jump to navigation

When Hate Comes to Town. . .or, Fred Phelps is all the things he claims to hate March 2, 2007

Posted by Administrator in Catholicism, Cultural Pessimism, Personal.
trackback

For those of you who have not heard the name, Phelps is the deranged “pastor” of the Westboro “Baptist Church” of Topeka, Kansas. This is the crazed homobigot who dashes about the Republic, protesting at the funerals of grieving survivors of victims of the Iraq War, claiming that the deaths of these soldiers are due to the fact that the US continues to allow the “menace” of homosexuality to exist within its borders.

Long-time readers of this blog know that I am no apologist for homosexual behavior. But know this: If I had to choose between spending an evening over dinner with my longtime -and recently quiescent- adversary and very voluble homosexual apologist GodofBiscuits and the utterly loathesome Phelps, I would pick Biscuits in a heartbeat; every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Make no mistake. Biscuits and I still have significant differences of belief of what is true. And those dinners would be loaded with serious arguments and maybe even fistfights.

But Biscuits is infinitely more the humanist and compassionate than Phelps can ever be, and much more the model of Christ-like behavior than Phelps.

You have to visit Phelps’ website (the name suggests a type of twisted humor; sadly it is not- and I will not link to the place. Google it, you can find it easily enough) to get the full flavor of his derangement. All I will say is that the man is not a Christian, and he is one of the few that I can think of on this earth that Christ would probably completely disavow if He were to return right now.

It is possible that Biscuits might argue that Phelps is at least an honest Christian, being completely up front about what Christians really think -deep down- about homosexuals.

That argument is incorrect for a host of reasons. The simplest refutation I can come up with is this: Jesus sat and dined with sinners, the most profound and shunned sinners his culture had to offer. He did not treat them with derision. He did not condemn them. He loved them. The ones he condemned were the pharisees, the juridical followers of the law that had no love in their hearts. True Christians would at least talk with those who sin unknowingly or in determination, rather than outright condemn them as has Phelps.

Why am I bothering talking about this?

Because demented followers of this hateful dingbat are coming to my town on Sunday to protest at the funeral of a local Sergeant that died in Iraq. The family has asked for people armed with American flags to stand 500 feet out beyond the entrance to the facility where the memorial is to take place. I’m gonna be there, in my sweatshirt that advertises my Catholic school (we’re also damned forever according to the scurrilous Phelps), and we are not going to let these swine in. We will be quiet, compassionate, prayerful, and absolute in our refusal to let these jackals in human clothing disrupt the service.

Advertisements

Comments»

1. Dana - March 3, 2007

Yeah. That man was HIGHLY active on my campus, chalking up sidewalks and hosting demonstrations (KU) since his church wasn’t all that far away.

As part of LesBiGay’s week long promotional activities one year, they decided to stage a public, homosexual kiss (which they actually decided against before doing it) and that really got Phelps and his gang upset. So they turned out en force to demonstrate against it.

If they did anything at all, it was aid in the campus’ already liberal leanings. Even I as a Christian did not want to be in any way associated with that group out protesting with signs which read, “God hates f***” (and without the decency to bleep themselves).

I would have liked to have lead a Christian demonstration against the demonstrators.

As it was, I was fairly new to the religion and distanced myself from it.

2. demolition65 - March 3, 2007

Yeah. I know that we as humans can come in all shapes, sizes and stripes, but Phelps is a particular brand of odiousness that is so vile it almost becomes difficult to categorize. Very little can make me sympathetic towards the plight of homosexuals. . .but THIS guy would make me join a gay-rights march just to protest him. He’s that offensive.

It’s that urge that aids in increasing sympathy for the liberal position. Phelps blackens all that is Christian by using the term “Baptist”.

3. B. Ryan - June 27, 2008

Regarding the Jesus argument:
Phelps and the WBC brigade have a counter for this; namely, that those whom Jesus dined with were honest seekers of the truth; he came to them because he knew they would repent of their previous crimes. Hence, they argue, he wouldn’t go into a bar and drink with your regular sinners. They are hardline Calvinists and would argue that those who responded positively to Jesus’ message were already “elect” and therefore in some sense saved already.*

Of course, it’s worth noting that the WBC almost never mention the name of Jesus – the atonement only gets a look in when they’re arguing that all Jews must repent of deicide to be saved (even though they are calling God a liar if he honoured the mob’s call for his blood to be “on (their) children,” as he previously stated with the coming of the prophet Ezekiel “The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father”).

They also hold to a form of Calvinism that argues we shouldn’t pray for the vast majority of people, because they aren’t elect and are therefore damned (but Jesus said to pray for your enemies) and that we shouldn’t preach the gospel because for most people it simply renders them more accountable. Take a look at their website – they openly state their purpose is to blind people to the truth and instead to preach judgement, Jonah-style (confusing the prophets, Christ’s ministry, and the Great Commission!). No mention of any “good news” there, even for the elect.

* This is where double predestination as anything other than a simple outgrowth of God as omniscient Creator falls flat on its face. Can a member of the “elect” die in sin? If yes, Christ’s sacrifice is purely judicial (without the ability to transform us or even draw us to God) and the Bible’s warnings about sin not being able to enter heaven a lie. If no, God must give saving faith before they die, in which case we’re back to predestination as a simple plan rather than a category of people born righteous. Either way, preaching these “behind the scenes” facts about God’s unique view of the world is contradictory to the Bible and encourages lewdness; after all, if you’re elect, God will save you. If you’re not, you’re going to hell anyway.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: