Video
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Christian majority's special responsibility
As a fellow Christian, I resonate with Brit Hume's desire to give a verbal witness to his faith. I love to share with others the good news of hope and grace that I have received through Christ. But when I saw the drama unfold regarding Hume's statements about Tiger Woods, Buddhism, and Christianity, I couldn't say amen. In fact, I winced.
Why? It took a few days for me to articulate why my heart couldn't in good conscience affirm Hume's verbal witness, or join the chorus of my fellow Christians who interpreted the negative response as widespread media bias against Christians. While affirming Brit Hume's free speech rights wholeheartedly, and while acknowledging I might have said something far less helpful in the same setting, here's why I would try to find a different response, if I were in a similar situation.
1. If someone wanted to get a personal message of hope and solidarity to Tiger Woods at a time of public shame, it would have been most appropriate to do so through personal means, accompanied with personal presence and other expressions of empathy and compassion.
2. Because the message was given in such a public forum, it seemed like Tiger's shame became an opportunity for a promotional message for Christian faith, and an critical message about Buddhism. Whether Hume intended to do something like this or not, the timing could be interpreted as somewhat analogous to Rush Limbaugh using the catastrophe in Haiti as an opportunity to criticize President Obama. Rush is certainly free to do this, but doing so will likely have unintended negative consequences along with the positive one of gaining empathy from the base to which he appeals.
3. Ironically, then, an intended message of compassion could be interpreted as an act of exploitation - using a shameful personal tragedy for the benefit of one's religion. I'm sure Brit Hume would never intend such a thing, but I can see how people could interpret it in this way.
4. Any group that is in a majority or that enjoys other kinds of advantages, I believe, has special responsibilities, remembering Jesus' words about much being expected from those to whom much has been given. The Christian faith is the largest faith community in the U.S. (and world) by a strong majority, which means that we Christians have to take special pains not to use our advantages inappropriately. So - to the degree that people expect more from Christians, to the degree they hold us to a higher standard - I think public hope for exemplary behavior from us is appropriate, even though as fallible humans we Christians fall short like everyone else.
5. Ironically, to use our freedom and power as Christians in ways that hurt or insult others - whether it's Tiger Woods or Buddhists - can be an act of inconsistency with the way of Jesus. When I think of how Jesus would respond to Tiger Woods, I immediately think of the powerful story in the Gospel of John (chapter 8). A woman was brought before Jesus - perhaps naked, or clutching a bed sheet - who had been "caught in the act" of adultery. He did not condemn her, and in fact, managed to confront those who were about to cast stones. It's an amazing story in which every detail rings with meaning, worth re-reading in this context.
It's always easy to offer Monday morning quarterbacking, and I don't want to do to Brit Hume what some may think did to Tiger Woods, namely, use a possible mistake on Hume's part to make a point of my own. I have misspoken so many times, sometimes as a lapse in the spur of the moment, sometimes in ignorance, and sometimes from indefensibly bad and shabby motives, so I don't intend this as a criticism of Mr. Hume, with whose desire to bear witness to his faith, again, I share. But I do want to learn from this episode, and so here's what - as a Monday morning quarterback, admittedly - I think Brit Hume himself might now wish he had said: "As a person who has made many, many mistakes myself, I identify with Tiger Woods. I am no better than he, and I stand at every moment in the same need of amazing grace that he does. I'm thankful that through my relationship with God and the life and message of Jesus, I have found forgiveness for my sins and power to begin to change and grow. I can only hope that Tiger will find the same mercy that I have experienced, and continue to experience, and if there's any way I can be of help to him, I offer myself for that purpose."
It's way easier to point out mistakes in others than to avoid them oneself!
By
Brian D. McLaren
|
January 14, 2010; 12:30 PM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Bias against the uninformed and pious |
Next: Ignorance of Christianity no virtue
Posted by: khote14 | January 18, 2010 4:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Mr. McLaren,
It saddens me to know that you, as a self professed Christian, have such a platform as the Washington Post, and yet you seem to be so very weak in your professed faith. Certainly I believe that Christ loved the sinner and hates the sin, and perhaps Brit Hume could have been more compassionate in his comments about Tiger, but Mr. Hume's criticism about the Liberal Media is spot on. You reference (without citing the book) John 8:1-11 when Jesus was confronted with a woman caught in adultery, and this is where we get "Let him that is without sin among you first cast the stone at her."
(John 8:7) However, we can not stop there, because Jesus also told her in verse 11 of that Chapter, "go, and sin no more." This is an impossibility, save we first have accepted Jesus as our Lord and Savior. We as Christian must be compassionate towards a sinful world and those that comprise this world. However, just as Jesus stood firm in His confrontations and criticisms of the Sanhedrin, we too must stand firm in our criticisms of a liberal government and the media that loves them! Might I suggest you read John MacArthur's book "The Jesus You Can't Ignore" published by Thomas Nelson. I pray it will give you a different perspective on who we should be as we follow in Jesus' example. I'll be praying for you.
Posted by: Court2 | January 16, 2010 10:17 AM
Report Offensive Comment
You either believe the same as Brit Hume - that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the light and that no one comes to the Father but through Him...and Tiger needs to ask forgiveness for his sins to receive Christ's forgiveness and love - or you believe there are other ways to do this. Forget whether or not Hume should've shared the advice at that time, on that program, or in his role. You either believe what he said is correct or wrong. Read more about it in "Politics and Religion: Knowing Little But Never Being Wrong" - http://richardtgarner.blogspot.com/2010/01/politics-and-religion-knowing-little.html
Posted by: webmonkeydc | January 15, 2010 5:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Please stop missionary activities, it kills the soul of the victim culture.
Posted by: Gautam38 | January 15, 2010 12:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Christianity isn't a majority and Brit Hume isn't one.
Posted by: dwickert51 | January 14, 2010 8:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Rev. McLaren:
I agree with you completely.
Especially, Hume's attempt to pillory Tiger Woods because of his religion.
Woods has a personal psychological problem exacerbated by the fact that, in order to follow his sport, he has to spend a lot of time apart from his family.
Had he been able to practice his sport while keeping his family closer, I believe he might have been able to overcome the temptations he succumbed to.
Woods' behavior is not a reflection on his religious belief.
Those in the Christian community who want to make public hay out of his private problems need to understand that, given Christianity is our largest major religion in this country, our 50-percent divorce rate doesn't stand our religious practice in good stead.
We are in no position to pillory individuals, since most of our Christian churches allow, even if they don't sanction, multiple marriages.
Many of us don't seem to take "till death do us part" and "in sickness (including psychological problems) or in health" very seriously.
That's not to say that I don't understand there is sometimes a need to legally sever bonds when the marriage becomes intolerable.
Hence, I don't see that Hume has a leg to stand on and, in fact, I believe he probably owes Tiger Woods an equally public and humble apology for his remarks.
Such an apology would be a fair public penance for publically humiliating Woods in the first place.
Hume is free to say whatever he thinks he can get away with.
In the same vein, I'm free to call him on it, as are you.
Posted by: Judy-in-TX | January 14, 2010 6:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
Liberal media, conservative media, blah blah blah. Once the christianist politicians took over the republican party they became politicians first, anything else second - including their christianity.
A political party's interests go to achieving power: obtaining it and keeping it.
The base of the republican party are the christianists. They're using their political power to not only promote their version of their religion, but also to enforce it.
Once your religion becomes a political party, you really differ only in the particulars of your ideology from the old-style communists - their political party became a religion. They passed and enforced laws about blasphemy, apostasy, heresy ... just as the christianists to want to do here.
Keep your religion to yourself. You get to tell people about it, to talk about it, to hope other people will want it - but once you start politicizing it you make it suck to have to put up with it. And you can expect the kinds of responses you've seen as a result.