Classical Values :: Pride goeth <i>after</i> the fall?

previous entry | main | next entry

January 11, 2007

Pride goeth after the fall?

Anyone who thinks Jesus is on the right, think again!

Hugo Chavez thinks Jesus Christ was the ultimate socialist -- "the greatest socialist in history."

And Bob Edgar, general secretary of the national council of churches, wants us to put Jesus in charge of war planning:

I think it's more important to put Christ back into our war planning than into our Christmas cards.

That was his Christmas message a year ago.

In an editorial today, Edgar is taking a long historical view of the Iraq War, which he seems to want to go the way of Vietnam -- a total rout for the U.S. Proudly recalling his clergy status and his role as a congressman in the days immediately before the fall of Saigon, he clearly sees the U.S. as deserving to lose now as it did then:

We were determined not to allow any more money to be spent on more troops for a war we were not winning.

It is somewhat ironic that, on that same day, April 22, 1975, an official White House photograph captured the architects of the proposed troop surge. President Ford is seated behind his desk in the Oval Office. He is conferring with his chief of staff, Donald Rumsfeld, and his deputy, Dick Cheney.

Fast-forward 32 years. We are hearing the same talk. We are hearing the same reasoning that more troops will help us get out of a war thousands of miles away.

We have just seen a new Congress sworn in. Many say voters spoke loudly last November against the status quo. In 1975, the 49 of us were called "Watergate babies," referring to the crimes that brought down the Nixon administration. Voters then were tired of being lied to, and wanted desperately to get our troops home from the war in Southeast Asia.

The architects of the waning days of the Vietnam War are many of the same planners who pushed our troops into the current war in Iraq. Apparently history has taught them nothing.

History, however, apparently was not lost on the American voters last November. I suspect it will likely not be lost on their representatives in the 110th Congress. I suspect those elected by the people will not approve spending any more tax dollars to extend another unpopular, ill-planned and shortsighted war.

Yes, wars can be lost. On that point, Bob Edgar and I agree.

What I can't understand is his apparent pride in scenes like this:

And this:

Is that our fate if Edgar and the National Council of Churches "put Christ back into our war planning"?

(What, I should move to Venezuela to live under Jesus?)

posted by Eric on 01.11.07 at 08:35 AM

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/4407

Comments

My grandfather used to enjoy raising eyebrows by proclaiming that, "Christ was the first communist."

Beck · January 11, 2007 10:38 AM

What I find amazing is the lack of "big picture" thinking most people with a "voice" have nowadays. I understand the suffering, I understand our reaction to the pictures and videos of violence but to lose sight of what it all means in the long wrong is sheer folly. I'm sure God Himself would wish no more to suffer but seeing as how we've been given a wonderful gift in free will He just can't swoop down from on high and change it all because I'm betting He sees long term as well. Astounding to see people of faith lacking that lesson.

As for Jesus being Commie or Socialist I suppose, in a way, you can see that. Nevermind I would think the Lord would transcend such titles. But you could also argue Jesus being a capitalist easy enough by referencing the parable of the talents. Seems the guy who just sat on his talents didn't make out to well compared to those who went out and created more from the original sum.

CTDeLude · January 11, 2007 12:16 PM

I never got the Parable of the Talents. No other passage of Mathew is as confusing to me. I had thought that this was a parable of a bad “Master” who has no compassion and takes from the meek to give to the capable. For instance in Luke the Master says “You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow?” I know that some (or all) Calvinists take this as a passage to work hard.Are there different interpretations? If find most of the Gospels clear but this one has stumped me.

In any case, most of the rest of the Gospels makes Jesus appear altruistic and a pacifist. If he's not a socialist it's because he's not a political man. Perhaps he'd prefer a Kibbutz.

Jason Pappas · January 11, 2007 08:54 PM

I clicked on the link to the news story about Chavez' pronuciamento of Christian Socialism, hoping Don Hugo would provide some New Testament chapter and verses to support his assertion, but alas no. My first thought, when people quote the New Testament to buttress some political position, is, "But what translation are you using?" I've read the King James, the Lattimore translation from the Greek, and parts of others, and I don't recall anything Jesus said that supports socialism; certainly not State socialism. He did tell the rich kid to sell off his stuff and give the proceeds to the poor but I'm not sure he was issuing a universal command. I don't recall him saying anything about the State having the right to coercively redistribute wealth (although given that in his day much wealth had been coercively distributed by the State, he would not have been entirely unjustified). It's hard to reconcile "He who takes up the sword will perish by the sword" (which, by the way, Francisco d'Anconia in ATLAS SHRUGGED says is his favorite line in the Bible) with the modern cult of Fidel and Che.

Bilwick · January 12, 2007 03:00 PM