Progressive Revival

Progressive Revival

Inaugural Invocation

posted by Paul Raushenbush | 7:18pm Wednesday December 17, 2008

Barack Obama has selected Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the inauguration. The choice of Warren is in line with other Obama appointments meant to bring a broad spectrum of viewpoints to the same table.  The patchwork of oddly opposing theological and social views held by Warren makes him a good, safe, political choice. Everyone can be pissed off, but also find something to like.   For me – I’ll be pissed off about Warren’s stance against gay marriage and seeming tepidness about torture, but will like his concern with poverty.  Steve Waldman offers a defense of Warren on his blog.  And Right Wing Watch delivers this condemnation.

 

My personal preference would have been Rabbi Saperstein who gave such a great invocation at the stadium at the DNC acceptance speech in Denver.  It would have been amazing to hear a Rabbi give the invocation for the inauguration of an African American Christian with an Arabic name, and sent a message of pluralism to the world as they will surely be watching.  Alas.  



Previous Posts

Why Jews Around the World are Praying for the Victory of the Egyptian Uprising
Originally appeared on Tikkun Daily BlogEver since the victory over the dictator of Tunisia and the subsequent uprising in Egypt, my email has been flooded with messages from Jews around the world hoping and praying for the victory of the Egyptian people over their cruel Mubarak regime.&nb

posted 1:48:39pm Feb. 01, 2011 | read full post »

When Generosity, Love, and Kindness are Public Policy, the Violence We Saw in Arizona will Dramatically Diminish
The attempted assassination of Congresswoman Giffords and the murder of so many others in Arizona has elicited a number of policy suggestions, from gun control to private protection for elected officials, to banning incitement to violence on websites either directly or more subtly (e.g., Sarah Palin

posted 2:44:04pm Jan. 19, 2011 | read full post »

The Spiritual Messages of Chanukah and Christmas -- and Their Downsides
Christmas and Chanukah share a spiritual message: that it is possible to bring light and hope in a world of darkness, oppression and despair. But whereas Christmas focuses on the birth of a single individual whose life and mission was itself supposed to bring liberation, Chanukah is about a national

posted 12:59:53pm Dec. 02, 2010 | read full post »

Obama (and Biden) Have No Clue About What's Bothering Their Political Base
Shortly before the California Democratic primary in 2008, the San Fransisco Chronicle invited me to write a short article explaining why I, chair of the interfaithNetwork of Spiritual Progressives, was supporting Barack Obama. Like most other progressive activists, I understood that a pres

posted 1:44:11pm Sep. 30, 2010 | read full post »

Values or Partisanship? TV Ad calls out Graham for caving on climate
by Keely Brewster It was disappointing that Lindsey Graham changed his mind, values, and opinions surrounding climate legislation. Lindsey Graham was right when he discussed the need to decrease our dependence on foreign oil for reasons of national security, economic security, and job loss. Lindsey

posted 2:32:58pm Jun. 16, 2010 | read full post »

Advertisement
Comments read comments(6)
post a comment
James Gilmore

posted December 18, 2008 at 12:23 am


I can’t say I’m pleased about the choice. Behind his moderate facade, Warren hates LGBT citizens just as much as Jerry Falwell or Rick Santorum – comparing homosexuality to incest – which makes him all the more dangerous, as people pretend that he’s a moderate. He’s basically Jim Dobson with a goatee. Bigots like him do not deserve a prominent place in public, and do not deserve a prominent place in Christianity.
Of course, the fact that actually giving a damn about world poverty and the environment is now considered something moderate or even liberal in Christianity, rather than a basic assumption and starting point to be considered a Christian of any kind, says a great deal about the state of contemporary American Christianity. It speaks to the extent to which the charlatans of the “Christian” Right have led American evangelicals to accept free-market consumer capitalism as a tenet of the Gospel.
That said, my problem is with Warren – not with Obama. Warren is being asked to give the opening prayer at the inauguration, not set policy positions or run a Cabinet department. Much as I may think Rick Warren is a terrible choice, and can think of ten people off the top of my head (some of whom post on this blog) who would be a better fit, I also think a lot of the outrage over this choice is overblown. Obama’s position on equal rights for all, while tepid and milquetoast, remains the same today as it was during the election.



report abuse
 

non-metaphysical stephen

posted December 18, 2008 at 2:56 am


I’m divided about this. Certainly I wish that someone more gay-friendly would be given the pulpit for this event, but I fear that we’re so theologically divided as a nation that choosing only pro-gay clergy for the event would effectively make evangelicals feel cut off. There may be no middle ground in our nation right now, and anyone who satisfies the progressives may well offend the conservatives and destroy the very bridges we’re all hoping we can build.
If the inauguration committee feels that Obama can gain the most traction by showing evangelicals that he respects them, someone like Warren might be the only possible compromise.
And doesn’t THAT suck?



report abuse
 

Van DeLisle

posted December 18, 2008 at 4:18 pm


Why do we even have an inaugural invocation anyway?



report abuse
 

PJ

posted December 18, 2008 at 5:45 pm


Obama’s choice of Reverend Warren to deliver the invocation is a painful blast for human rights! Faith and religion should necessarily include ALL PEOPLE in our human family. This concept is reflected at the core of all religious movments.
Although I do not belong to any Christian sect, I belive in the princpal–HE WHO CASTS THE FIRST STONE….
Reverend Warren certainly has cast a few stones in his career–this in direct opposition to Jesus’ teachings.
Would some one in your ranks please reconsider this choice!!!!



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted December 18, 2008 at 6:15 pm


Rick Warren is not the appropiate person to give the inaugural
invocation for President e-lect Obama. He is a right-winger
and hates black people, WHERE IS HIS PASTOR AT HIS NEW BLACK CHURCH?
I HOPE WARREN IS NOT HIS SPIRITUAL ADVISOR.



report abuse
 

Craig Flaherty

posted December 23, 2008 at 11:29 pm


The Gay and Lesbian Community Needs Some Help during the Rick Warren-Obama Inauguration Situation
The saddest part of the controversy regarding Obama’s pick of Warren as “inauguration invocator” has been the way the controversy has been framed by the mass media. The political dust-up has been portrayed as “the gay and lesbian community v. Rick Warren.” The idea that the gay and lesbian community should be the only ones outraged by Obama’s decision is ludicrous. Every American with a conscience, regardless of sexual orientation, should be outraged with Obama for this decision. Rick Warren is a fundamentalist Christian and biblical literalist. Does anyone know what that means exactly?
It means that Rick warren believes that women should be subjugated to men as is laid out in 1 Corinthians 11:3. It means that he believes public schools shouldn’t teach our children that the earth is more than “thousands of years old” as is told in the book of Genesis. It means he agrees with the statement that men are “holy to god” and not women, as Luke 2:23 tells us. It means he adheres to the belief that the “natural use” of women is for sexual objectification as is stated in Romans 1:27. It means he embraces and preaches the belief that those who do not love Jesus will be damned as is indicated in 1 Corinthians 16:22. Approximately one third of the bible is so x-rated that children can’t even read it. It’s wrought with everything from genocide to slavery.
Warren perpetuates a millennia-old dogma that should be relegated to the history books, not made part of the modern American record. There is a 30 to 50 million strong evangelical community in this country that is growing by leaps and bounds every year that adheres to this type of warped philosophy. Obama’s decision to give their leader a center stage position at the inauguration is not an act of tolerance or goodwill. Rather, it’s a decision that says: “It’s OK to believe what you believe, even if I don’t.” No, Mr. Obama, in fact, it’s not OK to believe what Warren believes!
Warren’s beliefs are immoral, divisive, and downright disgusting in many cases. And it’s a crying shame that the gay and lesbian community is alone in stating that. It’s time that all Americans, especially conservative females like Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter, and Bay Buchanan denounce this man’s beliefs. Or perhaps they believe they should remain silent, as is taught in 1 Timothy 2:11-12.
Best Regards
Craig M. Flaherty



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.

Share this story


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Help

Media Kit

Subscribe

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.