Thursday 2 September 2010

Beck, Christianity, And Social Justice

Daniel Larison writes:

Ross:

“To the extent that this theological chasm can be bridged, though, the obvious place to fling out a rope bridge is the question of America’s providential purpose, since both Mormonism and evangelicalism (especially in their more populist manifestations) often incline toward highly-theologized readings of American history, the founding fathers, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, etc.”

In other words, when Mormons and evangelicals are at their worst and are indulging their least admirable tendencies to idolize the country at the expense of their religious teachings, there is a chance for them to find common ground. If you think that a serious religious revival in America might have something to do with a spirit of repentance and humility rather than with an extravaganza of validation and national self-congratulation, that is really a very damning indictment of what Beck is doing. As Joe Carter correctly says, “As Moore notes, the problem isn’t really Beck. The problem is believers trading the true faith for the syncretism of Christian-flavored civic religion.”

On a related point that Moore may or may not have had in mind when he was writing his post, Beck has previously framed his opposition to progressivism in Christianity in terms of ridiculing the idea of social justice. Certainly, some understanding of social justice isn’t the whole of Christian teaching, and social activism certainly isn’t a substitute for faith and participation in the life of God, but one would have a hard time persuading many serious and theologically conservative Catholics and Mennonites, among others, that social justice is not a major Christian priority. His total rejection of social justice doesn’t make any sense within the LDS church’s tradition or within the Christian tradition. If one insists on identifying the idea of social justice with the most political expressions of liberation theology, as Beck wants to do, a broad, rich tradition of the Church’s concern for the poor and dispossessed is simply cast aside, and so is a significant part of his own church’s social teachings. People may be buying Beck’s revivalism right now, but in the process they are selling their birthright for a mess of pottage.

On a more political note, it’s not as if conservatives cannot talk about social justice. Does Beck remember Pat Buchanan’s The Great Betrayal: How American Sovereignty and Social Justice Are Being Sacrificed to the Gods of the Global Economy? Was that just another kind of liberation theology? To put it that way is to show Beck’s conceit in this case to be empty.

P.S. After I mentioned this post to my wife, she said she thought Beck reminded her a bit of Gaius Baltar, and this comparison made some sense. Inasmuch as he is simply validating his audience’s way of life, it does seem to be very much like Baltar’s “we are all perfect just as we are,” which makes the entire exercise that much worse.

As surely as the readers of Melanie Phillips may end up organising themselves into some sort of Judaism (Julie Burchill has dropped similar hints), with or without Phillips herself, so Beck's readers, viewers and listeners may end up converting, as he did, to the only form of religion in which Manifest Destiny makes sense as anything other than an add-on and an aberration.

And as surely as a Phillipsian or Burchillian neo-Judaism would be quite unlike any existing form (none of your kosher food laws or women in the gallery, but none of your Reform views on social and political issues, either), so a Beckian Mormonism would be something quite different from that taught by the grand old men of Salt Lake City.

That ought to be impossible, since being a Mormon means submitting to the authority of the Prophet and First President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. But they already tolerate Beck himself, as we tolerate certain high-profile neoconservative converts, although Fr Neuhaus, at least, did seem to be coming round by the end, and might very well have done so in the end.

Bringing us to that which is really sought by those who seek that fullness of Christianity which includes priesthood, a high theology of baptism, a living earthly Teaching Office focused in a person on this earth, an intercessory relationship between those on this side of bodily death and those on the other side of it, and so much else besides.

3 comments:

  1. Larison is a Marxist, a neo-con, no conservative and no Christian, neither are his fellow travelers at the so called "American Conservative".

    As a former liberal democrat, now an independent, I have witnessed first hand the fraud, the hypocrisies of the left, and I include the so called "progressive" "Christian" movement, which has exposed itself for what it is, after the infusion of large sums of money from people whose agenda seeks global serfdom as an outcome.

    Larison has no more right to frame Beck, than he does the United States purpose. Beck was 100% spot on, when he exposed the fraud and hypocrisies, the lies of Jim Wallis and those like him. I've personally spoken with Jim Wallis, and his underlings on several occasions. Asked him and them hard questions and watched him/them first squirm, attempt to change the subject then grow combative when he/they couldn't get away with it.

    Beck never disputed the Christian obligation to do good works, to help others, et al.. he did, and quite rightly, challenged the fraud that is the social justice movement, that is not in aid of helping the poor, but in exploiting them for political agenda, as well as increasing poverty, and ensuring that there is no way of lifting ones self out of poverty. It's all in aid of the imposition of something on par with a feudal system, chattel slavery.

    I read a response to Larison's piece from someone who quoted Lewis, yet the respondent was willfully blind to, or disinterested in the fact that what both he and Larison were attempting to impugn Beck's motives as being, were in fact guilty of that, themselves.

    The US citizenry aren't rubes to be exploited, we are sincere in our beliefs, and aren't shy about speaking truth to the presumption of power. We reject the lies, the deception of Marxists, whether they're on the left, or whether they happen to be the Marxist wolves in neo-conservative sheep's clothing. You're all in aid of the same thing, you are the same thing. Your days of imposing your rot are over, you have no credibility.

    I'd recommend David Lindsay stop kidding himself, and others, because he isn't a Christian, merely seeking to exploit Christianity as a trojan horse, through which to attain power.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you for an excuse to reproduce Michael Sheridan's two quotations from 'The Screwtape Letters':

    "Let him begin by treating the Patriotism or the Pacifism as a part of his religion. Then let him, under the influence of partisan spirit, come to regard it as the most important part. Then quietly and gradually nurse him on to the stage at which the religion becomes merely part of the “cause”… Once you have made the World an end, and faith a means, you have almost won your man, and it makes very little difference what kind of worldly end he is pursuing. Provided that meetings, pamphlets, policies, movements, causes, and crusades, matter more to him than prayers and sacraments and charity, he is ours — and the more “religious” (on those terms) the more securely ours. I could show you a pretty cageful down here."

    And:

    "What we want, if men become Christians at all, is to keep them in the state of mind I call “Christianity And”. You know — Christianity and the Crisis, Christianity and the New Psychology, Christianity and the New Order, Christianity and Faith Healing, Christianity and Psychical Research, Christianity and Vegetarianism, Christianity and Spelling Reform. If they must be Christians let them at least be Christians with a difference. Substitute for the faith itself some Fashion with a Christian colouring."

    TAC was trying to be nice about Beck some months ago. But he has put paid to that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. To be totally frank, Beck is a huckster. I personally think this is just another attempt to rebrand the GOP and movement conservatism. But even if Beck is sincere, he is still wrong about the various Christian social justice traditions, as Larison states.

    ReplyDelete