Article VI Blog

An Exchange with Kevin McCullough

Lowell:  On Wednesday John and I had an interesting and cordial discussion with Kevin McCullough.  I had said this a few days ago about Kevin's comments on why Mormons are not Christian:

Here's another example. I think McCullough's piece is downright silly, but my real problem with this stuff is that it opens the door to bashing Romney because of his faith.

Kevin took exception to my calling his post "silly," and John and I had an e-mail exchange with him.  He posts that exchange here.  We recommend the whole thing as an example of respectful discussion between Mormon and creedal Christian.  For my part, I apologize for calling Kevin's heartfelt comments "silly."  I still think they are wrong-headed and (unintentionally) destructive, however.  I  also think everyone involved in this discussion learned something.  A little more on this here.

John's thoughts on same:  I share Kevin and Lowell's gratitude for the reasonable, cordial exchange.  We can disagree on theology all day long and preserve our political unity under such circumstances, and that in the end is what really matters.

Back to John for Other News . . .

The Boston Globe just cannot leave it alone.

Despite skirting inquiries about his Mormon faith during the first Bible Belt debate, Republican Mitt Romney said Wednesday he will not shrink from any future questions "because I'm real pleased with my faith."

What?!?!?!  That is just flat out east coast liberal patronizing – "Bible Belt debate" indeed.  And precisely how did he "skirt" inquiries?  I guess they have to ask The Question even when it is completely and utterly inapplicable because they aren't smart enough to think of anything else.

Lowell:  Maybe the Globe is smarter than I am, but I watched the entire thing and I could swear that no religious question came within a country mile of Romney at Tuesday night's debate.

But that is nothing compared to the reach for the religious angle that this piece from the Huffington Post represents.  It is so convoluted and tortured that there is no possible pull quote that would adequately summarize it.  It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the irreligious left simply should not try to talk about religion without, you know, studying it a bit . . . .

Late addition from Lowell:  I debated whether we should even link to that piece, or screed, or rant, or whatever it is.  One of the authors is a Mormon and thereby claims credibility. Take it from this Article VI Blog Mormon: Don't be fooled.  The authors' thesis seems to be that by taking positions on the war against islamofascism with which the left disagrees, Romney has renounced his faith.  (Sigh.)  Leaving aside the piece's laughable premise, it is an interesting window into how the leftward-tilting mind will twist, distort, ridicule or lampoon a candidate's religion.

But then it seems the whole church/state thing is just too difficult a concept for the left to get their heads around anyway.  Maggie Gallagher looks at the issue of serving communion to those that publicly uphold abortion:

"Do you agree with the excommunications given to legislators in Mexico City on the question?" a reporter asked the Holy Father. "Yes," Benedict replied.

 

[...]

 

Back in D.C., the gang of 18 went apoplectic. Catholic popes, bishops or clergy who withhold communion to politicians, they said, are engaging in essentially un-American activities: "Religious sanction in the political arena directly conflicts with our fundamental beliefs about the role of democratic representatives in a pluralistic America — it clashes with freedoms guaranteed in our Constitution. Such notions offend the very nature of the American experiment and do a great disservice to the centuries of good work the church has done."

Gallagher closes her piece by quoting Romney from the first debate.  Imagine that, the Mormon defending the Roman Catholic church that way.  Hmmmm . . . .

Finally, in the Washington Post, Michael Gerson looks at where culture and religion meet and finds things in a bit of a mess:

But the largest adjustments are coming on the religious left. For decades it has preached multiculturalism, but now, on further acquaintance, it doesn't seem to like other cultures very much. Episcopal leaders complain of the threat of "foreign prelates," echoing anti-Catholic rhetoric of the 19th century. An activist at one Episcopal meeting urged the African bishops to "go back to the jungle where you came from." Not since Victorians hunted tigers on elephants has the condescension been this raw.

Part of understanding the separation of church and state and the proper influence of religion in state matters is understadning what is religion, what is culture, and what is politics.  It seems increasingly clear that the left cannot make those distinctions very well.

Posted in Reading List | 1 Comment » |  Print this post |  Email This Post

Recently Posted:

• The Animal Takes A Swipe Through The Cage Bars
• Dennis Prager Addresses The Question
• The Animal Is Caged, But Very Dangerous
• What Everybody Is Thinking And No One Is Saying
• We Interrupt The Serious Blog…