Posted on 03/24/2004 12:11:09 AM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
In the Pacific Northwest, we’re the most irreligious folks in America. We have the largest percentage of adults in the nation who are unaffiliated with any church (63 percent) and the largest percentage who don’t identify with any religion (25 percent)—which is more than double the size of the largest religious group in the region (Catholics, 11 percent). The “state” religion in the Pacific Northwest is no religion, according to a new study, Religion and Public Life in the Pacific Northwest: The None Zone (AltaMira Press). If you’re one of these so-called “Nones,” you’re in good company here.
That doesn’t mean we Nones aren’t deeply involved in religious conflict. From Israel and Palestine to the war on terror to the culture wars at home, they’re unavoidable, whether you’re religious or not. God, we are told, is setting the agenda.
In his Iraq anniversary speech last week, George W. Bush, whose statements since 9/11 have been filled with Biblical resonance and religious phrasings, showed that he’s honed his Manichean view of the world. We are engaged in a war of civilizations, good versus evil, he said again. But this time he was clearer than ever, provoked by the upstart Spanish electorate to assert that there is no room for dissent. “There is no neutral ground—no neutral ground—in the fight between civilization and terror, because there is no neutral ground between good and evil, freedom and slavery, and life and death.” He preached to representatives of 84 nations, and the essence was: Bush’s values constitute the dividing line between good and evil, and he represents good. Choose Bush, or you’re the enemy.
America loves certainty. We value it above nearly everything, even if it constitutes wrongheadedness. We’re a complicated country that doesn’t like complexity; we’re a pluralistic society that seeks conformity; we’re ingenious and creative, yet we grandly reward brute power. Bush’s advisors understand this. Indeed, they dominate the political landscape with their God-endorsed agenda. Their faith is strengthened by the fact that we have been attacked by a group of religious fanatics who are equally convinced that God is on their side, a God that sanctions the murder of innocents.
For some of us Nones, there is a no man’s land in this religious war. Not that we don’t want to see Bin Laden’s head on a pike, not that we don’t also fear American stupidity and excess. But we’re religiously neutral in that we don’t see God in any of it, only the handiwork of cruel religious zealots killing in the name of God.
But it’s even more complicated, because even among Christians, God is sending mixed signals.
In the March/April newsletter of the Sunset Presbyterian Church in Portland, pastor Ron Kincaid wrote: “Western European socialists and their American supporters want to dominate the world as much as militant Muslims want Islam to. Their vehicles are the United Nations, the European Union, and international institutions such as the International Court.” This view is more explicitly intolerant—and specific—than Bush’s, but it amounts to the same thing: Those who disagree with how we’re fighting evil are just like Al Qaeda.
The view is also bleak from the other side. Someone e-mailed me a talk given by the Rev. Richard Lang at Seattle’s Trinity United Methodist Church. The title is, “George Bush and the Rise of Christian Fascism.” Lang sees literal evil at work in the president’s “diabolical manipulation” of religious doctrine to justify his worldview. “It is a form of Christianity that is the mirror opposite of what Jesus embodied,” Lang has written. “It is, indeed, the materialization of the spirit of the Antichrist: a perversion of Christian faith and practice.” Indeed, he argues that it is not just Bush’s mixing of religion and politics that is wrong. The president’s particular theology is dangerous. “Whoever controls the interpretation of scripture will control the future of this nation,” Lang predicts. “In other words it’s the vision of Pat Robertson or Martin Luther King.”
However much I might share Lang’s political views or find his more benevolent version of Christian faith less threatening, I can’t say I’m happy at the prospect of the future of America being determined by a contest over wording in the Bible. That’s what our Constitution was designed to avoid. But there it is.
In that Christian contest, it appears that Bush’s side is winning—even here in heathen country. According to James Wellman, a professor of comparative religion at the University of Washington, evangelical churches are where the growth is. He described a veritable “revival” in Washington state. They seem to appeal to people who find the mainline protestant denominations too wishy-washy, secular, liberal, or old-school. Evangelical congregations are thriving because they’re dynamic, growth-oriented, and they offer moral clarity. He also notes that with Bush articulating so well the evangelical worldview of a titanic struggle between good and evil, people are drawn to the churches because they seem to reflect reality.
In this, Bush’s role is key right now. He believes he is called to rise to the challenges of his times. Others believe that he is interpreting events to suit his beliefs. Either way, he’s right that there is no longer a dividing line: His faith is shaping politics, and his politics are shaping America’s faith.
And those who stand in the None zone feel helpless, suffering the consequences of a debate over a God we don’t believe in.
This dimwit's e-mail address is: kberger@seattleweekly.com
DO make a point of letting him know just how much you enjoyed reading what he had to say, won't you...? :)
A good example of why I am no longer a United Methodist.
And don't forget to send that nice Mr. Berger an e-mail. :)
Which is saying something....I mean, I dated a chick out of The Stranger once.
(Mistake....I wouldn't suggest it. Unless you know I hate you. THEN I suggest it.)
According to James Wellman, a professor of comparative religion at the University of Washington, evangelical churches are where the growth is. He described a veritable “revival” in Washington state. They seem to appeal to people who find the mainline protestant denominations too wishy-washy, secular, liberal, or old-school.
Amen...and yes, away from the liberal, secular and wishy-washy mainline denominations such as the one he cited...which, as memory serves, is the same one that just recently acquitted a gay pastor as not violating Christian teachings.
Evangelical congregations are thriving because they're dynamic, growth-oriented, and they offer moral clarity.
Yes, and who would chose moral confusion in exchange...other than this writer, apparently?
And those who stand in the None zone feel helpless, suffering the consequences of a debate over a God we don’t believe in.
For this part I feel badly for this guy and would offer my hand to help him through his confusion...although I doubt he would be interested in grasping it.
Answer - he can't stand being on the side of anyone who is in the least religious. Religious wars therefore confuse him. His normal rule in politics is not to have an opinion or a preference, but just to look around, see what religious people are doing, and oppose them as strongly as he can.
But here Bin Laden is very very religious, and Bush is at least somewhat religious, and gosh even some liberal opponents of Bush are bleeding heart religious. What the devil is he supposed to do? Who to "fade"?
True, one is a mass murderer, the other is a president doing his duty to protect his country, and the last is a self-important activist doing his best to disarm his own country. But which is worse? I mean, they are all religious, so they are all icky. How can one be against all of them? And even if there is some way - like writing as a snide editorial - what real effect can it have?
Borrow another brain cell and see if you can reason your way to the idea, "mass murderers of innocents must be opposed by force", all on your lonesome without looking around to see what religious people are doing. Then put a clothspin across your nose and punch "republican".
Eeek. Siding with someone known to have a religion. What's next, voluntary cannibalism?
Wow, Psycho_Bunny really is an accurate handle for you! Were you just, like, really bored?
Or, as Dark Helmet says in Space Balls..."What's with you man!?"
Good Lord, man... you really are a danger seeker, aren't you...?!? :)
Let me guess: prominent Adam's apple? A pronounced tendency towards checkered flannel shirts, and away from regular bathroom hygiene? Thought that The Vagina Monologues was "The feel-good family hit of the summer"...? Former sex groupie for Ten Inch Nails? (... or, even worse: former sex groupie for Pink...?)
Tell me. TellMeTellMeTellMe. :)
Let's face it folks, if you want to make and keep friends, don't freaking serve them eggplant. I swear those things are Satan's testes.
In any event...after dating her a couple weeks she ended up asking me to...um...(there's really no nice way to put this)....tie her up in a Betty Paige outfit and urinate on her.
I haven't opened The Stranger since.
groan
sheep to the slaughter
Omigawd! MOM -- !!! :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.