John Hagee on Roman Catholicism
Jonathan Rowe on Feb 29th 2008
John Hagee, a religious lunatic of the highest order, gives his opinion of the Roman Catholic Church.
Oh yeah, he just endorsed McCain who said he was “very honored by Pastor John Hagee’s endorsement.”
Filed in The Belfry
As a putative Catholic, I’ve tried to sort through my intellectual honesty as to why McCain’s acceptance of Reverend Hagee’s endorsement troubles me less than Sen. Obama’s somewhat slippery yet clear rejection of Minister Farrakhan’s.
[My teeth grate at assigning the honorifics "Rev." and "Minister" to these individuals.]
I think I’m basically being dishonestly partisan in favor of the Republican, except I don’t mind Hagee’s theological disdain for Catholicism, as I think it’s protected by the principles of the Founding, but Farrakhan’s calling Judaism a “gutter religion” seems racist, as Jews are both a religion and a people.
Jonathan Rowe has previously blogged on ex-Cincinnati Reds pitcher cum fundamentalist Christian Frank Pastore’s theological condemnations of Mormonism. Still, on the political/social level, Pastore was OK with Mitt Romney as a presidential candidate, as he found much to agree with.
I dunno if as Americans, Hagee could bear a Catholic president, or Farrakhan a Jewish one. This is all I’d really want to know.
Tom Van Dyke,
I thought those who belonged to the Nation of Islam were citizens too. Farrakhan has a right as much as David Duke to speak on who he wishes to be president. I know this is off topic, but did how Farrakhan get to be in this discussion? Is it that all black folk not only look alike, but think alike?
It bothers me that Obama is held to a different standard than McCain. I don’t lightly cry racism in politics, but in this case I don’t see why, other than race, Obama “rejecting and denouncing” an endorsement from Farrakhan he never sought is more controversial than McCain embracing an endorsement from John Hagee.
Aside from Hagee’s comments on Catholicism, he also blamed Katrina on God’s hatred of gay people and claims the world will soon be ruled by the Antichrist, who will rise to leadership in the EU. Why hasn’t McCain been asked to denounce this nonsense, or at least comment on it?
tilts,
I think it’s because Obama has close (non-denounced) relationships with his pastor whom he sees his spiritual adviser, whom has failed to denounce Farrakhan, but instead does the reverse, i.e., praises him. This isn’t as much about endorsements, it’s about being connected closely with a person who praises one who is basically vile.
VRB, please read what I wrote again.
Mark,
Say what?? Obama does not have “close ties” to Farrakhan. MCain, on the other hand, not only embraced Hagee’s endorsement, but has had secret meetings with him, the nature of which Hagee refuses to reveal. Mostly to do with bombing Iran. (remember “bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran?). (see: http://www.christianzionism.org)
Hagee is much more dangerous than Farrakhan as he draws support from the fringe right of the Pentecostal and Southern Baptist church which is much better politically connected than Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam. The numbers aren’t even close in terms of clout.
Tom Van Dyke
“As a putative Catholic, I’ve tried to sort through my intellectual honesty as to why McCain’s acceptance of Reverend Hagee’s endorsement troubles me less than Sen. Obama’s somewhat slippery yet clear rejection of Minister Farrakhan’s.”
You see when you said ”Sen. Obama’s somewhat slippery…,” I wondered why it would bother you. When I heard of Farrakhan’s comments I did not in any way think that it was Barack Obama’s point of view. In fact I thought of Farrakhan as being a black man being proud to have a black man as a viable candidate running for president. Knowing that long before Farrakhan was a Muslim he was another black child born in a racist society.
“Black” really had nothing to do with what I wrote. ‘Twas you who injected race, and quite a lot of it. I was talking about religious bigotry.
Cheers.
YES I DID.
John,
You write:
Say what?? Obama does not have “close ties” to Farrakhan.
And I didn’t say he did. I said he has close ties with a man (his spiritual adviser) who is unstinting in his praise for Farrakhan.
I think it’s because Obama has close (non-denounced) relationships with his pastor whom he sees his spiritual adviser, whom has failed to denounce Farrakhan, but instead does the reverse, i.e., praises him.
Even if that’s an accurate characterization, I fail to see why a candidate having a “close relationship” to a pastor who has praised a religious leader with crazy views is more problematic than the candidate himself publicly praising a religious leader with crazy views.
Indeed, tilts, that was my problem, and one I was trying to be honest about. Dunno if I succeeded. Somehow it doesn’t bother me when someone’s virulently anti-Catholic on a theological level, but I have trouble separating anti-Judaism from anti-Semitism, so Judaism-as-gutter-religion alarms me more.
Something to do with various unpleasantnesses towards Jews in Europe in the past century, I think. The Papists and anti-Papists have been done with wantonly massacring each other for awhile now.
Having shared a house with a couple from Northern Ireland, I’m not sure thats true, unless by a while you only mean the past decade, and even so the anger remains.
To pre-empt the obvious rebutal I know that the ‘official’ dispute in the troubles was over whether NI should be part of the UK or the Republic. But when you talk to the more, lets say motivated, unionists the anger is directed at Papists and Fenians, not at administrative borders.
tilts,
Well, that’s because a spiritual adviser is one from whom you take advice and see as a person of wisdom. A political recommendation is a different thing entirely.
Besides, while Anti-Semitism is virtually universally forbidden, Catholic bashing is socially acceptable almost everywhere.
It seems to me that who a politician embraces and praises publicly as a political act may tell you more about his future political behavior than who his friends are. It’s certainly worth exploring more than the MSM has done so far.
You’re right that in our culture Catholic bashing tends to be more readily excused than anti-Semitism, although I don’t know that I’d call it “socially acceptable” outside of some of the more millennial-minded conservative Evangelical circles. However, a) that doesn’t make Catholic bashing right, and b) Hagee doesn’t just bash Catholics.
Excerpt from “Letter from Louis Farrakhan” on ‘Judaism is gutter religion’ canard
Countless times over the years I have explained that I never referred to Judaism as a dirty religion, but, clearly referred to the machinations of those who hide behind the shield of Judaism while using unjust political means to achieve their objectives. This was distilled in the New York tabloids and other media saying, “Farrakhan calls Judaism a gutter religion.”
As a Muslim, I revere Abraham, Moses, and all the Prophets who Allah (God) sent to the children of Israel. I believe in the scriptures brought by these Prophets and the Laws of Allah (God) as expressed in the Torah. I would never refer to the Revealed Word of Allah (God) — the basis of Jewish Faith — as “dirty” or “gutter.” You know, Jude, as well as I, that the Revealed Word of Allah (God) comes as a Message from Allah (God) to purify us from our evil that has divided us and caused us to fall into the gutter.
Over the centuries, the evils of Christians, Jews and Muslims have dirtied their respective religions. True Faith in the laws and Teaching of Abraham, Jesus and Muhammad is not dirty, but, practices in the name of these religions can be unclean and can cause people to look upon the misrepresented religion as being unclean.
full letter text: http://www.noi.org/statements/rift/Wanniski12-22-1997.htm