Thawing The Big Chill: More From The Religious Left

If I were pressed as to what defines this website, I would suggest that Contratimes is devoted to pointing out the hypocrisies and contradictions of the Religious Left. This is not this site's exclusive target, but if the entirety of my essays was boiled down, the remaining precipitate would consist mostly of a confrontation with my brothers and sisters on the Left who dwell in the halls of religion.

Somewhere it was said that "As the Church goes, so goes the culture." It is a debatable claim, of course, but it smacks of truth. My conflict with the Religious Left deals almost exclusively with a point which they make constantly: that the Religious Right is intent on creating a theocracy in America. For the sake of argument, I will stipulate that the Left is right, the Religious Right is filled with theocrats. But that is only part of the story, even a small part. For the essence of the story is this: The Religious Left are the real theocrats, expending far more energy shaping America into the image they think most pleases God, and they are blind to their own zeal. THAT is the essence of the story, and it is no doubt the essential goal of this website to make that fact clear. Indeed it is clear that as the Left wing of the Church goes, so goes the culture.

In one of the first Contratimes posts, "The God Of Love," I asked readers' permission to "announce my rejection of Christ. For if Christianity is as the United Church of Christ (UCC) suggests in its recent TV commercial, then I have no interest in being a Christian..." What follows continues in that vein, for I have read the "alternative State of the Union address" given by the National Council of Church's affiliate "Faithful America," and I'll be damned if I do not loathe it. I would ask that you read it. It is an amazing piece of rhetoric. And it pushes me even farther away from the Christ the Left adores.

Please realize that I am not suggesting that I approve of President Bush's speech or that his vision of the Christ is mine. It would be remiss of me to suggest that I even know what Mr. Bush believes about Jesus (the Christ). I know nothing. But I do know that Christ is not a socialist or a capitalist; He is non-partisan, I hope, through and through. If Jesus is indeed God Incarnate, which the Church has asserted for nearly 2,000 years, then it seems reasonable to conclude that He loves both the poor and the rich, equally. He is no "respecter of persons," to quote the King James Version of the Christian Bible. Christ loves all (and confronts all, too).

With that said, please note the grotesque irony of Mr. Vince Isner's citing of the Jewish prophet Micah at the outset of Mr. Isner's alternative State of the Union address: "What does the Lord require of you but to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God?" For Mr. Isner offers little mercy to those with whom he disagrees, particularly the President of the United States. And talk about "walking humbly." Read this by Mr. Isner and ask yourself if this is not the most gratuitous self-congratulation you've ever seen:

"As persons of faith and conscience we hold ourselves to a standard that measures more than our economic wealth and military might. We recognize that we are more than consumers, voters in red or blue states, taxpayers, polling numbers, demographics, target markets and all the rest. As human beings living together on this planet we know that we are, as the Judeo-Christian tradition reminds us – our brother's and our sister's keepers."

You see, Mr. Isner is not like them, not like those greed-freaks who only see GDP and net profits. Isner is MORE than a consumer; he is more than a militarist, a taxpayer, a polling number. He is deep, humane, genuine; a caregiver. Of course, a President of the United States ostensibly involved in running a country on secular principles is not really supposed to be interested in the ontological and moral dimensions of Mr. Isner's personality; that's the Church's job. But more importantly, Mr. Isner is convinced, or so his mercy suggests, that President Bush is less than human. Mr Isner is "more."

And then note this:

"We are also the living agents of Micah's prophetic call. So let us examine just how we are doing justice, loving mercy, and walking humbly."

It seems Mr. Isner believes we should assess the United States of America, its entire government, according to the strictures of a Jewish prophet (whose audience, by the way, was not American at all). Clearly, Americans should submit to the Left's most beloved sacred texts and toss to the wind the separation of Church and State. That, to the Left, is what they mean by "doing justice," I presume.

As for Mr. Isner's explicit statements about American justice, he enlightens us with this:

"Few of us would dare approach the Supreme Court and openly declare, 'My views are better, truer, and more important, than theirs and therefore you should interpret the law in light of me.'

"That is why special interests choose the BACK door when trying to influence the courts. Recently some well-funded and organized fundamentalist groups have used massive media events to help load the open seats on the Supreme Court with ultra-conservative judges sympathetic to their fundamentalist agenda. They even said that those who disagree with them are “against people of faith.”

This speech, I realize, is offered in the name of faith, even in the name of Christ. So let us take seriously what Mr. Isner says about the "back door" and "fundamentalist groups" in his, well, reductionistic and unmerciful look at his fellow citizens. One wonders what planet he is on, for there are all sorts of groups using the back door of the judiciary, leftists and rightists and yes, even "people of faith." Does anyone really believe that the "right to privacy" found in the Constitution justifying the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision walked through the judiciary's front door? Does anyone really think that "special interests" during the Alito hearings were not pounding on the back door of Senators Schumer, Leahy, Kerry and Kennedy's chambers to resist the electorate's will, which elected, through the front door, a President who would appoint justices sympathetic to his convictions? Come, Mr. Isner. Surely you think your ideas are better than others.' How else to explain your "alternative" speech. You don't take us for fools, do you?

And there's this true conundrum:

"People of faith in the United States of America do not march lock step [sic] to the drums of fundamentalism, and we must resist the claims of those who claim to speak for people of faith and conscience everywhere."

Hmm. Does Mr. Isner realize that he has just spoken for people of faith everywhere : "People of faith ... do not march lock step [sic] ..."? Oh, yes, they do, Mr. Isner. They march in lockstep to the drumbeats of the National Council of Churches.

I can't stop myself:

"It is an arrogant dinner guest who seizes the conversation and shouts his proclamation so loudly that nobody else can speak. That is why all who love their faith and their country must work to insure [sic] that everyone has a voice around the national table. It is only through dialogue, the free expression of ideas, and respect for all points of view can justice reach its full height."

So much for respecting the points of view of those with whom you disagree, Mr. Isner. And I guess it's not an act of arrogance for a man of "faith" to presume to draft and deliver an alternative State of the Union address. God forbid that Mr. Bush's views are part of the free expression of ideas.

Alas! I'm snowballing! Read on:

"The world has been shocked and outraged by the revelation that the U.S. has engaged ... in torture of its detainees. ... Yet using 9/11, the White House has tragically adopted a policy that bears little resemblance to the example of Christ."

So Christ is indeed the model for American governance. Unite theocrats everywhere! And now I know why I am not a theocrat, nor am I fit to be in the liberal Christian halls: I am too dumb! I mean, I don't understand this at all:

"Looking at the earth from space, only a degree or two separates shadow from light."

I am glad to know that not only is Mr. Isner humble, merciful and just, he is an astronaut.

And so much for kindness and not sowing seeds of fear:

"Congress' cruel and reckless decision to cut billions from aid programs may seem like a small shift in a massive budget, but that tiny shift is critical to those already on life's margins. The consequences will be real – in the form of more children frozen into lives of poverty, young people succumbing to the fever of despair, unable to afford an education. ... On February 1, the House will have one final chance to vote on what has been called one of the most immoral budgets in American History [sic]. If it passes, millions will suffer needlessly."

Congressmen are "cruel" and "reckless," poised to pass the most "immoral budget" in "American History," (which is a course offered at Mr. Isner's alma mater, I believe).

Lastly, let it be noted that in not one single paragraph of Mr. Isner's lengthy speech is there anything resembling an argument. Not one paragraph! Accusations abound, as do insinuations. But not one conclusion backed by evidence. For shame!

I think my point has been made, and it is not a fun one. The Religious Left is really nothing other than the Democratic Party platform in religious vestments. There is nothing distinctly new here, nor is there anything uniquely Christian. What there is is the use of religion to inform the State, and to silence criticism of the Left's religiously held agenda. It is the citation of Scripture in order to make subjective what should be objective: If God has spoken through Mr. Isner, who can disagree? You see, Mr. Isner claims to want to keep open a national dialogue, but it is mere lip-service. If "God has spoken through the prophets," what else, then, can be said?

Contratimes

©Bill Gnade 2006/Contratimes - All Rights Reserved.

[Photo: Ice melting from tree branch. Dublin Lake, Dublin, NH.]