You may have noticed two new links on the left hand side of this blog. They are "The Deacon's Bench" and "Perspectives from the Summit." The first is written by Deacon Greg who happens to work for Katie Couric as a writer and is also a recently-ordained Roman Catholic deacon. The second is written by Greg who is a teaching pastor at a Christian church in Oregon. Who they are isn't really important. Rather my focus today is the differences in the blogs.
At first I thought the Deacon's Bench was interesting. Some Catholic news items, his personal experiences as a recently-ordained deacon going through his first Easter season. From personal experience, Easter is rough on priests. You are basically in church for five straight days. Saying Mass is often the least fulfilling of a Priest's duties. The best part for them is the sermon. He does like to throw some current events in there. However, he's gone into overdrive with the Pope's trip to the US this week.
Now I am as interested in the Pope coming as your next run-of-the-mill Catholic. However, some real humdingers were posted. First, it was about how the President really respects Catholic theology and has more Catholics on his staff than any other blah blah blah. The next piece that got my attention was one about how Sen. Obama has a group of Catholics as advisers for the Pennsylvania primary campaign. I don't think it was his intention to draw the crazies out, but he certainly did. First it was the comments about how they wouldn't be surprised if "W" converted after his presidency. I nearly wanted to vomit. Then there were the series of comments about how evil Sen. Obama is and how now they have a convenient list of supporters of this evil man to pray for. I nearly lost my dinner.
Remember how I had to step away from the blogs after the caucus? I had to do it again. First, I was offended that politicians were using MY faith for political gain. The implication is that a photo op with the Pope or a list of prominent Catholics as advisers is an endorsement for all Catholics. Second, I was offended because there are people out there that will fall for this! Enough people simply do not care about details to judge for themselves. It's conveniently forgotten that the late Pope John Paul II chided Pres. Bush for the war in Iraq and for not doing more to help God's less fortunate children.
Matt's blog is interesting. Matt's the craziest, but that's mostly because of his obsession with Peet's Coffee that makes mine pale in comparison. His deals with weighty issues of faith. It makes me think.
Anything out there rubbing your pet peeves or making you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I hate it when people promote things through religion. I think they should be kept seperate. Just because there are some crazy mormon people out there doesn't mean we all are.
I came over here to thank you for the comment you left on my blog re: my wife's birthday, and now I see I need to thank you for putting me front & center!
I do stand guilty as charged on the Peet's Coffee deal, but just remember that you're the one with a burr grinder.
As far as faith in presidential politics goes, I think it's an important piece of evaluating a person, more because of what it says about his/her worldview and character than whether or not he/she attends my particular denomination. I think I've learned a lot about Obama and Clinton as I've listened to them talk about their faith (McCain has yet to say anything of import here). Of course faith is one part - some agnostics and atheists could make great presidents, while some Christians would be horrible.
Having said that, I do share your frustration when politicians use religion as a way to garner votes and build a constituency. Then again, that's what politicians do in our system, so maybe my frustration is more generally about the system than about their use of religion.
Post a Comment