Has anyone else noticed that the Christian right has been quiescent about "Charlottesville?"

And it’s not just history, either. Much of the anger directed at white Christians following the Charlottesville attacks was tied to Trump. Some people believe his election empowered white-supremacist fringe groups like those who gathered in at the “Unite the Right” rally this weekend. They blame white Christians for enabling this to happen: Eighty percent of white evangelicals voted for the president (See also: Among white evangelicals, regular churchgoers are the most supportive of Trump), as did 60 percent of white Catholics. At best, they ignored or dismissed Trump’s appeal to these racist fringe groups, these critics say; at worst, they were complicit.

Interesting. Some people are angry at Christians for voting for Trump because some racist scumbags also voted for Trump. These people figure therefore, that the Christians are responsible for the bad acts of the scumbags. Why then, would these some people be satisfied with a statement from Christians denouncing the violence at all?

You've already said yourself with the example of Franklin Graham. He made a statement that he would pray for those dealing with this violence. That isn't good enough for you. He didn't specifically denounce the violence, so you claim he approves of it.

Tell us, what exact verbiage must all the Christians state in order to satisfy you?
Some people are angry at Christians for voting for Trump because some racist scumbags also voted for Trump. These people figure therefore, that the Christians are responsible for the bad acts of the scumbags.

And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;
-- John 2:15​

Perhaps....I don't know anyone who thinks as you've described. Admittedly, between Friday and today, I've only had conversations with about 50-60 people, and even were I to have discussed the matter with every person I know, that still wouldn't amount to a notable share of the U.S. population.

Even I, detesting Trump more than anyone I've ever disliked, don't think that. It's absurd to think that, wearing their "Christian hat," most Christians voted for Trump because "racist scumbags" also voted for Trump. What's far more rational is recognizing that "racist scumbags" happen to self-identify as Christians and that white Christian leaders may be fearful of risking sources of funding by denouncing them. That latter reason is a good reason to be angry at Christian leaders.

Jesus went into the temple courtyard and threw out everyone who was buying and selling there. He overturned the moneychangers’ tables and the chairs of those who sold pigeons. He told them, “Scripture says, ‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’ but you’re turning it into a gathering place for thieves!” Blind and lame people came to him in the temple courtyard, and he healed them. When the chief priests and the experts in Moses’ Teachings saw the amazing miracles he performed and the children shouting in the temple courtyard, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” they were irritated. They said to him, “Do you hear what these children are saying?” Jesus replied, “Yes, I do. Have you never read, ‘From the mouths of little children and infants, you have created praise’?” He left them and went out of the city to Bethany and spent the night there.
-- Matthew 21:12-17
[
Oooooh. So your quote really means that the scumbags are Christians! Then you make a wild accusation about white Christian leaders fearful of losing money! As proof, you quote scripture!

You are slandering an entire group of people. You better denounce that slander or we will all think you are in favor of slandering all groups of people, don't ya think?
 
Since when does the Left care what Christian leaders think or say?

having fun trolling today, little boy?

aren't you the ones who demand that every muslim disavow terrorists?

i don't see you or anyone else of your ilk doing anything but defending the Nazis, little boy.

you understand that, right? or is it beyond your meager IQ?
Love you Silly Jilly.
 
And it’s not just history, either. Much of the anger directed at white Christians following the Charlottesville attacks was tied to Trump. Some people believe his election empowered white-supremacist fringe groups like those who gathered in at the “Unite the Right” rally this weekend. They blame white Christians for enabling this to happen: Eighty percent of white evangelicals voted for the president (See also: Among white evangelicals, regular churchgoers are the most supportive of Trump), as did 60 percent of white Catholics. At best, they ignored or dismissed Trump’s appeal to these racist fringe groups, these critics say; at worst, they were complicit.

Interesting. Some people are angry at Christians for voting for Trump because some racist scumbags also voted for Trump. These people figure therefore, that the Christians are responsible for the bad acts of the scumbags. Why then, would these some people be satisfied with a statement from Christians denouncing the violence at all?

You've already said yourself with the example of Franklin Graham. He made a statement that he would pray for those dealing with this violence. That isn't good enough for you. He didn't specifically denounce the violence, so you claim he approves of it.

Tell us, what exact verbiage must all the Christians state in order to satisfy you?
Some people are angry at Christians for voting for Trump because some racist scumbags also voted for Trump. These people figure therefore, that the Christians are responsible for the bad acts of the scumbags.

And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;
-- John 2:15​

Perhaps....I don't know anyone who thinks as you've described. Admittedly, between Friday and today, I've only had conversations with about 50-60 people, and even were I to have discussed the matter with every person I know, that still wouldn't amount to a notable share of the U.S. population.

Even I, detesting Trump more than anyone I've ever disliked, don't think that. It's absurd to think that, wearing their "Christian hat," most Christians voted for Trump because "racist scumbags" also voted for Trump. What's far more rational is recognizing that "racist scumbags" happen to self-identify as Christians and that white Christian leaders may be fearful of risking sources of funding by denouncing them. That latter reason is a good reason to be angry at Christian leaders.

Jesus went into the temple courtyard and threw out everyone who was buying and selling there. He overturned the moneychangers’ tables and the chairs of those who sold pigeons. He told them, “Scripture says, ‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’ but you’re turning it into a gathering place for thieves!” Blind and lame people came to him in the temple courtyard, and he healed them. When the chief priests and the experts in Moses’ Teachings saw the amazing miracles he performed and the children shouting in the temple courtyard, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” they were irritated. They said to him, “Do you hear what these children are saying?” Jesus replied, “Yes, I do. Have you never read, ‘From the mouths of little children and infants, you have created praise’?” He left them and went out of the city to Bethany and spent the night there.
-- Matthew 21:12-17
[
Oooooh. So your quote really means that the scumbags are Christians! Then you make a wild accusation about white Christian leaders fearful of losing money! As proof, you quote scripture!

You are slandering an entire group of people. You better denounce that slander or we will all think you are in favor of slandering all groups of people, don't ya think?
So your quote really means that the scumbags are Christians! Then you make a wild accusation about white Christian leaders fearful of losing money! As proof, you quote scripture!
Insofar as you have no better sense than to make that of my comment and respond with the inanity of above, let's see whether you have enough sense to know that you can just plain ol' not bother to respond to me.
 
The Christian right should keep silent. If they tell the truth, violence from both sides, they'll be branded a racist. If they repeat the media's lie, they'll be liars and part of the problem.

If I were a public personality, I'd never talk about race directly.
 
In listening to news reports and commentary in the aftermath of "Charlottesville," I've not seen any of the major leaders of the white Protestant Christian right denouncing the hatred and violence that last weekend took place there.

I'm not saying no Christian leaders have condemned the white supremacists/supremacy, white nationalists, and racists. I'm saying that surprisingly few have.
  • Cardinal Blase Cupich, leader of the Archdiocese of Chicago, said, "When it comes to racism, there is only one side: to stand against it."
  • Russell Moore, political leader of the Southern Baptist Convention, tweeted, "The so-called Alt-Right white supremacist ideologies are anti-Christ and satanic to the core. We should say so."
Franklin Graham, on the other hand, has condemned nothing and shown notably more tacit tolerance of the ideological underpinnings that fomented the rally. Instead Graham has said only that we should "pray for Governor of Virginia Terry McAuliffe, law enforcement, and everyone struggling to deal with the chaos and violence that reared its ugly head in Charlottesville." Graham's relative silence on "Charlottesville" is characteristic of the overwhelming majority of white Christian leaders, at least as far as I have observed.

Jemar Tisby, president of the Reformed African American Network, wrote in The Washington Post:
Despite all our efforts, some white pastors still remain silent on Sunday. They relegate racism to the status of a “social” issue and not a “gospel” issue. Leadership in churches and other Christian organizations remain all or mostly white. It’s the same with the boards of directors and trustees of these institutions. Evangelicals who prostitute the faith for political power remain in the pulpit and are given wide latitude to stir up racial resentment in the guise of “race neutral” language.
Racial divisions have been part of the American church for as long as it has existed. Many early denominational splits were driven by Christians who supported slavery and justified it with Bible verses. Historians argue that the spread of Christian private schools in the South in the 1960s and ’70s was largely driven by racism. White supremacy is undeniably a part of the history of American Christianity, as is abolition, and support for civil rights. Clashes over race have roiled congregations for as long as they’ve been in America.

And it’s not just history, either. Much of the anger directed at white Christians following the Charlottesville attacks was tied to Trump. Some people believe his election empowered white-supremacist fringe groups like those who gathered in at the “Unite the Right” rally this weekend. They blame white Christians for enabling this to happen: Eighty percent of white evangelicals voted for the president (See also: Among white evangelicals, regular churchgoers are the most supportive of Trump), as did 60 percent of white Catholics. At best, they ignored or dismissed Trump’s appeal to these racist fringe groups, these critics say; at worst, they were complicit.

And to top it all of, as I type this, Ms. Heyer's memorial service is underway. Is Donald Trump there? Nope. Apparently the most rueful and palpable outcome of the Charlottesville violence doesn't move Trump in accordance with how it may have seemed when he issued his remarks about it...yet another "wink and nod."

I agree. I've wondered the same thing. They have been very quiet. I suspect Christian leaders are concerned about their collection plates.
 
And it’s not just history, either. Much of the anger directed at white Christians following the Charlottesville attacks was tied to Trump. Some people believe his election empowered white-supremacist fringe groups like those who gathered in at the “Unite the Right” rally this weekend. They blame white Christians for enabling this to happen: Eighty percent of white evangelicals voted for the president (See also: Among white evangelicals, regular churchgoers are the most supportive of Trump), as did 60 percent of white Catholics. At best, they ignored or dismissed Trump’s appeal to these racist fringe groups, these critics say; at worst, they were complicit.

Interesting. Some people are angry at Christians for voting for Trump because some racist scumbags also voted for Trump. These people figure therefore, that the Christians are responsible for the bad acts of the scumbags. Why then, would these some people be satisfied with a statement from Christians denouncing the violence at all?

You've already said yourself with the example of Franklin Graham. He made a statement that he would pray for those dealing with this violence. That isn't good enough for you. He didn't specifically denounce the violence, so you claim he approves of it.

Tell us, what exact verbiage must all the Christians state in order to satisfy you?
Some people are angry at Christians for voting for Trump because some racist scumbags also voted for Trump. These people figure therefore, that the Christians are responsible for the bad acts of the scumbags.

And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;
-- John 2:15​

Perhaps....I don't know anyone who thinks as you've described. Admittedly, between Friday and today, I've only had conversations with about 50-60 people, and even were I to have discussed the matter with every person I know, that still wouldn't amount to a notable share of the U.S. population.

Even I, detesting Trump more than anyone I've ever disliked, don't think that. It's absurd to think that, wearing their "Christian hat," most Christians voted for Trump because "racist scumbags" also voted for Trump. What's far more rational is recognizing that "racist scumbags" happen to self-identify as Christians and that white Christian leaders may be fearful of risking sources of funding by denouncing them. That latter reason is a good reason to be angry at Christian leaders.

Jesus went into the temple courtyard and threw out everyone who was buying and selling there. He overturned the moneychangers’ tables and the chairs of those who sold pigeons. He told them, “Scripture says, ‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’ but you’re turning it into a gathering place for thieves!” Blind and lame people came to him in the temple courtyard, and he healed them. When the chief priests and the experts in Moses’ Teachings saw the amazing miracles he performed and the children shouting in the temple courtyard, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” they were irritated. They said to him, “Do you hear what these children are saying?” Jesus replied, “Yes, I do. Have you never read, ‘From the mouths of little children and infants, you have created praise’?” He left them and went out of the city to Bethany and spent the night there.
-- Matthew 21:12-17
[
Oooooh. So your quote really means that the scumbags are Christians! Then you make a wild accusation about white Christian leaders fearful of losing money! As proof, you quote scripture!

You are slandering an entire group of people. You better denounce that slander or we will all think you are in favor of slandering all groups of people, don't ya think?
So your quote really means that the scumbags are Christians! Then you make a wild accusation about white Christian leaders fearful of losing money! As proof, you quote scripture!
Insofar as you have no better sense than to make that of my comment and respond with the inanity of above, let's see whether you have enough sense to know that you can just plain ol' not bother to respond to me.
You painted yourself into a corner and don't have the character to admit it. I denounce hypocrites like you. LOL
 
In listening to news reports and commentary in the aftermath of "Charlottesville," I've not seen any of the major leaders of the white Protestant Christian right denouncing the hatred and violence that last weekend took place there.

I'm not saying no Christian leaders have condemned the white supremacists/supremacy, white nationalists, and racists. I'm saying that surprisingly few have.
  • Cardinal Blase Cupich, leader of the Archdiocese of Chicago, said, "When it comes to racism, there is only one side: to stand against it."
  • Russell Moore, political leader of the Southern Baptist Convention, tweeted, "The so-called Alt-Right white supremacist ideologies are anti-Christ and satanic to the core. We should say so."
Franklin Graham, on the other hand, has condemned nothing and shown notably more tacit tolerance of the ideological underpinnings that fomented the rally. Instead Graham has said only that we should "pray for Governor of Virginia Terry McAuliffe, law enforcement, and everyone struggling to deal with the chaos and violence that reared its ugly head in Charlottesville." Graham's relative silence on "Charlottesville" is characteristic of the overwhelming majority of white Christian leaders, at least as far as I have observed.

Jemar Tisby, president of the Reformed African American Network, wrote in The Washington Post:
Despite all our efforts, some white pastors still remain silent on Sunday. They relegate racism to the status of a “social” issue and not a “gospel” issue. Leadership in churches and other Christian organizations remain all or mostly white. It’s the same with the boards of directors and trustees of these institutions. Evangelicals who prostitute the faith for political power remain in the pulpit and are given wide latitude to stir up racial resentment in the guise of “race neutral” language.
Racial divisions have been part of the American church for as long as it has existed. Many early denominational splits were driven by Christians who supported slavery and justified it with Bible verses. Historians argue that the spread of Christian private schools in the South in the 1960s and ’70s was largely driven by racism. White supremacy is undeniably a part of the history of American Christianity, as is abolition, and support for civil rights. Clashes over race have roiled congregations for as long as they’ve been in America.

And it’s not just history, either. Much of the anger directed at white Christians following the Charlottesville attacks was tied to Trump. Some people believe his election empowered white-supremacist fringe groups like those who gathered in at the “Unite the Right” rally this weekend. They blame white Christians for enabling this to happen: Eighty percent of white evangelicals voted for the president (See also: Among white evangelicals, regular churchgoers are the most supportive of Trump), as did 60 percent of white Catholics. At best, they ignored or dismissed Trump’s appeal to these racist fringe groups, these critics say; at worst, they were complicit.

And to top it all of, as I type this, Ms. Heyer's memorial service is underway. Is Donald Trump there? Nope. Apparently the most rueful and palpable outcome of the Charlottesville violence doesn't move Trump in accordance with how it may have seemed when he issued his remarks about it...yet another "wink and nod."

I agree. I've wondered the same thing. They have been very quiet. I suspect Christian leaders are concerned about their collection plates.
Christian leaders are concerned about their collection plates.

That or they aren't actually concerned about "living a life of Christ," something that requires far more than merely preaching from the pulpit.
 
The Christian right should keep silent. If they tell the truth, violence from both sides, they'll be branded a racist. If they repeat the media's lie, they'll be liars and part of the problem.

If I were a public personality, I'd never talk about race directly.

Why should being or not being a public personality have anything to do with the topics one elects to discuss? Celebrity does not make one more nor less principled; one is whichever well before acquiring fame. One can acquire celebrity via infamy or eminence.

That said, if one isn't well informed on race and how it does and doesn't factor into "whatever," one shouldn't discuss it at all, regardless of the nature and extent of one's renown. That's merely a matter of having intellectual and discursive integrity, and anyone can exhibit that so long as they actually have it. The thing is that the sociology of conflict -- race-based, theologically driven, etc. -- are among the things religious leaders are expected to understand. Thus their quietude is surprising.
 

Forum List

Back
Top