July 16, 2011

"Taking a page from President Obama’s political playbook, Michele Bachmann has..."

"... formally left a church in Minnesota accused of holding anti-Catholic views."
... The matter has been tailing Bachmann for much of her political career. She was asked about the church’s statement in 2006, when she was running for Congress.

“It's abhorrent, it's religious bigotry,” Bachmann said then. “I love Catholics, I'm a Christian, and my church does not believe that the pope is the antichrist, that's absolutely false.”

101 comments:

Randomscrub said...

This whole issue seems like nothing more than a pile of historical ignorance dressed up as an "issue." It's the Lutheran church - OF COURSE it has issues with the papacy! This has been the position of Lutheran congregations everywhere for more than 400 years - it's built into the confessional documents. Why is it suddenly beyond the pale?

Paddy O said...

Good thing she's leaving a church that is elitist and biased against the status of other congregations.

No doubt with this gesture, she'll be invited to share communion and be embraced by all and sundry in the Catholic Church.

Meanwhile, in Lutheran land, people will be wondering why she's so against Martin Luther and wonder if she supports indulgences (which is really more of a Democrat thing).

Beta Rube said...

Inherent in the word Protestant is a rebellion against and harsh judgment of Catholicism and the Pope.

It's never been an issue until now apparently.

Nice to see the scorched earth destruction of prominent conservative women continuing apace.

NYTNewYorker said...

This will be interesting. Will the MSM now pursue this and risk dredging up all of the Rev. Wright caca or just let it die?

I say the MSM will pursue Bachmann on this and make like Rev. Wright never happened.

Their clay feet idol must be saved by any means necessary, even at the expense of the integrity of their profession.

This they have shown.

Curious George said...

"Some people have this vision of a little devil running around with horns and red pointy ears. (Martin) Luther was clear that by 'antichrist' [he meant] anybody who puts himself up in place of Christ. Luther never bought the idea of the Pope being God's voice in today's world. He believed Scripture is God's word."

versus

This racist Anti-American Fuck

Sh's got nothing to worry about.

rhhardin said...

I get the 95 theses mixed up with the diet of worms.

nevadabob said...

They're anti-Islamic and anti-Jewish too.

Also, anti-Buddist.

Isn't a Lutheran church anti- any religion that's not Lutheran?

Wasn't that kind of the point of establishing a new Lutheran religious order?

Bachmann is also heterosexual. Doens't that make her anti-gay?

Paddy O said...

summary:

Michelle Bachmann willing to abandon core commitments in the face of withering media misinterpretations.

What she needs to do is say that she thinks her husband is the anti-Christ, that way she can embrace the Pope (which is in now) and reject submitting to a man (except, of course, the Pope, but not submit to him too much or on issues of political interest, but just enough to make a gesture that she thinks him a fine fellow even if misguided on topics related to life and death).

Fortunately, then, if the Catholic Church refuses her communion, then we can have articles about how they're inserting religion into politics, which is forbidden, because we all know that politics does the inserting in this relationship.

Oh, and does anyone argue that Leo X wasn't anti-Christ? God love the Catholic Church and the many saints who have led it and lead in it, but there certainly have been a number of folks who have done everything that is not of Christ, in the name of Christ, which pretty much defines anti-Christ. Leo X pretty much exemplifies everything that was not Christ in the Catholic Church.

Dad29 said...

Technically, WELS believes that "the Papacy" is--corporately--the Antichrist, not any individual Pope.

And they don't talk about that much, if at all, so it's no surprise that Bachmann didn't know about it.

DADvocate said...

Major non-issue. As others have noted, amazingly enough, Protestant religions have issues with Catholicism. As a Southern Catholic, or Catholic Southerner, the only people I've experienced prejudice from (girls who wouldn't go out with me) due to religious reasons were Baptists, the religion of Al Gore and Bill Clinton.

Does Michele Bachman scare the libs so much that they have to scrape the bottom of the barrel for anything so miniscule to try and discredit her? Personally, I make a rational decision on which to base my vote and not fear mongering about religion. ;)

lyssalovelyredhead said...

I'm Catholic, and I'm not bothered by this at all. I would expect that religious ideologies which differ will have . . . differences. If they didn't disagree with Catholics, they would just be Catholics. Assuming they aren't being obsessive about it, or going around wishing death (or causing death) on other beliefs, or proclaiming everyone involved to be evil, I have no problem.

This is completely different to me than the racism and victimization of Reverend Wright.

- Lyssa

Hagar said...

Neither Martin Luther nor Henry VIII were "anti-Catholic;" rather they both thought they were much better Catholics than the popes of their time.

FedkaTheConvict said...

Not that it matters much in the greater scheme of things but I've lost all respect for Bachmann because of this issue. Just like every other politician she appears to stand for nothing. The marriage contract stunt in Iowa and now this...what does she really believe?

Others have made the point already; its a Lutheran church for crying out loud, of course they have issues with Catholicism.

Paddy O said...

Lutherans are also anti-atheist.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Hi Dadvocate, from a fellow Southern Catholic. (Hey, you're in Knoxville, aren't you? What church? (don't feel obligated to answer if you don't want to) I'm sort of lapsed.)

I heard a lot of weird and extremely ignorant things about Catholicism from other kids, who I assume heard them from their pastors or parents, growing up. But it's mostly ignorance, and it's not that big of a deal. If folks want to actually criticize the Catholic faith, that's fine. It's imperfect, and so is their religion. I'm always interested in discussions of the impact of the differences in different faiths.

- Lyssa

Deborah said...

Reminds me of one of Garrison Keillor's Lake Wobegon monologues. [Lutheran] Paster Inkvist (sp?)is having some problems with his congregation because "they think he is soft on Catholocism."

wv: oughter: Michelle B. oughter stick to her guns.
(originally posted to wrong thread :-)

Deborah said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deborah said...

sorry; I can't spell or type today. "pastor" and "catholicism"

Paddy O said...

They tried this same sort of "you go to a wacky church" thing with Palin.

I might be wrong, but I think she ignored the media, and continued her commitments to her church.

Though, I also suspect Palin is genuinely religious, while Bachmann is culturally so, which means she didn't have a particular loyalty.

I wonder what else other apparent loyalties she will abandon in the pursuit of her ambitions? The media, no doubt, have thirty pieces of silver to give her for every shifted commitment.

chickenlittle said...

Did Bachmann wright about her pastor in an autoerography like potus did?

This sounds more smear than legitimate fear. It sounds exactly like what the kooks tried to do to Palin before they burned her former church.

chickenlittle said...

What do you suppose the odd are that the same people who smeared Palin are behind this smear?

This would be prima facie obvious if TPM led both charges.

nevadabob said...

"Technically, WELS believes that "the Papacy" is--corporately--the Antichrist, not any individual Pope."

Look at this photo.

If all those priests raping all those kids didn't convince you, this photo probably won't either.

edutcher said...

Didn't realize there were so many Catholics here.

I've noticed more anti-Catholicism in the Midwest than in PA, which, after all, is about 45% Catholic. Every once in a while you wonder if the Know-Nothings and Robert Simmons' version of the Klan really went away.

She's smart for cutting her ties now. It's one of the few clubs with which the media can beat her as a person, rather than as a politician.

nevadabob said...

Didn't realize there were so many victims of Catholic priests here.

FIFY.

Darleen said...

My ex is Roman Catholic and I attended Catholic church (which I liked) and our girls were baptized and took their first communion in the Catholic Church.

There were times when they'd come home from grade school and say some of their friends told them "Catholic" wasn't "Christian".

Which is something people would say about my Mormom relatives.

It is such a non-issue -- but that's not the way the MFM will spin it. Obama attends of Church for 20 years that deals in Black Liberation and ::::yawn::::. Michele Bachmann is being attacked for anything not dealing with policy and that's ok because she's an apostate from the "Real Women are Left-Liberals" religion.

Darleen said...

oops... "Mormon" (haven't had my 2nd cup of coffee yet)

YoungHegelian said...

Actually, after the 1999 Joint Declaration between the Lutherans (the Evangelical Church, not the Missouri Synod) and the RC Church, there really aren't any major doctrinal differences between them.

If there's still some EC Lutheran who's still lambasting the RC's, he's got to get with the program.

I mean, the RCs did their part: they named a Luther scholar pope. How's that for a sense of humor?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutheran-Roman_Catholic_dialogue

Phil 3:14 said...

She went to the Lutheran church!? Well I guess that fits her Minnesota roots but I thought she would have been going to some Assembly of God Church (based on her attendance at Oral Robert School of Law.)

And beyond that, who's ever heard of a controversial lutheran pastor?

But on another note I appreciate the Professor responding to my requests for information on "Mr. Republican".

I wasn't aware of Mr. Republican's candidacy? Is he black? Is he a Mormon? What's his wife look like? What church does he go to? Did he sign the tax pledge?

Litmus tests please!!


So in a short 24 hours I now know of Mrs. Bachmann's spouse and her church. And I already know she signed "the pledge", so I've got her pegged.

NEXT!

DADvocate said...

Lyssa - I lived the first 38 years of my life in Knoxville. Attended Immaculate Conception and John XXIII. Now I live in the Maysville, KY area on the KY/OH border.

There's a much higher percentage of Catholics up here. I went to a public high school in Knoxville. There were 4 Catholics (myself, my brother and sister and one other girl) out of 1,200 students. There's probably 100-200 in my kid's public high school of 850 kids here. Most people don't understand Catholicism but there's no problems.

Lots of Catholics get elected to city and county government. The joke here is that you have to belong to the local parish to get elected.

Phil 3:14 said...

I say the MSM will pursue Bachmann on this and make like Rev. Wright never happened.

You have doubts?

And the only requirement for a Democratic candidate re: church is that they have the obligatory Sunday morning speech/sermon (sprinkled with a few "spiritual" words) at an all-black church. That's a "good" thing and smart politically (even if it is an uncomfortable admixture of church and politics. But hey, they're black folk; they don't know better. Its part of their culture you see.)

edutcher said...

nevadabob said...

Didn't realize there were so many victims of Catholic priests here.

FIFY.


As I said, I didn't realize the Know-Nothings were still around.

Until recently.

PS Didn't realize there were so many people who benefited from the teaching of Catholic priests here.

Now it's fixed.

Fred4Pres said...

She should say she has a problem with Lutefisk.

Beta Rube said...

Did she have a role in this kerfuffle?

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2004/01/peace_elusive_i.html

From Inwood said...

Gee, I'd like to join in but, as a Catholic, I have enough trouble explaining Ephesians 5, 22-24, so I'll just vote "present" here.

YoungHegelian said...

@From_Inwood,

Why would you have a problem, especially if you continue reading verses 25-33?

Does it really seem to you that Paul imposes some burden on wives that is not shared equally in Holy Matrimony by husbands?

Really?

Freeman Hunt said...

Michelle Bachmann willing to abandon core commitments in the face of withering media misinterpretations.

She has a core commitment to believing that the Pope is the anti-Christ? I imagine that she didn't even know, like many other people, that that was included in the core doctrine of her church.

Can denomination even been a core commitment for a Christian? Should it be?

AJ Lynch said...

I caught a few seconds of Bill Maher's show last night and the professional gay grievance monger Glenn Greenwald was on suggesting Bachman's husband is nuts and maybe gay too.

David said...

YoungHegelian --

Thanks for reminding me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3HuShaTNoY

AJ Lynch said...

I went to Catholic grade school and we referred to the neighbor kids who didn't as "the publics".


wv= blessi!

YoungHegelian said...

Look, there's believing someone's the AntiChrist, and then there's believing someone's the AntiChrist AntiChrist, to paraphrase Whoopie Goldberg.

I doubt that Bachmann's pastor believes the present Pope to be the leader of the forces of evil of the last days. I doubt he even believes we are in the last days. (If he does, she has a bigger doctrinal issue than his views on the papacy.)

He just thinks the papacy, including its present inhabitant, is, at root, a really bad idea for Christianity. He's just using the traditional religious invective of Lutheranism to express that idea.

Paddy O said...

Freeman, I meant to her church, not to that particular bit. Though, being Lutheran, or any non-Catholic, does imply a inherent rejection of core Catholic theology. Otherwise, they'd be Catholic.

I don't believe a denomination should be a core commitment for a Christian, but that's a fair cry different than renouncing a membership commitment just in time for media coverage and a campaign.

Hearing Bachmann swear, "I don't know this church!" and leave it so publicly does not inspire confidence.

YoungHegelian said...

@David,

Your posting reminds me of this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2005/sep/29/comedy.religion

(See first joke)

David said...

The Lutherans and the Catholics have issues with each other?

Who knew?

traditionalguy said...

Bachmann must be tried by fire like Palin was for 3 years. She is just getting started.

Not only are they women, they are believers in spooky supernatural stuff.

Why can't they be more like a man who is a proud atheist?

Religion will always be scary to the ignorant over-educated who have never encountered it.

edutcher said...

AJ Lynch said...

I caught a few seconds of Bill Maher's show last night and the professional gay grievance monger Glenn Greenwald was on suggesting Bachman's husband is nuts and maybe gay too.

You stayed for that much?

In any case, it's about all the Lefties have.

Carol_Herman said...

Michele Bachmann is Karl Rove's counter-punch to Sarah Palin! She's a clown that rushes out to the limelight. She did it after obama's SOTU speech ... when Paul Ryan came out to give the GOP address.

She's also a religious nutter. (Where Sarah Palin is not.)

So, in a sense, Karl Rove wants to drag Sarah Palin to the right of Michele Bachmann.

Sarah Palin isn't gonna bite this bait at all.

The GOP is still the stupid party. And, Sarah Palin will be her own force. Behind ONE NATION.

Though I'm not surprised at the stupid party, and iowa. As if farmers can tell the rest of America how to vote!

Hm? I wonder how UNDEFEATED is doing at the box office?

The Crack Emcee said...

“It's abhorrent, it's religious bigotry. I love Catholics, I'm a Christian, and my church does not believe that the pope is the antichrist, that's absolutely false.”

Yeah - your church. But there's some other church that also disagrees with your church, and the church you disagree with, and on and on and on.

I say drop the whole church/believing/spirituality/religion thing and start making some sense for a change.

That would be very, very nice.

Mary Beth said...

There's the Church and then there's your church. You know what gets preached from the pulpit, if that's objectionable you leave, if it agrees with your beliefs you stay. The doctrine of the big-C Church is less important than what goes on in the little-c church.

Phil 3:14 said...

Max Lindemann at the "Diary of a Wimpy Catholic" blog nails it.

(As does Mollie Hemingway)

Paddy O said...

"I say drop the whole church/believing/spirituality/religion thing"

...and on and on and on and on...

Freeman Hunt said...

Hearing Bachmann swear, "I don't know this church!" and leave it so publicly does not inspire confidence.

I disagree. I think that if you find out a new piece of information that fundamentally changes your mind about something, you should act.

That bit of anti-christ doctrine is on the denomination's website (or was--I remember reading it years ago there), but I doubt most members have read it.

Ambrose said...

All Protestants are anti-Catholic. That's why they're Protestants. Can wehandle a little religious diversity or do we have to pretend that all beliefs are the same?

FedkaTheConvict said...

All Christian denominations that teach eschatology as a central tenet believe in the Anti-Christ. Its naive to think that Bachmann did not know it is a core belief of her denomination. Didn't she go to Bible study and wasn't she baptized?

rcocean said...

So what does the Catholic Church think of the Lutherans? Religious bigotry can go both ways.

BTW, did Luther think the Pope was the "Anti-Christ"?

Carol_Herman said...

Political theater has nothing to do with religion.

And, the one thing most Americans don't want, again ... Is Dubya ... with his "prayer circles!"

Not that you can't take religious zealots to the cleaners ... You can. Each and every time!

If this were a pool table ... You'd see the stick hitting the Michele Bachmann "ball" ... hoping it sails into Sarah Palin. And, dumps her in a pocket.

Heck, If this were a Jackie Gleason movie ... You'd even see the stick point to what pocket. While "who" is on first.

Paddy O said...

"I think that if you find out a new piece of information that fundamentally changes your mind about something, you should act."

Yeah... fundamentally, sure. If the Lutheran church said they didn't believe in Jesus anymore, that's pretty fundamental change.

The Lutheran church not liking the pope? That's about as basic of church history as you can get. It has been true for 400 years. It's not some new piece of information.

It's like if Palin rejected her Pentecostal church because the media reported it believed in speaking in tongues.

So, either she rejects her association based on media manipulation or she was surprisingly ignorant about a tradition she, at one time, committed to following.

Neither inspires confidence.

AJ Lynch said...

Edutcher:

Believe me, it was purely unintentional and accidental that I even lingered for 15-20 seconds on the POS Bill Maher's crappy show.

Chip Ahoy said...

Have you ever driven through a small town and noticed dozens of tiny churches? On a Sunday the churches will have no more than twenty or so cars parked there. That is so strange. One imagines minute differences in dogma keeping them all ridiculously separated. Which is probably better than being ridiculously united. No matter. It's off to brunch then where we'll see you all trickling in following services and finally all together anyway, all dressed up and well-mannered.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

It's not enough that it completly hurts my opinion of her, but I'm somewhat inclined to agree with Paddy O. What bothers me even more is that it seems like I've seen this from her before.

For example, I heard a bit on the radio the other day where she was discussing removing gov't regulations, and someone kept asking about minimum wage, and she wouldn't give a straight answer. There are a lot of problems with min wage; she needed to just say that and explain what they are, not wuss out about addressing something that might sound bad to the ignorant.

As I've said before, she's 100 times better than the person she seeks to oppose, but I'm not crazy about her as a presidential candidate. I see a replay of the go-along-to-get-along-ism of Bush (and McCain) (not on every issue, but enough to cause problems).

- Lyssa

Carol_Herman said...

From John Wayne's Waterloo ... To her recent pronouncement that "Obama has a lot of choots-pah." She can't say a Yiddish word, either!

That woman is a chutzpa-dick.

Randomscrub said...

FedkaTheConvict:

Actually, Lutherans place very little emphasis on eschatology. Catechesis is based on Luther's Small Catechism, so the main topics are the Ten Commandments (and what they tell us about how we are to relate to God and to one another), the Apostles' Creed (and what it tells us about the nature of God), the Lord's Prayer, and the Sacraments, as well as some general miscellany.

If somebody's really curious, they catechism class may spend one entire lesson on eschatology. Even then, it mostly focuses on the fact that none know the hour of the second coming, and what the Bible says about the new heaven, new earth, and new Jerusalem (especially as it relates to informing our knowledge of the nature of God).

Carol_Herman said...

For gay history they can put Michelangelo on the cover.

And, they can quote Oscar Wilde. (Who was the role model Sir Arthur Conan Doyle used ... when he wrote his second adventure of Sherlock Holmes. Plus, every single one of them stories, there-after.

Don't be fooled! Gays have made enormous contributions! Catholic priests? They got caught out, finally. So it can be said, "Catholics, not so much."

The whole thing with religions is that they are divisive. Early on, though, the famous ark disappeared in battle. Not on Mt. Ararat. But in hand-to-hand combat.

Which shows ya. Even when you remove symbols ... others who make a living at religious affairs ... can always get adherents to part with their money.

It keeps the lights on! Just like at Motel 6.

FedkaTheConvict said...

Randomscrub: that's fine except that Bachmann is an Evangelical Lutheran. The Wisconsin Evangelican Lutheran Synod teaching on the antichrist differs from the other Lutheran Synods but its well-known nonetheless.

Bachmann's sudden realization about this teaching is analogous to Obama attending Rev. Wright's church for 20 years and not knowing what he was preaching about.

Freeman Hunt said...

The Lutheran church not liking the pope?

There's a difference between disliking and labeling as the literal anti-Christ.

Not that I have a problem with the Lutheran church. I don't. But I didn't visit it when we were looking for a church for the same reason that she just left it.

I don't find it surprising at all that a Lutheran of that synod wouldn't know that bit of information. Most people have almost no idea what their denominations believe. They know their churches by the people in them.

Freeman Hunt said...

Bachmann's sudden realization about this teaching is analogous to Obama attending Rev. Wright's church for 20 years and not knowing what he was preaching about.

That would only be true if her pastor were regularly preaching on the topic.

Kirk Parker said...

Freeman,

No, and no.

Freeman Hunt said...

Bachmann's not even one of my top primary picks, by the way.

Freeman Hunt said...

How many Catholics do you suppose know the Catechism of the Catholic Church well? How about Episcopals and their Catechism?

People are not generally very well informed on specific church doctrines, especially when those doctrines are extensive, and those of the Lutheran church certainly are.

reader_iam said...

1. I don't know that we really know why the Bachmanns changed churches.

2. I find it hard to believe that educated, deeply involved congregants wouldn't know the history of the Lutheran church (or the Episcopal church, or what have you) with regards to the Catholic church. I also don't find those histories shocking. These are long histories.

3. There is more than one Lutheran denomination in the U.S. They very in conservatism (as do individual congregations within the denominations). That noted, generally speaking the Lutherans are generally friendly with the Catholics in modern day America; for example, I believe they accept that each others' baptisms are valid.

(Aside: Lutherans and Episcopalians used to have problems, too, and now they are formally In Communion--though I'm trying to remember if this applies to all Lutheran denomination branches or just ELCA. By In Communion, to put it simply, I mean that they can share priests and the clergy of each denomination can perform valid sacraments--for example, the Eucharist--for congregants of the other denomination.)

4. I would dispute--or at least call in question as unsubstantiated--that Michelle Bachmann (whose candidacy for president I do not support, by the way) is more "culturally" religious than "genuinely religious" as compared to Palin. Where did this come from? Perhaps I am unclear as to Paddy O's meaning.

Bachmann had a conversion experience in high school and, so far as everything I've ever read about her, continued on that path out of conviction. She strikes me as "genuinely" religious, and every bit as much as Palin, though the latter is Assemblies of God. What distinction is being drawn here that I am missing? In fact, I think their histories are somewhat similar, in that they both found their faiths strengthened in high school and then carried on. Neither were raised in historic, liturgical churches. And I'm not sure either were raised in families that were committed church-goers to one faith, one tradition, one church when these women were little girls.

(Well, I'm almost certain Palin wasn't. Not as sure about Bachmann, but one gets the sense her religious epiphany in high school was a departure from her childhood experience.)

Caveat: I'd have to do some research to verify this impression of mine. But I suspect I'm not far off--and I'm certain that neither were"raised XX" in the sense that people are "raised Catholic"! In any case, it seems to me that being raised "big C" Catholic comprises both religious and cultural aspects.

5. I think it's jumping to a conclusion to judge Bachmann's loyalty based on this.

6. I don't find it surprising at all that a Lutheran of that synod wouldn't know that bit of information.

Sorry, Freeman, but I do find that surprising, especially given Bachmann's age, experience, education & etc.

Now, that is NOT to say, of course, that her knowing it makes her "anti-Catholics" in the sense that's commonly used today.

7. It seems to me that there's more than a little bit of a lack of knowledge of other denominations and faith traditions on display around here today ... and also a lot of assumptions being made.

Andy R. said...

Bachmann is also heterosexual. Doens't that make her anti-gay?

No, she's anti-gay because she's a bigoted homophobe.

Kakashi said...

Don't like what the Wels says but doubt Bachman knew about it before someone from the Atlantic went digging through the WELS site.

MarkG said...

That's a very unflattering photo of Bachmann.

I was raised Lutheran and I can't believe they're anything but immensely boring.

If I knew I was being taught that Catholics are devil spawn, I might've paid more attention.

reader_iam said...

Freeman: You don't have to be thoroughly grounded in church canons etc. to know a denomination's basic theology, history and so forth, and in my opinion this is especially true of liturgical churches, wherein much of the liturgy is repeated every week and much of the rest at least seasonally.

Now, if Bachmann were, say, in her 20s and assuming she was not been raised in the Lutheran church (again, I'm not sure what her family's religion was or how regularly she attended church/Christian ed), I might buy what you're saying. But she's in her 50s, she's been a devout Christian for decades and she chose to be attached to a liturgical church for many, many years.

I reiterate, none of that would automatically make her "anti-Catholics" in today's common sense, in any case.

reader_iam said...

I've noticed more anti-Catholicism in the Midwest than in PA, which, after all, is about 45% Catholic.

First off, I'd want to know what you mean by Midwest (and do you really mean to compare an entire region to a single states? Seems like the very definition of apples-to-orange to me. ; ) )

Second, it seems to me, generally speaking and in terms of human nature, that there are two situations in which people tend to become profoundly "anti-"something: 1. when they're very unexposed to something and 2. when they're very exposed to something. So just living in proximity to a lot of something doesn't **necessarily** lead to more tolerance, any more than lack of exposure to something **necessarily** leads to an open mind.

Finally, I'm sincerely interested in your source for saying that PA is 51% Catholic. That's never been my understanding (which OF COURSE could be WRONG!).

These statistics, for example, are closer to what my understanding has been.

Cedarford said...

Beta Rube said...
Inherent in the word Protestant is a rebellion against and harsh judgment of Catholicism and the Pope.

It's never been an issue until now apparently.
===================
Aside from the matter of 400 years of religious wars, and a history of antiCatholicism here inc. the Ku Klux Klan.

Better than the 1400 years of the Islamoids at war with all infidels and pagan religions. That is still going strong, Muslims still largely an intolerant lot outside Syria, parts of India, and to a lesser extent Malaysia and parts of Indonesia....

We supposedly put that behind us with JFK winning in West Virginia.

Though the war on Christianity was also picked up by the communists, the Left, progressive Jews through their channels of influence, and of course the loud gay activists of todays "anti-breeder, anti-Christianist" agitprop.

FedkaTheConvict said...

@reader_iam; if what you say that Bachmann became an Evangelican Lutheran as a high schooler/teenager is accurate; then her decision now becomes even more curious. Its even more of a conscious choice than being baptized as an infant without knowing the teachings of the denomination. From my observations people who convert to a particular religion as teenagers or later (I've known quite a few) tend to be much stricter adherents and also tend to proselytize more.

Cedarford said...

traditionalguy said...
Bachmann must be tried by fire like Palin was for 3 years. She is just getting started.

======================
She was appointed to an oil and gas commission and quit.

She was elected governor in a Republican state on a reform platform when 72% of Alaskans polled said they were dismayed with the existing powers graft and scandal.

She was selected to be McCains VP based on an hour's interview with the guy after skipping the "fire" of the Primaries.

In her only debate, while praised for her ability to put together extemporaneous coherent sentences for the 1st time in public - polls had Biden winning 44-53%, Palin 20-31%, the rest undecided or calling it a tie.

She failed open under fire and pressure on a few interviews.

After the campaign was over, the heat on her in Alaska rose, and she quit.

After quitting, she has won some battles of wits against the cabal of journalists arrayed against her, but that is like coming in 1st in the Special Olympics.

In short, even in her ranks of True Believers, some uncertainty about her ability to perform and take the heat exists. That would be dispelled if she could prove herself a full campaign, but she appears to be ducking 2012 or hoping she can avoid the Primaries and have the True Believers in the Goddess demand her inclusion as a VP the 2nd time.
But her negatives with voters make her the weakest current potential Republican candidate against Obama. She trails him by 26 points, 56-30.

Paddy O said...

Far be it from me to be conclusive about someone's religious convictions as it is displayed by church membership.

So, I take the push back as a correction.

At the same time, it's not as much an issue of convictions or devotions or such as it is the timing of it all.

It is just too reminiscent of Obama's throwing people under the bus when they get in the way of his attempts to curry media favor.

The article I read said that she hadn't been even attending for about 2 years. So clearly she wasn't committed to the congregation. Which makes it all seem like a big show in order to assuage media vapors.

There really is a lot of genuine anti-Catholicism in Evangelical churches, though a lot of it that I saw came from ex-Catholics. Educated members of such churches are able to sort out the history and distinctions and do so in a way that isn't sudden surprise when the media finds a gotcha.

It's not decisive about any particular issue concerning her, but it does raise some red flags about her possible tendency to be politically expedient in the face of criticism, rather than holding her ground and finding an educated response. What other prior commitments will she find sudden realization about?

reader_iam said...

Fedka: I don't know what her childhood faith was. In this case, I used the phrase "conversion experience" perhaps too non-specifically--what I meant was more along the lines of "born again," or at least experiencing an epiphany. I don't know whether her conversion experience involved switching denominations/affiliations (or non-affiliations) or not, and I don't know, as stated before, what her childhood--family--religion was, much less how devout and/or active her family was). It would be interesting to know.

You make an interesting point. I've known of many examples (including that of my own brother--a cradle Episcopalian, as I am--when he became Southern Baptist) where the newly converted become among the most passionate etc. etc. in their newly embraced faith tradition. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of examples where that hasn't been the case, and plenty where, regardless of the presence or lack thereof of "New Christian/ New XX" syndrome, didn't seem correlated to congregation-switching. Thus, it's hard for me to draw conclusions with surety.

reader_iam said...

You know, the other thing is that I imagine the Bachmanns chose their shared denomination/church home together (and they got together very young), whether one went with the other's or they went with another one altogether. And that they continue to do so.

This is not unusual, after all. : )

chickenlittle said...

Cedarford wrote: After quitting, she has won some battles of wits against the cabal of journalists arrayed against her, but that is like coming in 1st in the Special Olympics.

After quitting, she has won some battles of wits against the cabal of journalists arrayed against her, but that is like coming in 1st in the sprints at the 1936 Summer Olympics in Berlin.

FTFY, mein Herr.

reader_iam said...

There really is a lot of genuine anti-Catholicism in Evangelical churches, though a lot of it that I saw came from ex-Catholics.

I certainly have observed that.

I've also observed some of it in Episcopal churches etc.

And I've observed various anti-xx's amongst Catholics. Sometimes I think almost every church would be better if only they didn't have to involve people!

Danged human nature.

; )









Danged human nature!

Freeman Hunt said...

I've had Catholics, including priests, try to tell me all sorts of interesting things taught by the Church that are wholly contradicted by the Catechism. I even heard a priest who had just returned from an education at a prestigious school argue that the Church viewed capital punishment and abortion as equally evil. (The Catechism of the Catholic Church disagrees.) My RCIA class was full of expounding on creative doctrines that did not actually exist.

But that's not specific to Catholics. I could give similar stories from involvement in other churches.

It has not been my experience at all that otherwise highly educated people are usually well-versed in denominational doctrine. In fact, it seems to be more of a hobbyist thing. A lot of people think doctrine is dry and unimportant compared to living as Christians in community, and so they put all of their energy into relationships and practice. (I happen to be a person who's into doctrine and thinks it's very important, but I can see why other people see it a different way.)

That said, sure, I will concede that she could be being dishonest in saying that she didn't know that her church taught that. I only submit that that conclusion is not obvious.

A real question: Is this bit of doctrine that the Pope is the anti-Christ included in the liturgy of her church? Not all doctrine makes it into the liturgy, and I'm wondering if this did.

reader_iam said...

Freeman: I agree. I don't we can know for sure whether she is OR is not being dishonest.

Bachmann's former church is part of the Wisconsin Evangelical Synod (WELS), as distinct from both the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS) and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (which, I daresay, is what most folks think of when they think Lutheran). I am most familiar with the latter, not just because it is indeed "In Communion" with ECUSA (Episcopal Church of the USA), but certainly especially because of that. I also have a certain familiarity with LCMS due to friends in that denomination and also with its differences from and with ECLA.

WELS, I'm less familiar with beyond generalities. I know that is a more conservative branch of Lutheranism (as is Missouri). Obviously, it's still a liturgical church, and like other liturgical churches, has roots in centuries old liturgical practice. To what extent or how similar it is, in practice, to the liturgies of other Lutheran branches, Anglicans, Episcopalian or Catholics (all of which share roots and similarities), I can't say. I haven't attended a WELS service nor have I perused its materials.

reader_iam said...

I really wish Mark Daniels (an early commenter here who is both an ECLA pastor a conservative [both theologically and politically) was still around. I'd be interested in his take.

reader_iam said...

Sorry: an "ELCA postor"

The Crack Emcee said...

Andy R.,

[Bachmann's] anti-gay because she's a bigoted homophobe.

Evidence? Where's it written everybody has to love gays, or that disliking them is always based on bigotry? What if you know everything there is to know about gays and you still come away not liking them, what are you then?

I swear, some of you people are so stuck on ass-backwards memes you can barely exhibit the capacity of having a thought of your own. Fucking idiot.

madhenmom said...

I’ve been WELS for about 26 years. I grew up LCMS (Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod), and switched while I was a student at UW-Madison.

I’ve been a member of 4 different WELS congregations. I can’t remember the Antichrist being mentioned in any of our liturgies. In fact, I don't recall ever hearing any of my pastors call the pope the Antichrist. I’ve been in one, maybe two, brief conversations with fellow members where the subject has come up, but my pastor was never involved.

To be a confirmed member in our church, it’s necessary to take 2-3 years of training in the Luther’s Small Catechism . I was confirmed in an LCMS church and my catechism classes did not discuss the Antichrist. I did take a discipleship course for a few months before I joined the WELS, but I can’t remember discussing this topic. My daughter was recently confirmed. I asked her if our pastor discussed the Antichrist and the pope. She said it came up in one of the classes for about 5 minutes. That’s 5 minutes out of about 120 total hours of instruction.

While I attend church regularly and am actively involved in my faith life, I’m hardly a theological scholar. I’m sure there are many WELS members who can recite church doctrine backwards and forwards, but I’m just not one of them. So, for my part, I find it totally understandable that an individual WELS member might not be familiar with this particular aspect of church doctrine.

reader_iam said...

Thanks, madhenmom!

DADvocate said...

[Bachmann's] anti-gay because she's a bigoted homophobe.

In addition to what Crack said, "phobe" means having a fear of. Why do they always try to tie not liking/bigotry to having a fear of? It's often far from the truth. But, again, as Crack said, many liberals/lefties "barely exhibit the capacity of having a thought of your own."

Paddy O said...

"compared to living as Christians in community, and so they put all of their energy into relationships and practice."

Absolutely. I've had Catholics shocked to learn that Christianity has a Jewish background, and most Evangelicals I know barely know anything about Church history, and I can't think of any who know how Evangelicalism, in its latest version, started.

At the same time, I think it's this emphasis on community over denomination that makes it more harsh for me. By making a big rejection of the church, she's tarring everyone there as some fanatic anti-papists, when it's almost certainly true there's a mix of opinions on Catholicism, and most people don't know there's some perspective on the pope as anti-Christ.

Rather than sticking with these people, she tosses them off to the side. Throws them under the bus. It's precisely because she's so willing to abandon those people in her quest that gets me worried.

But, this is only a perceived indication that has to be mixed in with a lot of other considerations. I'm certainly not going to take this and draw some kind of absolute conclusions about her. She's not on the top of my list, but she's not at the bottom either, even still.

reader_iam said...

Huh. Can't comment on a couple of posts more recent than this one. There's a new interface (are you guys doing migration tonight) and it won't allow me to post even though I do have IDs attached to the options listed under the "select profile" drop-down menu.

Oh, well. So it goes. When it's a hassle, it's not worth the hassle.

Have a nice evening!

ken in sc said...

I read that she has not attended a WELS church in several years. Her family has been attending a non-denominational church in her home town. What's recent is an official change in membership. Around here, among Presbyterians and Methodists, people move their membership from one to the other quite frequently.

FissionChips said...

1536 Luther's The Smalcald Articles
Part II, Article IV: Of the Papacy.

9] Therefore the Church can never be better governed and preserved than if we all live under one head, Christ, and all the bishops equal in office (although they be unequal in gifts), be diligently joined in unity of doctrine, faith, Sacraments, prayer, and works of love, etc., as St. Jerome writes that the priests at Alexandria together and in common governed the churches, as did also the apostles, and afterwards all bishops throughout all Christendom, until the Pope raised his head above all.

10] This teaching shows forcefully that the Pope is the very Antichrist, who has exalted himself above, and opposed himself against Christ because he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power, which, nevertheless, is nothing, and is neither ordained nor commanded by God. 11] This is, properly speaking to exalt himself above all that is called God as Paul says, 2 Thess. 2:4. Even the Turks or the Tartars, great enemies of Christians as they are, do not do this, but they allow whoever wishes to believe in Christ, and take bodily tribute and obedience from Christians.

Luther's Articles were published in the Book of Concord which continues to be the doctrinal foundation for all "varieties" of Lutheranism. The Book of Concord also contains Melanchthon's Tract Concerning the Power and Primacy of the Pope which also refers to the Pope as the Anti-Christ in thesame context.

While this isn't emphasized in congregational preaching, I doubt whether any of the American Lutheran's National Synodical Conferences ever took the time to formally vote down Luther's Articles or Melanchton's Tract as no longer doctrine.

Chuck66 said...

Will Democrat Congressman Ron Kind also leave the WELS?

phx said...

Believing someone is the "anti-christ" is not the same as not liking them.

phx said...

After the fact, I see somebody already made that point.
Carry on.

phx said...

But shouldn't religious people be embarrassed to call other religious people such vile names? How is this moral?

reader_iam said...

Believing someone is the "anti-christ" is not the same as not liking them.

Not liking someone is not the same as believing he or she is the "anti-christ." (At least, it oughtn't be.)

Sheesh.

Will all of this crap never end?

My bet is: Yes, this crap will never end.

reader_iam said...

phx: But shouldn't religious people be embarrassed to call other religious people such vile names? How is this moral?

You'd need to define both "religious" and "religious people" both cogently and knowledgeably before I'd even consider addressing your question, phx. (For the present,let's put aside both your "How is this moral?" question and any query I might have about what you mean by "moral" and how you choose to apply it.)

phx said...

Save your sophistry reader_jam. The question was rhetorical.