Why Religious Wars Rage On
This just came to my attention. For those of you too lazy to click on the link (and, really, who am I to find fault here?) I'll go ahead and summarize. That, however, does not diminish the fact that I really, really, really think you should RTFA. That said, here's the deal: According to The Daily Courier in North Carolina the pastor of a local church updated his marquee to read, "THE KORAN NEEDS TO BE FLUSHED!" Let's start here -- Um, What!?! Aren't you a Minister? Aren't you supposed to be preaching the teaching of Christ? Didn't He say something to the effect of "Turn the other cheek"? I wish, dearly, that I could give this guy the benefit of the doubt, but, really, what doubt is there? It's pretty evident what he was trying to say.
In case you have any questions, allow me to quote from the article:
When Lovelace (the minister in question) was asked whether he considered before he put the sign up that there may be some consequences or that some people may be angered, he said he was aware of the likelihood of angering some people.
"Well, I thought about it and I said there may be people who are offended by it but the way I look at it, Jesus told his followers that if the world hates you, don't feel bad because they hated me first," said Lovelace. "If we stand for what is right and for God's word and for Christianity then the world is going to condemn us and so right away when I got a complaint I said 'well somebody's mad, somebody's offended, so we must be doing something right.'"
The genius also said that he felt it was the work of God to display the sign and that no one in the church has spoken up against it to him. (With a pastor that intolerant, I would be afraid that speaking up against it to him would only lead to my personal public condemnation.)
I'm still reeling from the hatred this man is exhibiting. I wonder how he would feel if I were to publicly desecrate something he finds Holy and Sacred? You know, I bet he would be pretty pissed off (erm, I mean, "mad" and "offended") if I were to remind him of the horrific Christian atrocity by Andre Serrano entitled Piss Christ. Briefly, if you are unfamiliar with this piece the creator, Serrano, was raised Catholic, and is very openly homosexual. The piece is a photograph of a small plastic crucifix submerged in a red-golden liquid. This liquid, we are told, is a mixture of cow's blood and Serrano's own urine (The factuality of this is left to the reader). Suddenly the beautiful peace which could represent everything from personal sin to the Resurrection has new meaning, doesn't it? So, using Lovelace's own logic, Serrano must be doing something right. (Let's not fail to mention Holy Virgin Mary -- you know, the one containing a spot of elephant dung and cut outs of bare bottoms from porn magazines.)
How can religious intolerance be remotely Christian? Did Christ, Himself, not teach the woman at the well, who was a Samaritan?
Now, I'm not going to do follow the footsteps of the extreme left and cry out that the Koran needs "special" handling -- over and above that which each religion asks of their holy items, nor am I going to do as the extreme right and get enraged that someone might suggest that the holy objects of another's religion should be treated as sacred by that religion, only, all others need not bother. What I am going to do, however, is declare the following: Each and every religion should consider objects that are holy and sacred to other religions to be something that they should handle with delicacy. If I were to walk into a cathedral I wouldn't start spitting in the Holy Water, just because I don't believe in that religion. Nor, would I want someone not of my faith to similarly desecrate that which I consider sacred. If each and every person would follow this advice (allowing for the few exceptions where "holy and sacred" are just scapegoats for "horrific and abhorrent") many of the world's problems would be dramatically reduced.
I used to wonder how medieval Christians could justify the Crusades -- Pastor Lovelace has just answered that question for me. Additionally, I believe he should be stripped of his pastoralship and sent somewhere far away where he can have no influence on the minds of those seeking to know God's Word. Thank goodness his congregation is only 55 "strong".
In case you have any questions, allow me to quote from the article:
When Lovelace (the minister in question) was asked whether he considered before he put the sign up that there may be some consequences or that some people may be angered, he said he was aware of the likelihood of angering some people.
"Well, I thought about it and I said there may be people who are offended by it but the way I look at it, Jesus told his followers that if the world hates you, don't feel bad because they hated me first," said Lovelace. "If we stand for what is right and for God's word and for Christianity then the world is going to condemn us and so right away when I got a complaint I said 'well somebody's mad, somebody's offended, so we must be doing something right.'"
The genius also said that he felt it was the work of God to display the sign and that no one in the church has spoken up against it to him. (With a pastor that intolerant, I would be afraid that speaking up against it to him would only lead to my personal public condemnation.)
I'm still reeling from the hatred this man is exhibiting. I wonder how he would feel if I were to publicly desecrate something he finds Holy and Sacred? You know, I bet he would be pretty pissed off (erm, I mean, "mad" and "offended") if I were to remind him of the horrific Christian atrocity by Andre Serrano entitled Piss Christ. Briefly, if you are unfamiliar with this piece the creator, Serrano, was raised Catholic, and is very openly homosexual. The piece is a photograph of a small plastic crucifix submerged in a red-golden liquid. This liquid, we are told, is a mixture of cow's blood and Serrano's own urine (The factuality of this is left to the reader). Suddenly the beautiful peace which could represent everything from personal sin to the Resurrection has new meaning, doesn't it? So, using Lovelace's own logic, Serrano must be doing something right. (Let's not fail to mention Holy Virgin Mary -- you know, the one containing a spot of elephant dung and cut outs of bare bottoms from porn magazines.)
How can religious intolerance be remotely Christian? Did Christ, Himself, not teach the woman at the well, who was a Samaritan?
Now, I'm not going to do follow the footsteps of the extreme left and cry out that the Koran needs "special" handling -- over and above that which each religion asks of their holy items, nor am I going to do as the extreme right and get enraged that someone might suggest that the holy objects of another's religion should be treated as sacred by that religion, only, all others need not bother. What I am going to do, however, is declare the following: Each and every religion should consider objects that are holy and sacred to other religions to be something that they should handle with delicacy. If I were to walk into a cathedral I wouldn't start spitting in the Holy Water, just because I don't believe in that religion. Nor, would I want someone not of my faith to similarly desecrate that which I consider sacred. If each and every person would follow this advice (allowing for the few exceptions where "holy and sacred" are just scapegoats for "horrific and abhorrent") many of the world's problems would be dramatically reduced.
I used to wonder how medieval Christians could justify the Crusades -- Pastor Lovelace has just answered that question for me. Additionally, I believe he should be stripped of his pastoralship and sent somewhere far away where he can have no influence on the minds of those seeking to know God's Word. Thank goodness his congregation is only 55 "strong".
posted by granola girl at 8:14 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home