Multi-Media Monday

Melissa Etheridge: Rick Warren doesn't "sound like a gay-hater, much less a preacher." (The Huffington Post)

That's because Rick Warren is not a gay-hater. Nor are most Christians, if you want to know the truth. Most people, however, don't want to know the truth about Christians. It's too easy to simply buy into every stereotype about us that you can find. And, trust me, you can find plenty.


See, mass media will tell you we hate gays, African-Americans, unwed mothers, illegal aliens, etc. And you thought Christians are hypocrites (we are, of course...just no more than anyone else.) The irony would be hilarious if it weren't so pathetically sad. Christians are accused of using stereotypes to push an agenda of hatred and fear. Yet, many times, the opposite is true. Our society has become so blatant in its perpetuation of stereotypes against Evangelicals that we don't even realize it's happening. We are the only socio-cultural group of whom it is socially acceptable to hate. Christians are seen as bigoted, intolerant and quick to judge. Sadly, many high-profile Evangelical leaders have said hurtful things (I'm looking at you, Pat Robertson), and those incidents have painted all of us with a very broad brush. The irony is that it's the same brush used to portray all homosexuals as pedophiles, predators and perverts. Are some homosexuals pedophiles, predators and perverts? You bet they are...just as you can bet there are Christians who are bigoted, intolerant and quick to judge. 


Christianity vs. Universalism (YouTube)

I get so stinkin' tired of universalist philosophy. It's so disingenuous...at best. At worst, it's a coward's way out. It's essentially saying "I don't have the stones to stand behind my own convictions, so I'll just hold hands with everyone, tap my red shoes together three times while singing 'Kumbaya, My Lord' and hope for the best. That's not hope.


"For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience."




Dante's Inferno (YouTube)

Disclaimer: I don't believe in purgatory, nor do I think Mr. Alighieri had the whole "hell thing" figured out. His Divine Comedy was just that: a work of poetic fiction. It's just that this animated movie version of "Inferno" looks really, really cool.


(It's sad, isn't it, that I have to put a disclaimer before posting this. Trust me. If I don't, some uber-legalist Christian will get all pissy with me for promoting something that's not in the King James Version of the Bible. So, just chill...)




Calvinism vs. Arminianism (YouTube)


And, finally, here's one for all of you armchair theologians out there.

Emergent Village Looks Ahead

Emergent Village is in the midst of a transformation in its operations, a move its board announced Thursday after a year of what it terms a "discernment process."

Its announcement lays out a framework for the future of the Emergent "conversation." I've certainly been critical of aspects of the movement; I've always felt those involved in shaping its message are too willing to capitulate on areas of core Christian doctrine. I know, I know. Emergent is about being a safe place where hard questions can be debated without fear of repurcussion. I get it, and I think that's an admirable goal. I love Emergent's commitment to social justice, too. Its stance on global poverty is wonderful. I've met some truly great, loving Christians that are a part of the Emergent conversation.

Here's what scares me. "Many religious communities fear, shame, restrict and exclude people who ask questions, propose creative innovations, or open up new ways of thinking (emphasis mine.)" That's from Emergent Village's recent announcement. What exactly does this mean? Is such a statement purposely vague? I wholeheartedly agree that it's an unfortunate fact that many fundamental Evangelical communities fear, shame and even exclude those from their congregations who ask hard questions and propose creative innovations. But does "open up new ways of thinking" really mean "open up new ways of believing?"

It's a fine line between Emergent theology and Universalism, which to me is worse than atheism. At least atheists have the courage of conviction. Universalism--there's a great piece about it in the current issue of Relevant magazine, by the way--is, at best, flaky and, at worst, cowardly.

Now, I don't think there's anything cowardly about "friends of Emergent." But it's a slippery slope.

What are your thoughts? Are you a "Friend of Emergent?" Do you agree with its goals and mission? What are your thoughts on its recent announcement? Is Emergent too close to Universalist theology? Join the conversation here.