Some liberals are upset at the way that the religious statements of one of Barack Obama’s ministers, Reverend Jeremiah Wright at the Trinity United Church of Christ, have been used to taint Barack Obama’s political campaign for President of the United States. Me, I’m not upset at that at all.
It was Barack Obama’s choice to link his political campaign to his Christian identity. He’s cited his religion as a proof that his character is good enough for the Presidency. Barack Obama has used Christian churches in many states as proxy campaign organizations. If Barack Obama wants to go ahead and reap the benefits of mixing religion and politics, then it’s only fair that people judge Obama’s character according to the wacky things his Reverend has said in church.
Of course, Barack Obama isn’t the only one who has mixed religion into his presidential campaign. I think that the controversy over Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s comments opens up a very useful opportunity for Americans to examine all the bizarre kinds of things that are taught in presidential candidates’ churches. Whenever a presidential candidate cites their religion as a legitimate issue in the presidential campaign, the churches that they have attended become part of their campaign resumes, and become open to political critique.
Let’s start looking at the churches of Hillary Clinton and John McCain too, and see what kinds of weird ideas they preach.
That’s a pretty big task, so I’ll have to take it on a little bit at a time. I’ll start today with a statement that really ought to be quite controversial – especially given Hillary Clinton’s book that advises that “It takes a village to raise a child.” Oh, but just what is the village raising that child for?
You may think I’m kidding, but the following statement is up, in full public view, on the web site of the Foundry United Methodist Church, the church that Hillary Clinton has been attending for the past several years:
In this reading, God asks Abraham to sacrifice his son. Abraham binds Isaac to the altar, has
the knife at readyâ€”and then God stops him:
Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. So Abraham called the name of that place, “The LORD will provide.” (GENESIS 22:13-14)
If God were more just than merciful, we would suffer more for our wrongs. We should suffer on a cross. But on Good Friday, what began in Advent is completed: God offered a substitute: Christ. Like the ram Abraham sacrificed, Jesus was our scapegoat. The sacrifice that God prevented Abraham from making, God made Himself. Although my father could not take away my physical sickness, our Father can take away our spiritual sickness, sin.
That’s pretty far out, isn’t it? Child sacrifice, condoned.
Let’s be clear: In this message, the Foundry United Methodist Church is not saying that children should have their throats slit and be burned as sacrifices to God. No, what the Foundry United Methodist Church actually is saying is that children deserve to have their throats slit and be burned as sacrifices to God… either that, or children deserve to be crucified.
The whole point of the lecture given on the Foundry United Methodist Church is that Isaac was such an inherently wicked child, as all children are sinful by nature, that he deserved to be executed, even by his own father. According to the Foundry United Methodist Church’s teaching, God is completely within his rights to demand that parents kill their children as a punishment for their sins. Hillary Clinton’s church apparently believes that it’s only because God has decided to go easy on human beings that we are not routinely called upon to actually slaughter out children, although they deserve it anyway.
It’s right there in the public statement by the Foundry United Methodist Church: “If God were more just than merciful, we would suffer more for our wrongs.” Divine justice, according to Hillary Clinton’s church, demands that children have their throats slit by their fathers. It’s only mercy that prevents that divine justice from being carried out.
“We should suffer on a cross,” Hillary Clinton’s church says, and in that statement, “we” includes children. Hillary Clinton’s church believes that children deserve to be crucified, because children are born sinners. When Clinton’s church says, “our Father can take away our spiritual sickness, sin,” they’re talking about the sin of children, and even little babies, not just adults.
I don’t care whether you’re a Christian or not. I want you to stop for just a second and ask yourself if you really believe this kind of controversial idea. Do you really believe that children are born deserving to be crucified, born deserving to have their throats cut and their bodies cooked by their parents? Do you really believe that babies have sinned so much as to deserve such a fate?
Hillary Clinton’s church does believe it. They’ve said as much in writing.
Just like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton has cited her religion, and her church attendance, as a reason that she has a character that makes her qualified to be President of the United States.
Well, now it’s accountability time for Hillary Clinton. I think she ought to be asked to explain the passage I’ve cited, the teaching from her church that babies are so morally corrupt that they deserve to be crucified.
Do you think that this teaching is merely symbolic, merely metaphorical? Well, I don’t see how a statement so blunt as “If God were more just than merciful, we would suffer more for our wrongs. We should suffer on a cross,” has any symbolism to it. Hillary Clinton’s church isn’t saying “It is as if we should suffer as if we were on a cross.” They don’t use the phrase “So to speak.” They say straight out that “We should suffer on a cross,” and that it’s only because God is merciful that we, and our children, do not suffer crucifixion, or some other form of gruesome execution.
But let’s give Hillary Clinton’s church the benefit of the doubt. Let’s say that this whole idea that children are so wicked that their throats should be cut and their hands should be pierced with nails is just meant metaphorically. Well, then, what’s the metaphorical lesson? The metaphorical lesson remains: Children are born evil. Babies are evil little, sinful wretches.
Do you believe that? Do you really want to elect a President who believes that?
Furthermore, if you’re willing to say that the wacko anti-child teachings of the Foundry United Methodist Church are just metaphorical, are you willing to say the same about the teachings of Barack Obama’s Reverend, Jeremiah Wright?
No? Why not? Why should one church’s preachings be accepted just as metahors, while another church’s preachings are interpreted literally?