Jan
08
2010
The Sacrament of the Sneer
From Michael Gerson’s article on the Brit Hume kerfuffle:
True tolerance consists in engaging deep disagreements respectfully — through persuasion — not in banning certain categories of argument and belief from public debate.
In this controversy, we are presented with two models of discourse. Hume, in an angry sea of loss and tragedy — his son’s death in 1998 — found a life preserver in faith. He offered that life preserver to another drowning man. Whatever your view of Hume’s beliefs, he could have no motive other than concern for Woods himself.
The other model has come from critics such as Shales, in a spittle-flinging rage at the mention of religion in public, comparing Hume to “Mary Poppins on the joys of a tidy room, or Ron Popeil on the glories of some amazing potato peeler.” Shales, of course, is engaged in proselytism of his own — for a secular fundamentalism that trivializes and banishes all other faiths. He distributes the sacrament of the sneer.
Who in this picture is more intolerant?
HT: Sarah Pulliam Bailey
14 Comments
Right on!
Absolutely brilliant article.
We in the west have been spoiled. The fact we have lived in a so called “Christian ” society that has allowed our faith to be respected and seen as a good moral foundation. However I hold that what we are seeing , with the attacks against Hume , are just the shifting sand under our feet. As we move in a even more post-Christian society , any display of faith in the public arena, be it work or school, will not be tolerated . Especially if you proclaim Christ and only Him. As Atheism becomes more militant , and those who say they are “spiritual” sneer at the Cross of our Lord , we better be prepared. But what a glorious time to count ourselves with our Lord who the world hated first and to give an answer for the hope that we have .
“As we move in a even more post-Christian society , any display of faith in the public arena, be it work or school, will not be tolerated.”
Justin Taylor: Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience
“It’s a careful, thoughtful statement, worthy of study and acceptance. I encourage you to read it and sign it.”
TUAD: I’m going to invent a new game called “Six Degrees of Separation with the Manhattan Declaration.” You are already the grand master!
Justin,
Since you signed and supported it before I did (you supported it on the day it was introduced, no?), and since I considered your counsel as part of a lengthy deliberative process before I eventually signed and supported it myself, your initial prescient insights into the wide and deep applicablility of the Manhattan Declaration make you well-suited as the inventor and advocate of your new game “Six Degrees of Separation with the Manhattan Declaration”! You saw and anticipated how useful the MD could be, and so you gave your early support. Truly, you are the grand master!
[...] in condemning christians and their message. (ht’s to: gospel coalition, denny burk, and justin taylor) [...]
The sneer is the last gasp of the devil. Christ is Victor! Christendom will prevail.
Post-Christian? No. Pre-Christian.
[...] Michael Gerson’s column in this morning’s Washington Post is really good (HT: Justin Taylor). He rightly concludes that Hume’s critics have shown themselves to be the intolerant [...]
esta increible tu blog. Soy de Guatemala y me gustaria saber como modificas tan bien tu blog
Justin, thanks so much for your mention today. I’ve gotten a lot of good reaction on this one.
Well said, Michael. Ironic, isn’t it, that our First Amendment “Free Exercise” and “Free Speech” liberties were birthed by the Christian view of the God-bestowed liberty and dignity of humans? Let “Free Exercise” have it’s full swing. God will sort it all out later.
From many of the comments I have read by believers I think this comment to the Gerson column makes a very good point:
“Had Hume’s primary concern really been for Tiger’s peace of mind he would have treated Tiger like a friend and made his suggestion in private, respecting Tiger’s dignity and privacy. Instead, Hume made a big, spashy show for the FOX News primary demographic — white middle aged Fundamentalist Christians — and delivered a message meant much more for them than for Tiger. Let’s be honest about that, Gerson, can’t we. Hume wasn’t interested in Tiger. He was playing to his crowd.”
I agree that there was a better way for Mr Hume to do this but I will defend his right to do it anywhere he wants. Just be ready to take the heat when he does and not cry about it. Free speech works both ways. Circling the wagons and bemoaning the criticism is a good way to shield ourselves but it might be a call to reflect rather than deflect.
Before any of you blast me as some wide-eyed liberal I am not. I am a been a Bible believing Christian since I was nine years old (I am much older than that now) What I am trying to articulate has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with reaching the world with the gospel of Jesus Christ. I have to disagree with Mr Hume’s method, not his message. I am opened to the possibility I could be wrong about this but I am very concern that the gospel especially here in America has been co-opted and become a “we” against “them” lacking in the love and compassion that Jesus brings. Lets not forget that Jesus’ harshest words were spoken to those who were the keepers of the faith and some of his most compassionate statements were to those on the outside (the woman at the well; the tax collector, etc). I am all for boldly carrying the word but we have to use that boldness wisely. I am in the camp that upon reflection Mr Hume did not use his boldness wisely.
It might feel good to dismiss our critics…but those are the very people we are called to minister to.