(Page 2 of 2)
One suspects they smell a con game. One also suspects they’re right.
WHAT MAKES THIS NEW CHURCH mission different from the kind carried out in the first 1,800 or so years of Christianity, is that its motives are purely selfish.
Put it this way — whether or not you accept the doctrines of Christian evangelists and missionaries of the past, it’s hard to deny that their activities were altruistic. If you really believe that people are going to Hell for eternity, it’s an act of kindness to tell them how to escape it. Thousands of missionaries suffered horribly and died far from home (often very young) to take that message.
But the ELCA, in its outreach to racial minorities, is motivated by no idea of giving these people anything. Instead they want something from them. In their own estimation, they themselves are “White,” as is a blank sheet of paper. To be white, they believe, is to be contentless, without meaning or value. “People of color,” on the other hand, are perceived to “have something.” They are vibrant and alive, purified by suffering. The ELCA wants to appropriate social atonement through them.
The agenda of the ELCA, in other words, is essentially racist.
And, like all racism (even when self-directed), it’s stupid.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?