PeaceBang

16 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

1. I wrote about the same topic on my blog:
   http://revthom.blogspot.com/2007/05/my-breakfast-with-jerry-falwell.html

   Comment by RevThom — May 15, 2007 #

2. Yep. Well said PB!

   Comment by The Diceman — May 15, 2007 #

3. I’ve been thinking about Jerry Falwell and his contributions to religion today since hearing the news of his death. I will admit, with some chagrin but maybe less than is appropriate, that my first uncontrollable reaction was to pump my fist and say “yes!” even though I was driving in LA traffic.

   As a professor of religious studies who works on American religious phenomena, I find Falwell an interesting and important subject, and am able to recognize ways in which he was both good and bad and how he represents something much more complex than mere evil.

   But as a religious person, I can’t help feeling repulsed by him and everything he stood for. It is he, Pat Robertson, and some other people like them who ultimately made it impossible for me to be Christian. As a UU raised in a New England Universalist church, the option of claiming and living a Christian life was certainly there. But ultimately it was not skepticism about the existence of God, disbelief in supernaturalism and miracles, or distaste for much of the Bible that prevented me from being Christian. I could, in fact, find ways to work with all of those and still remain the Christian fold, I believe.

   But by far the most prominent Christian spokespersons of my childhood and young adulthood were Falwell, Robertson, and their TV ilk. They made it impossible for me to be Christian because a) they made it clear that I was unwelcome if I had any doubts and b) to be Christian was to be lumped in with them, even if as an opposition figure, and they quite frankly poisoned Christianity irretrievably as far as I was concerned.

   Later, I came to see that there were plenty of much better Christians (including many in my own church) and I can appreciate that Christianity is not only a threatening force but also one that does much good in specific instances. But you can’t undue such early impressions and nothing short of an overwhelming Pauline conversion experience could allow me to comfortably claim a Christian identity.

   I wonder if the big evangelicals ever consider this, that in their zeal they disgust a considerable number of people who might have been turned on to Christianity otherwise, but are instead permanently lost to the religion by their actions. If Falwell is right about the way the afterlife works, then he is directly responsible for driving many decent people into Hell.

   For my part, the Universalist upbringing dies hard, even harder than Christianity. Though he didn’t do much to earn it, I assume Falwell will enjoy a peaceful afterlife due to the ever-embracing nature of Love.

   As long as I’m reflecting, I do have to say that Falwell doesn’t strike me as a particularly extreme Christian, just an extreme jerk. Nothing he said or did, including the post-9/11 quote above, sounds much different to me than what many of the sainted prophets of the Bible said about various people (including some of these same targets), nor does it sound more extreme. I have difficulty imagining that many of those bearded guys out in the desert would say things substantially different about the situation, and so Falwell seems like a Christian who is generally living up to his tradition.

   From what I’m hearing, it does sound like the canonization process has begun. Even evangelicals who hated the man in life seem content to lionize and thus capitalize on his cache in death.

   Comment by Jeff W. — May 15, 2007 #

4. I would love to be a fly on the wall when Jerry meets God face to face. Talk about a light bulb moment.

   Comment by God Guurrll — May 16, 2007 #

5. For all the disgust many have expressed here for him I would think that a ‘love your enemies’ would begin to apply.
   I think the prospect of anyone being meeting God face to face and being found deficent in some way is a frightening thing. It reminds me of my own deficencies.
   It actually surprises me. From what usually seems to be a blog coloured by mercy, love, and grace, I was surprised to see what seems such a lack of it.
   I didn’t particularly like the man myself and shudder at how he has presented the Christian faith to the world, but why rejoice at his death?

   Comment by James Richards — May 16, 2007 #

6. Hey Thom, is that an actual comment, or an advertisement?

   

   Comment by PeaceBang — May 16, 2007 #

7. Where do you get “rejoicing” at his death, James?

   Let me respectfully disagree with you. I do not think that “love your enemies” means to put on a false patina of piety and affection. It means, I think, to be willing to stand with them side by side in their humanity, to struggle with them, and to offer them help in any way when asked.

   Jerry Falwell was a hateful man who demonized people like me. I don’t rejoice at his death. Nothing that I have said, no matter how sarcastic, ever hinted at that. I do, however, have enough experience in this culture to know what kind of lionization of him that we’re in for. And I roll my eyes at it.

   My snarky remark about blaming gays, pagans, etc. for his death was no more outrageous than his blaming of gays, pagans and feminists for 9/11. I expect that my own enemies will throw some of my nasty remarks at *my* grave when I’m six feet under. We reap what we sow.

   Sometimes we must stand in the Biblical truth that there are those who are our ideological enemies. I was Jerry’s enemy and he was mine. The way I feel about it is that he set it up that way, and I had no choice but to respond in kind.

   I have no personal hatred for the guy. I hate his devastating interpretation of the Christian Way. I hate the damage he’s caused. I hate the divisiveness that he and his kind have sown among the body of Christ.

   And like I said, he’s in God’s hands now.

   Comment by PeaceBang — May 16, 2007 #

8. In my little corner of the big world, Falwell’s death does not seem particularly relevant. Newspapers do include short articles on the man, particularly depicting him as the builder of Reagan’s presidency and the rise of the Moral Majority. They also speak about the comments on 9/11, although sometimes adding that apparently he later repented from his early blamings. But not much else. Perhaps we are not being fair in paying so little attention about this man’s passing away.

   I cannot understand how the Protestant culture(s) receives this kind of news, when a leading preacher and a successful and influential minister leaves this world for good. For those of us who were born and raised in a Catholic country, the big event is the Pope’s death. All other Christian leaders seem like supporting roles at best. During my business stays in the US, only Billy Graham gave me the impression of being a sort of equivalent of an “Evangelical Pope” (particularly when he published his memoirs). How do you feel about these differences in Christian culture? (and I mean culture and not religion, i.e. not the doctrines but the underlying assumptions and value systems that have built our respective societies and have made so different, and yet, strangely similar in some ways).

   Comment by Jaume — May 16, 2007 #

9. The best comment I have read so far in the blogosphere re: Jerry Falwell’s deaht is this one from Christy at Dry Bones Dance: “Jerry Falwell died. I have a feeling that right about now, he’s feeling very very surprised.”

   Comment by Jane R — May 16, 2007 #

10. I have very good reason for not liking Jerry Falwell, but his passing neither puts a smile on my face or makes my life easier. I do, however, like to think that he was met at the Pearly Gates by two gay angels holding hands and grinning ear to ear.

    Comment by anniesmom — May 17, 2007 #

11. PB, with all fondness and respect, I think James is right, and you are construing “love your enemies” much too narrowly.

    The full admonition, as you know, is much more than a glib one-liner. It contains no exceptions like the ones you are trying to claim for unjust injury or righteous indignation, and it specifically proscribes the retributive attitude that leads one to say things like “I had no choice but to respond in kind”:

    “Ye have heard that it hath been said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

    “Ye have heard that it hath been said, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.’ But I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

    “For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

    “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”

    Yes, those are difficult ideals to try to live by, but there it is. The early Christians lived by these precepts in a time of far more persecution and danger than anything Dr. Falwell ever dished out.

    Comment by fausto — May 17, 2007 #

12. Fausto, my dear, I think you’re defining “love” too narrowly. Love does not require false expressions of morose regret when someone dies. Love does not require us to ignore someone’s true character and its effect on the larger community. Here I could quote a whole lot of stuff from Jesus and Paul about how we live in love as Christians, but I don’t have time. You know what I mean and can find those passages yourself.

    Hey, helluva sermon idea here!

    Comment by PeaceBang — May 17, 2007 #

13. Of course I’m not saying we are called to insincerity. The kind of love that requires “rebuking in love” certainly has its time and place, and Falwell certainly received some of that while he was alive (though not nearly enough, and not that he ever listened to it); but there’s also turning the other cheek.

    Comment by fausto — May 17, 2007 #

14. On the other hand, for an articulate rebuke with not even a pretense of love included, this clip is worth a view:

    Christopher Hitchens on Falwell

    Comment by fausto — May 17, 2007 #

15. I have to admit I wasn’t affected much by his passing, even though I feel for his family during this time. I addressed it on my blog. But, as Rev. Falwell would say, I love the sinner but hate the sin he perpetrated on others.

    Comment by Rev. Cindi — May 18, 2007 #

16. I’ve got to give Jerry some credit and here’s why.

    I was raised in a small town, fundamentalist, protestant of the vaguely antibaptist variety. When dear Jerry came to prominence in the 80’s, I was made aware of another cross town, fundamentalist, protestant, Southern Baptist church that loved him. I remember thinking “those people are crazy”. Then I thought some more.

    So Thank You, dear Rev. Falwell, for making me the (somewhat) radical feminist clergyperson that I am. Had it not been for your polarizing presence, I might have never seen the light.

    Comment by Madgebaby — May 18, 2007 #

Leave a comment