The Deacon's Bench

The Deacon's Bench


Don’t stop believing: “Glee” gets religion — UPDATED

posted by jmcgee

101glee_sc-79_6025-500x346.jpg
I caught part of last night’s episode of “Glee,” which dealt (rather delicately) with the idea of religion.  The plot swirled around a teenager who discovered the face of Jesus on a grilled cheese sandwich, and another kid, whose father was in critical condition in the hospital.  Life, death, doubt, belief — it was all there, set against the backdrop of songs like “Losing My Religion” and “Papa, Can You Hear Me?”

What really hit me, though, was the final scene, which was strikingly Catholic: the teenager, Finn, finally ate the “Grilled Jesus” sandwich, to the strains of “What If God Was One of Us?” 

You’d have to go back to “Mad Men,” and Peggy’s brilliant popsicle ad, to find a more potent Eucharistic message on mainstream television.   
 
Speaking of “Glee” and faith: I’ve lately noticed another quirky phenomenon: priests who love “Glee.”

Father Alexander Santora happened to catch the pilot of Fox’s “Glee” – and he was hooked.

“It’s ushering in something upbeat and vital even if it’s a little kooky,” says the New Jersey priest. “I even preached about it one Sunday, highlighting the importance of belonging to a group as a way to shape one’s self-esteem and identity.”

I’m beginning to think there is a priest fan base for the show, beyond Fr. Santora. I’ve encountered priests who will chat amiably about “Glee” episodes on Facebook, or drop characters’ names into polite dinner conversation. They seem to be full-fledged “Gleeks.”

Could “Glee” end up being a tool in the New Evangelization?  

Don’t stop believin’.

UPDATE: Others weighing in on the episode include Mike Hayes (pro) and Mary Poust (con), which prompted a respectful followup by Mike the following day. The Catholic League also couldn’t resist issuing a statement on the subject.

UPDATE II: The hysteria has reached ear-splitting proportions.  Comments for this thread are now shut down.
 



Advertisement
Comments read comments(43)
post a comment
Brian Sullivan

posted October 6, 2010 at 11:08 am


I thought of it as a Eucharistic image too, but I wonder any of the writers did. It seemed like it was more an apologetic for atheisim than faith, on balance. (Faith, esp,. Chrisitanity, isn’t represented well on Glee.) Only one character, Emma, had any reasonable response to questions of faith. Kurt’s singing “I Wanna Hold Your Hand” was powerful. I get that the show is a comedy fantasy–how else would a school like that happen to have a concert harp around when they need it!–but sometimes it tries too hard to be important at the same time. It throws the show off when they do that.



report abuse
 

Michele

posted October 6, 2010 at 12:14 pm


I have to say that Kirk’s comments in the beginning of the show about why he does not believe in God hit me pretty hard. I had several friends in Catholic High School who were homosexual and felt the same way. It hurt to hear him say that ‘Churches don’t like or want people like me’ (meaning, gay). It really made me so sad that is the message people who are homosexual hear, instead of the love of Christ. I also wept when Sue revealed why she doesn’t believe in God. How many people feel that way? That God does not answer prayers? Although, I loved her sister’s answer that God doesn’t make mistakes. Jane Lynch is a very good actress- you could see the realization in her face.
I really like Glee- it’s sometimes flippant and silly, but for the most part, it gets right down to brass tacks and portrays difficult issues, not only in high school, but in life.



report abuse
 

Bill

posted October 6, 2010 at 12:26 pm


Did any of you see last week’s episode in which the entire theme centered around Britney Spears and her sexual prowess? Despite its creativity and obvious musical achievement, in many respects, the show is nothing short of typical, shallow, pop-culture egotism in every scene.



report abuse
 

Marcel LeJeune

posted October 6, 2010 at 12:29 pm


Unfortunately Journey’s song “Don’t Stop Believing” is about a one night stand:
“A singer in a smokey room
A smell of wine and cheap perfume
For a smile they can share the night
It goes on and on and on and on”
It has nothing to do with faith. Teenagers and young adults have resurrected this song from the 80s and it has become an “old-school anthem” for many of them, but I haven’t met a single one who really knows the lyrics.



report abuse
 

Panthera

posted October 6, 2010 at 12:56 pm


Michele said:
‘Churches don’t like or want people like me’ (meaning, gay).
Michele, that is only true in some of the US, most of Eastern Europe as well and nearly all of Africa.
In South American, Central America, Canada and Western Europe, there is a welcoming place for gays, lesbian and transgender in churches. Quite a few ‘defenders’ of the Roman Catholic faith in the US would be shocked at the way gays, lesbians and transgender are treated as full children of God and welcome, truly welcome in the Catholich church in Western Europe.
The important thing to remember is that a highly vocal minority of American Christianity has taken a deep, deep swing away from God’s love towards using the Bible and churches to drive an agenda of hatred. They are not, however, Christ’s representatives.
Things always get worse when an oppressed minority begins to gain its civil rights. This is why we have seen the enormous uptick in bullying and beatings of gay children in the US. I defy anyone to show me where in the Bible or Roman Catholic teaching this is even tolerated, much less encouraged.
Personally, I don’t have the time for TV, so am not familiar with Glee, except as a program which seems to have a loyal following among thinkers on the Internet. Maybe I should give it a gander.



report abuse
 

Deacon Greg Kandra

posted October 6, 2010 at 1:01 pm


Marcel…
You raise an interesting point, though the song seems to have been absorbed into the popular culture for use in a variety of fairly innocent venues (The Wikipedia entry about it is fascinating.) I think the song is less about a one night stand, and more about the yearning of the young, and the anxious searching of those “streetlight people” who are struggling to keep hope alive in the face of uncertainty, disappointment and doubt.
But that’s me. Your mileage may vary.
Dcn. G.



report abuse
 

jestrfyl

posted October 6, 2010 at 1:02 pm


Writing as a straight, Liberal (loud & proud), “mainstream”, Protestant, clergy man, I too am a Glee fan. It is unappologeticly musical in theme and actuality. This program teaches intuitively as well as intentionally that diversity is strength and that exclusion is cancerous. It is creative, innovative, and touches the lives of the hundreds of thousands (tens of millions?) of people who are not and were not part of the athletic programs in their high schools.



report abuse
 

Marcel LeJeune

posted October 6, 2010 at 1:26 pm


Deacon Greg – It can certainly be interpreted in many different ways, and I think that is valid. But, it isn’t an innocent puppy-love song.
More interesting to me is the way the millenials have grasped onto it.



report abuse
 

S. Bellam

posted October 6, 2010 at 2:42 pm


Tell me again how religion is “inclusive” religion. It seems to me to be the most exclusive of clubs. What religion doesn’t basically offer membership on terms that “Believe this or you’ll go to a very bad place.”? Belief without compelling evidence is just blind faith or delusion.



report abuse
 

jestrfyl

posted October 6, 2010 at 3:56 pm


S.Bellam
Check out a United Church of Christ congregation. You may surprised at how inclusive we try to be. We have no “else” for your “or else” equation. It is a fascinating challenge to help people greet each other gratefully as we find ourselves at different places on the journey of faith – and it’s the trip that counts.
I hope you are well surprised.



report abuse
 

deaconnecessary

posted October 6, 2010 at 4:00 pm


“Don’t Stop Believing” was a big hit during my Senior Year of High School(’81-’82).
Although we all knew back then that it wasn’t “an innocent puppy-love song,” it did convey a message that faith sustains and instills hope in adversity and uncertainty.
I think that message carries over today, and that could be the reason, at least partially, the song enjoys a revival today.



report abuse
 

Charlotte

posted October 6, 2010 at 4:07 pm


Sorry, but as a Catholic, I refuse to watch or endorse Glee. It’s not-so-veiled agenda is pro-gay, pro-divorce, pro-teen rebellion, etc.
Ministers and priests who are mega-fans of this show make me very, very scared. It’s a very secular, unholy show that promotes ungodly, sinful behavior and now we have our Christian leaders publically rallying for it?
UGH



report abuse
 

kiro

posted October 6, 2010 at 4:11 pm


S Bellam, you say, “belief without compelling evidence is just blind faith or delusion”.
I assume you make certain assumptions about what sort of evidence qualifies as “compelling”?
Perhaps you accept the secular humanist articles of faith: the scientific method, Ockham’s razor, etc.
No matter how many times these assumptions are proven wrong, secular humanists still cling to them as “the” way to know what is true and what is not. And yet, all their biggest, costliest blunders – and all their human rights abuses – are linked to one of the biggest articles of faith of secular humanism: the negative burden of proof – that is, the belief that an absence of evidence may be interpreted as the evidence of an absence.
A dangerous assumption – but fundamental to the working of the scientific method. (Logically, of course, all that you can “know” in the absence of evidence is that the question is lacking enough data to form any meaningful conclusion whatsoever.)
No faith is blinder than the faith of a man who can’t tell the difference between fact vs. assumption – belief – leap of faith.
Talk about blind faith in authority!



report abuse
 

RomCath

posted October 6, 2010 at 4:30 pm


Hebrews Chapter 11 verse 1: “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.”
Bellam I think you confuse faith with knowledge. If there is compelling evidence for something, it is not faith. Faith is believing is something not seen and beyond human reasoning.
Jesus said, Blessed are those who believe but have not seen!



report abuse
 

Frank

posted October 6, 2010 at 6:37 pm


Kiro,
Your attack on the scientific method as assuming that an absence of evidence means the evidence of an absence is just plain wrong.



report abuse
 

Frank

posted October 6, 2010 at 6:43 pm


So, Charlotte, you admit that your version of Catholicism is inherently and reflexively gay-hating?
It would appear that you’re in the minority among American Catholics. In the United States, the laity are more accepting of gays that average Americans are. While the hierarchy may not reflect this tolerance, the laity certainly do have to be given credit.
If you don’t like the Chris Colfer character, I imagine this will deeply offend you:
http://www.examiner.com/young-adult-pop-culture-in-national/chris-colfer-psa-video



report abuse
 

Young Canadian RC Male

posted October 6, 2010 at 7:49 pm


Sorry to say Deacon, but I disagree with your posting on the Eucharistic undertones of Finn eating the Grilled Chessus. I finished watching the episode in its entirety.
Finn in the end dismissed God or religion because he (in his simplistic understanding of things with his limited intelligence, similar to the female character Brittany,) discovered that he did not have God directly doing things he was praying for. The counsellor, Emma, pointed out the praticals of how his prayers were answered and that prayer isn’t just getting things answered directly by God. At this he dismissed religion enitrely singing “Losing my Religion” and ate the sandwich because he did not believe in God anymore.
That and the media today is anti-catholic. The era of Fr. Sheen isn’t coming back without something like the supposed Great Chastisement or in general a big kick in the pants. This would be the only way you’d get to see the return of the era of programming of Fr. Sheen’s shows in the 50′s/60s on public media.



report abuse
 

Frank

posted October 6, 2010 at 10:40 pm


One reason priests might have an affinity Glee is that it celebrates one of their art forms. The Mass is a religious expression in two forms the Word (literature) and the Eucharist (drama). While other religions, Judaism for instance, emphasize that the literature (the spoken word of God) becomes real, Catholicism emphasizes that the drama (the act of sacrifice) in the becomes real and is no mere commemoration.
For performers and priests, the experience of an emotional and spiritual union with the audience or congregation is a kind of intimate expression
(I imagine).



report abuse
 

John

posted October 6, 2010 at 11:18 pm


With all due respect, the writers of this show are not terribly kind to religion.
“The reason I don’t go to church is because most churches don’t think very much of gay people. Or women. Or science.”
or perhaps the line that ended “God is kind of a jerk.”
I don’t see a respectful connection between the Sacrament of the Eucharist and the consumption of this sandwich. It’s beyond a reasonable stretch.
As to the issue of homosexuality and the Church. Read the Catechism, 2357 to 2359. That’s the teachings of the Catholic Church and really doesn’t leave room for negotiation or prevarication. Catholicism is a disciplined religion combining faith and reason….and obedience. With all due respect, Frank, I don’t see where you come to your conclusions. There is a name for Catholics who think that the Catechism is optional – Episcopalians.
As to the priest who is a Glee fan….all I have to say is thank God for Father Joe. When he needs to preach about the value of being a member of a community, he uses the congregation as his example – not a bunch of kids and adults who routinely mock our Faith.



report abuse
 

Sandra

posted October 7, 2010 at 12:35 am


Well I was using Mr. Mister (lots of good ones in the album, Welcome to the Real World)in my Pre-Conformation classes… And there was “Father Harry” from many years a regular show on AFRTS. (a.k.a. Monsignor Harry Schlitt, San Francisco Archdiocese)
Interesting note “Losing my religion” is a southern term for losing your temper, behaving in an uncivil manner, or your mind, usually because of an unrequited love, (the situation in the song).



report abuse
 

Kiro

posted October 7, 2010 at 4:27 am


Frank, why do you assume that people who believe that homosexuality is a sin are motivated by hatred?
Christianity teaches that it is right to hate the sin but love the sinner.
Sin has been defined as estrangement from God. For example: it has been my experience that promiscuity does in fact estrange me from God, therefore I believe that promiscuity is both wrong and a sin – but does that mean I hate promiscuous people? You can’t know that about me, not based on just what I’ve said, and anyone who says they do “know” that I am motivated by hatred, must be guilty of dishonesty.
Some people believe that the sacred union of marriage is different in kind from sex that is ultimately about nothing but animal pleasure. That you do not see the difference does not mean that there is no difference, or that this difference is not valuable.



report abuse
 

Kiro

posted October 7, 2010 at 4:33 am


Regarding the scientific method and “The absence of evidence = the evidence of absence”….if you study the history of human beings harmed by scientific conclusions that turn out to be wrong (oops!), you find that in EVERY SINGLE CASE, the cause is an omission based on the assumption that a thing must be presumed to not exist or not be relevant until and unless proof exists that it is/does.
The scientific method does this because it is the answer to uncertainty: if there is not enough data to know, you use starting assumptions, and either you’ll be right – or, by the act of being wrong, you’ll generate more data. The problem comes when people don’t realize assumptions are being used, and start confusing assumption with fact (“if there’s no proof that it exists, then we have to conclude it does not exist” is appropriate under laboratory conditions, but it is also the reason why the scientific method will always be – inherently – limited in what it can and cannot demonstrate, or speak to).



report abuse
 

Panthera

posted October 7, 2010 at 5:03 am


Kiro,
Not all Christians believe that being gay is a sin. Just some.
Obviously, you pick and chose which ‘sins’ to oppose, so you clearly are interpreting Christian belief yourself.
You can’t have it both ways – and if you allow, on even one single point that every word in the Bible is not the be all and end all of Christian faith, then how do you chose?
Why, for instance, is it so important to you how Mormons, who have suffered not one single physical attack, much less brutal murder be given more attention than all the gays and transgender in the US who, in just the last year alone were murdered, beaten or driven to suicide? The only possible conclusion is that you believe God values gays less than He values Mormons.



report abuse
 

The Doctor

posted October 7, 2010 at 6:03 am


@Panthera:
Actually your premise needs clarification. All Christians who read Scripture and don’t pick and choose what they call “sin” believe homosexuality is a sin. Christians who are more interested in standing for what they believe in, even when it makes them unpopular as opposed to watering down the Gospel for the sake of being PC, believe it’s a sin. The Bible says it is, very clearly, just as it says lying, stealing and other things are as well.
HOWEVER – and this is the important point – not all Christians make it the be-all end-all of sin. If, indeed, the Bible is true, then homosexuality is A sin – no different than any other sin that any other person deals with. It is the “Christians” who use it as a pulpit to cause hate, fear and discrimination that are the enemy; the ones who presume to speak for God as though that sin were worse or more damning then any other – not the followers of Christ who have the courage to say “Yes, I believe it’s a sin, but it’s no different than any sins I struggle with” that are not the enemy.



report abuse
 

RomCath

posted October 7, 2010 at 7:38 am


“Not all Christians believe that being gay is a sin. Just some.”
This is certainly not the Catholic position. I am not aware of which churches teach that simply being homosexual is a sin.



report abuse
 

Deacon Greg Kandra

posted October 7, 2010 at 9:09 am


Pan…
To clarify: the Catholic Church does not teach that homosexuality is a sin. Homosexual acts are.
Dcn. G.



report abuse
 

Br. Daniel Horan, OFM

posted October 7, 2010 at 10:30 am


You can add (at least) one Franciscan to your list of priests and religious who watch Glee. Like Mike Hayes, I found that there were serveral things worth reflecting on theologically in the recent episode. While I don’t know if I agree on the Eucharistic symbolism of the “Grilled Cheesus” that Mike suggests, I do believe that we can find plenty in pop culture to provide us with the opportunity to explore our faith. Here is my take from the other day:
http://www.datinggod.org/2010/10/06/glee-god-and-the-question-of-theodicy/



report abuse
 

Charlotte

posted October 7, 2010 at 1:26 pm


Frank,
You’re off your rocker and obviously either a.) a non-Christian, b.) a Catholic-hater, or c.) a liberal, lefty Catholic.
The Catholic Church has ALWAYS, ALWAYS, and STILL DOES teach that homosexual acts are inherently disordered. That is not hate. But for those who are gay themselves and/or vociferously promote the gay-agenda, it always equates to hate.
And no, I do not consider myself a member of the “AmCath” (American Catholic) church that routinely teaches heresy and weak theology (if any is taught at all.) I consider myself an orthodox, conservative Catholic.
Bottom line, “Glee” is a tool for the gay agenda in this country. You’d have to be blind not to see it. It is the overriding storyline. What’s worse is that it promotes to teenagers (and younger) the notion that you can absolutely know and affirm your sexual orientation at such a young age, which is total garbage.
Deacon Greg, again I say that it’s too bad you moved your blog over here. You had a much better audience when you were a solo effort.



report abuse
 

Panthera

posted October 7, 2010 at 2:07 pm


Charlotte said:
Charlotte
October 7, 2010 1:26 PM
Frank,
You’re off your rocker and obviously either a.) a non-Christian, b.) a Catholic-hater, or c.) a liberal, lefty Catholic.
endquote
Charlotte, one of the most frustrating aspects of dealing with Christians of your persuasions is their firm belief that they, and only they, are ‘true’ Christians and the rest of us aren’t.
Paul struggled with this problem – his exasperation over the ‘circumcised/non-circumcised’ question is still, all these many centuries later, easy to feel.
I could cite several Bible versus against passing judgment on others, but you’d just snarl back that your self-determined state of righteousness lets you judge.
In the end, though, it is God and neither you nor I who will proclaim which of us followed Him and which of us didn’t.
In the meantime, calling Christians non-Christian, saying that a Catholic who doesn’t share your views is a ‘lefty Catholic’ (like that is something bad?) is only going to continue to add fuel to the culture wars, only going to drive home the point to Christians who don’t share your view that it really is all about hatred and animus.
And you expect this behavior to bring people to our Lord exactly how?



report abuse
 

jim

posted October 7, 2010 at 2:30 pm


Dcn. GREG, THE RCC may not teach that homosexuality is not a sin but the BIBLE does ! SODOMY means homosexuality.HOMOSEXUALITY is a damning and destroying ” SIN “. GOD is a GOD of love and a GOD of wrath ! Romans 1: 18
Praise GOD that this ” sin ” is forgiveable ! ” Such were some of you, but you are washed . sanctified , you are justified ( doctrine of justification ) and all this thru JESUS CHRIST and the spirit of GOD. ”
The most compassionate thing we can do is not ” accept ” them but ” warn ” them for if they don’t understand the ” sin ” , they can’t see the SAVIOR . JESUS began his public ministry saying : REPENT AND BE BAPTIZED. ALL THINGS BECOME NEW !!



report abuse
 

Panthera

posted October 7, 2010 at 2:31 pm


OK, I so do hate smartphone keyboards.
“verses” not “versus”.
My apologies – but the point stands. This venom is precisely what those of us Christians mean when we speak of animus.



report abuse
 

Panthera

posted October 7, 2010 at 2:39 pm


Jim,
The Bible most assuredly also teaches: (with thanks to the above website)
Adultery (Lev 18:20), sex with animals (Lev 18:23), remarrying one’s wife after she’s had another husband in between (Deut 24:4), or approaching any woman during the time of her “uncleanness” (Lev 18:19).
Cross-dressing is out (Deut 22:5), and that includes Halloween costumes, slacks on women, bib overalls on little girls, or a wife wearing her husband’s favorite Oxford buttondown. And more on buttondowns in a moment.
Other abominations include tarot readings, glancing at your horoscope, trimming one’s beard, and getting a tattoo “Mom” (Lev 19:26-28).
Haughty eyes (Prov 6:17) and telling lies (Prov 6:17, 12:22).
Being untruthful also includes false weights and measures (Prov 11:1), or any other dishonesty in business. “Everyone who acts unjustly is an abomination to the LORD your God” (Prov 11:16).
Rare steaks off the grill (Lev 17:10), Lobster Newburg (Lev 11:10), a rack of ribs (Lev 11:7).
Charging or paying interest are abominations.
Bankers and anyone with a mortgage, car loan or credit card debt will be unavailable to throw the first stone, regardless of the interest rate (Psalm 15:1-5, Jeremiah 15:10).
Wearing blended fabrics. Deuteronomy 22:11 forbids wearing a material made of wool and linen, but Leviticus 19:19 says it’s an abomination to wear any blended material, period. Hence a woman in a man’s buttondown can be doubly abominable if it’s a no-iron, easy care blend of cotton and polyester.
end abridged text
Now, since all of these above are ranked equally with homosexuality, I would very much like to hear your positions on them?



report abuse
 

kiro

posted October 7, 2010 at 2:51 pm


Panthera, Christianity has never been about focusing on the pleasures of this world.
Many Christian sects have embraced secular humanist beliefs. To the extent that they have, they are Christian/Secular Humanist hybrid.
Ultimately, however, if you are a Unitarian, you’re a Unitarian, whatever you call yourself.



report abuse
 

kiro

posted October 7, 2010 at 2:54 pm


Re: the Old Testament law, perhaps you should take the time to look up the history of the various laws.
You would learn that not all laws are viewed as equal by the Church.
Jesus spoke as if some laws were non-negotiable, yet he also spoke as if other laws were optional. How do we interpret that?
Both the Catholic and mainline Protestant churches do have an interpretation of this – an interpretation of which you seem to be unaware.
So that is why Christians no longer feel bound to those Old Testament laws – because Jesus said he came to “fulfill” the law, and it is no longer necessary to stone an adulterer because Jesus died on the Cross.



report abuse
 

RomCath

posted October 7, 2010 at 3:00 pm


Jim,
Do you even try to see that there is vast difference in being homosexual and homosexual activity?
Saying simply being homosexual is a sin is just silly.



report abuse
 

Panthera

posted October 7, 2010 at 3:07 pm


kiro,
You are making assumptions about me which are inaccurate and uncharitable.
First, I am not a Unitarian. I do, indeed, have a great respect for the Unitarians. Back during the height of the first AIDS death wave in the US, there were only a handful of brave Christians who were willing to minister to the dying.
Quite a few were Catholic Priests and Sisters. Others were Quakers.
Many were Unitarians.
There were others from other denominations, not many. In the Rocky Mountain Area of New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado and Wyoming for nearly two awful years, one Methodist Deacon, a woman, and one Catholic priest (unsurprisingly, his Archbishop was furious, but his bishop sheltered him) were the only two willing to actually go to the bedsides of the dying.
Quite frankly, if what you say about Jesus forgiveness wiping the slate clean applies to all the other abominations, then it also does so to homosexuality.
I was asking Jim these questions, not you. Since you’ve decided to lecture me, let me ask you a question. Which interpretation and in which language/s do you read the Bible?
Another question, could you show me, please, where, exactly, Christ says homosexual love is bad? Christ, in his own words, please. After all, since so very many American Christians now say that granting homosexuals full human status and civil rights poses a greater risk to the security of the US than do all the terrorists combined, I would think Jesus, who spent a lot of time of loving one’s enemies and neighbors would have certainly had something to say here.
Hmm, in between turning over tables in the temple, perhaps? Or, maybe, when addressing the pharisees?



report abuse
 

kiro

posted October 7, 2010 at 3:15 pm


Panthera, I am assuming that people with Unitarian beliefs are Unitarians, and people with Christian beliefs are Christian.
I use standard definitions – the Unitarians are good about defining who and what they are, while I hold as Christian anyone who defines Jesus as The Christ, and refute as “fake Christian” anyone whose beliefs are incompatible with either the notion that Jesus was THE Christ, or the notion that Christhood is necessary and relevant. (This being a logically demonstrable relationship, I feel justified in upholding it: if you believe Jesus is a generic and indiscriminate pleasure-based ideal of Love, then what you believe in is not IMO Christianity, even if you do appropriate His name, because you have to deny the Bible to do this.)
I do this because there is a growing body of people who want to “reform” Christianity by taking out the parts about sin, the fallen nature of man, redemption, Jesus, God, the afterlife, and so on.
They want to add parts that are not Christian, but are rather Enlightenment philosophy – that is, secular humanism.
It is becoming important to distinguish between truth and falsehood, because some people see deceit and infiltration as valid ways to disrupt communities.
Hopefully secular humanism will soon discover what every other religion knows: that the “Golden Rule” exists because, while it’s fun to do unto others, it’s not so much fun to have others do right back unto you.



report abuse
 

kiro

posted October 7, 2010 at 3:16 pm


Sex outside of marriage is adultery.
Marriage is “man and woman, become one flesh”.
Its purpose is linked to procreation.
Thou Shalt Not Covet.



report abuse
 

Panthera

posted October 7, 2010 at 3:23 pm


Kiro, no wonder you call yourself ‘lord’.
OK; first of all, I am not one to run to the Deacon screaming how gravely I have been insulted and how grievously the Accord of Kandra from May 10, 2010 has been insulted.
That said: How dare you!
First, I am a Christian. I accept that it is only through the grace of God, extended to me through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ of Nazarath that my unpardonable sins are forgiven. If your definition of Christian involves anything else, then you are both in heresy as regards the Catholic church as well as ever single truly Christian church in the USA. Defend you statements!
Second, Unitarians can very well be Christian. Your base insults and crass attacks are in very poor taste.



report abuse
 

anthony

posted October 7, 2010 at 3:27 pm


It is hard to believe that a deacon or priests can really think that Glee can be tool for new evangisation.
I waited till I watched the show before I would comment, and I think it is just one big propaganda tool for “new age” spirituality and totally accepts the gay agenda that seems to be part of the main line commercial TV stations.
How a show like this can be seen as a tool for evangeisation is very hard to see, and if people teaching religion are using this as a example, we really have the blind leading the blind over the cliff.



report abuse
 

Panthera

posted October 7, 2010 at 3:33 pm


OK, it’s official. I’m buying a Smartphone with a better spell checker and keyboard ASAP. My apologies for the misspellings – this thing finishes words for me as I type. Smudge with my thumbs might be a better description.
“Jesus Christ of Nazareth”, not the music group.
Sheesh. It’s hard to ride a horse of self-righteous anger when your keyboard mocks you.



report abuse
 

Panthera

posted October 7, 2010 at 3:36 pm


Anthony,
Non-liberal Christians use the term “gay agenda” all the time. I must have been out mucking out the barn or somesuch when it got passed around.
Where can I find a copy? Can you give me the bullet points?



report abuse
 

Panthera

posted October 7, 2010 at 3:39 pm


Well, given the violence against gays by non-liberal Christians in the last weeks, maybe asking for ‘bullet’ points was unwise. How about the highlights?
Oh, my, I sure hope this doesn’t mean lumberjack shirts and millimeter trimmed mustaches again. Though it would be nice to see all the fundamentalist Christians out of their polyester suits and into something more biblically sound, see Deut.



report abuse
 



Previous Posts

This blog is no longer active
This blog is no longer being actively updated. Please feel free to browse the archives or: Read our most popular inspiration blog See our most popular inspirational video Take our most popular quiz

posted 10:42:40pm Dec. 12, 2010 | read full post »

One day more
A reminder: "The Deacon's Bench" is closed! Please enjoy the archives!

posted 11:26:20pm Dec. 11, 2010 | read full post »

Meet Montana's married priest
Earlier this week, I posted an item about Montana getting its first married priest. Now a local TV station has hopped on the bandwagon. Take a look, below.

posted 10:29:55pm Dec. 11, 2010 | read full post »

Big day in the Big Easy: 10 new deacons
Deacon Mike Talbot has the scoop: 10 men today were ordained as Permanent Deacons for the Archdiocese of New Orleans. This group of men was formally selected on the day the evacuation of New Orleans began as Hurricane Katrina approached. The immediate aftermath of the storm for this class would be

posted 6:55:42pm Dec. 11, 2010 | read full post »

Gaudete! And let's break out a carol or two...
"Gesu Bambino," anyone? This is one of my favorites, and nobody does it better than these gals: Kathleen Battle and Frederica von Staade. Enjoy.

posted 1:04:10pm Dec. 11, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.