Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Larry gives two Catholic objections to Ann Coulter’s remarks on Jews
For which many thanks. A follow-up to this conversation we had.

First off he sees what I did:
If she weren’t talking about politics and power and America as a nation, her comments would simply be a fairly facile and lacking in nuance (but true) description of a theological view of the relationship between Judaism and Christianity.
Which in short was what I meant by ‘she’s right’.

Rude? Infelicitous? Grandstanding? Doing what she usually does, getting negative attention, her schtick as an entertainer (essentially a moderately attractive version of Rush Limbaugh)? Yes. But not untrue.

Of course one must be careful not to fall into the pathetic fallacy (‘“A year is 365 1/4 days” said Hitler so obviously that can’t be true!’): I’m not a fan but if what she says is true I was willing to give credit.

But if she really meant what Larry says she meant — like Karl Rove trying to play the Christian vote to bring about a American fascism, just like the Nazis tried with ‘German Christianity’, which seems to fit her ‘platform’ — then indeed she’s taking God’s name in vain in the Gott mit uns sense.

Here is the second part of Larry’s Catholic argument:
You see technically for Coulter to have been right... she needed to speak of the Church, the Body of Christ, as the one people of God which God began to gather with the creation of the people of Israel. This Body of Christ the Church cannot be confused with American Christianity, nor the Christianity of Marcion, or any other form of Christianity that attaches itself to this world and its power politics which are passing away.
Correct but to be fair I don’t think Marcionism counts as Christianity and Coulter wasn’t preaching Marcionism. Re-read the relevant part of the transcription.

That the church, certainly as we understand it, was missing from her remarks is an interesting omission and kudos to Larry for picking up on it. She is speaking perhaps unconsciously from a Protestant point of view.

No comments:

Post a comment

Leave comment