Israel, Donations, and Social Justice

Dr. Jim over at Zwinglius Redivivus has a pretty good discussion going on Tax Exempt Donations and Israel.  This also happens to coincide with a conversation I'm having with a conservative Christian blogger regarding social justice.  If the conservative Christian model of social justice seeks to keep minimal government involvement, then why do the need to take advantage of programs that use "tax-exempt donations to help Jews establish permanence in the Israeli-occupied territories?"  Since tax exempt status comes through the government, isn't this a self-defeating argument?

Joel at The Church of Jesus Christ has also weighed in on this issue.

Tax-Exempt Funds Aid Settlements in West Bank | The New York Times

Prayers for Dick Cheney

Former VP Dick Cheney was hospitalized earlier today complaining of chest pain.  While I might not agree with Dick Cheney's politics, I do not wish the man ill will. Some people on the liberal side might be praying for Cheney to drop dead, I am not one of them.  I actually despise imprecatory prayer.  I take 1 Timothy 2:1-4 very seriously.

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way.  This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

My prayer goes out to Dick Cheney and his family for his recovery.

Lady Gaga and Religion

I don't have a problem with Lady Gaga.  I happen to like most of her songs as does my 3 month old daughter (we listen, not watch). But, not everyone shares my opinion.  It's not surprising that many from Christian Right and the Catholic Church are up in arms over Lady Gaga's latest video, "Alejandro".  I've seen the video and I can see where some people on the Christian Right might have a problem, but it isn't the first time a pop singer's video might be misunderstood.  (Note: This video is NSFW.)

In the video, Lady Gaga wears a nun's habit and swallows a rosary.  One blogger writes concerning the video,

[T]he video mixes homoerotic, S&M and Nazi motifs with some pretty interesting latex nun costumes...and some odd rosary scenes (Lady Ga Ga swallows one in the video).

Does this automatically make this video blasphemous?  Some do.  Pop star Katie Perry recently commented on the video via Twitter,

Using blasphemy as entertainment is as cheap as a comedian telling a fart joke. (Source: CNN)

I think a more critical eye is needed to examine the video.  Is there use of religious symbols?  Yes.  Does that automatically make is blasphemous?  I don't think so.

Some are comparing this video to Madonna's "Like A Prayer".  I can remember my mom telling me that I wasn't allowed to watch the video for "Like A Prayer" because Madonna "compared herself to Jesus".  Being nine at the time, I really couldn't argue with my mom and I didn't have any theological training at the time. 

Mark Judge of the Washington Post disagrees with the comparison of Lady Gaga and Madonna,

Lady Gaga is no Madonna. That some conservatives are conflating the two performers is yet another sign of the pop culture (and even religious) illiteracy of the right. I myself am a conservative, and it always demoralizes me when people on the right fumble the ball on popular culture, particularly in the field of pop music.

Judge goes on to write,

Now, taking a lead from Bill Donohue of the Catholic League, everyone is comparing Gaga to Madonna. To me Madonna will always be a mediocre talent, but one of her better songs is "Like a Prayer," which came out in 1986. Many conservative culture warriors wrongly considered the video for "Like a Prayer" blasphemous, and are now juxtaposing it with a new video by pop star Lady Gaga. In the video for her song "Alejandro," Gaga is dressed in a red latex nun costume. She swallows a rosary, and is depicted in scenes of sadomasochistic sex and Nazi marching troops. As night follows day, conservatives went nuts. Donohue called Lady Gaga a "Madonna wannabe." The rest of the right wing photosphere fell into place.

They will miss a crucial fact: Madonna's video for "Like a Prayer" is an intelligent and even devout meditation on grace, love and conscience. Lady Gaga's is lazy trash.

According to Judge, the similarities between Lady Gaga and Madonna pretty much end on the surface.  He concludes his article by stating,

When "Like a Prayer" was released, it was completely misunderstood by conservatives. A bishop condemned it. So did Donohue. On the other side, liberals mindlessly defended Madonna without understanding the message of the video. The only truly coherent analysis came from Fr. Andrew Greeley, a liberal Catholic priest. "Like a Prayer" was blasphemous, wrote Greeley in America magazine, "only for the prurient and the sick who come to the video determined to read their own twisted sexual hang-ups into it. Only for those who think that sexual passion is an inappropriate metaphor for divine passion (and thus are pretty hard on Hosea, Jesus, Saint Paul, Saint Bernard of Clairvaux and Saint Teresa of Avila)."

Lada Gaga's video for "Alejandro" is not just slightly dissimilar to "Like a Prayer" - it's like a fascistic antipode. There is no moral story, no call to conscience. The very language of the bodies is different. In "Like a Prayer," Madonna and the gospel choir dance with freedom and individual joy. They are powered with the power of the Holy Spirit, which gave Madonna grace the courage to fully respond the call from her conscience. In "Alejandro" the dancing is militaristic, joyless. The scenes of sadomasochism are cold and dehumanizing; they reek of fascism. The entire thing is cold.

I have to agree with Judge.  I think Christianity on a whole lacks a good cultural theology, so we only look to the surface and often, we miss the broader message that can be found in music videos.  

HT: James McGrath

Lady Gaga is no Madonna | The Washington Post

Jesus Cartoon=Blasphemy?

The potential thought of having modern day Jesus Christ star in his own cartoon is offensive to some Christians.

The newly formed Citizens Against Religious Bigotry said Thursday that it believes the "JC" series would be offensive. They accuse Comedy Central of a double standard in mocking Christian figures and beliefs while recently refusing to let "South Park" depict the Prophet Muhammad for fear of offending Muslims. (from the Huffington Post)

Brent Bozell of Citizens Against Religious Bigotry (CARB) had this to say:

After we reveal the vile and offensive nature of Comedy Central's previous characterizations of Jesus Chris and God the Father, we expect these advertisers to agree wholeheartedly to end their advertising on Comedy Central and discontinue their support for unabashed, anti-Christian discrimination...Why should they be supporting a business that makes a habit of attacking Christianity and yet has a formal policy to censor anything considered offensive to followers of Islam? This double standard is pure bigotry, one from which advertisers should quickly shy away. (from ABC News)

But here's my question: Why now? There seems to be some fundamental flaws with their argument. The Jesus character is not new to Comedy Central as South Park has Jesus as one of the characters. Why pick this fight now, with "JC" and not when Jesus first appeared on South Park? It makes no sense to me.

It should also be pointed out that "JC" is only being developed at this point. The series has not been given the green light, so it is quite possible it could die before it even makes it to a television near you.

As for offending someone with a depiction of Christ, I also think that ship has sailed. Again, why now?

Most churches I know of have a Jesus depicted somewhere in their building. Chances are the depiction is of a white man, with flowing brown hair and a freshly trimmed beard...something like this:



Chances are Jesus looked nothing like that. So before we go out and say other depictions of Christ are offensive, let's take a long, hard look at the depictions in our own churches.

Also, last I checked, there is this little thing called the First Amendment...you know, freedom of speech. It's been my experience that conservative Christians and conservative Christian groups like CARB have a love/hate relationship with the First Amendment. They love when it applies to them, and hate when it applies to others.

St. Paul writes,

But we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Gentiles. (1 Corinthians 1:23)

Yes, the message of the cross is offensive. So, if we were to apply this line of logic to ourselves (banning the offensive) then we should stop preaching the Gospel. I'm not advocating that. And I don't think anyone from CARB would advocate that either. But to protest something that might be offensive (JC) and then turn around and preach something that is offensive (the Gospel) is hypocritical.

As a Christian, I don't care one way or another about this. It's not even on my radar...probably because I do not get Comedy Central. Do I think Comedy Central should allowed to do this show if they want? Absolutely. Will I watch it? Absolutely not. I think that this is the response we need...not create a controversy around the show.

Other Posts:

• Jesus Cartoon Coming to Comedy Central | Scotteriology
• Hey, Maybe Christians Should Declare Jihad Against Comedy Central. If the Muslims Can, Why Can't We? | Zwinglius Redivivus
• Comedy Central considers cartoon series about Jesus Christ | The Church of Jesus Christ
• Comedy Central: No to Muhammad -- But Yes! to Jesus | The Washington Post
• If Christians Were Like Radical Muslims... | Zwinglius Redivivus
• Religious Leaders Unite Against Planned Jesus Cartoon | ABC News