Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Evangelicals and Catholics apart

Rick Garnett gathers some concerns and raises a reasonable question about where Huckabee stands, say, in the spectrum of theoloically conservative Christian opinion. I have to confess that I’m a little less troubled by Rick Scarborough than he is, though John Hagee does give me cause for pause, as his support for Israel seems in part predicated on a vision of the End Times and, as Kathryn Jean Lopez points out, there’s a substantial admixture of anti-Catholicism in his thought.

Will Huckabee take support from any source, or will he draw the line anywhere?

Discussions - 11 Comments

This is ridiculous.

Hagee has appeared with McCain, Gingrich and DeLay. HE'S ALSO appeared with SANTORUM, that would be the very ROMAN CATHOLIC RICK SANTORUM, and Hagee has appeared with Joe Lieberman. Do I agree with everything Hagee has ever written? Absolutely not. Am I Catholic? You bet your ass I am. But I'm very leery of tossing around anti-Catholic bigotry smears. KLO, in her unhinged admiration for Romney's appearance and his marital status, has gone completely bonkers trying to tarnish a man who hasn't any record of disdain for Catholics or Catholicism. That doesn't mean Huckabee agrees with everything the Church has done, or left undone. Huckabee ISN'T Catholic. He's in a particular Protestant denomination. Neither Huckabee nor Hagee for that matter, NEED refrain from criticism of the Catholic Church. They're allowed to criticize that Church, her tenets, her hierarchy, they're free to criticize the whole lot. And that doesn't mean they're prejudiced or bigoted. Difference of opinion does not mean bigotry. And KLO would ordinarily have understood that fine point were she not besotted over Romney.

Is EVERY politician who has shaken the hand of Hagee a Catholic hater? Is every member of his church, which is rather popular in Dallas, a Catholic hater? Is sharing the stage with a John Hagee verboten now? When did that memo get circulated, for apparently a great many Jewish leaders and a great many Conservative leaders must have missed out on it.

Take a gander at Powerline today. And take a look at the unbelievable lengths ostensibly educated men will go to rationalize away the crystal clear gist of what Romney said about MLK. He said he remembered his father "marching" with MLK. Now that's being read in a figurative, not literal manner. However The Boston Globe reports that NOT JUST DID Romney say his father "marched" with MLK, but he also said that he too "marched" with King.

Those statements, and the Clintonesque defense that some make of them, is something to focus on.

But branding Huckabee a bigot because he spoke before Hagee's group is simply beyond the pale.

Take Huckabee on for his record and his policy proposals. But don't try to smear that clearly affable man with the brush of anti-Catholic bigotry.

KLO's piece, per usual for her of late when writing on anything relating to Romney, is unhinged. They're so desperate to stop Huckabee winning Iowa that now they'll bash him with any stick at hand. It just shows you what happens to somebody, or to a publication for that matter, when they've sold their souls over to that soulless Romney campaign.

It's so damn squalid.

I'd say Dan called out your sophistry and lies on this claim Joe. Joe, you told me that I should not question why Romney refused to distance himself from the Mormon church's past racism, and then you try to spread seeds that Huckabee is bad because he is supported by Hagee. Huckabee would certainly distance himself from some of Hagee's beliefs as most people would, but that does not mean that a mainstream politician would not accept his support. This would only be troubling if Huckabee said "I agree with Hagee." In fact we do have a candidate who says "I agree with Mormonism" which is probably weirder and more dangerous than Hagee. It's only a problem to accept someone's support when you succumb to all of there views. There is NO INDICATION OR EVEN CLAIM THAT HUCK DOES.

Joe you are disgusting. Why the blatant double standard? Why do you make up claims against Huck and defend Romney from everything? Do you work for the NRO?

Dan,

Point taken. Someone can like and support MH without the latter agreeing with everything he says. And theological disagreements aren't the same as bigotry. Of course.

But just as I would like the Left to marginalize its extremists, so I'd like conservatives to do the same, which to me means that theologically conservative evangelicals have to be careful about how they relate to "Reconstructionists," who have some rather pronounced theocratic tendencies. I write this as a member of a theologically conservative evangelical church (but not a Southern Baptist).

Clint,

Relax. There are things about Huckabee I find appealing, as well as things I find troubling, which, by the way, is something I could say for any of the Republican contenders. I'm still on the fence, having ruled only Giuliani out, though I can't say that your commentary is helping Huckabee win my vote.

Joe, Would you please explain why you are so quick to question Huck's religious ties, but told me that any inquiry into Romney and his supporters wrong (racisism) was off the table? If you would explain what I'm missing or why the difference, then I would "relax." Otherwise most will continue to be very suspicious of your motives.

As for me, even if any of this is true I see no good coming from a discussion of it. Catholics should have thicker skin.

"And theological disagreements aren't the same as bigotry. Of course."



Of course we realize this, but a lot of the PC crowd does not. They want everybody to embrace universalism. Anything short of universalism they consider bigotry.



It is entirely fair, I believe, to ask how much evangelical support of the War and our policy in the Middle East is predicated on their dominant pre-mil, dispensational beliefs. I think this is probably overblown by some of the anti-dispensational obsessives, but it is not incidental.



Hagee, however, goes well beyond typical pre-mil, dispy beliefs. While he denies it, he seems to support a "dual covenant" theory that is considered heretical by most evangelicals. This is why he is particularly concerned with Israel.

Julie is right. Catholics should and often do have thicker skin.

That's part of the reason I'm real leery before tossing around a line about anti-Catholic bigotry.

Part of Catholicism is intellectual combat, and combat of the first order. That requires besides a certain intellectual confidence, a temper of mind, and that temper of mind is inconsistent with a thin skin.

Clint,

The charges of racism with respect to Mormons are a matter of the past, and very much put to rest by the current practices of the church. If Romney were currently associating with or accepting support from obvious racists (not merely as so defined by professional victimologists), he'd have some "splainin" to do.

Feel free to be suspicious of my motives, just as I feel free to be suspicious of your man Huckabee's strategic deployment of religious language (something he's brought on himself), but please express your suspicion with as much civility as you can muster.

A fun little tidbit of information:
Tony Blair becomes Catholic!

Joe, I find the false civility presented on this blog to be generally disgraceful. It is not civil to merely use big words when one is twisting the facts so much (you may be viewing them honestly but it looks fake). I'm just calling spades as I see them, and while I would apologize for over-the-top language, I think other conservatives should apologize for over-the-top Huckabee attacks.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/11618