Wall Street Occupiers integrate militant liberation theology with the potency of process theology

Photo courtesy of yesmagazine.org

All I could say this morning upon reading visiting Harvard Islamic Society chaplain, Nuri Friedlander’s post, From Tahrir to Wall Street: The Role of Religion in Protest Movements was “Amen and amen!”

Friedlander beautifully integrates the energy of liberation theology that can spark revolutions with the peace-making power of process theology, which eschews the use of force, and the result is what Thomas Merton and his close friend Thich Nhat Hanh would call “engaged spirituality.”

Friedlander concludes with words that would gladden the hearts of leading process theologians:

It is by rejecting the narrative that religions are fighting each other, and that reason is fighting faith, that we will disarm those forces that truly stand in the way of our success, and we will enable ourselves to co-create a more just society, one that thrives in its diversity, and revels in its singularity.

Read the entire article here.

The Rev. Rick Warren to Interview McCain and Obama Today

Well, it’s a Saturday night special in mid-August and what better way could you think of to spend a summer evening than watching an evangelical preacher, the Rev. Rick Warren, interview Barack Obama and John McCain about their faith? Seriously. The forum will be televised on CNN and Fox News Channel at 8 p.m. EST and 7 p.m. CST today, August 16, 2008.

Duke Helfand at the LA Times provides some in-depth background material on this religion meets politics event and the pastor who has instigated it.

Helfand writes:

“Today's forum also is a sign of religion's importance in the 2008 presidential campaign, and the emergence of a new style of evangelical leadership on the national stage that is not tied to a single party and has broadened its social agenda beyond that of the religious right.”

To read the entire article, go here.

P.S.

I’m planning to watch the interview this evening and will post my comments.

Obama’s Divisive Comments a Potential Turning Point in Campaign

Photo credits: AP



At Politico this morning, Mike Allen is talking comeback for Hillary Clinton in the aftermath of Obama’s comments at a San Francisco fundraiser about small-town Pennsylvanians and Midwesterners hit by job losses.

On April 6, Obama said, “It’s not surprising, then, that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”


Below are a dozen reasons offered by Allen to explain why this is a potential turning point for Obama’s campaign — an episode that Allen says could be even more damaging than the remarks by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, “since this time the controversial words came out of his {Obama’s} own mouth.

“1. It lets Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) off the mat at a time when even some of her top supporters had begun to despair about her prospects. Clinton hit back hard on the campaign trail Saturday. And her campaign held a conference call where former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, a Pittsburgh native, described Obama’s remarks as 'condescending and disappointing' and “undercutting his message of hope.”

“2. If you are going to say something that makes you sound like a clueless liberal, don’t say it in San Francisco. Obama’s views might have been received very differently if he had expressed them in public to Pennsylvania voters, saying he understood and could alleviate their frustrations.

“3. Some people actually use guns to hunt — not to compensate for a salary that’s less than a U.S. senator’s.

“4. Some people cling to religion not because they are bitter but because they believe it, and because faith in God gives them purpose and comfort.

“5. Some hard-working Americans find it insulting when rich elites explain away things dear to their hearts as desperation. It would be like a white politician telling blacks they cling to charismatic churches to compensate for their plight. And it vindicates centrist Democrats who have been arguing for a decade that their party has allowed itself to look culturally out of touch with the American mainstream.

“6. It provides a handy excuse for people who were looking for a reason not to vote for Obama but don’t want to think of themselves as bigoted. It hurts Obama especially with the former Reagan Democrats, the culturally conservative, blue-collar workers who could be a promising voter group for him. It also antagonizes people who were concerned about his minister but might have given him the benefit of the doubt after his eloquent speech on race.


“7. It gives the Clinton campaign new arguments for trying to recruit superdelegates, the Democratic elected officials and other insiders who get a vote on the nomination. A moderate politician from a swing district, for example, might not want to have to explain support for a candidate who is being hammered as a liberal. And Clinton’s agents can claim that for all the talk of her being divisive, Obama has provided plenty of fodder to energize Republicans.

“8. It helps Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) frame a potential race against Obama, even though both of them have found support among independents. Now Republicans have a simple, easily repeated line of attack to use against Obama as an out-of-touch snob, as they had with Sen. John F. Kerry after he blundered by commenting about military funding, “I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.”

“9. The comments play directly into an already-established narrative about his candidacy. Clinton supporters have been arguing that Obama has limited appeal beyond upscale Democrats — the so-called latte liberals. You can’t win red states if people there don’t like you. 'Elites need to understand that middle-class Americans view values and culture as more important than mere trickery,' said Paul Begala, a Clinton backer. 'Democrats have to respect their values and reflect their values, not condescend to them as if they were children who’ve been bamboozled.'

“10. The timing is terrible. With the Pennsylvania primary nine days off, late-deciding voters are starting to tune in. Obama and Clinton are scheduled to appear separately on CNN on Sunday for a forum on, of all topics, faith and values. And ABC News is staging a Clinton-Obama debate in Philadelphia on Wednesday. So Clinton has the maximum opportunity to keep a spotlight on the issue. Besides sex, little drives the news and opinion industry more than race, religion, culture and class. So as far as chances the chattering-class will perpetuate the issue, Obama has hit the jackpot.

“11. The story did not have its roots in right-wing or conservative circles. It was published — and aggressively promoted — by The Huffington Post, a liberally oriented organization that was Obama’s outlet of choice when he wanted to release a personal statement distancing himself from some comments by the Rev. Wright.

“12. It undermines Democratic congressional candidates who had thought that Obama would make a stronger top for the ticket than Clinton. Already, Republican House candidates are challenging their Democratic opponents to renounce or embrace Obama’s remarks. Ken Spain, press secretary for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said: ‘There is a myth being perpetuated by Democrats and even some in the media that an Obama candidacy would somehow be better for their chances down ballot. But we don’t believe that is the case.’”




Additional credits: “Politico's Jonathan Martin, Jim VandeHei and John F. Harris contributed to this story.”

Clinton Responds to Obama’s “Demeaning” Take on the Working Class

Photo credits: Getty

A key component of Barack Obama’s base is the extreme left, composed of elite, upscale liberals who not so long ago flocked to Ralph Nader. It’s therefore understandable that Obama is a little awkward in his efforts to appeal to working class voters.

The always impeccably dressed Obama went bowling in Pennsylvania in a suit and tie and scored a stunning 37. He also visited a chocolate factory where he showed concern for his waistline by refusing to sample the factory’s main product and flirted with the female workers instead of treating them with respect.

Most recently, Obama demonstrated how out of touch he is with working-class America in a talk he gave at a fundraiser in San Francisco. Referring to voters in Pennsylvania and Indiana, Obama said:

“So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Sen. Hillary Clinton has been quick to respond:

At Drexel University in Philadelphia, Clinton said: "Well, that's not my experience. As I travel around Pennsylvania, I meet people who are resilient, who are optimistic, who are positive. . . . They're working hard every day for a better future for themselves and their children. Pennsylvanians don't need a president who looks down on them. They need a president who stands up for them, who fights for them."

Later on while campaigning in Indianapolis, she remarked: "Senator Obama's remarks were elitist and out of touch. They are not reflective of the values and beliefs of Americans." Watch video of Clinton's speech.

As noted in an article in the Associated Press, “The flap threatened to highlight an Obama Achilles heel — the image that the Harvard-trained lawyer is arrogant and carries himself with an air of superiority.”

The AP article quoted additional comments by Clinton:

"I was raised with Midwestern values and an unshakable faith in America and its policies," she said. "Now, Americans who believe in the Second Amendment believe it's a matter of constitutional right. Americans who believe in God believe it's a matter of personal faith.

"I grew up in a church-going family, a family that believed in the importance of living out and expressing our faith. The people of faith I know don't 'cling' to religion because they're bitter. People embrace faith not because they are materially poor, but because they are spiritually rich.

"Our faith is the faith of our parents and our grandparents. It is a fundamental expression of who we are and what we believe."

For more on the firestorm created by Obama’s take on the working class, visit these articles in the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Associated Press.

More on Teresa and Process Theology

It’s been a week since I posted my take on Mother Teresa’s loss of faith, and the media buzz continues with yet more commentary from atheist and orthodox on Teresa’s bleak life.

In Newsweek’s feature, “On Faith,” atheist Sam Harris offers an unsympathetic response to excerpts of Mother Teresa’s letters. “Christianity,” Harris says, “amounts to the claim that we must love and be loved by a God who approves of the scapegoating, torture, and murder of one man—his son, incidentally—in compensation for the misbehavior and thought-crimes of all others.”

Harris adds: “The notion that Jesus Christ died for our sins and that his death constitutes a successful propitiation of a ‘loving’ God is a direct and undisguised inheritance of the scapegoating barbarism that has plagued bewildered people throughout history.”

Harris diagnoses Mother Teresa’s despair as “run of the mill depression,” and he calls confessors and superiors to account for responding to her pleas for help by encouraging martyrdom.

Immediately after reading Harris’s piece, I turned to an op-ed in the New York Times by the Rev. James Martin, author of “The Lives of the Saints.” And sure enough, the Rev. Martin confirmed that at a confessor’s suggestion, Mother Teresa had apparently found solace in identifying with the suffering of the crucified Jesus.

In a 2006 interview with TruthDig Harris connects his concern about the dangers of martyrdom with those deluded Islamic faithful who chose to fly planes into the Twin Towers on 9/11. Harris says, “We can no longer ignore the fact that billions of our neighbors believe in the metaphysics of martyrdom, or in the literal truth of the Book of Revelation, or any of the other fantastical notions that have lurked in the minds of the faithful for millennia—because our neighbors are now armed with chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.”

In introducing Harris, Truthdig explains his fame/notoriety: “With the publication of his 2004 New York Times bestseller, ‘The End of Faith,’ a full-throttle attack on religion, Sam Harris became the most prominent atheist in America.”

Truthdig mentions Harris’s degree in philosophy from Stanford, where he’s currently completing a doctorate in neuroscience, and it also suggests that Harris has studied Eastern and Western religious disciplines for 20 years. Regrettably, many of his comments in Truthdig’s lengthy interview indicate that Harris has had little or no formal theological education. For one thing, he seems oblivious to modern day biblical criticism routinely included in seminary curricula. He also appears to be unaware that many thoughtful Christians rejected his interpretation of their tradition, including the element of martyrdom, long before he got around to it.

Some of us even found a spiritual home in process theology. For the uninitiated, process theology is derived from Alfred North Whitehead’s philosophical ruminations. My background in philosophy is limited to the introductory course in undergraduate school; however, I do have a theological education from an accredited seminary, whose instructors were undaunted by Whitehead’s integration of findings from quantum physics with his philosophical principles.

As a refresher, I recently reviewed “Process Thought and Its Applications,” in which theologian John Cobb, Jr. offered two theses: “First, the three dominant intellectual traditions of the modern West ― materialism, dualism, and idealism ― are leading us all to destruction. Second, process thought is the most adequate and promising alternative.”

In this article, Cobb nails materialism, dualism, and idealism for attitudes toward nature that are contributing to the global warming crisis. But he lets the church off the hook for repenting and becoming more ecologically sensitive ― coincidentally, Pope Benedict recently urged young Catholics at a youth rally in Loreto, Italy to take the lead in caring for the planet.

Process theology gets the gold star for an ecological attitude that acknowledges human beings are of nature ― not apart from it ― and we obviously cannot survive outside nature’s web of relationships.

Adherents of process theology believe the ecological web of relationships is the essential context of our faith. Noted process theologian Charles Hartshorne envisioned God’s relationship to the natural world as like that of the psyche or soul to the body, or most particularly to the brain, maintaining that all of life exists within God, and that we are as interconnected as cells within the human body.

To be clear: the God of process theology is not some big, macho guy in the sky who keeps a ledger of our good deeds and our misdeeds, handing out rewards and punishments accordingly. Instead, as process theology would have it, God relates to us in a consistently loving manner, respecting our free will, while continuously inviting each of us to act in the best interests of all of life ― including our own.

That should effectively rule out any kind of propitiating blood sacrifice, as described by Sam Harris, and the related dangers of martyrdom. It might even lead orthodox Christians toward focusing a little more on the life and teachings of the historical Jesus, instead of the cruel manner in which he died.

NOTE to readers: My schedule won’t permit me to update Katalusis again until next Tuesday, September 11, so have a great week and please check back in.

Peace,

Virginia