Monday, November 22, 2004
In AND of this World: Christ the King Feast Day
Hugh Hewitt is a man with whom I have love-hate relationship.
I think he is a Machiavellian-Christian. Anyone who has studied Machiavelli realizes that the man is not amoral nor immoral as many casual observers paint him to be. Rather, Machiavelli is a man who understood how the world and political leaders worked, and wrote a brief tome on how a practical man should behave if he wanted to retain power (but when considered as a part of his entire work he seems less dastardly).
I must admit that I have never read nor even touched Mr. Hewitt's In But Not Of due to the content of his radio show since I think his radio show exposes his "in and in" the world attitude. When I tag Mr. Hewitt with the "Machiavellian" label, it is based on all the works of Machiavelli. Thus, the label of Machiavellian-Christian is accurate and a constructivism criticism.
Let me give you a recent example of his Machiavellian-Christianity:
In but in: Arlen Specter is okay - abortions are okay! Bad tort laws are okay! Bad workmans-comp laws are okay!
In but not of: Target is bad for not letting the Salvation Army collect during the Christmas season.
Pro-growth, pro-tort refrom and ANTI-ABORTIONISTS all came out against Specter becoming the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Hewitt was for it for "long term" reasons. Translation: Machiavellian reasons.
His anti-Target nonsense seems to be for short-term gain. He claims otherwise citing the birth of Our Savior, but I was raised Roman Catholic, and I can remember my mother telling me that we did not put money in those kettles because our OWN church did "the same work here and around the world" like Catholic Charities. Of course that charity is part of the Roman Catholic Church that Mr. Hewitt has left. The Salvation Army, which can find it roots in the Methodist Church, is very evangelical which caters to the whims of Mr. Hewitt these days.
Mr. Hewitt probably feels victorious since Specter has agreed to back Bush's nominees. BUT, Specter only did that after those of us who are not like Hewitt complained... as real Conservative Christians who understand that there are certain issues that are non-negotiable when clear alternatives are offered.
Mr. Hewitt is not the conservative Christian that many of his brethren in the evangelical movement thinks he is.
Think about this:
Today, in the Roman Catholic Church, was the feast of Christ the King.
I'll make it easy for y'all:
The gospel was about the two felons, crucified, dying in pain on either side of Jesus. The first to comment taunted Jesus just as the Roman Soldiers were doing claiming that if He, Jesus, was the King of the Jews, He should prove it.
The second criminal chastised the first, telling him that the man beside them, Jesus, was not guilty of anything whereas the two criminals were guilty. Dismas (traditionally San Dimas here in Southern California) was afforded the chance to repent. Some may feel that he was lucky.
Maybe.
But Saint Dimas was nailed to cross to die just as Christ was.
He took responsibility for his immoral actions that affected others.
Should the rest of us gamble our souls and silence ourselves for "long-term" political gains if it means the death of milliions?
The voices of conservative-Christians (Catholics and non-Catholics alike) forced Senator Spector to change his tune.
Hewitt did not help us accomplish this goal.
Folks like Katherine Lopez at least tried!
(Originally posted at 9:00 p.m. on 11/22)
I think he is a Machiavellian-Christian. Anyone who has studied Machiavelli realizes that the man is not amoral nor immoral as many casual observers paint him to be. Rather, Machiavelli is a man who understood how the world and political leaders worked, and wrote a brief tome on how a practical man should behave if he wanted to retain power (but when considered as a part of his entire work he seems less dastardly).
I must admit that I have never read nor even touched Mr. Hewitt's In But Not Of due to the content of his radio show since I think his radio show exposes his "in and in" the world attitude. When I tag Mr. Hewitt with the "Machiavellian" label, it is based on all the works of Machiavelli. Thus, the label of Machiavellian-Christian is accurate and a constructivism criticism.
Let me give you a recent example of his Machiavellian-Christianity:
In but in: Arlen Specter is okay - abortions are okay! Bad tort laws are okay! Bad workmans-comp laws are okay!
In but not of: Target is bad for not letting the Salvation Army collect during the Christmas season.
Pro-growth, pro-tort refrom and ANTI-ABORTIONISTS all came out against Specter becoming the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Hewitt was for it for "long term" reasons. Translation: Machiavellian reasons.
His anti-Target nonsense seems to be for short-term gain. He claims otherwise citing the birth of Our Savior, but I was raised Roman Catholic, and I can remember my mother telling me that we did not put money in those kettles because our OWN church did "the same work here and around the world" like Catholic Charities. Of course that charity is part of the Roman Catholic Church that Mr. Hewitt has left. The Salvation Army, which can find it roots in the Methodist Church, is very evangelical which caters to the whims of Mr. Hewitt these days.
Mr. Hewitt probably feels victorious since Specter has agreed to back Bush's nominees. BUT, Specter only did that after those of us who are not like Hewitt complained... as real Conservative Christians who understand that there are certain issues that are non-negotiable when clear alternatives are offered.
Mr. Hewitt is not the conservative Christian that many of his brethren in the evangelical movement thinks he is.
Think about this:
Today, in the Roman Catholic Church, was the feast of Christ the King.
I'll make it easy for y'all:
The gospel was about the two felons, crucified, dying in pain on either side of Jesus. The first to comment taunted Jesus just as the Roman Soldiers were doing claiming that if He, Jesus, was the King of the Jews, He should prove it.
The second criminal chastised the first, telling him that the man beside them, Jesus, was not guilty of anything whereas the two criminals were guilty. Dismas (traditionally San Dimas here in Southern California) was afforded the chance to repent. Some may feel that he was lucky.
Maybe.
But Saint Dimas was nailed to cross to die just as Christ was.
He took responsibility for his immoral actions that affected others.
Should the rest of us gamble our souls and silence ourselves for "long-term" political gains if it means the death of milliions?
The voices of conservative-Christians (Catholics and non-Catholics alike) forced Senator Spector to change his tune.
Hewitt did not help us accomplish this goal.
Folks like Katherine Lopez at least tried!
(Originally posted at 9:00 p.m. on 11/22)
