I feel insulted when you say Falwell and Robertson are Protestant leaders

[demnan]

Dr. Martin Luther King was my Protestant leader. These guys are not heads of any established religions. So don't compare the Pope with these turkeys. I assure you that you have more in common with real Protestant leaders than you do with Catholic ones.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

1. Falwell and Robertson are Protestant scam artists...

You're right, Dr. King was a true leader.
Duckie

[KittyWampus]

2. Scam Artists Sounds About Right, Although Pharisee Has A Certain Ring

[YellowRubberDuckie]

17. Oohh...that sounds even better!

[Inland]

3. "Protestant leader" = "Democratic party leader" = "jumbo shrimp"

Just saying.

[liberal N proud]

4. They are not leaders, but rather radical clerics

No different than Osama Bin Laden

[Dorian Gray]

13. And they are not Protestant, either.

They would claim the "Born Again" moniker and deny the Protestant moniker. They don't liken themselves to any of the established Protestant churches: Episcopal, Methodist, Lutheran, etc.

[Spider Jerusalem]

33. They can deny it all they want.

They're still Protestant. They aren't Catholic or Orthodox, and their thology has its roots in Martin Luther, John Calvin and John Wesley. Ergo, they are Protestant.

[BOSSHOG]

5. I guess it was my post that insulted you

falwell and robertson are scum of the earth, camera hogging, hatemongering opportunists. There is no comparison with them and the Pope. However, THEY think they are leaders, and THEY would feel in their cold hearts that THEY are on the level of a "Church Leader." I know exactly what falwell and robertson are and I know exactly what Pope John Paul II was, therefore my previous post.

[demnan]

9. Not in particular yours

but over the last few days there have been many. I've been to a lot of Methodist church functions where environmental and peace issues have been discussed. Believe me, there are a lot people in the established Protestant churches whose stomachs turn at the thought of these two spiritual leapers.

[kliljedahl]

16. Was that supposed to be lepers?

If not, I don't understand the leapers reference.


http://www.kliljedahl.net

[YellowRubberDuckie]

18. It makes me FURIOUS they think they are on the same level as the pope!!!

:grr:

[mopaul]

6. falwell is one of cnn's most frequent commentaters on religion

that says it all

[tanyev]

8. And Tim LaHaye filled in for him a couple days ago.

God Help America.

[mopaul]

11. i caught that

mr. left behind himself, taking up the slack for jerry, we should all be scared shitless.

[Orrex]

14. That's my view as well

As long as the organized Protestant Church-as-an-entity is content to allow Falwell and Robertson to posture themselves as representatives of the church, the church itself is complicit in their bigotry and mania.

Many took *'s refusal to condemn the Swift Boat Veterans was as his implicit endorsement of their lies and slander; the same is true, unfortunately, in this case. If no statement by Falwell or Robertson is so egregious as to result in a formal rebuke by the church, then one can be forgiven for inferring that the church doesn't find such statements to be objectionable.

I’m sorry that millions of good Protestants are misrepresented by these two insane zealots, but they’re still insane zealots, and the church should formally identify them as such.

[Dorian Gray]

21. But Orrex...

there is no oraganized Protestat Church as an entity. The various churches that are Protestant vary in great degrees theologically, and I don't know one mainstream Protestant Church (with the exception of perhaps the Baptist Church) that would embrace Falwell. The Episcopalians/Anglicans? No way! The Lutherans? Nope! The Methodists? Other than Bush, not really! The Quaker? No way! The Amish, The Mennonites, the Shakers? Nuh uh!

Truly, there are few Protestants that embrace the Falwells, and since there is no central authority in the Protestant churches, who is supposed to speak out against him as a representative of all the religions?

Perhaps it's because I'm from the NYC, but nobody I know, despite their religious leanings, takes Falwell seriously. Certainly not the Catholics I know, but not even any of the Protestants.

[mondo joe]

22. But don't the various denominations have national associations

or something comparable?

I don't pretend to know that much about protestantism, but surely there is some unifying body for the various denominations.

[Dorian Gray]

28. There are associations, of course,

for the Protestant Churches, but I don't know that they are representative of their theological ideas. I think that they are more "diplomatic associations" where churches can send representatives to discuss the Ecumenical movements, and find some sort of fellowship between the faiths. There is probably a loosely established leadership within those organizations, but (I am assuming) not a leadership that fully represents all the member churches theologically.

I also assume that the Falwells and the Robertsons are so far away, theologically, from all the member churches of any association that they don't necessarily feel the need to rebut anything/everything that they say. When someone is a kook who doesn't represent my beliefs, I don't necessarily feel the need to respond to his assertions. (Even if we "loosely" follow the same religion.) Remember, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America and the Missouri Synod-Lutheran Church are very similar, but they even have theological differences and different organizations and leaders. I'm sure that, despite the vast similarities in the two churches, the leaders don't address everything that the leaders from the other churches say because they don't apply to the general population of their churches.

It's even a bigger difference between both those Lutheran churches and the faith that Falwell represents.

Anyhow, here is a website that shows the various Christian denominations in the world. There are hundreds of them, and to find any structural organization that would have a representative respond to Falwell every time he opened his mouth would be impossible.

http://www.wcc-coe.org/wcc/links/church.html

(My church, after 9-11 and the Falwell's attempt at blaming the "sin in the USA," acttually addressed that sentiment during the priest's homily. The priest talked about how that sentiment actually dismisses the idea of Free Will. That those who were responsible for the attacks had Free Will to choose to commit those evil attacks, that we should not say that the attacks were an act of God to punish the evil within the borders of our country. I'm sure similar sermons were repeated throughout the Christian community, but that's not exactly the type of thing that is picked up by the New York Times.)

Sorry about my long-winded response. I find religion fascinating, and making your way through the various denominations of Christianity can be quite puzzling. I agree, however, with the original poster and the sentiment that Falwell and Robertson are heinous human beings. I guess, however, that I am defending the more mainstream Protestant Churches only because the members of those churches I know do so much to help out their communities. I'm sure that the organizations can be remiss in steering their flock away from the dangers of the 700 Club and the like. They should perhaps spend more time in discussing the dangers of "the Prosperity Gospel," something that I find morally repugnant. (See Benny Hinn, whom I find even more repelling than Falwell and Robertson. Also Paul and Jan Crouch!)

[Orrex]

29. What about the Pope?

Oh, wait a minute...


Yeah, you're definitely right that there's no Grand Protestant Poohbah, but isn't there some over-arching structure by which a statement could be put forth? I'm asking honestly because I just don't know.

What's to prevent you or me or that guy at the bus station from "speaking for the Protestant church" as Falwell does?

Of course, I guess an equal problem is that CNN et al throw Falwell on the screen every chance they get, as though the MSM have identified him as Protestantism's spiritual leader even if the church itself has not.

Come to think of it, he has been on the air a lot less in the past week.

[RaleighNCDUer]

24. Mainstream religious leaders' attitudes are disturbingly similar

to those of doctors who will not criticize doctors accused of malpractice -- for the good of the profession.

I saw this 20 years ago when these mainstream religious leaders would not condemn Rev Moon, or Jim Jones, or other cult leaders who attained some prominence. To cast aspersions on the cult leaders, whose methods and beliefs are but focused and magnified versions of their own, would make their methods and beliefs open to examination.

If Jones' paranoia had not overwhelmed him, might he not today be one of those mainstream leaders with a congregation of 10,000, broadcasting from his 'Redwood Cathedral' in northern California?

Moon did not self-destruct, and with hundreds of thousands of adherents across the world, is he no longer a cult leader but truly a mainstream leader, despite his belief that he is the Second Coming?

Where does the line between cult and mainstream break? A hundred and fifty years ago, Mormonism was a cult. Now it is one of the strongest mainstream churches is America.

The mainstream churches need to protect their own image by not giving credence to scam artists. They must also, however, pay heed to their own teachings, as in "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."

[MountainLaurel]

36. Excellent points NC

I've never thought about the issue in those terms before, but I think you're dead on.

:applause:

[Orrex]

26. deleted

[Dorian Gray]

30. There is nothing to stop

anyone from claiming they are representatives of any faith. With Protestantism, because of the MANY MANY churches that make up Protestantism, it's more difficult to control. With the structure of the Catholic Church, if someone spews heresies, the Pope or representatives of the Vatican will always respond to that. With Falwell, because he actually doesn't represent the majority of Protestantism, I just assume that people don't respond because they expect people to know that his words do not represent the theology of the Methodists/Lutherans/Quakers/Anglicans/etc.

(I wrote more of my thoughts out in another post, so you can see what I think of the situation a little more clearly!) Please don't think that I am defending anybody who believes or follows Falwell. He's a charlatan.

And, I suspect that he's not around so much now because he was seriously ill and hospitalized. As a Catholic, I am happy and relieved that I won't have to see his mug on television in response to the Pope's passing.

[leesa]

7. Tell your religious leaders, not us. Get your churches to fight these con

artists...all of them Foulwell, Robertson, the Grahams...ALL of the con men.

[demnan]

12. I believe the head of the (Bush's) Methodist church in Texas

came out against the Iraq war too.

[yellowcanine]

15. Billy Graham is ok, but Franklin is a theocrat and not very bright either.

[wicket]

10. AMEN!!!!!!!

[Zenlitened]

19. If only they were in fact the fringe... but they're not.

The 700 Club - November 2004 Sweeps In - Tremendous Ratings Growth
Backchannelmedia Feb 21, 2005

December Reaches Ten Year Ratings High
Shows Renewed Interest in Family and Faith Oriented Content

VIRGINIA BEACH, Va., January 20, 2005-- The 700 Club's average daily audience, according to AC Nielsen's November sweeps, is up 26% over last year. At a time when most daily shows are struggling The 700 Club is experiencing tremendous increases. November's average daily audience of 922,000 households is the highest in ten years and we experienced the same success in October and November. John Turver, Vice President of Marketing, said, "I attribute the ratings spike to strong program content, great distribution, and a trend in America towards family friendly and faith-based programming." This audience success has carried over to The Christian Broadcasting Network's website, www.cbn.com,. As one of the most popular Christian sites on the web there was a 28% jump in unique user sessions (15.3 million) from year to year and a 60% increase in page views (61 million), which resulted in a 7% growth in average session times to 15.8 minutes, according to Web Methods.

The 700 Club is a live television program that airs weekdays before a studio audience from the Christian Broadcasting Network's (CBN) broadcast facilities in Virginia Beach, Va. On the air continuously since 1966, it is one of the longest-running programs in broadcast history and can be seen in 95% of homes in America. Hosted by Pat Robertson, Terry Meeuwsen, Kristi Watts and Gordon Robertson, with news anchor Lee Webb, The 700 Club is a mix of news and commentary, interviews, feature stories and Christian ministry. The program is carried on The ABC Family Channel three times daily and is seen in 104 million homes by local broadcast syndication. It is seen daily by approximately one million households and over 17 million over the course of a month.

http://www.backchannelmedia.com/newsletter/story/5028779305/The_Club_November_Sweeps_In_Tr.html

[mondo joe]

20. No offense intended, but I don't see why I need to decide who is

Protestant or not.

Catholic is easy - the church decides what's Catholic or not.

Protestanism is more free wheeling. There is no central authority.

It sure looks like Falwell and Robertson are protestant - I don't know how to determine who is or isn't, and I don't know why I should decide.

[Dorian Gray]

23. You shouldn't.

I tend to go by what people claim to be. The mainstream Protestant churches are easiest to determine. (The ones that came out of the Lutheran/Calvinist/Zwinglist movements.) Most Born Again Christians that I do know deny the Protestant label themselves, so I tend not to group them into mainstream Protestantism only because of their denial of the label.

For that reason, the preachers that represent the Born-Again/Non-denominational Christianity I personally separate from the leaders of the Lutheran Church or the Presbyterian Church. Those churches have an established order rather than people who are self-appointed leaders because of their media savvy.

And (not in response to Mondo Joe, but the general thread), I assume that the people in these leadership positions don't feel the need to respond to the Falwells, the Robertsons, and the Roberts because they don't consider them representatives of their religious beliefs at all. Just as I, a Catholic, don't consider Falwell as any sort of representative of the Christianity that I hold close to me.

[RevCheesehead]

25. I don't think it's about religion at all.

It's about the politics of "morality."

Jerry Falwell: leader of the "Moral Majority." A group, disguised as religion, formed to influence politics and culture - through hate.

Pat Robertson: CBN - "the Christian Broadcast Network." When he chose to run for president, he entered the world of politics.

Neither of these men speak on behalf of my protestant (United Methodist) faith. They speak on behalf of themselves, and for the individual congregations they may or may not represent.

on edit: blivet is a member of the United Methodist Church, but even he is not authorized to speak on behalf of the church. In fact, there is a petition/complaint against his membership, as it regards his violation of the UMC Book of Discipline.

"United Methodists calling for Accountable Leadership" Petition Online: http://www.petitiononline.com/tmrloc03/petition.html

[Dorian Gray]

32. I think you hit the nail on the head there...

The Moral Majority is more about politics than about religion. It's dangerous, and a way to manipulate the average person into creating a society that benefits a few rather than the majority.

[RevCheesehead]

34. That's why I've always had a dislike for the movement.

It uses the bible to manipulate its own purposes, rather than responding to the Gospel as a call to love God and one another.

[Discord]

27. King is gone, his message obscured by time

and these are your NEW leaders... embrace them, embrace the church, embrace your God and ALL his followers.

These are your representitives whether YOU like it or not.


So, what do you propose to do about it?

[Dorian Gray]

31. Not much.

They don't represent me. They don't represent the Church that is defined in love and charity, and I don't need to do anything about them. As I said, I know nobody who follows their word, who believes that they are true preachers of God, or who believe that they are the leaders of any Church of God. Perhaps a lot of other people fall for it, but my "fight" is to do the good works that will represent my faith. To help people in need. That is the work of the true Christian.

[Discord]

35. Then help the needs of those in this country.

This is YOUR fight. They do represent you to those who choose to believe whether you like it or not. They represent YOUR religion to the masses while they sell their lies and hatred. Blindfolding the religious of this country as silent partners to this great attrocity being committed.

It is the DUTY of the religious who support the seperation of Church and State to take a stand... because whether you actively support them, or sit quietly on the sidelines.. You help them to achieve their fanatical goals. Silence = Acceptance. Either your with us, or against us. Enough trying to tow the line and play off both sides, because you cant anymore while our rights and freedoms are at stake.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=104&ItemID=7569

because NOW they are at stake...

full Bill here:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.520: