Author Topic: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial  (Read 9031 times)

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12928
    • View Profile
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #375 on: November 30, 2021, 01:06:13 PM »
I thought that Bill O'Reilly should have been up for an acting Emmy the way he intoned "Fair and Balanced" with utter seriousness and sincerity.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

DCharlton

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 6871
    • View Profile
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #376 on: November 30, 2021, 02:31:35 PM »
Does not the same thing happen on the conservative side of the aisle in labeling and using mantras and slogans?  That's what Dan is saying in his post.  As far as I'm concerned, for instance, Tucker Carlson is not a representative of a conservative point of view - he's a sloganeer.

Dave Benke

Well, of course.  I can remember the run up to the 2003 Iraq War and the way the media parroted the mantras and slogans coming from the White House.  But that was 18 years ago.  Today, the Democratic Party, the media, and corporations are talking from their own script of left-wing mantras and slogans.  Whenever I am tempted to become a Republican or a Conservative, I remember that my agreement with them may be only temporary.  What is sad is that people who claim to speak for the Church decide to exchange the Word of God for mantras and slogans.  The fact that Jerry Falwell did it 40 years ago doesn't make it any less tragic when so called Lutheran bishops do it today.  When I was young and naive, I took pride in the "fact" that Lutherans didn't covet political influence the way that the Evangelicals like Falwell and Pat Robertson did.  Now I know better, as I am repeated embarrassed by the "sloganeers" who pretend to be Lutheran bishops.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2021, 02:36:36 PM by DCharlton »
David Charlton  

Was Algul Siento a divinity school?

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 18360
    • View Profile
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #377 on: November 30, 2021, 02:47:01 PM »
Whenever I am tempted to become a Republican or a Conservative, I remember that it my agreement with them may be only temporary. 
I think that is always true. No party is permanent, and no inclination, be it for change or preservation, is always the salutary approach. You can only seek to go by the truth.

As for grand alliances and allegiances, not even the Fellowship of the Ring lasted long before breaking up. Even before setting out together the members of the party knew they had differing ultimate routes and destinations. And in our context, orthodox religious believers, libertarians, and cultural conservatives have outlooks, penultimate goals, and current intentions that may not be politically compatible in the long run. But as Aragorn said to Frodo while they were still in Rivendell, "Your road and our road lie together for many hundreds of miles."   

DCharlton

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 6871
    • View Profile
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #378 on: November 30, 2021, 03:07:44 PM »
Whenever I am tempted to become a Republican or a Conservative, I remember that it my agreement with them may be only temporary. 
I think that is always true. No party is permanent, and no inclination, be it for change or preservation, is always the salutary approach. You can only seek to go by the truth.

As for grand alliances and allegiances, not even the Fellowship of the Ring lasted long before breaking up. Even before setting out together the members of the party knew they had differing ultimate routes and destinations. And in our context, orthodox religious believers, libertarians, and cultural conservatives have outlooks, penultimate goals, and current intentions that may not be politically compatible in the long run. But as Aragorn said to Frodo while they were still in Rivendell, "Your road and our road lie together for many hundreds of miles."   

Well said.
David Charlton  

Was Algul Siento a divinity school?

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12920
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #379 on: November 30, 2021, 03:14:33 PM »
w I know better, as I am repeated embarrassed by the "sloganeers" who pretend to be Lutheran bishops.

Not in that loop on one side of the aisle.  What are the typical slogans and how/when are they used?

Dave Benke

Dave Likeness

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 5204
    • View Profile
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #380 on: November 30, 2021, 03:21:38 PM »
Bill O'Reilly:  B.A. in History, M.A. in Broadcast Journalism

1982-86...CBS, 1986-89...ABC, 1989-95...Inside Edition, FOX 1996-2016


Tucker Carlson:  B.A. in History

2000-05...CNN, 2005-08...MSNBC, 2009-Present...FOX

Neither one of these guys comes close to the gravitas of Walter Cronkite.
Of course Cronkite never had an hour of commentary 5 nights a week.

Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11887
    • View Profile
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #381 on: November 30, 2021, 03:52:01 PM »
I thought that Bill O'Reilly should have been up for an acting Emmy the way he intoned "Fair and Balanced" with utter seriousness and sincerity.

Along with his continual "Jesus was a philosopher" mantra.   ::)
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 18360
    • View Profile
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #382 on: November 30, 2021, 03:57:30 PM »
For years we didn’t have cable. We didn’t even have an antenna for live tv hooked up except for football season. We got Netflix and Prime. Now because of a special deal by our WiFi provider we get virtually every channel ever invented. We watch still pretty much only watch Netflix, Prime, and NFL football if we watch anything at all. It hasn’t occurred to me even once to turn on a news show now that I can. 

David Garner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 7623
    • View Profile
    • For He is Good and Loves Mankind
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #383 on: November 30, 2021, 03:58:35 PM »
Bill O'Reilly:  B.A. in History, M.A. in Broadcast Journalism

1982-86...CBS, 1986-89...ABC, 1989-95...Inside Edition, FOX 1996-2016


Tucker Carlson:  B.A. in History

2000-05...CNN, 2005-08...MSNBC, 2009-Present...FOX

Neither one of these guys comes close to the gravitas of Walter Cronkite.
Of course Cronkite never had an hour of commentary 5 nights a week.

Cronkite was educated at UT Austin, presumably with a BA or BS in Journalism.

I don't disagree at all with your conclusion that Carlson and O'Reilly don't approach his gravitas.  I'm not sure their respective educations are the dividing line though.
Orthodox Reader and former Lutheran (LCMS and WELS).

DCharlton

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 6871
    • View Profile
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #384 on: November 30, 2021, 06:27:30 PM »
w I know better, as I am repeated embarrassed by the "sloganeers" who pretend to be Lutheran bishops.

Not in that loop on one side of the aisle.  What are the typical slogans and how/when are they used?

Dave Benke

Take Bishop Eaton's "pastoral letter".  Rather than explaining why the Rittenhouse verdict was unjust, she threw out slogans about white- supremacy and guns.  The slogan obviates any need for reasons or argument.  You'll also notice the absence of any theological reflection.  The slogans are deemed to be sufficient.

This type of argument by slogan typifies the language of ELCA bishops.  Rather than trying to persuade, they resort to labeling anyone who disagrees with them. 
David Charlton  

Was Algul Siento a divinity school?

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 14241
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #385 on: November 30, 2021, 06:45:09 PM »
Pastor Charlton:
…am repeated embarrassed by the "sloganeers" who pretend to be Lutheran bishops.

Me:
I think I can include you are referring to our ELCA presiding Bishop, in which case I wonder a lot of things about your involvement with our church body. Or do you contend people out there are pretending to be Lutheran Bishops.
Retired ELCA Pastor. You can say liberal Christians are wrong. You can say that you disagree with our interpretation of faith. But when you say we are driven by “culture” or “trendiness,” you prove that you do not listen to us. Luther fared better with Rome.

DCharlton

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 6871
    • View Profile
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #386 on: November 30, 2021, 06:54:18 PM »
You can either be a bishop, or you can be a political agent, but not both.  Article 28 clearly distinguishes between when a bishop speaks with divine authority, and when she speaks with human authority.  When Elizabeth Eaton speaks with human authority, she is not speaking as a bishop but a political pundit.
David Charlton  

Was Algul Siento a divinity school?

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12920
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #387 on: November 30, 2021, 06:57:39 PM »
w I know better, as I am repeated embarrassed by the "sloganeers" who pretend to be Lutheran bishops.

Not in that loop on one side of the aisle.  What are the typical slogans and how/when are they used?

Dave Benke

Take Bishop Eaton's "pastoral letter".  Rather than explaining why the Rittenhouse verdict was unjust, she threw out slogans about white- supremacy and guns.  The slogan obviates any need for reasons or argument.  You'll also notice the absence of any theological reflection.  The slogans are deemed to be sufficient.

This type of argument by slogan typifies the language of ELCA bishops.  Rather than trying to persuade, they resort to labeling anyone who disagrees with them.

I don't have an insight here per se.  I prefer the title Bishop of ecclesiastical supervisors, because it has street cred through the history of the Church, and isn't just a denominational label.  That being said, I believe the position is a divine call to responsibility for oversight.  Meaning to me there is accountability before God for appropriate oversight, and accountability in the Church from those you serve or fail to serve.  It's a divine call because it has to do with the article of the Gospel in the Schmalkaldic Articles, the "mutual conversation and consolation" of the faithful.  That gets overlooked in my denomination by some, but as you think about it it's the Word applied by people and to people through the power of the Spirit in earnest conversation. 

Sloganeering does damage to appropriate oversight, because it is not based on either the Word or traditions of the Church (which are imbedded in all church bodies even those who don't think that's the way they operate).  When oversight isn't based first on the Word/doctrine, it's going to veer off all over the place. 

My own experience was that the LCMS Council of Presidents was a convivium fraternum, where the folks in it, particularly the District Presidents, could hash through casuistry in prayer and conversation based on their ecclesiastical supervision in their place.  I miss that sometimes (less and less frequently), because there was an underlying unity that the church-politically oriented folks didn't and couldn't see - we were all doing our vocation to supervise - it's not easy, and sometimes there are no good options.  The guys well to the conservative side of the aisle and I were very tight, because once we got into dialog it was very clear we were wrestling with the same issues.  I could name them, but by now most are retired.  There were also geographical alignments, and and sports alignments (we had a coterie of Packer backers when I was in there that went oddly through Minnesota and North Dakota as well as Wisconsin, so go figure).  And there's iron sharpening iron.  I personally had some great shouting matches in those (always) closed sessions.  In fact, I liked close sessions only for that reason, because basically I was opposed to them on principle.  But giving somebody a piece of my mind was good for my peace of mind and it stayed on the intramural level.

From what you're saying, I'm not sure there is a serious theological ecclesiology at the ELCA bishop level, and that's "missing the mark" of that vocation.

Dave Benke

Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11887
    • View Profile
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #388 on: November 30, 2021, 07:08:52 PM »
Agreed. Everyone kept talking about it, so I went and read Eaton's message. Pastoral?    ;D

Vigilante, guns, white supremacy. All in one sentence!   ::)

Hey, is she Charles' niece?
« Last Edit: November 30, 2021, 08:44:58 PM by Donald_Kirchner »
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 14241
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Christian response to Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #389 on: December 01, 2021, 05:00:08 AM »
In the days when dinosaurs roamed the earth and this humble correspondent was a young pastor, there were political and social divisions within the church bodies that would eventually become the ELCA. Some here remember the documentary "A Time For Burning", about an Omaha church and community change. We had divisions on how to approach racism, the Vietnam War, church and society involvement and where to "plant" or support new churches. The youth/adult gap existed and was growing, but wasn't that wide on matters of worship, women in the church, and there was just the hint of sexuality becoming an issue.
   "Inter-Lutheran" was the name of the game, and "ecumenism" was a growth stock, despite strong lingering anti-Romanism in some quarters.
   Some disagreements were strong, but there was a "sense of Church" and a feeling that we were "all in it together." We respected our synod presidents/bishops, and had a flag-waving loyalty to our denomination (although the ALC didn't wave so many flags as the LCA did). We were "church" together, diverse (though not racially so); we had our geographic idiosyncrasies, and too loudly trumpeted our ancestry, but we learned that "church" was more than our congregation and that was "church" all over the country and all over the world and we were bound by that "Body of Christ" feeling.
   This is where I am sad now. We have lost the larger sense of "Church," we have lost respect for our ecclesiastical superiors, and many intentionally pull away from the broader of the mission of our denominations, isolating themselves so has not to be "corrupted" by something above.
   Inter-Lutheran is no game at all. ELCA ecumenism is strong and I am glad for our ecumenical partners, where full fellowship enables us to be sacramentally close in many places. But even those places are islands, not continents.
   I like what I read from the Lutheran World Federation and the vigor and vibrancy of Lutheranism (not always "our kind") in many places.
   But in our land, we have lost something. Perhaps the civil disagreements - also stronger than in former times, after we were betrayed by those leading the Vietnam war and our failures to overcome systemic racism - have made us cynical and driven us apart, in Church as well as in society.
   There is much to overcome, much requiring prayer, study, and just-do-it energy.
    Those Lutherans I knew in my youth, in separate denominations for Swedes (I was baptized in Swedish and 13 years later my grandmother actually thought I would take confirmation instruction in Swedish), Norwegians, Finns, Danes, Latvians, Slovaks, took the desire for a common mission into the ALC and the LCA. Ecumenism opened up those two parts of Lutheranism.
    Good times. I hope we can get them back, not as they were then, but as they need to be for what lies ahead.
Retired ELCA Pastor. You can say liberal Christians are wrong. You can say that you disagree with our interpretation of faith. But when you say we are driven by “culture” or “trendiness,” you prove that you do not listen to us. Luther fared better with Rome.