Laodicea

On Tuesday, April 29th, Barack Obama finally broke with Jeremiah Wright. Here are some of the ways Obama described his soon-to-be former pastor's weekend performances, mostly his National Press Club question and answer session.

I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened over the spectacle that we saw . . . His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate . . . All it was, was a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in truth . . . he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS . . . he suggests that Minister Farrakhan somehow represents one of the greatest voices of the 20th and 21st centuries . . . he equates the United States wartime efforts with terrorism . . . outrageous remarks . . . appalling . . . makes me angry . . . saddens me . . . insensitivity . . . outrageousness . . . a complete disregard for what the American people are going through and the need for them to rally together to solve these problems . . . that did not matter to Reverend Wright. What mattered was him commanding center stage . . . he caricatured himself.

Until last weekend, Pastor Wright's apologists, including Senator Obama, defended the minister by saying it is unfair to judge a sermon by a sound bite. Never mind that every person in public life is judged by sound bites. Wright's sermons, we were told, could not be understood that easily.

After the pastor's weekend media blitz, you probably won't be hearing that complaint again. The man reiterated all the controversial points, and never denied the obvious meanings of the words he had spoken. Instead, he tried to show that his positions were reasonable or that we had misunderstood them.

He never apologized, never even hinted that he could be wrong about anything.

Instead he gave an amazing display of narcissism. For instance, when asked about his relationship with nation of Islam leader, Louis Farrakhan, he replied, "Louis Farrakhan is not my enemy. He did not put me in chains, he did not put me in slavery, and he didn't make me this color."

In other words, if you're not my enemy, then you are good. It's all about me.

Wright grew up in an upscale Philadelphia neighborhood almost a hundred years too late for anyone to put him in chains or slavery. And since, as a Christian minister, he clearly believes that God gave him his color, is he implying that God is his enemy?

It's Not Just Wright

Every pastor and Christian leader in America should view this as a warning. When you are revered, Reverend, the enemy called pride is never far away.

Most of my adult life, I have worked with churches — first in Christian radio, then as Harald Bredesen's assistant for 22 years. The last five to ten years, I've seen the frustration of Christian ministers at growing attacks from within their own flocks. Harald and I spoke of it often. It's not new, but seems to have a fresh intensity.

Harald, however, didn't see hostility toward preachers as the biggest problem. In going through notes on a book he considered writing (but never did) I found some amazing quotes with a powerful message warning Christian leaders against arrogance. You can find them here.

When a leader feels bricks and bottles coming his way, it's only natural to grow more isolated. Combine this with the adoration of a flock sometimes numbering thousands of people, and the tendency is toward both isolation and arrogance — a potentially lethal combination.

Pragmatism Over the Bible

Cold pragmatism has invaded the American Church. Many now see wealth and prestige as God's stamp of approval. Success is measured in the size of buildings and bank accounts. Pragmatism looks at the mega-church pastor and says, "His church is massive, so he must be doing things the right way. He's rich, so God must be pleased with him."

It's all too easy for any Christian leader to delude himself into a belief that worldly standards of success are the true measure of worth. Full pews prove his critics wrong. Full offering plates mean all questions and questioners should be derided and dismissed.

Pastor's wives can also buy into this wicked system of thought. They, too, have enormous power, and they, too, want the money to keep rolling in. Under such circumstances, it's easy to make maintenance of the status quo, job one.

Please don't misunderstand. I'm not talking about every evangelical church nor even most of them. But we are now seeing an epidemic of power-happy, money-driven, self-satisfied, Laodicean pastors.

I used to think of the falling away spoken of in scripture as more or less random. I now see that it is led.

Some churches, intentionally or not, create an environment where questions and questioners are belittled, and where power and status come from close and adoring adherence to the party line. In such environments, fatuous comments sound better than thoughtful ones. Outrageous words full of ear tickling compliments to the listeners and ridicule of others, become habitual to the speakers. Jeremiah Wright's now famous sound bites reflect this. Even more, we see it reflected in the reactions of his congregation.

Pride's Embarrassing Result

Bill O'Reilly thinks Pastor Wright was intentionally trying to hurt Obama's chances of becoming President. Newt Gingrich counts that as a distinct possibility. New York Times columnist Bob Herbert wrote, "The Rev. Jeremiah Wright went to Washington on Monday not to praise Barack Obama, but to bury him."

I disagree. The problem wasn't Wright's harmful intent, but his hubris. I think he really believed he could sway the masses to his point of view the way he's been swaying his congregants all these years. Don't just read the transcript of his National Press Club appearance. Look at the video of his question and answer time.

He showed clear delight with himself after every answer. He seemed to feel he was making a monkey out of the woman whose job it was to serve as moderator of the event and he enjoyed every moment of her discomfort. His every answer showed contempt for the questioners, their mental acuity, moral standing, and, finally, for the questions themselves. He clearly considered each one beneath him.

As an example, here's the first.

MODERATOR: You have said that the media have taken you out of context. Can you explain what you meant in a sermon shortly after 9/11 when you said the United States had brought the terrorist attacks on itself? Quote, "America's chickens are coming home to roost."

WRIGHT: Have you heard the whole sermon? Have you heard the whole sermon?

MODERATOR: I heard most of it.

WRIGHT: No, no, the whole sermon, yes or no? No, you haven't heard the whole sermon? That nullifies that question.

This was his line of attack against Sean Hannity in a March, 2007 interview. He apparently felt Hannity wasn't qualified to ask questions unless he had read books by James Cone — a brilliant, but angry theologian who expresses equal admiration for Martin Luther King's advocacy of non-violence and Malcom X's advocacy of violence.

At the National Press Club, the Moderator gave Wright an opportunity to make clear what he really meant by one of the controversial statements he has said was taken out of context. But the question was nullified, Wright said, because she only listened to most of his sermon, not all of it. Can you imagine anything sillier for a teacher to say? If a teenager at his church comes to him with a question regarding scripture, does Wright consider the question nullified if the teen hasn't first read the entire Bible? Are Jeremiah Wright's words so important that we have to listen to all of them before we can even ask what he meant in a certain passage?

Sadder than Wright himself, was his audience. The Moderator made it clear that there were many guests there who were not working reporters. The reporters, she said, were mostly in the balcony. So who were these people on the ground floor who seemed to regard every word from the minister's mouth as brilliant? I wonder if many of them weren't from his home church in Chicago, there to support their embattled pastor. They certainly acted like the people at Trinity United Church of Christ when responding to the pastor's wildest pronouncements.

Sadly, their presence did him more harm than good. He played to them. He mugged for them. He showed out for them. And it made him look ridiculous to almost everyone else, including Barack Obama.

What Took Him So Long?

So why did Barack stay under this man's ministry for so long? Why is it that he seems to have just now realized what a nutty guy he's been listening to all these years? Most pundits suggest it's purely political, that Obama went to church as another way to gain power. The Senator himself indicates that, though he heard some rough stuff in a few sermons, he somehow missed all the worst ones.

Here's what I think. Wright's sermons didn't sound so nutty when Obama heard them at TUCC. That's the first church environment Obama had been in on a regular basis. Wright clearly has a great (though somewhat deluded) mind. I'm sure this impressed the young Obama. As the years passed, Barack grew as a person, but was so completely accustomed to his pastor's outrageous style that he hardly gave it a thought. He equated it with "black church."

I'm sure the words of his pastor never sounded so ridiculous to Obama as when they were paraded in front of the nation on newscast after newscast, and he heard them through the ears of the American electorate.

The pundits rightly point out that we still know very little about Senator Obama. His public record is embarrassingly short. Maybe a bigger question is, does Barack Obama know who he is?

When he was growing up, everyone called him Barry. When you're the only black kid in your school, you don't necessarily want an African-sounding name. When he grew older, he decided to embrace his African heritage, and he became Barack. I see that as personal growth. He was raised mostly by white people and as a young adult, he embraced many aspects of his black heritage, including attendance at a black church where he found in his new pastor the thing he longed for most — a father.

This particular path of personal growth is not a quick one, but personal growth doesn't necessarily need to happen quickly. Then Barack stepped into the vortex of a massive tornado. Suddenly, everything started spinning around him at incredible speed. He made an acclaimed speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004, and everyone from Ted Kennedy on down said he should use his newfound fame in a 2008 bid for the White House.

It worked. He's almost there. But he isn't ready.

It's not about his color. In fact, I think one of the most important things America can do to get out from under the shadow of slavery and Jim Crow, will be to elect an African-American president. It will change our view of ourselves, and erase a mountain of misconceptions throughout the world. But blackness alone doesn't make up for the gaps in his resume.

Have his core values fully formed? The best interpretation of the Wright controversy says they haven't.

He believes in bi-partisanship, but he hasn't done it. He wants to be post-racial (something we desperately need) but he's been imbibing a racially charged world view at church for the last twenty years. He occasionally reaches out to conservatives, but his poor understanding of that point of view shows he's not ready to be a "uniter" and if he's elected now, is doomed to be a "divider."

Barack Obama is a liberal. So was Franklin Roosevelt. As a conservative, I disagree with many things FDR did, but I'm also thankful for his successes. The difference between these two liberals is that FDR was a seasoned professional. He was only a little older, but had been in public life much longer. His skills and positions were well-honed long before he entered the White House. Though we've seen real growth in Barack Obama since Iowa, he's still a novice. And right now, we need the best skills available.

But even more, we need revival. America needs a new spiritual awakening. . . . especially among those who stand in her pulpits.

Posted: 5-02-2008
Note: At original posting, all links were active.