A little over two weeks since presidential hopeful Barack Obama gave a speech seeking to change the subject from his 20-year relationship with the noxious Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago to national conversation on the issue of race in general, the national UCC leadership has decided to echo the tactic:
As a proactive response to the heightened interest surrounding Trinity UCC in Chicago, national and regional UCC leaders, joined by the National Council of Churches, today called for a nationwide “sacred conversation” about race in the United States.
At a press conference held at Trinity UCC on the 40th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s last sermon, the Rev. John H. Thomas, the UCC’s general minister and president; the Rev. Michael Kinnamon, general secretary of the National Council of Churches; and the Rev. Otis Moss III, pastor of Chicago’s Trinity UCC, called UCC pastors, congregations and others to participate in a May 18 preach-in on race.
Note the internally contradictory phrase “proactive response.” UCCtruths certainly did:
As disgusting and vulgar as it sounds, Thomas appears to be playing the race card to dodge the criticism which ultimately undermines the very conversation on race that he and others are seeking.
What role will Trinity UCC and its members play in this “sacred conversation”? Your guess will probably be as good as any — the new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, has laid out a series of restrictions on media coverage to allow Trinity to reclaim its “sacred” space.
Thus, the public’s last impression of Obama’s church may be that of seven guest preachers comparing the hateful, conspiracy-monger Wright to Jesus Christ (and occasionally praising Louis Farrakhan, as Wright did).
Ironically, before Wright and Trinity made major headlines, UCC’s leaders were hoping that Obama’s high profile would reverse the 40% decline in its membership since the denomination began its Left turn in the late 1960s. Now they would probably like nothing better than to have the public forget Trinity as UCC reaps the whirlwind.
If I support Obama and his Church, but don’t support their mission, am I still a racist?
Karl, just wanted to tell you that I appreciate the work you have done on this aspect of Obama’s candidacy. You’re fast becoming the “go-to-guy” for me on this issue.
With that in mind, what are some questions about Trinity, BLT, or Wright that you think Obama must address?
“sacred conversation” ? I suppose when you worship at the altar of identity and greivance politics, sacred may seem to be an appropriate word choice. I wonder if the “sacred conversation” and the difficult conversation the Dems always talk about are the same thing?
I blame whitey.
And Bush.
Victor – I think the “conversation” about race that the nation (apparently) so desperately needs must address not only those questions that have been asked of whites for the last 40 years (Why are you racist?), but also issues of black racism and all that entails. Churches such as Wright’s go to the CORE of divisiveness that emanates from black society. White racism is examined to the minutia (for example, the Vogue Cover with the model and a black athlete – KING KONG!- READ BETWEEN THE LINES), while black divisiveness is excused away as a necessary evil.
THAT, in my mind, is what Obama needs to address specifically. Question and answer format, not some nicely scripted speech.
A sacred conversation? Pray tell what we would converse about? How Trinity Church became a ceespit of racial bigots, or would we just go back to discussing race in the context of slavery to Selma, Alabama, and give Trinity a pass?
I suspect that the ‘sacred conversation’ would be the same as it ever was with all brought down on whitey’s head and the bigots of Trinity ignored. As such, the ‘conversation’ isn’t worth having.
Excellent post, Karl. You da man!
As noted in the WaPo link, this decline is reflected by the ski slope fall in congregants in virtually all mainline protestant denominations, with the notable exception of Southern Baptists. Almost without exception those denominations have tacked left on social and geopolitical issues abd turned away from traditional doctrine and tenets.
While the following information will no doubt cause a certain xtian hater’s head to explode, virtually all of the growth being experienced in Christian denominations is either in more doctinally conservative offshoots of the mainline organizations or independant evangelical churches (mega churches being a significant part of this movement) also known for their scriptural and doctrinal conservatism.
No doubt this will elicit a response on how the xtian theocons are killing the Republican party and will, eventually and against all evidence, mold the rest of the country into a screaming bloc of hopey defiance and shunning of the anti-science snake handlers.
(/sarcasm)
I disagree, Carin. I don’t think Obama needs to address anything, personally. He sat there for twenty years and listened to this tsunami of poison and didn’t say a word (more likely, he nodded and amen’ed right along with the rest of the faithful). What’s to explain? I just want it exposed.
Like cockroaches suddenly exposed to light, they’re making a dash for the exits.
Sad, but heartening: At least they have shame enough to try to hide what they are.
I’ve talked to so many people (all white) who are besotted with Obama’s “historic” speech on race. If probed the one thing in common is their blind acceptance of justified black anger over slavery, segregation and Jim Crow. also, their complete discomfort with even questioning said anger for fear of being labeled .. well … you know what. Watching them squirm when I raise the entirety of the Obama’s concept of slavery’s “original sin” is both amusing and depressing.
But, hey, it doesn’t matter! We’ve been told ad nauseum that just because Obama sat in a church for 20 years and made its pastor his spiritual and political advisor, we continue to have no evidence that he embraces any aspect of BLT.
I’m calling in CSI!!
Just as Obama supporters (including much of the media) were hoping Wright and Trinity were in the rearview mirror, Wright’s victory tour, his Chicagoland Catholic defender, and now this May 18 “sacred conversation,” ensure that it’s never going to away. Happily for McCain, this issue will be alive and breathing until Hillary drops out and it can be picked up by the Republican 527s.
For me, the whole issue is not about race or religion, it’s about how an intelligent, well educated, and prominent member of his church and Chicagoland communities could allow lies and hatred to be spewed from his church’s pulpit without challenging it over a 20-year period. I’ve heard too many times how a fundamental tenet is “speaking truth to power”–that is, being willing to stand up for what is right, even when it means personal sacrifice or risk. In this case, Obama didn’t dare risk crossing Wright and losing the local political base that was essential to his election to the Illinois state senate and, in turn, to the U.S. Senate. He’s demonstrated the height of cowardice and the height of political calculation. Obama got in bed with Wright, so all the resulting problems are his own fault.
Victor,
There are plenty of pieces on the ‘net suggesting such questions. Personally, setting aside Wright’s most inflammatory remarks, my question(s) would be more along the lines of quoting Obama’s own writings about why he joined the church, e.g., seeing the church as the center of political and economic life, as well as spiritual, and asking how someone with that view separates church & state. What political views does he hold that are inconsistent with or contrary to the teachings of his church? Has he ever voted contrary to those teachings? That would be a start, anyway.
A Sacred Conversation – White People Not Invited
Fried Chicken And Watermelon Supper To Follow
Well, Jeffersonian, I do agree. But, for those who insist that he’s addressed the whole Wright issue, as well as pretend that he’s actually discussing race – I say that neither of those things have actually been done, unless he is willing to do what I’ve suggested.
But, you know, I’m a racist.
The idea that Obama would use the 40th anniversary of the assassination of someone who actually risked for not only justice, but also for PEACE, is a travesty. He did it in Dealey Plaza when his motorcade took the assassinated President Kennedy’s brother, Ted-the-punked-by-the Bushes, past the grassy knoll from which James Files fired the fatal shot; his bullet shell casing found with his teethmarks in it (www.jfkmurdersolved.com).
Obama’s political liars said Oswald fired the fatal shot from the Texas School Book Depository building, a lie proven by every single film that was taken that day, Friday, November 22, 1963. Plus, 80% of the eyewitnesses who saw Jimmy fire the shot. The other shooter behind the fence 45 feet away was mentioned by CIA spy master, E. Howard Hunt in his tape-recorded confession (“The Last Confession of E. Howard Hunt”) can be heard online under that search engine.
I wonder, just now, who Obama’s people will say killed our brave Dr. King??
It was Col. Mustard in the Hall with the candlestick.
Clean up of whiffle brain, aisle #15.
Carin: As I reread Obama’s speech, he was discussing race only within the context of proclaiming the need to have a dialogue about race. That and the fact that both blacks and whites are entitled to their particular resentments and angers although blacks are not stained by the “original sin” of slavery so, by implication, their anger may have just a leetle more weight.
Hey, hey, we’re talkin’ race hee-ya! Buzz off!
White Jesus is teh suck anyway. Baracky’s gay black southeast asian Jesus is way less hatey than your stupid Jesus.
Obama drives a Dodge? Maybe he really is teh messiah! After all, Jesus drove the moneychangers from the temple in a Fury.
[…] Tribune columnist Jim Kass notes the essential dodge of Barack Obama’s church atempting to deflect attention from its leadership under the noxious […]