So, the clip of Brit Hume\u2019s \u201cTiger, Come to Jesus\u201d moment<\/a><\/strong> is running viral.<\/p>\n Over at the<\/strong> National Catholic Reporter<\/a>, the rather left-of-center Michael Sean Winters writes:<\/p>\n Fox News commentator Brit Hume has gone off the deep end, even by Fox News\u2019 standards which are a pretty low bar. [\u2026] I am a big fan of everyone becoming Christian. But, a person in crisis should probably not be counseled to abandon his or her own faith traditions unless the conversion was part of an organic process, not the result of advice offered on a Sunday talk show. Buddhism<\/a> is not my cup of tea . . . but it certainly embodies a means towards achieving forgiveness and redemption.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Does it?<\/strong> I wish our long-missing friend Joseph Marshall (who I have not been able to get in touch with, and am concerned about) was around to give some clarification on that point. Without Joseph at our disposal, I checked around and found this<\/a> from Buddhist<\/a> Barbara O\u2019 Brien:<\/p>\n I don\u2019t like to point out others\u2019 faults, but given the record I would think Christians would show a little more humility about offering advice to the sexually wayward. As Jesus once said, let those who have never sinned throw the first stones (John 8:7).<\/p>\n However, Mr. Hume is right, in a sense, that Buddhism doesn\u2019t offer redemption and forgiveness in the same way Christianity does. Buddhism has no concept of sin; therefore, redemption and forgiveness in the Christian sense is meaningless in Buddhism. Forgiveness is important, but it is approached differently in Buddhism\u2026 <\/p><\/blockquote>\n Hmmmm\u2026gets more complicated.<\/strong> O\u2019 Brien -in the full piece- seems to suggest that Hume is correct, but makes it clear that redemption and forgiveness are comprehended differently from the get-go, so there are no real equivalences with which to argue.<\/p>\n However,<\/em> Ms. O\u2019 Brien seems to be mistaking Hume\u2019s obvious compassion for Woods as \u201cstone-throwing.\u201d Having watched the video several times, it seems to me that Hume is doing no such thing. Like Creative Minority, I see Hume taking Wood\u2019s situation, and the state of his soul<\/a> very seriously, and from the perspective of his own beliefs. Rather than hoisting a stone of judgment in Wood\u2019s direction, Hume is offering what he believes to be a healing balm. The distinction between stoning someone to death or offering them hope for their lives is not exactly a fine<\/em> or subtle<\/em> one; the fact that Ms. O\u2019 Brien can\u2019t make that distinction suggests that she -like most of us- has allowed a prejudice -or her condescension- to dull her own clarity, and that -again like most of us- she finds it hard to resist the urge to cynicism.<\/p>\n The faith journey is not for wimps, is it? We all have so much to learn.<\/p>\n Conservative and Buddhist<\/strong>, Charles Martin, sounding slightly defensive writes<\/a>:<\/p>\n \nI\u2019ll grant that Buddhism doesn\u2019t provide a transcendental entity which can forgive sin, but then Buddhism doesn\u2019t actually provide the concept of sin either; we replace it with \u201cthings which lead to a peaceful life, causing no avoidable harm to others\u201d and, of course, the opposite. High on that list is \u201cavoid sexual misconduct\u201d which can be translated to \u201cknow when to keep your pants zipped.\u201d<\/p>\n Having no concept of transcendent forgiveness, we replace it with the idea that having harmed someone, you should make amends and reconsider your behavior in the future. You tell me which is more productive: being Forgiven of Sin, or making amends and remedying your faults?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Heh. As a Catholic, I choose both<\/em>!<\/strong> and (let me be clear) I think most Christians would. Martin, who is a very smart fellow, undercut his helpful answer by -like Ms. O\u2019 Brien- being unable to instruct without trying to one-up. I understand the instinct, of course, but wonder if it was really necessary. I am certain Martin knows that Christianity is about more than \u201csinning with a get-out-of-hell-free\u201d card, but he chooses not to acknowledge that, in this piece.<\/p>\n Americablog<\/strong> writes<\/a>:<\/p>\n \u201c. . . that\u2019s not really his job as a news anchor, to tell non-Christians to become Christians. Not to mention, there seems to be an implication that Tiger Woods would be a better person, movie downloads<\/a> or something, if he became a Christian. Yes, because all those Republican Christians don\u2019t ever cheat on their wives.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Well, once again, I don\u2019t think Hume was suggesting<\/strong> to anyone that Christians (or, as they write, \u201cRepublican\u201d Christians) are not subject to the same failings, faults and weaknesses as any other human beings, only that Christ and His Grace offer strength, consolation and, sometimes, real healing<\/a>, depending upon one\u2019s own openness. Speaking only from my own perspective as a Christian, it seems to me there are a lot of non-Christians out there who really don\u2019t understand Christianity, or the mystery and purpose of Christ, and this is partly the fault of Christians. If we lived our creed better, preaching the gospel by the way we live our lives, and by our love, then perhaps those who currently distrust us enough to be satisfied with incuriousness and stereotypes, would not be so quick to jump to the worst conclusions when a fellow like Hume speaks -very gently, it must be said, without stoning or consignment to flames of woe- on the Christian application to the human condition.<\/p>\n Should Hume have said what he did, on the air?<\/strong> I am a little ambivilent about it.<\/p>\n On one hand, as a Christian, I admire it; Hume put himself out there, as \u201ca fool for Christ,\u201d willing to face ridicule and scorn for his faith. On the other hand, I\u2019m not comfortable with the venue<\/em>. I don\u2019t think I would like it if, for example, Christopher Hitchens suggested to Tiger, \u201cdon\u2019t worry about it, there is no God, anyway,\u201d or if some Muslim used a news broadcast to suggest that Woods should turn to Islam. As the writer at Americablog suggested, minding the salvation of Tiger Woods this is not Hume\u2019s job<\/em> as a newscaster.<\/p>\n It is<\/em> his job as a Christian, however, and Hume might have done better, in a host of ways, by contacting Woods privately, and offering to pray for him (as he is likely already doing) and perhaps introducing Woods to the Good Shepherd, in the process.<\/p>\n But we don\u2019t know everything;<\/strong> perhaps Hume has tried to reach out to Woods, but the golfer -not wishing to talk to members of the press- has closed all avenues, and so Hume decided to make a public plea. Not an optimal situation, to be sure, but the Holy Spirit does have a way of confounding us and using what is available, and we do not always understand why He does what He does.<\/p>\n I wrote here<\/a>, about Marcella Dubuque:<\/p>\n Perhaps God\u2019s will for Marcella Dubuque was not that she die, but that she learn the means, and the power, of perfect prayer.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Perhaps the Holy Spirit\u2019s will in this case, then,<\/strong> is not that Brit Hume bring Tiger Woods to Jesus in sixty seconds, but for something larger, that we do not yet understand, and will not until the thing plays out a bit. Since so much of the negative commentary pounces on the hypocritical sexual failings of Christians<\/a>, perhaps the Holy Spirit is using this event as a means to teach us Christians, and the lesson is: Christians would be more credible if they (collectively and individually) lived their own lives in a more Christ-like manner and gave less public scandal.<\/em><\/p>\n And good heavens, don\u2019t we all need to hear and internalize that! I sure do!<\/p>\n Interesting stuff.<\/p>\n David Gibson<\/a> in Politics Daily, finds Hume\u2019s \u201caltar call\u201d problematic on several levels but manages some human perspective:<\/p>\n Hume\u2019s homily was understandable, because, well, this is Fox News, but also because Hume himself reconnected with his faith in a serious way after his son committed suicide in 1998 and his faith clearly carried him through.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Gateway Pundit<\/strong> seems to support Hume\u2019s remarks, sees the criticism as impending persecution<\/a>:<\/p>\n It used to be that liberals didn\u2019t want you to mention Christ in schools. Then they banned Christ from Christmas concerts and public squares. Now they are demanding that we not talk about Christianity in public. We should have seen this coming.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I don\u2019t know if this is persecution. I frankly don\u2019t want to see newscasts become daily forums for proselytizing.<\/p>\n Allahpundit<\/a>:<\/p>\n I\u2019m as ignorant of Buddhism as I am everything else, but isn\u2019t one of the key teachings that all suffering is caused by, er, desire and that the path to serenity lies through freeing yourself from that desire? In which case, Tige\u2019s problem might not be that he\u2019s got the wrong religion but that the one he\u2019s got hasn\u2019t quite penetrated yet. No pun intended.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Bookworm has<\/a> a typically thoughtful take that looks at the fall of Rome, the fall of the UK, and the fall of the USA:<\/p>\n In America, I think we\u2019ll go the other way: It won\u2019t be Islam that destroys us, but Christianity that saves us. I make this prediction as a Jewish woman who trusts that her Christian fellow-Americans will continue to believe in religious freedom. This means that I don\u2019t imagine a theocracy, with militant Christians taking over Washington at gun point. I simply believe that Americans will look at what\u2019s happening around them, and take refuge in traditional religious morality \u2014 and in this country, traditional religious morality is predominantly Christian.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Pursuing Holiness: <\/a><\/p>\n In Ireland, that may or may not be a legal crime, but here in America it is at least being made socially unacceptable by postmodern leftists who screech like a goth in the sun if they hear a simple declarative statement that Christianity is superior to other religions.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Sort of related, another sort of news cast proselytizing:<\/strong> NPR, publicly funded but disdainful of half the public<\/a><\/p>\n Of Interest:<\/strong>
\n
\nHume had to know, when he was making his remarks<\/strong>, that he was opening himself (and to an extent, all of Christianity) for some criticism and ridicule; perhaps he expected that his remarks would foment debate and dialogue. As we see, though, from our Buddhist friends, Ms. O\u2019 Brien, Charles Martin, and from Americablog, first reactions to his remarks have either completely misconstrued his intent (stone-throwing?) or his meaning (unproductive-faith-alone?) or his message (\u201cRepublican\u201d Christians don\u2019t sin?), and so any dialogue will begin with a deficit in understanding, on both sides.<\/p>\n
\nUSA Today<\/a>
\nAlthouse<\/a><\/p>\n