Dark Christianity
.::: .::..:.::.:.
Back July 10th, 2007 Forward
dogemperor [userpic]
Graphic Novels!

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY [info]tristantzara)

I'd seen in the Dark_Christianity wiki a page listing some recommended graphic novels, but I thought I might post here some descriptions of three that I thought were important and deal with the topic of dominionist Christianity pretty directly, and in a really insightful way.

Cut for large images and length )

location: work
Current Mood: geeky
Current Music: Big News I by Clutch
dogemperor [userpic]
Test-driving a strategy statement--Feedback appreciated

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY [info]gloucester)

I've been working with one of my friends who is studying public relations and one who is an evangelical Christian on a strategy for approaching the gay-rights debate. One day after a three weeks of particular frustration, a conversation with them yielded what I post here. The presentation has been refined somewhat and tailored to address this community. As an explanation, I approach both from the point of view of a "lefty" supporter of gay rights and a southern conservative Christian, so I use "we" to identify myself with both groups in what follows.
I recognize that many of these points will be "preaching to the choir" in a community like this, but I need to know A) if any points are so bad as to be unpalatable, B) If I've just missed some important detail that leaps out at anyone, and C)If this can be implemented by "Spreading the word."

So without further ado... )

So what do you think? Am I off my rocker?

dogemperor [userpic]
Dominionists honor Roy Moore under Confederate Flag

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY [info]wyldraven)

From JewsOnFirst: Christian Right Gathering Honors Deposed Alabama Judge Roy Moore -- Under a Confederate Flag

Excerpt. Click Headline for full story. )
This part really got to me.
Michael A. Peroutka, who was the 2004 presidential candidate of the far-right Constitution Party and a supporter of Roy Moore's fight to remain Alabama's chief justice, emcee'd the ceremony.

Toward the end, apropos of nothing apparent, Peroutka referred to the Confederate flag, as "the American flag."

"Behind you," he said, gesturing to the three flags flanking the stage, "you see the Maryland flag, the Alabama flag and the American Flag." The last was a reference to the Confederate Flag.
Does he really believe that? These people are just scary.

dogemperor [userpic]
school chaplaincy in South Australia

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY [info]crazyjane13)

Hi all,

I attended an academic conference for Studies in Religion on the weekend. One of the papers delivered looked at School Chaplaincy and the Religious Right. Some of the things I heard seemed downright alarming, and I wondered if anyone had any feedback regarding the organisations involved. From what I've been finding, there are few groups Down Here that don't have a parent group in the US, so I'd appreciate any info, please.

Recently the Howard government set up its National Chaplaincy in Schools Program. This is a non-compulsory, opt-in program. There are all sorts of hidden problems, however. In South Australia, this has had huge consequences. The sole group that is providing specialised chaplain training is the School Ministries Group, which describes itself as a co-operative network of 11 church denominations. A quick look at their links pages shows what appears to be a pretty ecumenical setup as far as "denominational organisations" go. Looking at the children's and youth organisations links page, though, there are some names that come up that ring a few alarm bells.

Those links are : Youth With A Mission, Youth Alive, Teen Challenge, Encounter Youth and In2Life.

I guess I'm kinda wondering to what extent this apparently multi-denominational group is, in fact, being run by groups that are Dominionist in orientation (or at least sympathy). There are whisperings that the SMG are planning to expand into the rest of Australia, and it would be as well to be forearmed.

Current Mood: concerned
dogemperor [userpic]
Dominionist leanings in the Pope?

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY [info]eiredrake) xposted to my LJ

Pope: Other denominations not true churches

I've been hearing a lot from my one Catholic friend about how 'we don't do that' whenever I describe the stuff that Dommies pull. She's not referring to her particular church, but to Catholicism in general. While it's believable that her specific church doesn't have these sort of ideas, it's hardly constructive to try to extend that idea to the entire Catholic religion given it's history. Just like you can't say all Protestant churches are 'bad' just because Westboro is you cant' say all churches are 'good' because one is either.

Just like any group, you've got the conservatives, liberals, authoritarians and so forth. Apparently  the head of the church just called out the rest of Christianity.

Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says Orthodox churches were defective and that other Christian denominations were not true churches. 
Benedict approved a document from his old offices at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that restates church teaching on relations with other Christians. It was the second time in a week the pope has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-65 meetings that modernized the church.
It restates key sections of a 2000 document the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, “Dominus Iesus,” which set off a firestorm of criticism among Protestant and other Christian denominations because it said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the “means of salvation.”

In the new document and an accompanying commentary, which were released as the pope vacations here in Italy’s Dolomite mountains, the Vatican repeated that position.

“Christ ‘established here on earth’ only one church,” the document said. The other communities “cannot be called ‘churches’ in the proper sense” because they do not have apostolic succession — the ability to trace their bishops back to Christ’s original apostles.


The document said Orthodox churches were indeed “churches” because they have apostolic succession and that they enjoyed “many elements of sanctification and of truth.” But it said they lack something because they do not recognize the primacy of the pope — a defect, or a “wound” that harmed them, it said.

“This is obviously not compatible with the doctrine of primacy which, according to the Catholic faith, is an ‘internal constitutive principle’ of the very existence of a particular church,” the commentary said.

“The Church is not backtracking on ecumenical commitment,” Di Noia told Vatican radio.

“But, as you know, it is fundamental to any kind of dialogue that the participants are clear about their own identity. That is, dialogue cannot be an occasion to accommodate or soften what you actually understand yourself to be.”

This whole thing, especially the last comment smacks to me of "All you people are wrong. Especially you Protestants.". I'm sure this will make the Protestant world very happy. The question is what precisely is Ratzinger attempting to accomplish here? Is he actively trying to start some sort of religious war with the more conservative Dommie sects of Christianity? Tell them "You are wrong to not recognize me as your leader" seems like a hell of a sure fire way to do it.


Current Mood: amused
dogemperor [userpic]

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY [info]gloucester)

I think the jury can be fairly said to be "in" on my last post, and it's back to the drawing board for me. Thank you to everyone who gave me constructive feedback and criticism.

I intend to remain in the community, unless there is significant outcry against it (I do have an interest in seeing Dominionism not succeed), and I hope my entrance will not be held against me.
And in case there is any doubt, for the record, I am very much in favor of gay rights.

dogemperor [userpic]
So the Pope Declares Catholicism the One True Church?

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY [info]travestine)

My first time posting here. If I were still a preacher, my sermon this Sunday would be based on John 14:2 "for in my father's house, there are many dwelling places". I have always taking this verse to be Jesus's code that there is a place for all of us in heaven - Jew, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, atheist - every path leads to God - there's a room for each of us. The Pope would like to slam that door shut in all of our faces, with Jesus as the gatekeeper. Not the Jesus I believe in, bucko. The writer of John took liberties by following with the much-contested "way, truth and light" verse. I still struggle with that one, but the "many dwelling places" does give me comfort and I've used it in a number of funerals. It's brought peace to many families and it's always brought comfort to me.

ETA: When I refer to "God" and "heaven" - I mean however they are perceived by the individual, not the Christian perception. Namaste.

Back July 10th, 2007 Forward