat’s nest of racism and evil set out to oppress black people. His statements about “U.S. of KKK” and his loony belief that the government created HIV to kill black people (this one seems to be left out most defenses of him) lead me to believe he’s not just standing in your average social justice pulpit. Either that, or that these views aren’t outside the mainstream of black conspiracy theory. I wouldn’t be surprised if he thinks that “Bush knew about 9/11” or that the government intentionally left people to die in New Orleans not out of incompetence, but because they were black.
I think people are justified in asking Obama about Wright. I also think Obama, in his speech, did a good job of answering his critics, particularly those who wonder why he never left Trinity even after hearing many of the inflammatory things Rev. Wright said.
Posted by: Eric | March 19, 2008 2:24 PM
Peter
So you think it "ironic" that another voice is speaking for the church beside the religious right?
I could think of many other adjectives that are not cynical. Sojo is not here to present both sides, they are here to present a different one. That's why it is the end of the monologue.
I have been a conservative on most issues both theologically and politically, but I for one am glad that when it comes to poverty, race, war and the environment, Abortion, and yes Ashpenaz, even Homosexuality, with all their political implications, the church is opening up to other voices and ideas. Not all of them will be good, and not all of them will even be new, but the discussion is opening up and that is welcome good news.
Our "right" wing attitudes have not done any more to address these societal problems than the older left wing policies we "righties" have derided since the days of FDR. It is a new Century,
we need to explore new answers and new ways of seeing and hearing and applying Biblical truth.
Norm Lowry's post is a good example of this occurring.
Posted by: wayne | March 19, 2008 2:25 PM
It seems as though Barack can take a topic no matter how controversial, and deal with it with sensitivity and integrity. It appears as though when he speaks, he has been thinking about the topic for years, shaping his opinion after much study and prayerful consideration. His speech struck me that same way. He spoke in a way that I felt that he figured , "I'm going to tell what I see as the truth and if it brings down my candidacy then so be it." I truly believe that he is interested in truth and justice and mercy. I am watching for the candidate that seems profoundly affected by his/her spiritual experience. I heard that in his speech. I believe he has been shaped by his religious experience to the point that he really does see the issues at hand through the eyes of a man buttressed by scripture and enthusiastic about how faith can transform people and institutions. He is hopeful, enthusiastic and inspired to lead. Just what we need. I refuse to focus on the snippets of tape he referred to of pastor Wright because I understand the context. The political analyst I heard yesterday on TV got all he knows about the Black experience from a text book. I refuse to listen to those people who are preaching fear in every way shape and form. I heard Reverend John MacArthur on Christian radio the other day preaching about how sinful we are as a nation and that we are deserving of God's condemnation, as a nation. He went on about the chareacter flaws of people and how personal virtue has been trampled. All true. He didn't even mention the moral failings of a grander scale that Rev. Wright did. Why is it ok for Rev. MacArthur to "turn America over to Satan" and for James Dobson to support him fully but when Rev Wright speaks from personal experience either directly or through the experiences of his parishioners he is condemned? Mr. Obama is right, we need to face these issues and move on to higher ground.
Posted by: boomer | March 19, 2008 3:02 PM
Troy,
You make a serious mistake when you assume that "God d**n America" was the worst of Rev. Wright's excesses. While that particular quote does not reflect well upon the man, it is his repeating the conspiracy theory that AIDS was created by the US government that was his lowest moment.
We have all had seditious thoughts pop into our heads from time to time. (Especially as the deadline for filing tax returns approaches.) Hearing them from the pulpit is jarring, but the accusation of mass murder is far worse. It represents the worst accusation that can be made at any person or nation, and is made without any evidence whatsoever. Regardless of your opinion of the current administration, there is simply no excuse for this.
Genuine Christian groups ought to renounce Wright until he publicly withdraws this accusation.
Wolverine
Posted by: Wolverine | March 19, 2008 3:12 PM
"they are here to present a different one. That's why it is the end of the monologue."
Well rats Wayne , because I was"am" part of the religious right and they never listened to me either .
"we need to explore new answers and new ways of seeing and hearing and applying Biblical truth."
Well rats again , because if you just allow the religious left to dominant , you will see , as I already do , Bibical truth twisted being used to defend liberal policies . Good people allowing themselves to dilute their faith for a political organization. Which make no mistake about , use similiar methods of gaining power as the right had and does .
When big business got welfare , look how Conservative Christians spoke about being fair to all people , even the rich , but welfare for the poor , look how that came out .With a different measuring cup . I see so much of that type of hypcracy here also , always defended , using degrading comments of those with a different view , and also degrading their faith . A faith used for comforting the sick , uplifting the poor in heart , helping those who are poor , and Wallis and company putting them into a steretypical deranged, flag waving pitiful group . Wallis dehumanizes people then speaks up so courgeously at times and I agree with him .
Am I pitifull flag waver when i disagree , and somehow bibically enlightened when I agree with him ?
I was hoping this would expand and not become just another Interfaith Alliance for the democratic party myself .
Looks like what happened to Wolverine recently is proof it is .
Posted by: Mick | March 19, 2008 3:20 PM
I thought many here believed in the "separation of church and state"??? A preacher is NOT a politician... let's all keep that in mind!
... AND keep in mind when a preacher is preaching he is talking to "Followers of Jesus" FIRST... and "American Patriots" SECOND. Preachers exaggerate for effect ALL the time... it is like storytelling... and it is VERY similar to what you read in the minor prophets... very "jarring" stuff that talk about nations doint horrible things... we are all for calling OTHER nations actions evil... but we have a plank in our eye... and that is ALL Rev. Wright (and others) point out.
As for people being afriad that Wright could very well be the "spiritual mentor of the next President"... we could do FAR WORSE (and have done, by any honest assessment). Haven't we had Presidents and First ladies who had contacted Psychics? In an era before Youtube you really believe our former white, male Presidents have gotten "spiritual guidance" from people ANY LESS inflammatory than Wright? We just don't know about it, folks!
I think Obama has handled this brilliantly. Why? Because he is brilliant. Imagine... a brilliant President... now that would be AMAZING!
Posted by: e-dubya | March 19, 2008 3:34 PM
Wolverine
It is certainly not just a mad man's thinking that could accuse our government of mass murder. We have not only committed mass murder before but many times. From an African American's experience it is definitely not a stretch of logic to think this could very well be true.
I am very disappointed that you keep coming back to this.
There is probably not a nation in all the world today or in all of history that has not committed mass murder. Why is it so incredible that Pastor Wright might think it true?
The fact that he is wrong about HIV/AIDS is not hard to understand at all, certainly there is excuse for it. What there is no excuse for is not seeing that the actions of this country could make some people more than a little prone to believing it, no matter how absurd it may be.
Your refusal to see that is more of an obstacle to any renunciation you say you want than it is an argument for it.
Posted by: wayne | March 19, 2008 3:35 PM
Why do so many want to make Wright out to be some modern day prophet? Prophets said timely, controversial things, but spoke the truth. Wright has made several false statements that cause great division.
Posted by: Chase | March 19, 2008 3:37 PM
What you say about the war and about Rev. Wright are just wrong. The New Testament said there would be wars and rumors of wars. Rev. Wright does not like Jews, but Jesus was a Jew. Christ taught love, not hate. Christ loved all of humanity. The color of our skin does not reveal the quality of our heart. Show me a country on this planet that is any better than the U.S.A.
Posted by: Njus | March 19, 2008 4:08 PM
As someone who has heard (and purchased for repeated hearing) Rev. Wright's sermons, when asked by a journalist about the snippets that were played on You-tube, radio, and television and were the source of so much offense and controversy, my immediate response was, not having heard those particular sermons, to tell the journalist that whatever Rev. Wright said, those snippets were attached to a much larger sermon with full exegesis and explication of a biblical text. Additionally, no matter how many issues he touched upon, Wright always emphasized God's grace and mercy in spite of the most awful of human failings and landed squarely in a call for individual decision for Christ at the end of his sermons. While most of us would disagree about the presentation of a conspiracy theory about AIDS and would find the g**d*** America phrasing problematic, as a well-educated African American I was immediately able to contextualize even those inflammatory snippets with materials I myself have quoted and shared with my students: Nina Simone's 1965 hit song "Mississippi Goddamn" and Edward Hooper's 1000+ page book titled THE RIVER, a book which argues that a combination of governmental and private interests surrounding the development of polio vaccine in the Congo may have been responsible for the introduction of HIV into human populations. When one combines Hooper's volume with Randy Shilts's book AND THE BAND PLAYED ON, and Shilts's vivid description of wards full of black and brown babies whose illnesses were ignored until the symptoms were discovered in affluent white men, one can argue that the consequences were racist even if the intent was not. Even what seems to be most "far out" in Rev. Wright's "rhetoric" has a foundation that is intelligible to this African American's ears. Additionally, Wright's church members often let him know when they disagreed with him thus provoking discussion and consciousness-raising as they exchanged views. The "talk back" at Trinity is more than just the call and response during the sermons on Sunday.
Posted by: Cheryl Townsend Gilkes | March 19, 2008 4:12 PM
When big business got welfare, look how Conservative Christians spoke about being fair to all people, even the rich, but welfare for the poor, look how that came out. With a different measuring cup.
I don't know which conservative Christians you were hanging out with, but the ones I knew (especially during Reagan) didn't say anything about that. And you know full well why Wallis has been so dismissive of the right -- scapegoating gays, welfare mothers, the ACLU and other "targets" were how the big boys kept their "ministries" afloat. The problem is not "liberals" dissing conservatives -- it's conservatives dissing everyone else.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 19, 2008 4:13 PM
Wayne – It’s actually not all that incredible that Wright believes the government invented HIV to kill off black people. There are many African-Americans who believe this. The U.S. government has done many bad things in its 200+ year history. This fact doesn’t excuse ignorance. Being unable to separate fact from fiction on such an unambiguous subject as this is the definition of nuttiness.
The U.S. military dropped atomic bombs on hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese civilians = true
The U.S. government legally sanctioned slavery for many years = true
Elvis Presley is still alive = false
The U.S. government invented HIV to kill black people = false
It’s that easy. Divergence from these known facts definitely puts you in the nut pile.
Posted by: Eric | March 19, 2008 4:16 PM
Njus,
is this the same God that destroyed Israel repeatedly. God is no respecter of nations. He can and will do what he wants. Acknowledging that Israel has sponsored terrorism among the Palestinians is truth. It happened. It doesn't mean that there has not been Palestinian terrorism but let's see which nation has the power to do more harm.
Go head Wayne,
Everyone else;
The Tuskegee Experiment is a perfect example of what our government has done to my people. they did this experiment for decades as a means of birth control. Think about that for a minute.
I could list more but I don't think that's not necessary. Just remember that this same nation that is revered as a bastion of Justice is also the same nation that killed millions of blacks and 1 nation people over greed and land.
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 19, 2008 4:19 PM
Troy - The reminder from scripture that prophets and presidents don't mix is very helpful.
I believe that Rev. Wright's voice is a prophetic one. His words have not always rung absolutely true. But, it's my understanding that not every word uttered by biblical prophets was 100% true either. Prophets, then and now, though, make statements that help us see truth and know love in our hearts. Wright's rhetoric may be incendiary at times (as was the voices of Jeremiah, Amos, Hosea, etc.), but he's also gotten the entire nation talking about race and its role in society. Wright's voice is helping the nation find the best path, the most just path, to racial reconciliation. Wright's voice is helping to move our entire nation closer to a discovering how we can best love one another despite our racial differences. Sounds awfully prophetic to me.
Posted by: Jason Crosby | March 19, 2008 4:55 PM
Moderatelad -- Christian conservatives have been "Johnnies-come-lately" to the fight against corporate welfare; indeed, the only major figure I'm aware of who has spoken out against it was Gary Bauer. That's good reason for that -- corporate America was paying the freight for the Reagan coalition. And the only reason some Chriatians are yelling about it now is because a lot of them are losing jobs overseas.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 19, 2008 4:59 PM
I agree with most of the blog, though I, like others, am not really offended by too much that Rev. Wright says. My biggest problem with him is that he gave an award honoring Farrakhan, who has said not true, but incendiary comments (like Wright), but truly hateful and prejudiced statements about whites, Jews and others that are not true nor helpful in trying to work through the problems we have in this country and the world. I don't care if Farrakhan exemplifies the "Black Value System" that Wright espouses and "has done great things for blacks" -- his hateful values render him undeserving of any award. It's on par with giving an award to a KKK leader for supporting the white community -- disgusting.
Anger is understandable and justified; hate and violence is never justified and should not be honored.
For the record, I thought Obama's speech was excellent, not that I couldn't have agreed with something stronger...
Posted by: Maren McLaren | March 19, 2008 5:06 PM
Eric
On other threads here people have stated that the historical fact that our government purposely infected native people with measles and small pox was not true. It is a myth and according to them it never happened.
Now only those calling for more understanding ever pointed out the lie in those instances. All the critics of Pastor Wright therefor appear to excuse such lies except when a Black Liberation theologian speaks them. By only pointing out Pastor Wright's wrong headed ideas you just further demonstrate the problem.
Or does your divergence from these known facts put you in the nut pile also?
Posted by: wayne | March 19, 2008 5:48 PM
I think what is misunderstood in the comments on Rev. Wright is how black preaching served the black community. The truth is, it has always taken almost outlandish statements to rasie awareness and attention to the plight of African-American people. People love to paint King out as this soft-spoken, gently, adorable preacher who spoke kind and loving words to all. Many forget how militant he was in his early life and actually believed he was called to "save the soul of American." Why? He believed America was under divine judgment. Unfortunately, it took these extreme measures to move America to do the right thing. If the truth be told, if it were not for King's radicilism and Malcolm X's overt black nationalism, blacks would still be under Jim Crow and segregation. King is adored only because he represented the lesser of two evils during his time (Malcolm X and Martin, even add black panthers). When Malcolm X appeared on the scene, people immediately saw that King was not as bad as Malcolm. But before Malcolm X, King (like Wright) was considered the scourge of the earth.
Secondly (and this one is for free), people want Obama to disown Wright which again reveals an ignorance of black community values. The church is family for black people. Under no circumstances do you leave family, regardless of political opinion and viewpoint. You just don't do it. Why? Family is prized and cherish at all cost. It is only in the recent mega-church growth movement have we seen church swapping among blacks. But as a general rule, community and family are huge values in the black community. Thus, even though Obama denounces Wright's statement, his cultural roots demands that he remain with his family.
TA
Posted by: TA | March 19, 2008 6:14 PM
I said much the same over at my blog a few days ago. I came to the conclusion that I want someone elected who is inherently unelectable.
Posted by: Jedidiah | March 19, 2008 6:37 PM
"the only major figure I'm aware of who has spoken out against it was Gary Bauer"
I never heard speak to it , but J.C. Watts is the first prominent Republican I heard speak to corporate welfare . Off my radar for sure till I heard him speak to it . That was some time ago too .
JC was famous for saying
Character is doing what's right when nobody is looking
also being the first African American who did not join the black caucus .
Posted by: Mick | March 19, 2008 6:45 PM
Ross
LOL
Posted by: Mick | March 19, 2008 6:50 PM
If we are going with probability in how many good sermons classify a Pastor then Jerry Falwell was the greatest preacher in America's history. And of course, James Dobson's views are even better.
Posted by: Carrey | March 19, 2008 7:06 PM
Rick,
The GOP gave up on JC ? More like many of us , JC included are giving up on the GOP . McCain and him are good friends . It would be a good ticket , he would appeal to the conservatives like myself . Would be historic if obama can out last the Hilary political dart game .
Watts has been critical of the Republican party's 2008 presidential candidates because they "don't show up" for black voters:
“" Republicans want to say we reach out. But what we do instead is 60 days before an election, we'll spend some money on black radio and TV or buy an ad in Ebony and Jet, and that's our outreach. People read through that."
Posted by: Mick | March 19, 2008 8:59 PM
Don: Thanks for the post. At our Association of Evangelical pastors meeting I proposed praying for Sen. Obama as a brother who was being persecuted for his faith. The reaction was, as we say in rural NY, like a cow looking at a new gate. One pastor's reaction was "If I said what Wright said, 90% of my congregation would walk out." Very revealing. Your comments are requested.
As I said on another thread, Rev Wright is to be judged by his fruit as to whether he is a false prophet according to Jesus. I am glad that Barack practiced this and chose to judge him on the "content of his character" I would take 100 Barack Obama's in my congregation. He demonstrated what being a mature brother in covenant relationship is all about.
Pastor Jeff
Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | March 19, 2008 9:43 PM
What I find most frightening about this is the idea that because you are a member of a church, you must patently agree with everything that comes from the Pastor's mouth. How many of us attend faithfully and are actively engaged in our churches without agreeing fully with everything our Pastor says.
There was a fine piece on "Talk of the Nation" today on NPR. Frank Schaeffer, the son of the late Francis Schaeffer, and one of the founders of the Religious Right, made many fine points, perhaps his finest being that of the hypocrisy with which we are judging Mr. Obama. When white candidates align themselves with those of the white religious right, who are just as capable of making inflammatory statements; i.e. Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell etc., they are not called on the carpet, they are not held up to scrutiny, they are not condemned nor even made to explain. We are only having this discussion because Barak Obama is a black candidate, and Jeremiah Wright is a black Pastor.
It is a sad commentary our country.
Posted by: moosette | March 19, 2008 9:45 PM
And where is he [JC Watts] today? Truth was, the GOP eventually abandoned him when it had no more use for him.
Did the GOP abandon the myriad other GOP Congressman through the years I didn't follow?
However, wiki states: In 2002 he decided not to run for re-election, publicly citing a desire to spend more time with his family.
Damn those alleged family-values GOP men for ...well whatever
Posted by: aaron | March 19, 2008 9:52 PM
As I said on another thread, Rev Wright is to be judged by his fruit as to whether he is a false prophet according to Jesus.
I've never seen a red blueberry. Are you also implying no Klansmen Pastor has ever helped his lower income, albeit demographically white flock/community?
Posted by: aaron | March 19, 2008 9:56 PM
Again I ask all those who are so certain about Rev. Wright's assertions about HIV/AIDS. Give me at least a reference to an independent study that shows definitively that the US government did not develop said virus. When you factor in Tuskegee and Margaret Sanger and friends eugenics agenda (something I can defer to anti-Planned Parenthood conservatives), it seems at least in the range of culpability to allege what Dr Wright has. (lest any of you relegate me to the "nut pile", I don't believe the conspiracy thing, but I am saying please do not debunk without solid evidence)
PJ
Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | March 19, 2008 10:16 PM
I'm sure this won't do any good (Matthew 25 apparently being missing from conservative Bibles), but Jesus said that people (even "nations") who failed to serve the needy were going to the place reserved for the devil and his angels. That sure does sound like God damming America. We can't even bring ourselves to provide food, clothing, medical, care and shelter to people who work.
Posted by: Don Gisselbeck | March 19, 2008 10:17 PM
He is quite successfull, is a Minister, stayed longer then he wanted because the GOP wanted him to stay. They still want him to come back. He originally stated he was staying for two terms.
The Republican Party recruited him because it was hoping that his would in turn recruit blacks into the GOP, but that never happened. And in fact, he bumped into the glass ceiling, rising only to the #4 leadership position in the House. He also supported affirmative action, which also took him down a peg or two in conservatives' eyes.
Watts has been critical of the Republican party's 2008 presidential candidates because they "don't show up" for black voters.
Because they know that if they did they would lose many white voters.
However, wiki states: In 2002 he decided not to run for re-election, publicly citing a desire to spend more time with his family.
Yeah, and if you believe that one ... You know, even his own father told him when he decided to run for Congress as a Republican that he would be used. And that's just what happened.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 19, 2008 10:44 PM
I’m not a Democrat or a Republican (or a moderate as some who post on this site pretend to be) but a European-American Christian curious about the corporate news feeding frenzy Rev. Wright.
I suppose that media ignorance about Christianity may explain the apparent misconception that people in the pew agree with everything a preacher says. But most Christians, let alone most Americans, don’t get the prophetic nature of African-American sermons, a tradition as old as slavery. Too many Americans confuse Christianity with support for U.S. economic and foreign policy and don’t notice the indictment of greed, injustice, and jingoism in the message of Jesus and the Prophets (Amos, Jeremiah, et.al. ("I have come to preach good news the poor, release to the captives..." “…Blessed are the peacemakers…”).
Can anyone offer a plausible explanation why it is that John McCain has gotten a pass on his welcome of the endorsement of wealthy right-wing preacher John Hagee, except for passing mention of the latter's anti-Catholic rants? Hagee's virulent distortion of the Book of Revelation into a catalog of predictions of violent apocalypse seems to inevitably lead to unquestioning support for the secular Israeli government, total disregard for Palestinian Christians, condemnation of all Muslims, and the anti-Semitic conviction that all Jews must ultimately convert.
Posted by: Peter W. | March 20, 2008 2:57 AM
Pastor Jeff:
You asked me for some comments. I don't really have too much to say. I, like so many of us white folks, have a lot to learn about what it really means to be black in the USA. But I think I'm beginning to learn.
The Rev. Wright sound bytes came up at my wife's Bible study group Tuesday evening. She was telling me about it yesterday. Apparently she was the only one trying to defend Wright. (I thought, good for her.) Others in the group were making comments similar to comments we've been reading here.
I'm glad this is happening. Whatever happens with Obama's candidacy, it is healthy for the nation to be having this conversation. As Pastor Ted Schroeder's brother said in the intro to his comments, the Word of God has broken into our national consciousness, and, I might add, in a way that it hasn't for decades. Maybe even longer than that. This is good.
One comment I might make. I find it so interesting that people would ask, why does Obama stay in this church if he disagrees with the pastor? And the answer is what you said: he understands the meaning of covenant, of the church as a community. He can no more leave the church that raised him in the faith than he could leave the family that nurtured him as a child. All too many of us are so quick to leave a church just because we don't like the new pastor, or we don't like the music, or whatever. And I've read comments right here on God's Politics who have said "if my pastor said/did ..., then I'd leave the church." (And I've been guilty of thinking that way too.) From what I've been reading here, it seems that the black churches better understand what what being "church" is really about. Maybe the rest of us should be paying more attention to them.
Peace,
Posted by: Don | March 20, 2008 7:29 AM
Why they let your perverted bigotry remain here is beyond me.
Pretty good Rickie, three posts without putting down Reagan, we are now onto white conservatives. Jerk
Careful, Mick. Remember what I've written before about staying away from personal attacks. You aren't making your case with these kinds of comments.
D
Posted by: Don | March 20, 2008 7:33 AM
Wayne – I’m not sure what you’re implying. I certainly don’t deny that American Indians were intentionally infected with disease. This is a known fact and if Rev. Wright wanted to criticize the American government of the 1800s for sanctioning this action (and many others directed at American Indians) then that’d be fine with me. But he didn’t. He repeated a myth that is prevalent in the black community that any little bit of research on his part would debunk. In my opinion, that makes him a little unsound. There’s nothing wrong with focusing on this as part of a larger critique of Wright’s sermons. This, combined with his desire to impute the actions of individuals to everyone who shares the same skin color, is wrong. There’s nothing wrong with arousing people’s anger against injustice if it leads to constructive solutions, it’s quite another thing to arouse people’s anger against an entire group of other people simply because of that group of people’s race.
Posted by: Eric | March 20, 2008 9:14 AM
"Jeff from your previous comments I am hoping Obama would not want to be in your congregation."
"Pretty good Rickie , three posts without putting down Reagan , we are now onto white conservatives . Jerk "
Careful, Mick, you're jeopardizing your conservative-Sojo-commenter-I-would-most-like-to-have-a-beer-with status. A Bell's Porter to you, but only after you stop calling your liberal brothers names. We're all human on this blog, and all trying to make sense of the world in our own way. Now bottoms up and let's forgive and forget.
Posted by: I and I | March 20, 2008 10:00 AM
It seems at times the truth seems so far out that we as a people have a hard time trusting in the words of a radical. However, think of the Hebrew Prophets and how they spoke judgment on the nations for their foreign policy, the ways they treated the minorities and how their own policies exploited the poor, by taking their land. Prophets seem to not exist any more, but when they do arise, such as Obama's pastor we instantly ridicule them in the same way they ridiculed Jeremiah.
I agree with Rev.Wright, what I disagree with is Obama separating himself from his words of truth. If one does not believe that blacks are still persecuted, I encourage you to come to Cleveland and spend some time on E. 112, or spend some time in the prison. Obama, like all of the other politicians has shown that he does not have a spine, that he will not stand up for the minority because he is to ashamed to tick of his real supporters, the wealthy, average American.
Posted by: JohnIV | March 20, 2008 11:17 AM
It seems at times the truth seems so far out that we as a people have a hard time trusting in the words of a radical. However, think of the Hebrew Prophets and how they spoke judgment on the nations for their foreign policy, the ways they treated the minorities and how their own policies exploited the poor, by taking their land. Prophets seem to not exist any more, but when they do arise, such as Obama's pastor we instantly ridicule them in the same way they ridiculed Jeremiah.
I agree with Rev.Wright, what I disagree with is Obama separating himself from his words of truth. If one does not believe that blacks are still persecuted, I encourage you to come to Cleveland and spend some time on E. 112, or spend some time in the prison. Obama, like all of the other politicians has shown that he does not have a spine, that he will not stand up for the minority because he is to ashamed to tick of his real supporters, the wealthy, average American.
Posted by: JohnIV | March 20, 2008 11:17 AM
Pastor Jeff --
The test of a false prophet is not just the fruit -- not if you read 2 Peter 2 -- falsehood is part of it. I am not saying that he has denied Christ as Lord or anything like that -- but blaming the white US government for AIDS without proof is like me saying you're sleeping with someone else's wife without proof that you've done it. What a destructive lie! Since lots of men have done it before -- it's a reasonable enough assumption about you -- isn't it?
The Tuskeegee experiment was horrible -- as seen today. They often did medical tests on orphans too -- and I think it was small pox -- that vaccine was brought to this country from Europe through a group of orphans from Spain--they had to keep the vaccine live -- so they injected a kid at a time until the ship crossed the ocean. As one was about to die, they'd inject another kid. There's a statue to their honor on the Spanish coast.
Such atrocities to not need to be exaggerated to be understood as horrible.
1 John 3:14 also comes to mind. "We know we have passed from death unto life if we love our brothers." Preaching hateful things brings anyone's Christianity into question.
Posted by: frankie | March 20, 2008 11:45 AM
1 John 3:14 also comes to mind. "We know we have passed from death unto life if we love our brothers." Preaching hateful things brings anyone's Christianity into question.
But also consider Jesus' words: "I have not come to bring peace but a sword." Sometimes the most "loving" thing to do is to get in people's face and "tell it like it is," and at times being "nice" won't cut it.
If Wright didn't care about such things -- and many black pastors don't -- he wouldn't bring them up in the first place; perhaps that's a function of his upcoming retirement from the pulpit, but he may feel he has nothing to gain or lose by speaking out. But perhaps that's what Wright's critics want -- the non-offensive type of clergyman who feeds his congregation the dessert of the "afterlife" instead of the strong medicine of the Gospel.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 12:14 PM
Arg!!!
He didn't tell it like it is! If it were true he would have told it like it is.
Obama's greatest strength (I'm am still pulling for Hillary) is that he stays so calm through all of it. His speech was powerful -- he told it like it is -- and was not the least bit hateful to anyone.
The truth is much more powerful than any lie. Wright said "God damn America" long before he was going to retire.
The point of confronting past sins is for repentence and restoration/forgiveness. If I confront my parents for their sins against me
Posted by: frankie | March 20, 2008 12:25 PM
The truth is much more powerful than any lie. Wright said "God damn America" long before he was going to retire.
He said that right after 9/11 in response to folks constantly singing "God Bless America" in the context of "If we think we're totally innocent victims, we need to think again. There are historical reasons for this; we're simply reaping what we're sowing."
But do you also know who was criticized for saying the same thing? Malcolm X in response to the Kennedy assassination; he said "The chickens have come home to roost." But can we really ignore the violence we have perpetrated? MLK Jr., who of course rejected violence at all costs, called our nation a perpetrator of violence for being in Vietnam; for that statement some on the far right even today call him a Communist.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 12:59 PM
Mick,
I wonder where all of the hatred and anger comes from....
Posted by: Lonnie | March 20, 2008 1:48 PM
Thank you for your article. I am a strong supporter of Senator Obama, the recent condemnation of him by the Right wing, makes me realize how much healing our nation needs and how much our nation needs Obama.
Since the presidential campaign of George W. Bush, with its blasphemy of the teachings of Jesus Christ, I have often wondered "where are the voices of the spiritual and the voices of religious leaders?"
I do believe that your voices are not heard as much as our country needs to hear from you.
Please find TV coverage to get the word out. I believe your message of peace and compassion will be heard, but not by just writing about it.
Posted by: Nona | March 20, 2008 2:43 PM
Thank you for your article. I am a strong supporter of Senator Obama, the recent condemnation of him by the Right wing, makes me realize how much healing our nation needs and how much our nation needs Obama.
Since the presidential campaign of George W. Bush, with its blasphemy of the teachings of Jesus Christ, I have often wondered "where are the voices of the spiritual and the voices of religious leaders?"
I do believe that your voices are not heard as much as our country needs to hear from you.
Please find TV coverage to get the word out. I believe your message of peace and compassion will be heard, but not by just writing about it.
Posted by: Nona | March 20, 2008 2:43 PM
And the answer is what you said: he understands the meaning of covenant, of the church as a community. He can no more leave the church that raised him in the faith than he could leave the family that nurtured him as a child. All too many of us are so quick to leave a church just because we don't like the new pastor, or we don't like the music, or whatever.
I think that's the key -- such relationships, including marriages, should be dissolved only as a last resort and only under the most extenuating circumstances. We have become a nature of "leavers," breaking things off at the first sign of trouble, when often God Himself sends it to toughen our respective character. When I left my last church, where I had attended for 14 years, it hurt for about a year even though it was the right move.
We also don't understand that a pastor is also changed by the people he shepherds, especially if they're growing in the faith -- a lot of times they're out in the world more than he is, so they see things he can't. This goes to the heart of another question: How many parishioners feel the same way he does? A lot more than you might think, and Wright could have also been speaking for them as well.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 2:58 PM
I appreciated Rick's earlier comment that most African American's would be offended by some of Dr. Wright's comments but agree with the message.
Personally, I think that an accurate assessment.
If I were in Chicago, I would not choose Dr. Wright's church as my church home (for my white self and transracial children); but it would be within my range of the churches I would consider. In my mind the message of the church is right but not complete.
And that incompleteness is true of every church.
I am completely disinterested in the question of whether Dr. Wrights words were right or wrong.
My question is whether white ears can hear before they judge.
Many have been very anxious to place Dr. Wrights words under the exam light.
Right? or Wrong? ANSWER!! ANSWER!! Come on, Obama: Reject or accept!!.................
Is it possible ears can lie as much as lips can??
Is it possible ears that hear words that offend and demand retractions are ears that have lied; and have then applied whatever power they have to demand others hear that same lie; and that the purpose of this charade is to damage the first African American with legitimate chance at the presidency?
What is it when one takes a lie, and brings systematic power to bear to advance a lie in order to damage one of another race??
If one understands the message of Dr. Wright--one understands there is not an issue related to Obama's candidacy; and at that point examining whether the HIV/AIDS statement is truthful is silly. If a preacher in Peoria gave a factually wrong illustration--it would be inane to have this ridiculous uproar.
Dr Wright is theoretically a legitimate issue for the nation given Obama's candidacy; IF after understanding Dr. Wright there is nothing revealed about Obama of concern; then Dr. Wright is not a legitimate national argument.
So far, the only way to argue he is a legitimate national argument is to intentionally or unintentionally turn him into what he is not.
At this point, the burden is on the accusers. They think they really have what they need. But the only they have it is by employing lying ears.
Maybe they'll find out Obama is running for President because he and Wright plan a violent terrorist operation to drive whites back to Europe. I don't know what they are looking for. If they find it--they will serve the country.
Up to now, proving themselves mostly incapable of listening; and fully capable of willful distortion to destroy; they are pretty much affirming the truthfulness of Dr. Wright's message.
And I don't say that to be cute. I say it with sorrow.
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | March 20, 2008 3:01 PM
Rick --
Wrights words smack of Malcolm X -- and he wasn't a prophet either.
I never sang God Bless America because I thought we were righteous and therefore deserving. I sing God Bless America because we don't deserve it. Just like you pray God will bless your kids when they're in more trouble than you know what to do with.
Of course we're going to reap what we sow as a nation -- we'll even reap the tares other folks throw in our fields. I think we are reaping it already or this would be a much better place to live.
While David often wished ill on his enemies, I think we need to be careful about praying ill on anyone. Vengence is God's to dole out. There have been a few times in my life when I've gotten to see someone pay for the sins they did to me. It was really a very, very small comfort. AND I still had to forgive them to get past it.
I'd even feel better about the whole sermon if he preached it to a white congregation -- that can stir up some repentence -- but preaching to the choir doesn't produce much fruit.
Posted by: frankie | March 20, 2008 3:32 PM
Wrights words smack of Malcolm X -- and he wasn't a prophet either.
Many consider him such, for that time.
It's important to note, however, that Wright did not say -- or, I think, would say -- "God damn America," full stop; only someone who would worship this country believes that. Rather, he was making the point that "if this nation continues down this path and doesn't repent, it may be the first step to God damning America."
But here's what bothers me: Trinity UCC is considered a theologically "liberal" church from a "liberal" denomination. Would we even be talking about that, and by extension Obama, were it not for Wright's incendiary commentary? (Others have mentioned that George W. Bush's church or pastor have never even been mentioned -- we don't even know their identities.) What if the church were more conservative and evangelical? In the black church theological leanings are basically irrelevant -- in fact, the civil-rights movement started as the result of prayer meetings in conservative black churches.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 3:54 PM
Rick--I think we are talking about this for two reasons.
First because a crowd thinks that in Rev Wright they discovered the real Barack who can be destroyed
Second--because Dr. Wright attacks whiteness--which I (i.e. white america) take very personally. Almost as if he used the name of my Jesus to attack my God. What we can't hear is that it is an idol called "White" that he is attacking--not white people.
Our offense with him does not arise out of his unpleasant speech but with the fact he offended my idol. ("White") If he thinks he can get away with that, he has not experienced White Wrath.
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | March 20, 2008 4:52 PM
I have heard preached similar sentiments as Rev. Wright's, only they were almost whispered in a calm litany of frustrations. I wonder if it is the shouting from the pulpit that is part of the offense some are taking? To continue to believe that God has singled out America for special blessing is just as offensive to me as God damning America.
Posted by: Kenn Chaplin | March 20, 2008 4:58 PM
Do you all here generally think that God judges countries? As in...if the ruling government is just, God will bring good things to a country, and, in turn, if the government is unjust, bad things will happen to the country because God wills it.
I, personally, do not believe that God judges countries. He judges us each individually. But it appears that Rev. Wright, as well as many of his defenders seem to think it's a theologically sounds belief that God does judge modern-day countries and that the U.S. will feel his wrath because of the numerous unjustices the U.S. government has been a part of in the past 200-plus years.
I'm sincerely interested in others' thoughts on this...
Posted by: Eric | March 20, 2008 5:01 PM
Eric,
That's interesting, both the new and old testaments make it clear that he judges nations. I can start quoting the prophets for proof on that. But Revelation also makes it clear that nations must stand before God and give an account. So I don't understand where your theological basis for individual sin is the only one there is?
It would seem to me that the bible is much more complicated.
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 20, 2008 5:10 PM
Yeah, and if you believe that one ... You know, even his own father told him when he decided to run for Congress as a Republican that he would be used. And that's just what happened.
So I'm not to believe the words that came out of Watts' mouth?
IS this because:
1. He's Republican/conservative and you just know from the warm fuzzy feeling in your heart that you can't trust them
2. He's allegedly a christian and between being closeted homo's, pedophiles, creationists, and/or embezzler's they can't be trusted
3. He's black and you know you can't trust a black
4. He's rich
Posted by: aaron | March 20, 2008 5:21 PM
Our offense with him does not arise out of his unpleasant speech but with the fact he offended my idol.
And we all know how God feels about idols ... :-)
But seriously, though it makes sense, I never considered that (nor could I, since I'm not white). That said, I dare anyone to name one living civil-rights leader whom white society has whole-heartedly embraced. Ever.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 5:29 PM
I never bought into the idea that God judges nations and punishes those nations who disobey. It means God punishes people for what their leaders or fellow citizens have done. That smacks of Falwell and his blaming gays and evolutionists for 9/11, or of other crackpots who blame the New Orleans Chamber of Commerce's gay mardi-gras for the suffering of poor people who mostly had nothing to do with it. If a preacher such as Rev. Wright wants to use the idea poetically, then fine, but he/she should make clear if he does not literally beleive that God will smite down entire nations for their sins.
Geez, even just talking about this makes me want to run to the closest Unitarian church, or some other place where faith is tempered by reason.
Posted by: I and I | March 20, 2008 5:33 PM
So I'm not to believe the words that came out of Watts' mouth?
When Karl Rove later uses the very same words for the very same reasons, you should be skeptical. They left because they lost.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 5:35 PM
Rick: "That said, I dare anyone to name one living civil-rights leader whom white society has whole-heartedly embraced. Ever."
Pondering that, I dare anyone to name one living leader, period, whom white-society has whole-heartedly embraced.
Posted by: I and I | March 20, 2008 5:39 PM
Rick: "That said, I dare anyone to name one living civil-rights leader whom white society has whole-heartedly embraced. Ever."
Pondering that, I dare anyone to name one living leader, period, whom white society has whole-heartedly embraced.
Posted by: I and I | March 20, 2008 5:39 PM
Well, it would have to be someone with a large media presence, which would likely make them either a politician or an entertainer. Any politician, preacher, or musician is going to have opponents. So that leaves entertainers. Has there been a 'great white hope' entertainment figure???
Rocky
Bob Hope
Walter Cronkite
Archie Bunker would be a unifying civil rights leader embraced by white america
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | March 20, 2008 7:07 PM
Eric: Good question. The first three chapters of the Revelation are addressed to the churches through their angels (pastors). What think ye?
Frankie: Thank you for the excellent scripture reference. Join me in an exercise if you would:
Rev Wright or Rev Righteous USA
"pitting one against another"
"give the way of Truth a bad name"
"Only out for themselves"
"say anything to exploit you"
"live by lust"
"despise authority, indulging in self-rule"
"Insolent egotists, speaking evil of splendid creatures"
"slandering others before God"
"predators on the prowl"
"Ignorant blasphemers"
"Wild partying, obsessed with adultry, compulsive in sin"
"Specializing in greed"
"Addicted to corruption"
Can you, before God, say that this is an apt description of Rev Wright? If not please stop with the false prophet nonsense.
Your analogy falls down as well. Now if my wife, who had suffered through many sexual betrayals, found me buckling my belt while leaving another woman's home, she might not believe my explanation that I was just using her bathroom on the way home-even if it is the truth.
Pastor Jeff Staples
Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | March 20, 2008 8:45 PM
Ashpenaz wrote,
"I simply cannot believe that anyone would defend "Rev." Wright. It's becoming clear to me that I am not part of religious left. Which is fine, since they aren't concerned about gay rights, anyway. Every other marginalized group, sure, but gays are still not invited to the table."
That is absolutely not true, especially in the case of the United Church of Christ, which was the first denomination to ordain an openly gay minister and now supports marriage equality. As for your dislike of Rev. Wright, have you even seen the sermons in question, or just out-of-context snippets?
Posted by: Hali | March 21, 2008 3:56 AM
Payshun,
When Revelation mentions "nations" do you think John is talking about what we think of as modern day countries (defined by geographical borders on a map ruled by a central government)? I find that hard to believe. When the Bible talks about "all the nations" it means "everyone" or "all people", not "Canada, Mexico, the U.S.A., etc".
I'm of the firm belief that the only nation that God judges as a whole was the ancient nation of Israel because he made a convanent with it through Abraham and his decendents. He hasn't made a convenant with any other country or nation of people. People make covenants with God all the time, but he's only made one with a specific subset of people.
Also, if you talk to a geographer, he or she will tell you that the word "country" refers to my description above while nation refers to an ethnicly or culturally similar group of people. Countries and nations are not the same thing.
Posted by: Eric | March 21, 2008 3:31 PM
I would like to thank you for writing this article. The fact is that the american church especially the christian right need to understand that a true minister of our Lord and Savior works for God and not for the nation. They are not to praise any nation or political side; but the Kingdom of God by preaching about it and helping to get the members to build it where they live. And yes also to vote for the people who will be true to the complete kingdom of God. We as members of any church listen to our pastors or priest and then think and study about what is said and then act according to the spirit within us. Some time the message might be soft and sometime strong as in Rev Wright. We the american people must firt check the scripture like Isa.10:1-4 and then speak and to me it say in short that any nation that makes laws which harms the poor by helping the rich are condemed by God. We need to think about that a little. Maybe Rev.Wright could have worded it different but the truth? you'll need to read the scriptures. it might make you fall on your knees
Posted by: Henry | March 22, 2008 1:34 AM
Regarding Barack Obama's speech,I couldn't disagree with you more. Barack listened to this racist bigoted pastor for twenty years while he spewed from his pulpit hatred, revenge, un-American and anti-Semitic venom. The hypocrisy of Obama is the most objectionable. His speech was full of lies and his comment concerning his grandmother, "she's a typical white person" was abominable. If any white candidate made the comment, "he's a typical black person" he would be chastised by the entire black community and the news media. Why should Barack Obama be given a pass on his racist comments just because he's black.
It's time for Christians to stop blaming Jews for something that happened two thousand years ago. I don't believe any of the Jews living today had anything to do with the crucifixion of Jesus Christ It's time for blacks to stop blaming white Americans for slavery. Nobody living today was a slave and nobody alive today owned any slaves. The Jews need to get over the holocaust. If anybody living today had anything to do with the holocaust they have been justly punished and would be to old to be a threat to anyone.
There are good and bad people in every race and religion. I am a Christian, but other than my Father and Grandfather, the most honorable person I've ever met was an atheist.
Posted by: Victor Magilke | March 22, 2008 2:20 PM
His speech was full of lies and his comment concerning his grandmother, "she's a typical white person" was abominable.
That's not what he said. Specifically, he noted that she was a product of her times.
It's time for blacks to stop blaming white Americans for slavery. Nobody living today was a slave and nobody alive today owned any slaves.
Wright was alive at a time when people were literally dying for the right to vote. Not slavery but the civil-rights movement informs much of contemporary black America.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 25, 2008 11:37 AM
Wow! At last I see an American who truly understands and is not carried away by passion for country over honestly and objectively looking at the facts. I also studied history and been so interested in international relations. Although I am an African, I studied American history. America is the only nation in the world that has done so much good to other nations around the world. The US government has been unique in helping other nations, the US is also respected for the great work of Christian missionaries around the world. There is nothing that comes near what the US has done. But there is a dark cloud on the US concerning what the CIA has also done. If you want to get a glimps, search the "family jewels" intelligence that was release by the CIA. It shows you a darkside of this great nation. Most Americans have refused to ask "why did the terrorist attack the US". In many countries around the world including Africa, the US is seen as a bully and people know some of the things the US is doing. I am surprise that there are many Christian leaders who have influence in this nation but donot even raise a word against it. As i visit churches across this nation, most have the US flag dsiplayed in churches. Televangelist have the flag behind them when they preach. Others around the world who donot understand Christianity, associate our faith with the wrong things that flag has done. I think instead of playing politics, if Christian leaders can play a truly prophatic role in this countries without taking sides with parties, that may help.
efiw@bornagain.com
Posted by: Efi | March 29, 2008 1:53 AM
I located the full audio of Rev. Wright's "911" sermon. Nothing could be further from this quote from Victor Magilke above:
"he spewed from his pulpit hatred, revenge, un-American and anti-Semitic venom."
That was a sermon with a deliberately shocking message - which was simply that "violence begets violence." His solution? To take a look at himself. And how he acts to those around him.
The sermon is explicitly anti-revenge, proclaiming that a violent American response to 9/11 would only beget more violence against America (and that this was at the root of why there WAS violence against America to begin with), but a "war on injustice" would have better results. Even with his flamboyant style, that now sounds like sound logic.
Posted by: Steve Cramb | April 1, 2008 1:10 AM
forgo the singing of "God Bless America" -- YES! at all times -- one of our "American sins" is worshipping the "idol of America" and not the Lord God who has created us and redeemed us and sustains us.
Posted by: Charles M. Webster | April 8, 2008 2:29 PM
the only thing he was wrong about really was making racist statements of calling italians garlic noses and saying the govt. injected blacks with aids, also about louis farrakhan being an important voice and saying people of all faiths can be saved without the Saviour Whom Christ Jesus is. maybe somethings could be worded better but the truth is that God cannot bless a nation who has turned against Him and is trying all it can do to legalize gay marriage and all kinds of blasphemy and idolatry and abominations. and the blood of the innocently condemned committed by this countrry shall return upon it, however repentance can move God to be merciful. but when will people repent for the sins committed of slavery and modern day slavery and racism today. the devastation of the native people who were here before us also. the deceitfulness of the govt. in in foreign countries and it's lie about iraq and knowing about 911 before it happened and provoking it for the cause of starting a war and potential wars. the real ai qaeda is in pakistan and afghanistan not iraq. but we let bin laden slip thru our hands when we have him and known his wherabouts. and will not the LORD who is the Judge cry out for justice and against injustice. but you be the Judge.that's the propblem everyone is judging and not allowing the LORD to judge and reveal to us His judgments. it is time for america to hear the truth. Jeremiah chapter 18 says when a nation turne from God all the good He thought to do will be turned into judgment to destroy it. we better look at israel who continued to provoke the LORD and where did it get them? to this very day the majority are lost and still turned away from the LORD while they in their unrepentance and self righteousness seek to keep the law which they don't even do that correctly. so has the church so we are no better or different then israel then and now. we shy away from sin and excuse it but we get offended for someone to say that God damns which by the way means condemns america for her unrighteousness. that kind of attitude is what caused the crucifixion of our LORD and Saviour Jesus Christ because He said the same things to israel who is the covenant people of God. now if they who are the chosen and promised seed were told these things how is america any different. let us hear what the Spirit of the Lord is saying to the churches and stop judging and leaning to our own understanding. many white people were offended by his commens because so many worship this country and fail to see the whole truth about it while many black people can see the truth because it has been our reality since we were brought here forcefully. there are two americas, one see with the veil blindly the other sees beyond the veil. we both need to repent to the Lord and then be reconciled together but in order for this we must lay it before the LORD and hear what He is saying to us individually and as a people group separately and then together. this won't go away like many people mainly caucasian would like it to but you dont dal with and issue by running from it and calling anyone who calls out the injustice divisive or else you don't remember what the LORD said when He came. i cam not to send peace on earth is that what you think, i came to send a sword and kindle fire and to set households in division, five people in a hose two against three and to divide and separate parents from their children. he that is not with me is against me. preach thr tru and pure Christ and stop preaching a fairy tale gospel so that souls may be saved or else you who hold the office of pastor or whatever you will be condemned. not my words but the LORD's.
Posted by: todd | May 10, 2008 1:30 AM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?