Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

17

Why are Christians not condemning the perversion of religion for profit?


Dave of NixGuy and my Wide Open colleague and I have been doing a point/counterpoint post that started here with Part I, in reaction to the reaction surrounding Ann Coulter’s Donny Deutsch (host of a cable show called, The Big Idea) interview last week. Here is Part II and Part III’s question and answers are below.

While Dave composes his answer to the question as well as to my answer, here is my part, cross-posted at Wide Open (I’ll provide the link once Dave posts the completed entry).  I want to say that this exploration is exactly what I enjoy about blogs and online interaction and Dave gets all the credit for the idea.  Thank you for asking me to participate, Dave.

Part III’s question: Is the use of a religious tenet for the purpose of being provocative acceptable?

JILL: I’m not a particularly superstitious person, but I do believe in fate. So I want to start off my answer to this question with my horoscope from today. I subscribe to some online thing that sends it to me everyday but I only read it once a week or so.

Your spiritual side is growing hungry for stimulation, so keep pushing for insights today. You need to avoid anything that is too easy to master, because it just isn’t going to engage your brain enough. This is not a day to seek out comfort and ease. It is a day to push yourself to try new things — you will surprise yourself with what you
find.

See what I mean about fate? This post and its question were meant to be.

Okay – The use of a religious tenet for provocation, in the manner in which Ann Coulter uses such concepts, is unacceptable and should be condemned. Here’s why I believe this and want to know whether Christians feel similarly or are just fine with however anyone perverts Christianity, if indeed the way in which some people use Christian tenets to further non-Christian goals (like attracting attention to sell books that are not liturgical in nature) is considered perverse:

Ann Coulter was asked by Donny Deutsch to describe her perfect country. She said it would look like the Republican National Convention in NYC, 2004. He said, what does that look like? She said, all Republican, all Christian.

Now – this is where there’s a divergence as to whether Deutsch provoked her, she became provocative or, let’s be honest – both things were probably going on. I can stipulate that Deutsch wanted to provoke her, but his follow up wasn’t unnatural. We have to be honest about Coulter being a willing participant because , #1, she’s on a book tour, and #2, she certainly could choose the Hillary Rodham Clinton tactic that was on display with Tim Russert during one of the Democratic primary candidate debates and say, “Ha! You are trying to provoke me into saying things that are provocative and I won’t play your game.”

I mean – raise your hand if you think they worked this out ahead of time. She’s trying to sell her book at a time when people are more and more vocal about how inappropriate she is in so many ways.

But – we’re talking about Ann Coulter. She adores playing games, though she seems to adore selling books even more. (yeah yeah snark)

Ok – so Deutsch seeks to provoke and, oh my God – Ann goes along with it, let’s herself “be provoked.” Then, when Deutsch further questions her about what she means by “all Christian,” Coulter chooses to become provocative: she launches into her Coulteresque way of defining the perfected Jew concept in Christianity.

This is where my astonishment comes in, in two ways:

Pre-amble: I know Christianity through the way in which the Christians I know observe it. I know Catholics, Methodists, Episcopalians, Unitarians, Congregationalists, Baptists, Evangelicals, Presbyterians, Greek Orthodox and I’m sure I’ve met many others for whom I don’t even know which denomination they belong.

When I have been asked about going to mass, nine out of ten times (yes, there have been that many) I have gone. I’ve been to Jesuit and Holy Cross father induction masses and countless Christian weddings, including being the maid of honor in an Episcopal one. My parents, two brothers and only living grandparent at the time (a first generation American born to Russian parents) sat through the entire Georgetown mass at my graduation – although my grandmother, 77 at the time, was nearly apopletic in the beginning, until a very kind Christian put her in her place (another story). I’ve spent nearly three weeks, at two different times, working in Appalachia on Methodist church missions. There, I participated in the faith services as part of the program – but as a Jew. And 90% of the mission experience was focused, not on working me over to become a Christian and not on them talking about how do we get Jews to become Christians (they had no idea that there’d be a Jew among all the Georgetown kids coming in – imagine their surprise).

No – the emphasis of the mission was on, what a shocker: GOOD WORKS. HELPING OTHERS. MAKING LIFE LIVEABLE for people who had nothing but strip mines in their backyards.

So, with that background and much more knowledge, my first astonishment is:

With all the amazing ways I know people pursue Christianity on a day to day basis, if a Christian, who views their Christianity as an important and very visible part of their public presence, was given the chance to describe their perfect country, no way on Earth would I ever expect that the first thing that they would say would be: Everyone will be a Christian.

In this day and age? When you know that’s not going to happen (and Dave has written as much in his posts on this topic – that Christians just are not around enough Jews to actively be getting close to the goal of all Jews wanting with free will to convert so that the messiah can come)?

No.

The first thing I would expect a person, who views their Christianity to be an important and visible part of who they are, to say when asked about their perfect country would be: no more hunger, no more poverty, no more abortions even, no more conditions under which people have to suffer, living in a country where everyone’s needs are met to as close as possible to everyone’s desires.

So part of my answer to this post’s question is: The only reason Coulter picked one of the absolute least achievable tenets in Christianity, over all the other far more accepted and exceptionally agreeable and good tenets in Christianity that are even shared by other religions and people who don’t profess a religion, is because she wanted to be provocative.

Which leads to my second astonishment:

If a Jew did this kind of game playing with the tenets of Judaism, I would be ballistic. I don’t like it when non-Jews use my religion to promote their goals, let alone when fanatical, fringe Jews like Meir Kahane (and no doubt many others I’m not thinking of at the moment) use my religion in perverse ways. And I would be happy to condemn in writing and in person such perversions.

So – I ask, Christians: are you okay with Coulter using a tenet of Christianity in this way? Why is the discussion not revolving around that question?

I don’t understand why a chorus of Christians is not rising up to say that what Coulter did is unacceptable because #1, she placed the perfected Jew tenet over and above all others in envisioning the perfect country and that doesn’t represent how Christians live their lives and #2, she did so during an effort geared specifically toward selling her book.

To head off one defense of her which might read something like: well, she’s a Christian – of course she’s going to use every chance she gets to promote perfecting Jews and she has a big platform and it’s all tied up together.

I’ll call B.S. on that. Do you think God would buy that explanation, or Jesus? And I don’t either. There are far too many love thy neighbor tenets in the Old and New Testament to defend her actions that way.

Someone wrote in a comment something about how the most important commandment in terms of a hierarchy for Christians is to not do that which is hateful to others. Well, using religion to sell books is hateful to me. And I would like to hear from Christians – is using religion to sell books hateful to you too? Because, I suppose, even if it isn’t hateful to you to do that, if it is in fact hateful to me, then you need to not do it. Go tell Ann!

To re-cap: Based on what I know and have experienced, Coulter’s use of a Christian tenet was perverse. Based on my beliefs, using religious tenets in a perverse way is contemptible. Based on my belief that such use is contemptible, such use should be condemned. Where is the condemnation? Or are Christians going to say that Coulter’s use of a religious tenet to sell books isn’t perverse and by all means, she should shout the perfecting Jew tenet over and above all the other Christian tenets as often and as loudly as she likes?

That would not reflect how I’ve experienced Christianity. And I’m one of those who needs perfecting and has been around hundreds of Christians throughout her life.

Final word of advice to Ann and those who defend her as just trying to fulfill this perfecting Jew tenet by trying to sell books to enable her to try harder to achieve that tenet:

Annie-baby, honey, doll: If you are so sure that this tenet is the number one Christian tenet that you think of when you think of your perfect country, do you really think you are going to persuade any Jew to even consider Jesus as their saviour if you keep presenting the “choice” the way you did on Deutsch? Honey – you need to work on that message big time. Because for sure, you are going to sell far more books than you’ll ever convert Jews. I would think that that conclusion means that, if you really consider yourself such a Christian-tenet following Christian, you need to do some serious soul-searching.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:28 am October 17th, 2007 in Jewish, Judaism, Marketing, Media, Religion, Women 

Comments

9 Responses to “Why are Christians not condemning the perversion of religion for profit?”

  1. 1 Coulter Christians « Bad American on October 17th, 2007 12:52 pm

    [...] on the PD Wide Open Blog, you should check it out. This morning WLST’s Jill Miller-Zimon wrote a long entry (I have a feeing she was up all night) in her blog asking a very basic and simple question that [...]

  2. 2 Jack on October 17th, 2007 1:23 pm

    The only reason Ann’s comments are getting such static is that it they were stated in a context of what Jews should do (i.e., convert or be “perfected”), as though Jews were somehow special in their shortfall. The fact is, and this is historic christian doctrine, we ALL fall short of God’s glory, therefore need a Savior. It’s not a Jewish “problem”, it’s a human one. The same can be said of Muslims, Hindus, Germans or Irish. If it’s human, it’s separated from God by sin and needing redemption. How is that anti-Semitic? The accusation is universally applicable, so no one group is singled out. The same solution is offered to all, therefore no discrimination. Christians aren’t any better than the next person; they just have been made aware of–and accepted–a free gift called Eternal Life offered by God through Christ. Everyone is free to reject it or receive it. A more level playing field I cannot imagine.

  3. 3 Roland Hansen on October 17th, 2007 3:55 pm

    In that I am not Christian and in that I have a very similar background to Jill, I understand and completely agree with her.
    I have made a few comments on a variety of blogs, e-bulletin boards, and my own two blogs that are somewhat along the same lines.
    Jack’s comment that precedes mine, as well intended as it tries to be, is just another example of how exasperating the intrusion of Christians unto non-Christians and their proselytizing can be.
    I will never forget a conversation my wife and I had with a “good Christian” couple who are neighbors of ours in which the woman said “Just because you’re Jewish doesn’t mean you can’t be good Christians.” That same couple frequently make references to being “jewed” or to “that Jew.”
    The money pot just keeps on growing for some of the televangelists and for several other Christian ministers in real life congregations to the point that many live a life of luxury far beyond the rest of us, let alone the poor and needy.
    No matter what religion one is, I for one, do not feel profiteering should be accepted as part of spreading the word nor should it be tolerated within the relgious community.

  4. 4 Roland Hansen on October 17th, 2007 3:59 pm

    er, ah, ahem,
    I mistyped. The last two words in the very last sentence of my previous comment should be “religious community.”
    Sorry.

  5. 5 Paul on October 18th, 2007 9:02 am

    “Someone wrote in a comment something about how the most important commandment in terms of a hierarchy for Christians is to not do that which is hateful to others.”

    Jill: if this is in reference to a comment I made, I didn’t get my point across. The Great Commandments are to love God, and to love one another. The meaning is all wrapped up in what ‘love’ connotes, and that would take lots of writing and discussion.

    Christians look at the life of Jesus as a model for how we should live. He served first, taught second.

    And as I said before, the writings in the Christian Bible with nearly all the bizarre imagery about the end times are contained within Revelations, a book written in the apocalyptic style, and one that not all Christian scholars agree should have been included in the Bible (and some books were left out, like the Gospel of Thomas).

    I guess I refuse to get wound up about Ann Coulter. In this big world, there are all kinds of folks talking crazy stuff, mostly for self-serving reasons.

    You believe in fate – I believe in justice. Coulter will experience the consquences of her behavior.

  6. 6 Jill Miller Zimon on October 19th, 2007 2:45 pm

    Jack – that’s an interesting distinction you make – re: Christians accepted a free gift for Eternal Life (though shouldn’t all gifts be free to the recipient? If you get the gift only if you accept Jesus, is that still a gift?).
    Jews don’t believe that life is Eternal. So accepting the gift would be accepting something of no value to Jews. We’d have to have other beliefs about the afterlife – which we don’t and aren’t part of Judaism.
    And – like I wrote – if you must accept Jesus in return for Eternal Life, well, then, it’s not really a gift, is it?

  7. 7 Jill Miller Zimon on October 19th, 2007 2:49 pm

    I agree 100% with this, Roland: “No matter what religion one is, I for one, do not feel profiteering should be accepted as part of spreading the word nor should it be tolerated within the relgious community.” I just don’t see why that is not an absolute for people of all faiths.

  8. 8 Jill Miller Zimon on October 19th, 2007 2:51 pm

    Paul – it was in fact someone else on the Wide Open threads – “skydaddy61″ I think or “ntyson” – one or the other. And they returned to correct me – I had it a bit backwards!

    But I agree 100% with you here too: You believe in fate – I believe in justice. Coulter will experience the consquences of her behavior.

  9. 9 MATTHEW 5:29… on October 22nd, 2007 8:58 am

    [...] This is what we’re dealing with Jill. digg_url=”http://havecoffeewillwrite.com/?p=5249″; digg_skin = ‘compact’; [...]

Leave a Reply




"));