Just Shut Up!!!

12 June 2007

Charles Wendell Colson MugshotESPN’s “Mike and Mike” show has a weekly segment on Tuesdays called “Just Shut Up!” Being Tuesday and being in the mood to blog, I’m making a nomination here for the first ever recipient of the undoubtedly soon-to-be-coveted Just Shut Up! Award of the Aedificium. After reading this piece in the online edition of Sunday’s Washington Post, the Aedificium has awarded the Just Shut Up! Certificate to Chuck Colson. Congratulations on your well-deserved accomplishment.

The WP headlines the short note containing Colson’s comments as follows: “Baptists Warned About Islam, Atheism,” and observes that Colson’s address to the pre-conference gathering of Southern Baptist pastors was a call to Christians to “do a better job of explaining their religion’s worldview.” He then singles out Islam as “vicious” and “evil,” noting that the merger of Islam with fascism results in an ideology that is “evil incarnate.” Colson also apparently dismissed the emergent movement as an irrelevant aberration in the church that is “abandoning the search for truth” in favor of “conversations in coffee shops,” and juxtaposes emergent with the “pure orthodox truth” of Third World Churches.

Colson has done some great work in his career, but his brand of evangelicalism makes me want to just secede and give it up completely. We simply don’t need a Christian denomination of nearly 16.5 million members to be taught that every Muslim (and, in fact, Colson can’t even bring himself to use that word, but calls Muslims “Islamists”), every one of the 1.3 billion or so who live on Late Great Planet Earth, is an evil fascist who could, and who would be perfectly willing to, blow himself or herself up just to kill off Christians. This, of course, is totally different from Christian behavior, who would never do anything of the sort. For the love of God and all that is holy, how can we get the word out that this is just simply, patently, and devastatingly untrue and that this kind of hateful, propagandistic drivel is exactly what the extremists want to hear?

The post and ensuing discussion from a few weeks back on the idea of Christian worldviews holds here too. Colson believes that if Christians do a better job of explaining “their religion’s worldview” that the evil of Islam and atheism can be defeated and the emergent movement shown for the fraud he thinks it is. This is hopelessly misguided, not only because there is not and has never really been a single Christian worldview, but because Colson has sold himself to the stereotypes of Islam and of emergent at the expense of actually knowing much of anything about them that is anything other than destructive and divisive. How about constructive and uniting? And how about considering the possibility that Muslims, “emergents,” and the Brights of Dawkins’ and Harris’ brand of faith are engaged in the “search for truth” every bit as much as Colson is? Or, that this search might entail other elements besides regurgitating outdated propositional expressions or coming up with new propositions to add to the outdated ones? To dismiss the emergent church as an abandoning of truth in favor of coffeehousing relativism is as irresponsible as it is ridiculous.

Yes, I’m ticked off, because, damn it, I’m a Baptist, I’m extremely sympathetic to the emergent movement and consider myself part of it, and I have numerous Muslim friends and acquaintances who condemn acts of terrorism and Islamic extremism and all forms of governmental fascism every bit as much as other people of faith do.

Colson is committed to his own ideology and is blind to everything that doesn’t fit; he’s made the world in his own image. Not even God had the audacity to do that.

Entry Filed under: Absurdity, Baptist, Christianity, Interfaith, Islam, Religion, Worldview. .

4 Comments Add your own

  • 1. StDogbert  |  12 June 2007 at 11:39 pm

    Good recipient for the “award”. This is dangerous rhetoric that tries to pit the One Christian Worldview vs. the One Islamic Worldview… when neither exists.

    On 9/11, I was working long term at a customer site, a global hotel company, as part of their IT email support team. Many of the properties I helped remotely support were in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia Pacific. Point being, why would it be that one of the Middle East IT managers that I worked closely with call me upon hearing the news that the US was being attacked to ask me if me and my family were ok, and if my coworkers were unharmed? Or to call me the next day to emphatically tell me that he is a Muslim, ask me if I was Christian (which I replied yes), and that this is not what true Islam is, and to condemn the actions of the extremists? He certainly would not have reached out the way he did if there was only this one (extremist) Islamic worldview.

  • 2. Benedict  |  13 June 2007 at 9:15 am

    Dogbert wrote:

    This is dangerous rhetoric that tries to pit the One Christian Worldview vs. the One Islamic Worldview… when neither exists.

    Very well said! The way you put it here really shows that what we have is two competing rhetorics within each faith tradition, but both of them, in order to understand each other, need to kinda speak the same language here, specifically that of division, hate, violence, and absolutism; in short, the language of terrorism. Imagine the difference if Colson, or someone else with the media influence that Colson has, had said something like this:

    Islamic fundamentalism and extremism represents an ideology that, through possible union with fascism in many states, is a clear and present danger. But religious extremism and political fascism and totalitarianism is not a weapon we can use to combat the enemy. I call upon Christians, Muslims, Jews, and all other Americans of various faiths to understand how these ideologies are contrary to the sacred teachings of their traditional faiths and to seek common ground in explaining their worldviews and teachings so that we can work together to bring the Kingdom of God/Allah/the Name to our world today.

  • 3. mdvp  |  16 June 2007 at 9:18 am

    Well, I didn’t see all of what he said but it seems as though you may have misunderstood something there. “Islamist” is a word used to describe radical Islam and extreme Muslims.

  • 4. Benedict  |  16 June 2007 at 12:03 pm

    Thanks, but I’m convinced that I have not misunderstood Colson here. If in fact your use of “Islamist” is correct, it simply reinforces the point.

Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Quote of the moment

My essays come from a desire to understand what I love and what I hope for and to defend those things. -- Wendell Berry

Calendar

June 2007
S M T W T F S
« May   Jul »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Recent Comments

Peter on Bonhoeffer and the Weakness of…
Peter on Bonhoeffer and the Weakness of…
On Things Political … on Politics and Biblical Fai…
TheDeeZone on Politics and Biblical Fai…
Benedict on Politics and Biblical Fai…
sioeengland on Politics and Biblical Fai…
michelle2005 on Politics and Biblical Fai…
Benedict on Politics and Biblical Fai…
Can you be a Christi… on And the 2008 Just Shut Up! Awa…
michelle2005 on Politics and Biblical Fai…

Top Posts

Topics of Discourse

Absurdity Always we begin again Apocalypticism Beauty Bible Body Books Christianity Church Community Consumerism Crisis management Economy Education Election Empire Environment Eschatology Ethics Evangelicalism Faith Family Food Fundamentalism Fun stuff Holidays Homeschooling Inspiration Interfaith Islam Judaism Lectio Lent Liberalism Life Media Memory Ministry Mumblings... Mysticism Nature Poetry Politics Pop culture Power Reading Religion Revelation Rumination Science Scriptures Sermons Sexuality Spirituality Sports Stewardship Theology Wendell Berry Worldview Worship

Links

Who's Reading?

Vanity counter

Email me