Praise the Lord and pass the reptile

snakehandlersLaura Miller of Salon tries mightily, in her ingenious twin review of The Twilight of Atheism by Alister McGrath and The End of Faith by Sam Harris, to adopt the enlightened tone of one who sees past two extremes.

Miller criticizes McGrath’s book as “a masterpiece of condescension masquerading as sober consideration, lucid in a magnanimous, Olympian sort of way, and so ensconced in its authority that it positively reeks of Oxford, where, sure enough, McGrath is a professor of historical theology.”

She does not spare Harris entirely:

Harris, by contrast, is fiery, a polemicist raging against the “life destroying gibberish” he maintains is threatening humanity’s very survival. He can’t resist studding the pages of “The End of Faith” with seemingly every withering zinger that’s occurred to him in the shower or during bouts of insomnia, from deploring “religious ideas that belong on the same shelf with Batman, the philosopher’s stone and unicorns” to asking us to “imagine a future in which millions of our descendants murder each other over rival interpretations of ‘Star Wars’ or Windows 98.”

Still, In writing on behalf of “the thinking agnostic,” Miller lets slip a few of her own whoppers of condescension. Miller’s most withering remarks are aimed at those “fundamentalist Christians” with whom McGrath associates himself merely by writing a book like The Twilight of Atheism.

She writes of McGrath, “Although perfectly happy to accuse Freud of misogyny and [Madalyn Murray] O’Hair of homophobia, he manages to entirely skirt the fact that, in this country, fundamentalist Christians have tried to elevate such prejudices to the status of law.” Miller doesn’t cite specific examples, of course. Apparently Salon editors consider such connections painfully self-evident to anyone other than a fundamentalist Christian.

Her strongest venom, however, is reserved for a paragraph that follows McGrath’s praise for Pentecostals:

There’s something comical about McGrath’s donnish nod to the snake handlers (what’s next, Anglican hip-hop?), but it isn’t nearly as absurd as his efforts to show that postmodernism has ridden to the rescue of religion by dismantling atheism’s insistence that there is “only one, correct, rational way of looking at the world.” Postmodernist philosophy, he writes, defies atheism’s “emphasis upon uniformity and control” and its demands for “the suppression of differences and diversity.” This assault on hierarchies makes postmodernism the natural ally of — what, the faith that brought us the Inquisition and the Moral Majority?

Amazing. Did you know that Pentecostals routinely handle snakes? Somebody really ought to inform the Assemblies of God about this, as its website offers no tips on the proper care and feeding of serpents. And since when has the Inquisition become synonymous with any threat posed by the long-ago disbanded Moral Majority Inc.? (Finally, a factual note: Anglican hip-hop already has premiered in all its goofy splendor. Miller needs to dream up some other oxymoronic joke.)

Print Friendly

  • http://www.batgung.com mr tall

    I read this article yesterday, and just shook my head. The chasm between Miller’s ignorant stereotypes and the truth is so vast one really doesn’t know how to begin correcting her.

    If you need a textbook case to illustrate the lack of religious sensibility in a mainstream magazine (a category in which I would include Salon; it seems to me right at the heart of ‘blue state’ thinking), you couldn’t do better.

  • greg

    I subscribed to Salon for one year. Toward the end of that year, I sent a letter to the editor to the effect that I was cancelling my subscription because their religion writing was ham-handed, ignorant, and saturated with that (classic) liberal, East Coast snobbery that finds a way to be condescending to nearly every phenomenon originating in faith movements. The religion coverage there is doubly disappointing as their other areas are generally excellent.

  • http://spiritualprogress.typepad.com/not_perfection not perfection

    wonderful review of the review – is that a “metareview?” – don’t know, don’t care. Miller is a classic case, as both greg and mr tall have pointed out. But consider the source: Slate. How could we expect anything other than disdainful and ignorant commentary on matters of religion? Would we expect, say, accurate political coverage from the New York Times? Of course not. Would we expect beliefnet to NOT chase the latest, addlebrained “spiritual” fad? I think not.

  • http://www.fidlerontheroof.blogspot.com Julie Anne Fidler

    >>Amazing. Did you know that Pentecostals routinely handle snakes? Somebody really ought to inform the Assemblies of God about this, as its website offers no tips on the proper care and feeding of serpents. And since when has the Inquisition become synonymous with any threat posed by the long-ago disbanded Moral Majority Inc.? <<

    With all due respect, this is one heck of an ignorant statement.

    My husband grew up in a Pentecostal church. Some of our closest friends are Assemblies Of God pastors. NONE OF THEM have ever handled snakes. AOG is a legitimate denomination. The people you speak of are in extremist cults. I don’t appreciate the association.

    Get educated before you pontificate, please.

  • http://www.fidlerontheroof.blogspot.com Julie Anne Fidler

    And if I misinterpreted your post, please forgive me.

  • http://getreligion.typepad.com/getreligion/2004/02/about_douglas_l.html Douglas LeBlanc

    You did misinterpret the post, I’m afraid, but we forgive readily here.

  • http://religiousliberal.blogspot.com/ Dwight

    “in this country, fundamentalist Christians have tried to elevate such prejudices to the status of law”

    -support of anti-sodomy laws

    -fighting laws which prevent job discrimination because of sexual orienation, like ENDA

    -the federal marriage amendment (anyone read baptistpress.org, the central goal is to ban gay marriage I hear)

    Miller’s claim struck me as self evident