Hello, out-there and bigoted religious views at Sarah Palin’s church:
…Palin’s church, the Wasilla Bible Church, gave its pulpit over to a figure viewed with deep hostility by many Jewish organizations: David Brickner, the executive director of Jews for Jesus.
Palin’s pastor, Larry Kroon, introduced Brickner on Aug. 17, according to a transcript of the sermon on the church’s website.
“He’s a leader of Jews for Jesus, a ministry that is out on the leading edge in a pressing, demanding area of witnessing and evangelism,” Kroon said.
Brickner then explained that Jesus and his disciples were themselves Jewish.
“The Jewish community, in particular, has a difficult time understanding this reality,” he said.
Brickner’s mission has drawn wide criticism from the organized Jewish community, and the Anti-Defamation League accused them in a report of “targeting Jews for conversion with subterfuge and deception.”Brickner also described terrorist attacks on Israelis as God’s “judgment of unbelief” of Jews who haven’t embraced Christianity.
“Judgment is very real and we see it played out on the pages of the newspapers and on the television. It’s very real. When [Brickner's son] was in Jerusalem he was there to witness some of that judgment, some of that conflict, when a Palestinian from East Jerusalem took a bulldozer and went plowing through a score of cars, killing numbers of people. Judgment — you can’t miss it.”
Assholery — you can’t miss it.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 43 comments }
I’ve only heard this on Air America. Maybe Tom Brokaw or David Gregory can ask her about it on Meet the Press. Or is that too tough of a question?
Of course it won’t get loads of attention, the majority of Christian Americans probably sympathise with Jews for Jesus and won’t see what the fuss is about.
Evangelical Christians evangelize. At least when they target us, they’re picking on people their own size. The stories I’ve heard of the extortion of disadvantaged people in poor countries really bug me. “Pray to my G-d, and I’ll build you a school house. . .”
My mom really hates Jews for Jesus; I just think they’re funny. But I didn’t care about Rev. Wright, either, so who knows what people who actually care about this stuff will think.
Sure. And I share your disdain for the evangelism tactics that target disadvantaged people. I also laugh at Jews for Jesus, because they’re so ridiculous.
But the problem here isn’t just that they’re trying to convert Jews to Christianity (although I find that offensive). The really big problem is the implication that Jews being killed in terrorist attacks is punishment for not being Christian. And if Jews getting killed in Israel is “judgment — you can’t miss it,” I wonder what that says about other infamous situations wherein Jews have been killed. The statement itself is bad enough; the broader (and obvious) implications are despicable and sickening.
Silly Jill. Is Sarah Palin’s middle name “Hussein”? That woman is a real red-blooded American, and you should not be limiting her freedoms. If she wants to, she can shotgun beers with the KKK for the rest of the campaign season. This is a free country, don’t you get it? Why do you hate America? WHY?
I’ve confronted some rightwingers with this. And I think I can tell you whey they (allege) that they’re not upset.
Their first excuse is that this is all made up by the “liberal media”.
Later, they start mumbling something about how, at least this guy didn’t say “God damn America”.. So, I guess they’re somehow tying it to patriotism. I guess they don’t consider Jews real americans, and outrageous statements on Jews and Israelis are wholly excusable in their minds.
Personally, I think the real reason they aren’t outraged is because Sarah Palin had an (R) next to her name.
…because the outrage surrounding Rev Wright was completely race related. Every time I hear the “I don’t like who he surrounds himself with” or the “elitist” arguments all I hear is “I’m racist, and I would never vote for a black man so I have to find ways to justify my prejudice.”
actually Jill people like that have said that Jews deserved all those infamous situations in which we were tortured and/or killed (WW II, the pogroms, divinely inspired reactions to passion plays in Europe . . .) all because we are damned for killing Christ and double-damned for continuing to reject him as our saviour. Don’t worry though, they do need to keep about 144,000 of us alive to convert us in their end days.
This is fairly standard political practice. Reverend Wright and Father Phleger are admissible attacks on Senator Obama, but Sarah Palin’s church is off limits. Michelle Obama’s understandable frustration, as a black woman, with modern America is an admissible attack but Mr. Palin’s advocation of Alaskan secession from the United States is off limits. The trap is that the conservative political machine is willing to be nakedly hypocritical within the rules of politics but that past Democratic candidates (Gore and Kerry, especially) have not been. Obama, who has been more aggressive in his campaigning, has then been accused by the McCain camp as being ‘the same old politician’ for fighting back. McCain, whose theme is every bit as rooted in change as Obama’s, is running the typical political campaign and yet expects to be able to attack Obama for doing so.
I do want to say something about Christian missionary work overseas: I know very little about evangelical missionary work, but I do know about the work of the church I grew up in and the majority of mainstream Christian churches. Their missionary work is primarily humanitarian, and the ’soul-saving’ is done on the side as the people being helped express interest in the ideas of the missionaries. There is no ‘believe as I believe or receive no help’ clause in the humanitarian charities of the majority of mainstream Christian churches around the world. Not being an evangelical, Charismatic, or Pentecostal, I can’t say whether this is or is not true of their churches as well.
Jews for Jesus is not, strictly speaking, an ‘evangelical’ Christian group. It is a group that practices evangelism, but this is not the same: ALL Christian groups and churches do so, MOST other religions do so as well. Evangelists and evangelicals are not the same. Evangelical Christians believe that, in order to truly be saved, one must hear the word of God spoken aloud by a preacher and believe it. Reading and believing the Bible and prayer are not enough. If Jews for Jesus has been taken over by right wing, evangelical elements then I am rather saddened. It used to be an actively liberal organization.
Religious leaders say many things in the church that are not meant for broader consumption and are open to many degrees of interpretation. Many religions believe things that mortally offend the practitioners of other religions, or the non-religious. This is one of the reasons our Constitution establishes freedom of religion and outlaws a state church. The fact that right wing, medievalist Christian leaders wish to make the state an element of their interpretation of what Christianity should be bothers me very much. Reverend Wright and Father Phleger are also Christian leaders and preachers, Reverend Wright is even technically an ‘evangelical.’
A few weeks ago, one of the many churches I pass on the way to work sported a sign reading ‘Can America afford a watered down Christianity?’ The real reason they aren’t outraged is because the leaders of the religious right believe they are the only real Christians in America, and they believe the kind of things spouted by John Hagee and David Brickner are REAL Christianity and that the many Christian and even evangelical liberals in this country are servants of the Antichrist. They believe they are fighting the war they believe to be foretold in Revelation and that they are the good guys.
They scare me so much more than Al Qaeda. All Al Qaeda can ever do is blow me up. These people are willing to blow the world up.
yes, well, saying disgusting things about Jews is clearly not as bad as saying “unpatriotic” things about America, because America = white people, and Jews = something else, we’re not quite sure what.
oy.
You can’t reason with religious nutters of any denomination.
I cannot completely argue with you, Rachel, but I will try a little anyway. I don’t believe that modern Republicans are racist in the classic sense, not the neoconservative leadership anyway. I will concede that quite a few paleoconservatives are racist in fact while telling themselves their theories are not truly racist, but merely practical. Pat Buchanan comes to mind.
I will say flatly and with contempt, however, that the modern Republican party is entirely intolerant of non-conformists or people who ‘don’t think like we do.’ Condoleeza Rice and Sarah Palin are acceptable as strong women because they hold the correct set of solidly bourgeouis values the Republican party sees as ‘right thinking.’ Blacks, Hispanics, Asian-Americans, women, Jews, and anyone else are welcome as long as they have the same idea of America as the Republican leadership. Darrell Issa of West Covina and the obnoxious Jonah Goldberg of ‘Liberal Fascism’ could sit down at dinner and get along very well, despite being a Lebanese Christian and a Jew. On the other hand, Glenn Beck and I are both white males from middle class Protestant backgrounds and we have almost nothing in common.
The new prejudice around which the ‘Big Tent’ of the Republican party is pitched is this lockstep vision of the United States as a political and economic entity. I’m certain Sarah Palin sees herself as a feminist and other Republicans see her as a great example of the ideal American woman. If she were Jewish instead of Pentecostal, it’s very likely they would still feel that way IF she were an Orthodox or Conservative Jew whose world-view meshed well with theirs. Remember, Bibi Netanyahu is one of the most beloved foreign leaders in GOP circles.
Saying disgusting things about /people who think differently/ will always be acceptable to the GOP because they are united in mindset. Saying ‘unpatriotic’ things about America means questioning their absolute, God-given rulership of the world.
Luckily, to paraphrase a quote from you, Jill, “Wright [Brickner] is only Obama’s [Palin's] pastor [pastor's invited guest speaker], and he has never been invited to influence policy.”
Brickner then explained that Jesus and his disciples were themselves Jewish.
“The Jewish community, in particular, has a difficult time understanding this reality,” he said.
Um, really? ‘Cos I’ve never met a Jew who thought Jesus was Christian, but I have met Christians who did. Just because Jesus was Jewish doesn’t mean Jewish people have to believe he was the Messiah.
Oh, wait. Jews for Jesus and Logic don’t get along.
EVERYONE SHOULD WATCH AND HELP SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT THIS VIDEO.
Very Creepy promotional video for a Wasilla Assembly of God Master’s Commission workshop.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJnhRhJW35o
When you watch this video REMEMBER…this was Sarah Palin’s church for nearly her entire life.
The man in the leather jacket donning a goatee was Sarah Palin’s pastor from 1999 till 2002.
This is the same workshop that Sarah Palin is addressing in the now widely seen footage in which she talks about God’s plan for Iraq, and asks people to pray for a new oil pipeline. The pastor who introduces her in that video is the same goatee, leather jacket donning man in this video.
She continues to have close ties to this church and is involved with workshops and seminars there.
I know, right? Was talking about this the other day with a couple of Jewish friends, and the consensus was that either a) they don’t care because it’s Jews, b) they don’t care because she’s Republican, or c) they don’t care because they agree.
Though you’ve gotta wonder how it would change foreign policy re: Israel.
Simple answer: IOKIYAR
Foreign policy, re: Israel, is deeply entrenched. The differences between the center-right (most Democrats, including Obama) the neoconservatives are negligible. Both sides are vocal in their support of Israel and their commitment to defend it, while also being committed to the peace process as long as it doesn’t anger Israeli conservatives. Bibi Netanyahu is the favorite of both President Bush and Bill Maher (though I’ll be fair and agree Maher has better liberal chops than anyone else on mainstream tv), whose ideas on the ‘Global War on Terror’ are shockingly right wing in many ways.
The evangelical wing of the neoconservative crowd is united around ‘Pro-Israel’ groups like that led by Hagee. Their reasons for supporting Israel may be anti-Semitic and fundamentally anti-Israeli in the long run, but their agenda is complete commitment to Israeli security.
Paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul have questioned the US’s Israel policy, but in particularly convoluted ways. Paul is an isolationist, pure and simple, who believes we should stay out of the rest of the world and keep the rest of the world out of the Americas. Buchanan’s criticisms of US-Israel policy are based in his view of history as the conflict of ethnic forces and his philosophical commitment to Fichtean theories of romantic nationalism. The Republican party does not listen seriously to either of them.
There are a few center-right voices (Jimmy Carter comes to mind) and more genuinely leftist voices (mostly in the liberal media, by which I mean print media targeting an already left-wing audience and not the ‘liberal media’ of Lou Dobbs or Bill O’Riley) whose attitude is that Israel is in the wrong and the Palestinians in the right in the regional conflict and that Israel is the primary stumbling block to Arab-Israeli peace. They see the the Israel-Palestine issue as identical either with South Africa (Carter) or the Balkans (many leftists) and speak up for a total shift in Middle East policy. They are not listened to either.
I am not arguing the virtue of these dissenting voices, I am pointing out that dissenting voices on Middle East policy are marginalized at this point in time. American policy on the Middle East and Israel is very nearly monolithic, with the differences being petty quibbling about tactics and minutiae of the peace process rather than overall goals or meaningful policies. Both the Democrats and Republicans appear to be deeply invested in right wing and center right groups like Likud and Kadima rather than involving themselves with more liberal political parties. Since Sharon’s medical issues have removed him from the forefront, the leaders of Kadima have advanced former Likud members to top spots while keeping former Labor leaders in harmless positions, out of major or visible ministries.
I don’t think there is either a risk of US-Israel policy changing for the worse or a hope of it changing for the better.
I’m surprised no one has brought up the “Why are you dirty atheistic Liberals so hellbent on attacking me for practicing my “Christian faith”?!!” line of arguments.
Recalled hearing plenty of such arguments to justify various forms of bigotry as a child growing up in the 1980’s and from my US history classes.
Lalaroo, missing the point.
if the examples are parallel, it’s not lucky at all that the media gives Palin a pass while raking obama over the coals . the point isn’t that pastors influence policy, it’s that the media is utterly complicit in slanting the election coverage against the democrats.
her own pastor, not the guest brickner nutso, is already pretty freaky, too.
And then there’s this: http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/09/05/alaskans-speak-in-a-frightened-whisper-palin-is-%E2%80%9Cracist-sexist-vindictive-and-mean/
which, fair enough, needs verification, but is pretty damned disturbing.
Rev. Wright is (justifiably) irritated about racial oppression in America. Larry Kroon thinks that he and his kinds of christians are the chosen people, and everyone else is screwed, especially the damn jews who killed jesus. Except it wasn’t really them, and maybe jesus never existed. Lynchings are real, talking in tongues is not. They’re different issues. The fact that the media had a flag waving amnesia attack over a valid critique of American foreign policy is another kind of failure. I think the Rev. Wright story is more of a story in that it addresses a pertinent issue, where hating on the jews is just what christians do. It’s not like christians thinking they’re going to be raptured away as we burn to cinders is a social issue that’s ever going to change… I just can’t make myself care very much. Still: What a bunch of callous assholes.
I am relieved to see such an awareness of the danger we face in a win by the republicans. Their was a perceived sway of female and middle road Dem’s over the race issue. Glad everyone is above that. McCain’s obvious ploy to reach woman and conservative voters has failed.
Eclectic Radical – sorry, but most religions do NOT evangelize. It’s expressly prohibited in Judaism, and is not practiced by Buddhists, Hindus, Shintoists, animists, or Unitarian Universalists. It also isn’t the main emphasis for most mainline Protestant churches.
As for Jews for Jesus…their purpose is to bring Jews to Christ. Period. If that isn’t evangelism, I don’t know what is.
Politicians’ pastors’ views are a secondary issue in my mind, to some of the other troubling issues at hand.
For example, on macro level, women’s rights are already under trouble RIGHT NOW:
http://digg.com/politics/19_days_before_HHS_rule_changes_everything
In addition, in couple of years, if McCain wins, the chance of Roe vs Wade being reversed increases as at least couple liberally appointed judges are likely to retire.
That, my friends, would mean going back to the middle ages in reproductive issues.
“Feminists for Life.” “Jews for Jesus.” Where does it end? “Tenth-Grade History Teachers for Wikipedia”?
I for one think that since the addition of Palin to the McCain ticket will once again drag conservative Christianity into the spotlight, everyone who does not want to see this country have a theocracy at any point needs to watch out to see how and where Palin’s religious-wrong ties go and expose them!
She has been rumored to have ties to Joel’s Army, but that hasn’t been proven yet, IIRC.
As a little girl I recall one sermon at my grandmother’s church that highlighted “the role of the woman is in the home,” and I remember the cognitive dissonance that resulted, as I examined my own thoughts/feelings and how they were not in line with that of the church. The point: both the men/women of this church are probably now more likely to vote McCain b/c he added Palin to the ticket. The group of people they are appealing to do not see her church membership as a concern. It would, of course, be nice if this were given equal play time from the media.
Did anyone else notice that Palin was wearing an Israeli flag pin on her lapel during the acceptance speech?
Looks like she didn’t really wrote off the teachings of her church, but embraced them.
Another thing she’s not getting any shit for that Obama got criticized for…flag pins.
Wright was much more of a media phenomena, because white america is both unfamiliar and uncomfortable with the image of the “angry” black preacher. Hence, the media’s obsession with playing the video of a racuous black preacher over and over and over.
The “disturbing” image of the uppity “angry black man” is something that is deeply rooted in white america’s DNA.
Crazy white preachers can get away with saying outrageous and bigoted things, because they are much more within cultural norm.
…really? Can you imagine the reaction if any Democrat wore a flag pin that wasn’t the U.S. flag? And, call me a conservative, but I do think it’s totally inappropriate to wear another nation’s flag to one of your country’s biggest domestic electoral events.
It was a blue star pin.
Good to know. Ignore my previous comment then. This is what I get for not watching the conventions.
Misspelled for the win!
Jill – I can see why you’d think it was the Israeli flag. I did too! But heaven forbid I question Palin’s wardrobe choices – even though it would seem to me that you’d think that a candidate would want to avoid wearing any lapel pin that ISN’T an American flag (the Alaskan flag would have been too easy to take potshots at, especially given her past “Alaska first” statements)
Just goes to show how untouchable this woman is as a candidate – the MSM can’t say a damned word about her without being labeled sexist and Obama/Biden can’t raise legitimate questions about her record and platforms without being tarred as sexist. In my mind, this is the most twisted form of sexism there is.
Ellid, you’ve named five religions and a club for people of any or no religious identity. That’s not ‘most’ religions. As for the discussion of whether it is an issue for most mainline Protestant churches, it is. It simply goes by a different set of codes: ‘How can we get more members? How can we get more people in the door?’ Mainline Protestant churches evangelize all over the US and all over the world, they just don’t use the head-breaking tactics of evangelicals or the disgusting commercial approach of the Charismatics and Pentecostals. I grew up in a traditional Protestant church, not at all evangelical, and the number one discussion at many of the members’ meetings was ‘How can we get more members?’ more often than not. All Christian denominations place some emphasis on evangelism. Many of them do it in very subtle, inoffensive, humanitarian ways. Others are aggressive and use the most savage hard sell techniques. With the exception of the Sufi, all the Islamic sects evangelize. While Orthodox Judaism does specifically forbid evangelism, many modern Reform rabbis are seeking out Gentiles interested in Judaic ideas and teaching them. That may not /strictly/ be evangelism, but it’s very close. Many Buddhists /do/ evangelize. There is a whole industry in Zen education, for instance. Many Hindu teachers, admittedly not the best or most legitimate of them, do actively seek out students. There is a huge market in ‘educational’ material about Taoism.
Evangelism is the process of seeking new practitioners, of selling your religion to the potential customer. ‘Educational’ material marketed for the non-practitioner with the purpose of building an interest in a particular direction of religious or philosophical thought is most definitely evangelism, even when not called such. Admittedly, many of the ‘evangelists’ of major religions not concerned with Jesus or Muhammad are not the intellectual cream of their faith and many of them do not have the grasp on their own tenets they believe they do. Many of them appear more interested in money than enlightenment. That said, they exist and in significant numbers. Nor is their profit motive all that removed from the desire of Charismatic and Pentecostal Christians for more, more, and more money. Arm yourself with lots of Pepto-Bismol for your nausea and force yourself to listen to the Kenneth Copelands and Rod Parsleys sometime. They want money, just as the hack ‘educators’ selling Eastern philosophy want money, and their grasp of the central tenets of their faith is every bit as flimsy.
The major difference is that the people selling pseudo-Zen, pseudo-Taoism and pseudo-Qaballah to the American upper-middle class don’t have their own political party in the United States. The people selling pseudo-Christianity to the American working class do.
even if it had been an israeli flag (she allegedly had one in her office) it is not a sign she wrote off her churches teachings about Jews. It is dangerous to conflate support for israel as some sort of support or acceptance of us Jews. Evangelical/Fundamentalist Christians support Israel (and Israeli control of Jerusalem) for the sole purpose of fulfilling their requirements for Armageddon. Jews on the other hand are bad and must repent for their sin of rejecting Christ by being saved (converting to Christianity). Most Jews understand this but some are naive enough to believe fundamentalist support of Israel means they respect the right of Jews not to have to live as Christians (the right also likes to use the phrase Judeo-Christian values to make it appear as though they’re not trying to establish a governance based on Christianity).
Annaliegh:
My concern is that the majority of those who don’t want to live under a fundamentalist theocracy don’t really see the danger. They either really don’t think it will happen or buy into the O’Reilly Factor war against Christmas BS.
Yes, I think you’re right about this one. Unfortunately most people have no idea about the scope of the religious-wrong’s insanity. I make it a point of educating myself about it and then talking to people who might not necesary know about it as much as possible!
“Most Jews understand this but some are naive enough to believe fundamentalist support of Israel means they respect the right of Jews not to have to live as Christians (the right also likes to use the phrase Judeo-Christian values to make it appear as though they’re not trying to establish a governance based on Christianity).”
I wouldn’t say that it’s a matter of naivete. I have an Israeli friend to whom I talk frequently, as I mentioned above. In her view, it doesn’t matter why someone supports Israel. The fact that they do is what is important. She is as angered by anti-Semitism as anyone, but her attitude is that Israel has so few friends that anyone who genuinely supports it is welcome regardless of motives. Many of the ‘people on the street’ in Israel have a bunker mentality about life. This is why Likud consistently does well, and why parties even further to the right than Likud pick up delegates in the Knesset. Likud wants to protect them from the people trying to kill them.
We’ve seen this in the US since 9/11. The Republicans want to protect us from the people who kill us, so we vote for them even though we realize they are screwing us the whole time. And that’s just the people intelligent enough to see the Republicans ARE screwing us. Don’t get me started on Mr. Numbnuts.
“In addition, in couple of years, if McCain wins, the chance of Roe vs Wade being reversed increases”
gah. can we please stop waving this stick around? the incremental attacks at the state level have already rendered this law mostly irrelevant. having rights on paper means nothing if there is no infrastructure supporting those rights.
“a club for people of any or no religious identity”
what? please to be cutting out the derision for other people’s belief systems. the UU is responsible for some pretty amazing interfaith initiatives, and many other *coff* “Real” religions could learn a few things from how they operate.
Do you really think that Roe is “mostly irrelevant”? State laws have done lots of damage to be sure, but something like 1.3 million women in the United States still manage to have abortions every year. They don’t have an easy time at it, and there are many more women who aren’t able to terminate their pregnancies, but the guarantees Roe provides remain crucial. Dismantle Roe — or do what the GOP platform wants to do and outlaw abortion — and a whole lot of those 1.3 million women are going to be facing some very dire circumstances.
Railing against state laws that limit abortion rights is certainly merited, but not at the expense of reality.
Oh fuck. I actually know the Brickners. My parents are friend with David’s parents Avi and Leah. This is probably the most embarrassed I’ve been in a long while. I really need to stop dismissing the crazy shit that the people around me are spouting out.
Jews for Jesus terrify me. In high school, my synagogue’s comparative religion class once went to a service at a Messianic church (I refuse to call it a temple or a shul or a synagogue, since it’s not) and I was incredibly creeped out by their messages.
And if anyone is up in the air about this: as a Jew who grew up in the Bible Belt and experienced all sorts of attempted conversions, Jews for Jesus go way beyond the usual, “By the way, have you thought about accepting Jesus?” It is downright coercive and scary.
Comments on this entry are closed.