AFZ, do you object to C of E churches flying their diocesan flag? ( the cross of St George with the diocesan arms in the upper canton)?
Also I wonder whether military standards and flags within churches are objectionable. It seems to be common in many British churches.
And at least in some Canadian churches I've seen, they have plaques etc on display, memorializing the names of fallen soldiers who had been members of the congregation.
Can't remember if the text contains any endorsements of Canada's participation in the wars, but it would be unusual if they didn't, and anyway, they don't have similar displays for people who died of other causes, so we can assume that the deceased are being remembered as having died under morally exceptional circumstances.
Said plaques and/or parchment rolls (my present congregation has both) usually begin "Lest We Forget" with Union Jacks and Canadian Flags hung above them.
I hope they aren't blasphemous else my congregation is done for.
Doing research on this hallowed genre has now led to ads for something called the Precious Moments Personalized Bible For Boys showing up in my feed. Apparently, in addition to the usual record-keeping section, you can get your boy's name emblazoned on the front cover.
The cover also has a cutesy image of a young boy at prayer, and it's all apparently connected to a franchise of cartoon characters. I'll say it does appear to be going a bit beyond the slapdash utility of "Well, on the sparse frontier, it was handy to have the one book you own also be the place for listing family history."
I hope they aren't blasphemous else my congregation is done for.
It occurs to me that "idolatrous" might be a better term for what these sorta religious texts and displays are allegedly engaged in.
Not that that would make much difference as to the concerns you evince.
(FWIW, I think you COULD argue a case for old war-memorials in churches being blasphemous/idolatrous, but at this point, campaigning for their removal might be a little on the pharisaic side.)
Doing research on this hallowed genre has now led to ads for something called the Precious Moments Personalized Bible For Boys showing up in my feed. Apparently, in addition to the usual record-keeping section, you can get your boy's name emblazoned on the front cover.
The cover also has a cutesy image of a young boy at prayer, and it's all apparently connected to a franchise of cartoon characters. I'll say it does appear to be going a bit beyond the slapdash utility of "Well, on the sparse frontier, it was handy to have the one book you own also be the place for listing family history."
That franchise is the suckiest thing ever, and we used to mock it by imagining Bible stories that, er, would NOT be improved by being handled with those sort of cartoon characters. I gather there is/was a chapel done up in the same sort of statuary. We used to wonder what the crucifix looked like.
That franchise is the suckiest thing ever, and we used to mock it by imagining Bible stories that, er, would NOT be improved by being handled with those sort of cartoon characters.
That franchise is the suckiest thing ever, and we used to mock it by imagining Bible stories that, er, would NOT be improved by being handled with those sort of cartoon characters.
Psalm 137:9?
Is that better or worse than, say, Lot and his daughters?
I hope they aren't blasphemous else my congregation is done for.
It occurs to me that "idolatrous" might be a better term for what these sorta religious texts and displays are allegedly engaged in.
Not that that would make much difference as to the concerns you evince.
(FWIW, I think you COULD argue a case for old war-memorials in churches being blasphemous/idolatrous, but at this point, campaigning for their removal might be a little on the pharisaic side.)
It strikes me that it is quite difficult to be part of an organised religion and avoid idols.
Of course there are idols and "idols" and things-that-become-idols, which is fine, we all define and redefine concepts to suit circumstances in our own worldview, especially in religious contexts.
A thought I had regarding Trump earlier is the resonance it has with earlier rampant dictators who sought to control religion and the masses of believers.
That seems to me to be the major difficulty here - if Trump is rejected and if he becomes the "dictator-for-a-day" he promised then his dalliances with certain kinds of nationalist religion become particularly worrying and uncomfortable.
To the extent that other personality driven political-religious figures are not. For me religious leadership is often an exercise in power and control (usually but not always at a local level), that becomes particularly worrying when the person seeking the power over religion is also the POTUS.
Maybe this is stating the obvious, for that I apologise.
I hope they aren't blasphemous else my congregation is done for.
It occurs to me that "idolatrous" might be a better term for what these sorta religious texts and displays are allegedly engaged in.
Not that that would make much difference as to the concerns you evince.
(FWIW, I think you COULD argue a case for old war-memorials in churches being blasphemous/idolatrous, but at this point, campaigning for their removal might be a little on the pharisaic side.)
I think war memorials in churches, at least the ones that are remembering the people from the community who died, are fine. The people who put them up presumably were the ones who had lost a whole lot of people in the community that they knew personally, often their own children and such since these would’ve been young men. And of course they wouldn’t necessarily even have bodies to bury. And back in the day, the local cemetery was connected to the parish church, wasn’t it?
Doing research on this hallowed genre has now led to ads for something called the Precious Moments Personalized Bible For Boys showing up in my feed. Apparently, in addition to the usual record-keeping section, you can get your boy's name emblazoned on the front cover.
The cover also has a cutesy image of a young boy at prayer, and it's all apparently connected to a franchise of cartoon characters. I'll say it does appear to be going a bit beyond the slapdash utility of "Well, on the sparse frontier, it was handy to have the one book you own also be the place for listing family history."
That franchise is the suckiest thing ever, and we used to mock it by imagining Bible stories that, er, would NOT be improved by being handled with those sort of cartoon characters. I gather there is/was a chapel done up in the same sort of statuary. We used to wonder what the crucifix looked like.
I used to call them “Vicious Moments.” 😈
There’s a trend now called Altered Moments, I believe, in which people buy old PM figures and repaint them to make them dark, goth, etc.
My grandfather was a career soldier across two world wars. I feel the poignancy of memorials to the dead. In fact I can see how this is important even for non-war dead. I once was in a church for a funeral and saw a metal plaque to a group of teenagers who died in a road accident 20+ years before.
For me where this becomes more problematic is where military flags and standards are in places of worship. Indicating a close relationship between the religion and the military/state.
Partly I think this is about equality, I don't think we see the same associations between other religions and the state, which makes me uncomfortable. Partly I am uncomfortable with the idea of state control of religion anyway. Mostly I think it suggests a misunderstanding of the purpose of religion and the difference between being a "state citizen", a "religious believer" etc. The end result is that the state tends to be associated with Christianity and tends to give the white war dead more respect than those of other skin colours. This is changing but very slowly.
Yes, I’m thinking more of stone or metal plaques with lists of names rather than military flags and such. And especially from the two big world wars, where tons of people died in a relatively short time. (And big local disasters, like coal mine collapses and things, etc.)
When you spoke of Islamic Terrorists or their equivalents, you did not define what you met by equivalent. There are other groups in Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Shintoism, various forms of tribalism that could be under that umbrella. I wish you had been more specific..
And I wish you'd read for comprehension. 'Elsewhere' covers a multitude of sins.
If I'd put 'Europe and elsewhere' would you complain that I hadn't listed Asia, Antarctica and Australasia among other continents?
No, don't go blaming me for your inability to read for comprehension. Hell beckons if you try to blame other people for your own shortcomings.
I'm not saying that because Lent's over I'm taking the gloves off but take this as a shot across your bows.
Meanwhile, go in peace to love and serve the Lord ...
In many English cathedrals you will find memorial chapels for the local regiment. That is where you may find old battle standards, apat from flags on war memorials.
In many English cathedrals you will find memorial chapels for the local regiment. That is where you may find old battle standards, apat from flags on war memorials.
Also St Mary's, Warwick. And of course in many rural churches next to the local manor house there's a whole series of family tombs. Christianity has been co-opted by many forms of power over the years. This one feels particularly egregious, but perhaps that's just because it's done by someone too stupid to do it with finesse.
For me with regard to the state, there's a big difference between if the flags are metaphorically over the cross or under it.
Actual State institutions being potentially problematic the other was round.
Trump Bible, probably is a whole package issue. It probably shouldn't be ignored how polarised things are and that in many ways it's been made a zero sum game.
The price doesn't help, either.
I think location also matters. My local Kirk has the war memorial behind the communion table above the minister's chair. The symbolism is not ideal.
I'm not familiar with the layout of a typical Scottish Kirk. Are the memorial, the communion table, and the chair at the front of the room, so that the audience is looking at them during the service? Or more off to the side?
In our church, and in most Church of Scotland churches with which I'm familiar, the Communion table is at the front, in the centre, and the congregation is looking straight at it.
That franchise is the suckiest thing ever, and we used to mock it by imagining Bible stories that, er, would NOT be improved by being handled with those sort of cartoon characters.
Psalm 137:9?
Is that better or worse than, say, Lot and his daughters?
In our church, and in most Church of Scotland churches with which I'm familiar, the Communion table is at the front, in the centre, and the congregation is looking straight at it.
So, going by this, the congregation in @Arethosemyfeet's church are staring straight at the war memorial during the service. If true, yeah, I could see that being less than ideal.
In the Canadian churches I've seen, the memorial was usually near the entrance, in the lobby.
I think the distinction between heresy and blasphemy is that heresy is belief deemed willfully incorrect, and blasphemy is an attitude that is deemed willfully irreverent.
Isn't another important distinction that one must be "inside" of a religion to commit heresy, but not blasphemy? To that end, can someone wholly outside of a religion really commit blasphemy? Isn't taking offense at an alleged blasphemy a self inflicted wound?
In our church, and in most Church of Scotland churches with which I'm familiar, the Communion table is at the front, in the centre, and the congregation is looking straight at it.
So, going by this, the congregation in @Arethosemyfeet's church are staring straight at the war memorial during the service. If true, yeah, I could see that being less than ideal.
I mean, the large vase of flowers that resides on the communion table obscures it somewhat most of the time, but the placing is unfortunate. I wouldn't dare suggest moving it, however.
Trying to get it moved might be like what I called "pharisaic", in my comments to @Sober Preacher's Kid above. The plaque means a lot to many people in the congregation, and there'd a big shouting match if you suggested moving it, with the now-elderly descendants of the dead being especially traumatized, so why bother, just to enforce some technical violation of the no-idols rule that even God probably doesn't really care about in this instance?
[Granted, this sort of argument always put me in mind of the schmaltzy defense of maryolatry that I've heard from Catholic apologists: "Yes, some people go a little overboard and treat Mary like a deity unto herself, but if a little boy over-praises his mother, is that really going to offend his father? More likely, the dad would just think it's cute."]
It's a sign of identity. Embassies fly flags, to let you know that this bit is theirs, rather than part of the host country. The Royal Standard flies over Buckingham Palace when the King is in residence. When he's not there, it's not there.
Which I think is why the US habit of flying the US flag everywhere seems a bit odd to my British sensibilities: you don't need to fly the flag to distinguish this bit of America from some other bit of America. It's all America.
IMHO in U.S. flag-flying there's something of the British attitude toward football clubs.
It’s probably—by which I mean almost certainly—a bit of a tangent in to get into why flags are flown in this thread, unless we’re specifically talking about national flags in/on/in front of churches or other religious places, but it’s hard for me to not say something when flags are mentioned.
Suffice it to say that national flags carry different meanings in different countries and cultures. In some countries, it’s very unusual for private citizens to fly the national flag, while in others (and not just the US), it’s very common. Some countries have different versions of their national flags—with one version for anyone to fly and another that’s just for the government—while other countries use the same design for both purposes.
So what flying or displaying a flag might mean is very culture-dependent.
It's a sign of identity. Embassies fly flags, to let you know that this bit is theirs, rather than part of the host country. The Royal Standard flies over Buckingham Palace when the King is in residence. When he's not there, it's not there.
Which I think is why the US habit of flying the US flag everywhere seems a bit odd to my British sensibilities: you don't need to fly the flag to distinguish this bit of America from some other bit of America. It's all America.
IMHO in U.S. flag-flying there's something of the British attitude toward football clubs.
It’s probably—by which I mean almost certainly—a bit of a tangent in to get into why flags are flown in this thread, unless we’re specifically talking about national flags in/on/in front of churches or other religious places, but it’s hard for me to not say something when flags are mentioned.
Suffice it to say that national flags carry different meanings in different countries and cultures. In some countries, it’s very unusual for private citizens to fly the national flag, while in others (and not just the US), it’s very common. Some countries have different versions of their national flags—with one version for anyone to fly and another that’s just for the government—while other countries use the same design for both purposes.
So what flying or displaying a flag might mean is very culture-dependent.
Yep. Sorry wasn't trying to create a tangent. Just put the church/nation thing in a broader context. The overarching point I was making is that Christian Nationalism is incompatible with the Gospel of Christ.
I am cautious that we should be wary of crossing the line where the church specifically endorses a nation or people. Especially as to me an English man, the flag of St George and the Union Flag mean particular things. To those not of my heritage, they often mean something very different and Jesus does not belong to the English or British nor is he particularly on our side. Joshua 5:13-14 is particularly meaningful here. So I'm not saying that CofE churches should be banned from flying such flags but this is why it concerns me. It is a line we should be careful of crossing. To me, many churches teeter on it. YMMV, of course.
But to come back to the topic at hand, there is no doubt in my mind that the 'Trump Bible' has crossed the line at breakneck speed such that it is no longer visible, even if these fools turned round as it's long over the visual horizon.
The article BF linked to confirmed two things for me. 1. That this is a co-opting of God as being specifically pro-America and pro-Trump in a way that is unequivocally blasphemous. 2. The description of the product quality suggests my $10 estimate of its real retail value was an overestimate and someone (or someones) is (are) making a lot of money out of these, which to me, just further enhances the blasphemy.
I hardly ever use that word, BTW.
Contrast it with how the various Copyright holders of Bible translations bend over backwards to make them as freely available as possible. H&S, I'm sure have made money from the NIV as so, so many have been sold but they appear to try not to. They control the Copyright, to protect the integrity of the translation, not to make money, it seems to me. They don't even try to stop critical or fiction writers using or misusing exerts. That's how it should be. And other translation Copyright do the same AFAICS. My point being that there is a righteous way to manage the necessary commercial aspect of Bible printing and distribution.
Anyway, I do pray that God will bless the USA - for lots of reasons. However, the GodBlessTheUSABible is grotesque.
In our church, and in most Church of Scotland churches with which I'm familiar, the Communion table is at the front, in the centre, and the congregation is looking straight at it.
So, going by this, the congregation in @Arethosemyfeet's church are staring straight at the war memorial during the service. If true, yeah, I could see that being less than ideal.
I mean, the large vase of flowers that resides on the communion table obscures it somewhat most of the time, but the placing is unfortunate. I wouldn't dare suggest moving it, however.
A vase of flowers on a communion table? Sacrilege!!
In our church, and in most Church of Scotland churches with which I'm familiar, the Communion table is at the front, in the centre, and the congregation is looking straight at it.
So, going by this, the congregation in @Arethosemyfeet's church are staring straight at the war memorial during the service. If true, yeah, I could see that being less than ideal.
I mean, the large vase of flowers that resides on the communion table obscures it somewhat most of the time, but the placing is unfortunate. I wouldn't dare suggest moving it, however.
A vase of flowers on a communion table? Sacrilege!!
Having a cross or candle(s) would be Rank Popery so what else can you do?
Alec Mapa, gay Filipino comedian, on the other hand, is awesome.
The info in the linked article is indeed ... honestly not surprising to me.
Given all of the weird quasi-religious stuff Trump has tried to do several times now, not just the stuff mentioned in the article, it adds an extra layer of creepiness to the whole thing:
One thing I was wondering this morning over coffee that someone here could perhaps help me with.
If we turn around the question, what then would be the answer?
What I mean is this: the narrative that we are being told is that Trump is trying to speak to a constituency of conservative Evangelical Christians. If that's really true (which in some ways seems quite unlikely given their focus on honesty and sexual purity on the one hand and his admissions about his own behaviour on the other), why don't these people feel that this "Trump bible" is blasphemous?
We are given to understand that the group of Evangelical Christian Trump supporters tend to be people who are anti-Catholic, believers in biblical inerrancy, etc and so on. These seem to be the group that is perhaps least likely to accept a bible edition that is bound with a bunch of other stuff. I'm thinking specifically of the type of Christian characterised by the late Ian Paisley in Northern Ireland.
Do you see what I mean? I lack the vocabulary to be specific about these ideas but hopefully others can clarify for me.
Could it be that Trump has miscalculated that these Evangelicals would accept this?
Or perhaps that the buyers of the "Trump bible" are not really Evangelicals of this kind. In which case perhaps the media narrative is wrong.
As I understand it, if you control for religious self-identification, support for Trump correlates negatively with frequency of religious observance.
Thus, a white conservative evangelical who attends church regularly is more likely to be a Trump supporter than a mixed-race atheist with no religious observance; but they're less likely to be a Trump supporter than a white self-identified conservative evangelical who attends church rarely or never.
I think you underestimate how thoroughly compromised much of US evangelicalism is by white supremacism and pseudo-Christian nationalism.
I think it depends what you mean by "evangelicalism". Pat Robertson and the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention almost certainly know that it's theologically off-base for Trump to claim, as he has, that he doesn't need to ask God for forgiveness because he never does anything wrong. But, as I've said, they keep quiet about stuff like that because he gives them the policies they like.
I think the Trump Bible is aimed mostly at people who have a much vaguer understanding of Christianity, the kind who answered "yes" on that poll about "Do you think Jesus is the greatest being created by God?", because they just heard the words "Jesus" and "greatest" conjoined together, and so assumed the statement must be true. In regards to the Trump Bible, they just reason: "Well, the Bible's a good book, and Trump's a good guy, so a Trump Bible just makes total sense."
As I and others have said, the Trump Bible is a talisman. It's aimed at people who want to have something people can see and know who they support, to sit on prominent positions on a book shelf but not to be actually read. It's not aimed at people who will ever open the pages and read it - either the Bible part, or the other documents appended into the volume. People who read the Bible already have copies of the Bible, and if there's anything appended to them then that's going to be some form of reading aid - maps showing where places are, or a "where to find help when xxx" notes directing to particular verses, or even a full study Bible; we can argue whether these are helpful, a hindrance or even blasphemous but I think we can all agree that the intent of these is to aid contemplation of the text of the Bible.
So, the market isn't regular church attending (conservative) Evangelicals. It's someone who wants to identify as such (without the effort of going to church or actually really believing anything) and who wants to identify as a MAGA Trumpian Republican. It's an overpriced, glorified bumper sticker that these people can display in their homes or offices.
I think you underestimate how thoroughly compromised much of US evangelicalism is by white supremacism and pseudo-Christian nationalism.
This, to a point. There’s also the strand in American evangelicalism that isn’t really white supremacist or quite pseudo-Christian nationalist, but that has bought into the “City on a Hill,” America-is-a-country-set-apart view of the US, and who do see foundational aspects of the US, like the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, as grounded in Christianity.
And @KoF, being anti-Catholic really isn’t part of the picture.
I think it depends what you mean by "evangelicalism". Pat Robertson and the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention almost certainly know that it's theologically off-base for Trump to claim, as he has, that he doesn't need to ask God for forgiveness because he never does anything wrong. But, as I've said, they keep quiet about stuff like that because he gives them the policies they like.
Well, I don’t know how much thinking Pat Robertson is doing, as he died last year. On the other hand, he may have much to contemplate in eternity . . . .
But yes, Trump is tolerated by those Evangelicals because he gives them power, so they rationalize that God is using him, despite his . . . flaws.
So, the market isn't regular church attending (conservative) Evangelicals. It's someone who wants to identify as such (without the effort of going to church or actually really believing anything) and who wants to identify as a MAGA Trumpian Republican. It's an overpriced, glorified bumper sticker that these people can display in their homes or offices.
There’s also the strand in American evangelicalism that isn’t really white supremacist or quite pseudo-Christian nationalist, but that has bought into the “City on a Hill,” America-is-a-country-set-apart view of the US, and who do see foundational aspects of the US, like the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, as grounded in Christianity.
Yeah, Harold Bloom et al have argued that American Christianity, in practice, amounts to a separate religion from the received European version. Bloom's focus was more on what he sees as the glorification of the individual, though nationalist Exceptionalism would probably be part of it as well.
And @KoF, being anti-Catholic really isn’t part of the picture.
If anything, believing that Trump has no need for forgiveness would probably make you MORE likely to tolerate, if not outright accept, the Catholic belief that Mary was conceived without Original Sin.
And Trump, like alot of professed conservative xtians these days, makes a point of bragging about how warmly disposed he is toward RCs. See his speech at the 2016 Al Smith Dinner, where he outright accused Hillary Clinton(also in attendance) of hating Catholics.
But yes, Trump is tolerated by those Evangelicals because he gives them power, so they rationalize that God is using him, despite his . . . flaws.
At one time, they made comparisons between Trump and King David, as morally questionable leaders who could nevertheless lead their respective nations to greatness.
However, from this morning's Guardian live-feed...
Daniels testifies Trump told her she reminded him of his daughter Ivanka
I think you underestimate how thoroughly compromised much of US evangelicalism is by white supremacism and pseudo-Christian nationalism.
This, to a point. There’s also the strand in American evangelicalism that isn’t really white supremacist or quite pseudo-Christian nationalist, but that has bought into the “City on a Hill,” America-is-a-country-set-apart view of the US, and who do see foundational aspects of the US, like the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, as grounded in Christianity.
And @KoF, being anti-Catholic really isn’t part of the picture.
I think it depends what you mean by "evangelicalism". Pat Robertson and the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention almost certainly know that it's theologically off-base for Trump to claim, as he has, that he doesn't need to ask God for forgiveness because he never does anything wrong. But, as I've said, they keep quiet about stuff like that because he gives them the policies they like.
Well, I don’t know how much thinking Pat Robertson is doing, as he died last year. On the other hand, he may have much to contemplate in eternity . . . .
But yes, Trump is tolerated by those Evangelicals because he gives them power, so they rationalize that God is using him, despite his . . . flaws.
Yeah, there’s a whole thing among a certain crowd of treating Trump as a modern Cyrus, used by God even if not an actual believer himself. (See links to coins above.)
IMHO in U.S. flag-flying there's something of the British attitude toward football clubs.
Sort of. But Liverpudlians aren't making their schoolchildren perform an act of semi-worship to their FC flag every day before school. "You'll Never Walk Alone" notwithstanding.
Yeah, there’s a whole thing among a certain crowd of treating Trump as a modern Cyrus, used by God even if not an actual believer himself. (See links to coins above.)
Well, those coins were apparently minted by the Israelis, and as such there is a certain internal logic to the message.
If I understand what I've been reading about Cyrus, he was a powerful, gentile leader who did something or other to recognize Jerusalem as a Jewish City. Adjusting for what I'm sure are very different political circumstances, that aptly describes Trump as well.
So it is at least a better comparison than suggesting that Trump has the same respect for and knowledge of Christianity that King David had of Judaism. YMMV, and you can have the last word.
IMHO in U.S. flag-flying there's something of the British attitude toward football clubs.
Sort of. But Liverpudlians aren't making their schoolchildren perform an act of semi-worship to their FC flag every day before school. "You'll Never Walk Alone" notwithstanding.
I would however be spectacularly unsurprised to discover that some in fact are!
Comments
Said plaques and/or parchment rolls (my present congregation has both) usually begin "Lest We Forget" with Union Jacks and Canadian Flags hung above them.
I hope they aren't blasphemous else my congregation is done for.
The cover also has a cutesy image of a young boy at prayer, and it's all apparently connected to a franchise of cartoon characters. I'll say it does appear to be going a bit beyond the slapdash utility of "Well, on the sparse frontier, it was handy to have the one book you own also be the place for listing family history."
It occurs to me that "idolatrous" might be a better term for what these sorta religious texts and displays are allegedly engaged in.
Not that that would make much difference as to the concerns you evince.
(FWIW, I think you COULD argue a case for old war-memorials in churches being blasphemous/idolatrous, but at this point, campaigning for their removal might be a little on the pharisaic side.)
That franchise is the suckiest thing ever, and we used to mock it by imagining Bible stories that, er, would NOT be improved by being handled with those sort of cartoon characters. I gather there is/was a chapel done up in the same sort of statuary. We used to wonder what the crucifix looked like.
Psalm 137:9?
Is that better or worse than, say, Lot and his daughters?
It strikes me that it is quite difficult to be part of an organised religion and avoid idols.
Of course there are idols and "idols" and things-that-become-idols, which is fine, we all define and redefine concepts to suit circumstances in our own worldview, especially in religious contexts.
A thought I had regarding Trump earlier is the resonance it has with earlier rampant dictators who sought to control religion and the masses of believers.
That seems to me to be the major difficulty here - if Trump is rejected and if he becomes the "dictator-for-a-day" he promised then his dalliances with certain kinds of nationalist religion become particularly worrying and uncomfortable.
To the extent that other personality driven political-religious figures are not. For me religious leadership is often an exercise in power and control (usually but not always at a local level), that becomes particularly worrying when the person seeking the power over religion is also the POTUS.
Maybe this is stating the obvious, for that I apologise.
I think war memorials in churches, at least the ones that are remembering the people from the community who died, are fine. The people who put them up presumably were the ones who had lost a whole lot of people in the community that they knew personally, often their own children and such since these would’ve been young men. And of course they wouldn’t necessarily even have bodies to bury. And back in the day, the local cemetery was connected to the parish church, wasn’t it?
I used to call them “Vicious Moments.” 😈
There’s a trend now called Altered Moments, I believe, in which people buy old PM figures and repaint them to make them dark, goth, etc.
For me where this becomes more problematic is where military flags and standards are in places of worship. Indicating a close relationship between the religion and the military/state.
Partly I think this is about equality, I don't think we see the same associations between other religions and the state, which makes me uncomfortable. Partly I am uncomfortable with the idea of state control of religion anyway. Mostly I think it suggests a misunderstanding of the purpose of religion and the difference between being a "state citizen", a "religious believer" etc. The end result is that the state tends to be associated with Christianity and tends to give the white war dead more respect than those of other skin colours. This is changing but very slowly.
And I wish you'd read for comprehension. 'Elsewhere' covers a multitude of sins.
If I'd put 'Europe and elsewhere' would you complain that I hadn't listed Asia, Antarctica and Australasia among other continents?
No, don't go blaming me for your inability to read for comprehension. Hell beckons if you try to blame other people for your own shortcomings.
I'm not saying that because Lent's over I'm taking the gloves off but take this as a shot across your bows.
Meanwhile, go in peace to love and serve the Lord ...
Also St Mary's, Warwick. And of course in many rural churches next to the local manor house there's a whole series of family tombs. Christianity has been co-opted by many forms of power over the years. This one feels particularly egregious, but perhaps that's just because it's done by someone too stupid to do it with finesse.
@Gamma Gamaliel if you have an issue with @Gramps49, please take it to Hell.
North East Quine, Purgatory host
Hostly hat off
Actual State institutions being potentially problematic the other was round.
Trump Bible, probably is a whole package issue. It probably shouldn't be ignored how polarised things are and that in many ways it's been made a zero sum game.
The price doesn't help, either.
I'm not familiar with the layout of a typical Scottish Kirk. Are the memorial, the communion table, and the chair at the front of the room, so that the audience is looking at them during the service? Or more off to the side?
I tend to give warnings before issuing Hell Calls. I try to do them less often than I used to. I was more trigger-happy at one time.
I apologise to @Gramps49 for being tetchy with him. No Hell Call awaits. I withdraw my grumpy remarks.
I think AI has finally found its true purpose.
So, going by this, the congregation in @Arethosemyfeet's church are staring straight at the war memorial during the service. If true, yeah, I could see that being less than ideal.
In the Canadian churches I've seen, the memorial was usually near the entrance, in the lobby.
Isn't another important distinction that one must be "inside" of a religion to commit heresy, but not blasphemy? To that end, can someone wholly outside of a religion really commit blasphemy? Isn't taking offense at an alleged blasphemy a self inflicted wound?
I mean, the large vase of flowers that resides on the communion table obscures it somewhat most of the time, but the placing is unfortunate. I wouldn't dare suggest moving it, however.
Trying to get it moved might be like what I called "pharisaic", in my comments to @Sober Preacher's Kid above. The plaque means a lot to many people in the congregation, and there'd a big shouting match if you suggested moving it, with the now-elderly descendants of the dead being especially traumatized, so why bother, just to enforce some technical violation of the no-idols rule that even God probably doesn't really care about in this instance?
[Granted, this sort of argument always put me in mind of the schmaltzy defense of maryolatry that I've heard from Catholic apologists: "Yes, some people go a little overboard and treat Mary like a deity unto herself, but if a little boy over-praises his mother, is that really going to offend his father? More likely, the dad would just think it's cute."]
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/06/trump-bible-review
Suffice it to say that national flags carry different meanings in different countries and cultures. In some countries, it’s very unusual for private citizens to fly the national flag, while in others (and not just the US), it’s very common. Some countries have different versions of their national flags—with one version for anyone to fly and another that’s just for the government—while other countries use the same design for both purposes.
So what flying or displaying a flag might mean is very culture-dependent.
Yep. Sorry wasn't trying to create a tangent. Just put the church/nation thing in a broader context. The overarching point I was making is that Christian Nationalism is incompatible with the Gospel of Christ.
I am cautious that we should be wary of crossing the line where the church specifically endorses a nation or people. Especially as to me an English man, the flag of St George and the Union Flag mean particular things. To those not of my heritage, they often mean something very different and Jesus does not belong to the English or British nor is he particularly on our side. Joshua 5:13-14 is particularly meaningful here. So I'm not saying that CofE churches should be banned from flying such flags but this is why it concerns me. It is a line we should be careful of crossing. To me, many churches teeter on it. YMMV, of course.
But to come back to the topic at hand, there is no doubt in my mind that the 'Trump Bible' has crossed the line at breakneck speed such that it is no longer visible, even if these fools turned round as it's long over the visual horizon.
The article BF linked to confirmed two things for me. 1. That this is a co-opting of God as being specifically pro-America and pro-Trump in a way that is unequivocally blasphemous. 2. The description of the product quality suggests my $10 estimate of its real retail value was an overestimate and someone (or someones) is (are) making a lot of money out of these, which to me, just further enhances the blasphemy.
I hardly ever use that word, BTW.
Contrast it with how the various Copyright holders of Bible translations bend over backwards to make them as freely available as possible. H&S, I'm sure have made money from the NIV as so, so many have been sold but they appear to try not to. They control the Copyright, to protect the integrity of the translation, not to make money, it seems to me. They don't even try to stop critical or fiction writers using or misusing exerts. That's how it should be. And other translation Copyright do the same AFAICS. My point being that there is a righteous way to manage the necessary commercial aspect of Bible printing and distribution.
Anyway, I do pray that God will bless the USA - for lots of reasons. However, the GodBlessTheUSABible is grotesque.
AFZ
A vase of flowers on a communion table? Sacrilege!!
Having a cross or candle(s) would be Rank Popery so what else can you do?
Alec Mapa, gay Filipino comedian, on the other hand, is awesome.
The info in the linked article is indeed ... honestly not surprising to me.
Given all of the weird quasi-religious stuff Trump has tried to do several times now, not just the stuff mentioned in the article, it adds an extra layer of creepiness to the whole thing:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/21/trump-press-conference-greenland-jewish-democrats
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-tweets-quote-calling-him-the-second-coming-of-god-to-jews-in-israel/
And then there's this weird thing:
https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/3/5/16796892/trump-cyrus-christian-right-bible-cbn-evangelical-propaganda
https://apnews.com/article/b5a9aaa901654c7bae00378cb95e7e7a
I personally think Randy Rainbow had a good response to ... all of this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW2SEpWWqXM
If we turn around the question, what then would be the answer?
What I mean is this: the narrative that we are being told is that Trump is trying to speak to a constituency of conservative Evangelical Christians. If that's really true (which in some ways seems quite unlikely given their focus on honesty and sexual purity on the one hand and his admissions about his own behaviour on the other), why don't these people feel that this "Trump bible" is blasphemous?
We are given to understand that the group of Evangelical Christian Trump supporters tend to be people who are anti-Catholic, believers in biblical inerrancy, etc and so on. These seem to be the group that is perhaps least likely to accept a bible edition that is bound with a bunch of other stuff. I'm thinking specifically of the type of Christian characterised by the late Ian Paisley in Northern Ireland.
Do you see what I mean? I lack the vocabulary to be specific about these ideas but hopefully others can clarify for me.
Could it be that Trump has miscalculated that these Evangelicals would accept this?
Or perhaps that the buyers of the "Trump bible" are not really Evangelicals of this kind. In which case perhaps the media narrative is wrong.
Yes, as I've said elsewhere, I think the main market for this Bible is MAGA, aka the Trump Personality Cult, not the Religious Right.
Thus, a white conservative evangelical who attends church regularly is more likely to be a Trump supporter than a mixed-race atheist with no religious observance; but they're less likely to be a Trump supporter than a white self-identified conservative evangelical who attends church rarely or never.
I think it depends what you mean by "evangelicalism". Pat Robertson and the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention almost certainly know that it's theologically off-base for Trump to claim, as he has, that he doesn't need to ask God for forgiveness because he never does anything wrong. But, as I've said, they keep quiet about stuff like that because he gives them the policies they like.
I think the Trump Bible is aimed mostly at people who have a much vaguer understanding of Christianity, the kind who answered "yes" on that poll about "Do you think Jesus is the greatest being created by God?", because they just heard the words "Jesus" and "greatest" conjoined together, and so assumed the statement must be true. In regards to the Trump Bible, they just reason: "Well, the Bible's a good book, and Trump's a good guy, so a Trump Bible just makes total sense."
So, the market isn't regular church attending (conservative) Evangelicals. It's someone who wants to identify as such (without the effort of going to church or actually really believing anything) and who wants to identify as a MAGA Trumpian Republican. It's an overpriced, glorified bumper sticker that these people can display in their homes or offices.
And @KoF, being anti-Catholic really isn’t part of the picture.
Well, I don’t know how much thinking Pat Robertson is doing, as he died last year. On the other hand, he may have much to contemplate in eternity . . . .
But yes, Trump is tolerated by those Evangelicals because he gives them power, so they rationalize that God is using him, despite his . . . flaws.
And talisman is a good word @Alan Cresswell .
So, the market isn't regular church attending (conservative) Evangelicals. It's someone who wants to identify as such (without the effort of going to church or actually really believing anything) and who wants to identify as a MAGA Trumpian Republican. It's an overpriced, glorified bumper sticker that these people can display in their homes or offices.
Exactly, or so ISTM.
Yeah, Harold Bloom et al have argued that American Christianity, in practice, amounts to a separate religion from the received European version. Bloom's focus was more on what he sees as the glorification of the individual, though nationalist Exceptionalism would probably be part of it as well.
If anything, believing that Trump has no need for forgiveness would probably make you MORE likely to tolerate, if not outright accept, the Catholic belief that Mary was conceived without Original Sin.
And Trump, like alot of professed conservative xtians these days, makes a point of bragging about how warmly disposed he is toward RCs. See his speech at the 2016 Al Smith Dinner, where he outright accused Hillary Clinton(also in attendance) of hating Catholics.
At one time, they made comparisons between Trump and King David, as morally questionable leaders who could nevertheless lead their respective nations to greatness.
However, from this morning's Guardian live-feed...
So, maybe more along the lines of Lot?
Yeah, there’s a whole thing among a certain crowd of treating Trump as a modern Cyrus, used by God even if not an actual believer himself. (See links to coins above.)
Sort of. But Liverpudlians aren't making their schoolchildren perform an act of semi-worship to their FC flag every day before school. "You'll Never Walk Alone" notwithstanding.
Well, those coins were apparently minted by the Israelis, and as such there is a certain internal logic to the message.
If I understand what I've been reading about Cyrus, he was a powerful, gentile leader who did something or other to recognize Jerusalem as a Jewish City. Adjusting for what I'm sure are very different political circumstances, that aptly describes Trump as well.
So it is at least a better comparison than suggesting that Trump has the same respect for and knowledge of Christianity that King David had of Judaism. YMMV, and you can have the last word.
I would however be spectacularly unsurprised to discover that some in fact are!
Facing the idol and reciting a prayer doesn't count?