Article VI Blog

Because yesterday’s poker analogy was not enough, we continue it today. Frankly theft would be a good analogy as well, because Obama is stealing right from Huckabee’s playbook.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s campaign has ramped up its efforts to emphasize his Christian faith in a series of new radio and television ads, as well as in a flier that volunteers have distributed.

Lt. Gov. Daniel Mongiardo, who endorsed Obama on Sunday, narrated a new radio spot for Obama that highlights the Illinois Senator’s upbringing and values, including how Obama is “a strong Christian.”

There is not much to add to this, we said it all yesterday - the double standard is extraordinary. But make a note of this stuff - we can beat him to death with it in the general.

Baptist Praise For Romney

David R. Stokes is a Baptist minister, with a church, and a radio host. Yesterday he wrote some reflections on Romney’s Becket Fund Canterbury Award acceptance speech, at the increasingly good “New Nixon” blog.

It’s not likely that Mr. Romney’s eloquent words will assuage the darker passions of some new-breed atheists (better: anti-theists). Men like Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins very much see religion (of whatever sort) as a scourge on society – the very root of all modern evil.

Their kind of thinking was reflected in a story out of the United Kingdom a couple of years ago. BBC History Magazine conducted a poll in its January 2006 issue asking the question: “Who was the worst Briton in the past thousand years?” Mr. Becket – a man who has been venerated by both the Roman Catholic and Anglican Churches – came in SECOND. The 5,000 people who participated in the poll ranked only JACK THE RIPPER higher. I guess a killer is just slightly worse than a cleric.

Apparently, the desperate question uttered by King Henry II way back in 1170 A.D. (pardon that religio-centric date citation) – “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?” – would have plenty of respondents in century number twenty-one.

Freedom of religion is a very good thing. Freedom FROM religion, though promoted by some as the wave of the future, is not.A simple look back at the eighteenth century gives us a case study. It was the “age of revolution.” Here in America, very much in the spirit of Becket, we rejected tyranny. Over in France they tried to do the same thing.

It worked out very well here. Not so much for France. For all the cries of “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity” – they instead wound up with a period of violent chaos only somewhat resolved when that despotic secularist Napoleon took over. Hello short man, good-bye freedom.

What made the difference? Well, an often overlooked factor is that it was RELIGION that may have made the difference – particularly something that happened here in the years immediately leading up to 1776 and beyond. It was called THE GREAT AWAKENING. Inspired by men such as George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards, there was a period of deep religious reflection in the land – one that ultimately served to temper human passions – even those inflamed by injustice and revolutionary fervor.

Heck of a point the man has there. The French Revolution comparison points out that religion has both a personal and a societal role to play. Good people should be able to distinguish the two. With its rejection of polygamy, more than a century ago, the CJCLDS became a church capable of fulfilling the societal role equally with other more orthodox Christian churches, even if I might find it unsatisfactory in the personal role.

It strikes me that the inability to distinguish the two roles is, in the end, selfish. It is a confusion of our personal perspective with the a societal perspective.
Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Reading List | No Comments yet » | Print this post | Email This Post