Skip to comments.Debra J. Saunders: Free the Saddleback One
Posted on 12/22/2008 9:18:43 PM PST by EveningStar
Gay civil rights groups -- the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force -- are calling on President-elect Barack Obama to yank his invitation to Saddleback Church pastor Rick Warren to give the inaugural prayer on Jan. 20. They demand tolerance from others, but won't spare any for those with whom they disagree. Unless of course, that person is Obama, who, like Warren, opposes same-sex marriage. Then they get real ecumenical. Not to mention, very forgetful.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
No way, no day, it’s Sistah Souljah time in Obama’s America. He is NOT about to let the gays think they own him.
Certain people need to be reminded just who holds the whip on the Messiah’s plantation.
BHO...divide and conquer...on both sides.
And by extension—every other liberal “constituency.”
You belong to Him, not the other way around.
“BHO...divide and conquer...on both sides.”
It wouldn’t work if there weren’t Christians willing to step over to the dark side. Not sure what Warren thinks he will get out of this one. But it will be way less than he wants.
What BO wants is clear—unearned legitimicy with Christians. I hope BO gets way less than he wants too.
All that said, I never expect much out of Warren—his written material constantly verges on heresy—an attempt to augment the Gospel with Oprah. The good thing that may come out of it Warren’s loss of status as a Christian leader. I hope other Christian leaders have more spine.
“They demand tolerance from others...”
Wrong. They are demanding victory over others.
Frankly, I have no problem with Obama’s base demanding Warren’s disinvitation. They are being honest and consistent. If they are right about gay marriage, then Warren is an odious bigot, and does not belong in the ceremonies in January.
I have a problem with Warren’s acceptance of the invitation. He is sucking up to a mass murderer of babies. When the history is written of how the U.S. government crushed the Christian churches within its borders, Warren will be among the multitude of nameless clergy who sucked up, not among the few who will be remembered for remaining faithful.
Frankly, I think Obama does support homosexual marriage, he just knew he couldn’t come out and say it during the campaign. I don’t think he’d do anything to STOP the effort to push legislation supporting the issue through Congress, if it came to that.
OK so he calls Rick Warner to give the prayer for his inauguration prayer but on other hand he wants that gays to serve openly in the military and give the homsexual a lot of what they want. If you feel appeased by Rick Warner prayer at Obama inauguration then you are a very simple human.
I think he supports it too; but if it isn’t to his advantage; he will poop all over them as fast as he can. In a dictatorship; there are no winners except for the dictator. No one is safe; but they don’t understand that.
Oh, I didn’t say he owned ME. But I do think he delivered a message to the gays that they pick fights with him at their expense.
Furthermore, I’m quite sure his black constituents, having endured racist insults from the gays in the wake of their vote on CA’s Prop. 8, are turning quiet cartwheels. Plus those evangelicals with soft spots in their heads may be having their heads turned.
Warren seemed to start out okay, but has veered into the leftist’s point of view that it is always right to share the wealth of others for the benefit of the poor. We ahve dozens of programs for the poor, nationally. Many of the ‘poor’ are that way because they choose to let someone else pay their bills for them, work for them, etc. I give generously to organizations who support the poor, but it is my chioce.
First, it's WARREN. Second... oh, never mind.
I consider myself a student of Scripture and feel that Warren, as a Christian, has an obligation to respond, positively, to the future President’s request. Warren can be criticized for much — but not for this.
Ecumenical? How so?
“I consider myself a student of Scripture and feel that Warren, as a Christian, has an obligation to respond, positively, to the future Presidents request.”
Hmmmm. An obligation. That’s pretty strong. Certainly, if BO were genuinely interested in learning about the Gospel, a request to any Christian should elicit a positive response. But in private. Not if it is a big public “Look at me, I’m asking about being a Christian” show.
Don’t you think it’s a bit like, say, Augustus asking Paul to attend and bless his coronation as emperor? How would Paul have responded? Not positively, I think (unless he took it as an opportunity to publically proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ—and we know we ain’t gonna hear any of that from Warren at the inaguration). I don’t recall any situations when Paul or any of the Apostles were called on to appear and bless bless the ascension of a civil authority to civil power—especially a non-Christian civil authority.
This is also quite a bit different a situation from “rendering unto Ceasar.” That was the submission to civil authorities. It would only be submission here were Warren ordered to show up and say the prayer. But he is not being compelled. So that doesn’t really help.
Bottom line here, there is an entirely secular and public purpose to BO’s request. And that purpose is for Obama to cover himself with a mantle of legitimacy from a prominent Christian.
I believe an appropriate response would be to tell BO that Warren prays for him daily; but that BO’s public positions are so deeply contrary to God’s law, it would be inappropriate for Warren to appear in public and pretend otherwise. Mind you, I would not say this were BO just a sinner and yet another nominal Christian. But he advocates that the government should aid and abet its citizens breaking God’s law.
That which comes to mind is David's involvement with Saul's "court" -- some time after Saul's open and public break with Samuel and his downward spiral into apostasy. After the request of Saul's advisors to Jesse, David became Saul's armor-bearer. This service was taken to a higher level when he became Saul and Judah's champion at Socoh. He says deferentially ("Your servant will go . . .").
Afterwards, David's service was elevated to that of a military commander in the service of this apostate. The fact that he was operating in the Lord's will is made clear in I Samuel 18:14.
Outside the context of Scripture, would not Billy Graham have had ample occasion to opt out of eulogizing President Nixon? Yet, perhaps no stronger Gospel presentation has been given in my lifetime.
I agree with you.
That’s right. Around here he’s vilified for everything he says. I have no problem with him praying at the inauguration. I just pray he says the right things. People here complained about Billy Graham, too. Sigh.
Who needs some radio blabber to launch an operation chaos, the Left will do it on their own!
I don't doubt that for an instant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.