Civil Commotion

Albert Mohler has a lengthy piece at his Web site that attacks the recent REVOICE conference, which aimed at finding a way to bridge the distance between LGBTQs and Christianity. Mohler’s sniffish view of the conference was predictable and his arguments aren’t very interesting, but for this: They exemplify the intellectual corruption of theology, and the harm it does in the real world.

To begin, a handful of settled facts about reality; if you don’t know these things, you might be tricked into believing that Mohler has established his premises and is an intellectually serious man.

• Nobody has ever offered a scintilla of objective evidence that there are any supernatural beings, including the Christian god, and modern physics has shown that the universe could have come into being without the prompting of a supernatural actor.

• There is no objective evidence that the Bible is of supernatural origin or inspiration.

• There was no Adam and Eve, which means there was no Fall, and there is no such thing as Original Sin.

• There is a complex of traits which comprise sexuality, including gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity. These are not hard-coded switches in our DNA; they are switches set according to the interaction of our DNA with the chemical environment of the developing fetus.

Mohler’s discussion of REVOICE ignores all these settled, established facts.

This revolution requires a total redefinition of morality, cultural authority, personal identity, and more. The revolution requires a new vocabulary and a radically revised dictionary. Ultimately, the moral revolutionaries seek to redefine reality itself.

Inexplicably, Mohler is nearly correct here — mainly, I suppose, because the statement doesn’t rest on his debunked premises. There is a moral revolution afoot in the narrow sense that the rules are changing, but the so-called revolution is grounded upon the same purpose that morality has always served — the flourishing of the person, the tribe, the community, the larger society. When men lived in tribes and its perpetuation required all hands on deck — so to speak — the condemnation of homosexuality made a certain crude sense.

Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.

A fertile woman should not be wasted, and a family name should be preserved — and neither should the means of impregnating her be wasted. The moral argument against same-sex relations is grounded in the perpetuation of the tribe — something we needn’t worry about today.

That moral rule from Bronze Age tribal life simply does not obtain nowadays. In ‘redefining’ morality, REVOICE’s ambition is to make morality serve its true purpose — human flourishing.

And on it goes, a regular cavalcade of nonsense grounded on faulty premises. And because of those faulty premises, Mohler intends that the Southern Baptist Convention should continue inflicting needless psychic pain on the blameless — and they will.

Am I the only person who has noticed how often religious leaders are Trump-like demagogues who mobilize malice against an alleged oppressor?

The question arises because an activist whose Twitter feed I follow was quoting various religious leaders this weekend, leaders who have said terrible things about women; Eve tempted Adam into sin, and therefore women instigated the Fall and the loss of Paradise, et cetera, et cetera. I’m fairly certain that the real story about most of these clowns is that they’re afraid of women, afraid of sexuality in general, that they’re insecure incel losers — but that doesn’t, of course, relieve them of responsibility for the evil that religion has done to women.

Then came a quote from Martin Luther, and I was reminded of a few things about Luther.

Luther spoke ill not merely of women, y’all should know, but also of Jews. In fact, he wrote an entire book about the wickedness of the Jews: On the Jews and Their Lies. A sampling of the contents:

• Therefore be on your guard against the Jews, knowing that wherever they have their synagogues, nothing is found but a den of devils in which sheer self-glory, conceit, lies, blasphemy, and defaming of God and men are practiced most maliciously and veheming his eyes on them.

• Moreover, they are nothing but thieves and robbers who daily eat no morsel and wear no thread of clothing which they have not stolen and pilfered from us by means of their accursed usury. Thus they live from day to day, together with wife and child, by theft and robbery, as arch-thieves and robbers, in the most impenitent security.

Luther had some definite ideas about what should be done about the problem, too:

1. First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians. For whatever we tolerated in the past unknowingly – and I myself was unaware of it – will be pardoned by God. But if we, now that we are informed, were to protect and shield such a house for the Jews, existing right before our very nose, in which they lie about, blaspheme, curse, vilify, and defame Christ and us (as was heard above), it would be the same as if we were doing all this and even worse ourselves, as we very well know.

2. Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. This will bring home to them that they are not masters in our country, as they boast, but that they are living in exile and in captivity, as they incessantly wail and lament about us before God.

3. Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them…

4. Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb. For they have justly forfeited the right to such an office by holding the poor Jews captive with the saying of Moses (Deuteronomy 17 [:10 ff.]) in which he commands them to obey their teachers on penalty of death, although Moses clearly adds: “what they teach you in accord with the law of the Lord.” Those villains ignore that. They wantonly employ the poor people’s obedience contrary to the law of the Lord and infuse them with this poison, cursing, and blasphemy. In the same way the Pope also held us captive with the declaration in Matthew 16 [:18], “You are Peter,” etc., inducing us to believe all the lies and deceptions that issued from his devilish mind. He did not teach in accord with the word of God, and therefore he forfeited the right to teach.

5. Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside, since they are not lords, officials, tradesmen, or the like. Let they stay at home…

6. Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping. The reason for such a measure is that, as said above, they have no other means of earning a livelihood than usury, and by it they have stolen and robbed from us all they possess. Such money should now be used in no other way than the following: Whenever a Jew is sincerely converted, he should be handed one hundred, two hundred, or three hundred florins, as personal circumstances may suggest. With this he could set himself up in some occupation for the support of his poor wife and children, and the maintenance of the old or feeble. For such evil gains are cursed if they are not put to use with God’s blessing in a good and worthy cause.

7. Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam (Gen 3[:19]}. For it is not fitting that they should let us accursed Goyim toil in the sweat of our faces while they, the holy people, idle away their time behind the stove, feasting and farting, and on top of all, boasting blasphemously of their lordship over the Christians by means of our sweat. No, one should toss out these lazy rogues by the seat of their pants.

I’ve marveled through the years that more isn’t made of Germany’s Lutheran heritage when The Holocaust is discussed.

Luther had a dim view of the Catholic Church and the Papacy, too.

• I feel much freer now that I am certain the pope is the Antichrist.

• Heretics are not to be disputed with, but to be condemned unheard, and whilst they perish by fire, the faithful ought to pursue the evil to its source, and bathe their heads in the blood of the Catholic bishops, and of the Pope, who is the devil in disguise.

• After the devil himself, there is no worse folk than the pope and his followers.

• May the Lord fill you with His blessings and with hatred of the Pope.

You get the idea.

This obscure monk seethed with hatred of women, Jews, and Catholics. Even so, he broke the Catholic Church in half, founded Protestantism — and remains an inspiration to many Christians today.

When we recall, too, that Jesus was often intemperate, and brutal in his condemnation of the Pharisees and the wealthy … does a pattern emerge? Why were the two most important, transformational religious leaders of the past two millennia so often so … vicious?

Thinking about this, I think we need to remember that separation of church and state is a fairly recent political innovation; there was no such thing in Jesus’ day, or in Luther’s. Both men would have been baffled by the concept. And because there was no separation, neither man can be considered merely a spiritual leader; they were political actors, too.

Here, I think, is the nexus with Trump. A strong case may be made — and easily made — that Jesus and Martin Luther were demagogues, as is Trump. And Trump, as Jesus and Luther did, makes his appeal to an aggrieved underclass. Trump channels and exploits the malice of others, just as Jesus and Luther did. It is not a mistake to say his followers are cult-like, or to describe his rallies as revival-like.

Is it even possible that anybody but the Deplorable One-third doesn’t know by now that the Buffoon-in-Chief is mentally unstable?

Remember: You are a sinner and no damn good, and the only way to escape the eternity of punishment you deserve is to join the right club.

Woodrow Wilson, Margaret Sanger (the founder of Planned Parenthood) and Hillary Clinton are of a type with Adolf Hitler? Really?

This is unhinged — but it won’t affect his popularity or influence because Southern Baptists have been claiming persecution and preaching sedition for years. Falwell is a whackjob, but he is not unique; you hear the exact same crazy-talk in the locker room of the local YMCA.