The Old Times, the End Times, and Glenn Beck
Aug 31, 2010
Elizabeth Scalia
Not being a fan of Glenn Beck’s, plans for his “Restoring Honor” rally flew rather under my radar nearly until the day was upon us. I wrote to a friend who is more attentive to Beck than I, asking, “What is this about, really, I’m not sure I get it.”
Her answer was uncharacteristically vague and inarticulate. “He wants to restore honor and integrity to the country, because things have gotten off track, everyone can feel it!” 
Sentimentalism and an over-emphasis on feelings, in general, have weakened the nation’s critical-thinking skills and our political processes. My friend knows I am leery of falling into sentimentalism—especially when it is seasoned with a thick layer of Americanism, which can too often turn into schmaltz—so she added, “I think basically Beck just wants to say good things about America, and to encourage others to do the same.”
In truth, the rally was a sort of sensible tent-revival meeting, reaching out to America, but not in a grabbing, aggressive manner, to say “Save yourself by reclaiming your soul; remember who you are, by remembering God’s grace.”
That’s not a bad message, and in fairness to Beck, he and Sarah Palin and the rest managed to craft something nearly unthinkable in 21st Century America: a political event so infused with a higher sense of purpose as to eschew the political, or at least to not name names. Less than two years after a presidential campaign that put out a cultish messianic vibe, however, it was difficult not to sense a deliberate mirroring of message.
Watching Beck pace the stage while urging a course-correction from “what we’ve allowed ourselves to become,” one could not miss the unspoken rebuke. “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for!” was being soundly rejected for “We are still the ones we used to be!” There was a great deal of looking-back in order to look-ahead, which was meant to help a crowd that has felt ignored and displaced find its bearings and its brand.
Restoration was the word of the day; a reclamation of identity, pride, and place the desired effect. But restoration as a concept is heavy with eschatological meaning; Christians await the time “when all things are restored in Christ”; Jews look for restoration of the Temple and the Davidic line; some Muslim factions look for restoration of the Islamic Caliphate.
As the Beck rally closed to the strains of a bagpipe and a few hundred thousand voices singing “Amazing Grace,” the calls for “restoration” seemed distinctly Protestant but somehow ironic; can end times and old times ever make a coherent mix?
Presumably, a mostly-Christian crowd is one that awaits the Second Coming of Christ and therefore understands that we cannot turn the page back. Just as the old hymn tells, “I have decided to follow Jesus, no turning back, no turning back…”, so the Christian understands that the passing of ages—for better or worse—must lead inexorably to the day we await “with joyful hope.”
The rally attendees want to halt what is rightly perceived to be a devolution of the nation’s founding principles, and that is a worthy goal, but it is important to remember that genies do not go back into bottles; reclaiming some of the foundation will not restore lost innocence. That, as we know from our beautiful Easter proclamation, is wholly the purview of the resurrected Christ.
Since we know that, and as Christians are a people meant to keep a watch for the Bridegroom’s return, the puzzled non-religious might be forgiven for wondering: Why are these Christians so intently resisting the forward thrust of narrative? Will restoring foundational principles and old-time patriotism delay end times, or will they come apace?
It is a moment of cognitive dissonance for the faithful: everyone wants the resurrection, but nobody wants the crucifixion. Everyone wants the Second Coming, but no one, including me, wants to live through the dreadful social and political precursors hinted at in Scripture, and I guess that’s the answer.
Looking at the crowd gathered last Saturday, I couldn’t help but wonder what First Things founder Richard John Neuhaus would have thought of the “Restoring Honor” Rally. In his last book, American Babylon, he quoted G.K. Chesterton’s famous remark that “America is a nation with the soul of a church,” and added that “in the absence of an ecclesiology that tethered them to the Church from its beginnings through every period of its history, for many American Protestant thinkers America became their Church.” But, he continued,
it is not enough for America to have the soul of a church. It is an American Protestant trait to forget that, in the biblical image, the Church is not the soul of Christ but the body of Christ. It is a distinctive society through time—a society distinct from the societies in which, sometimes for better and sometimes for worse, she is compelled to live through time toward the End Time.
At one point during the rally, the question was asked, “Where is our Washington, where is our Lincoln?” The speeches were populist and pretty, and they struck chords meant to swell the American breast, but the overall message seemed as vaguely hopeful as my friend’s explanation: “restore honor and integrity; say good things about America, again!”
Well, all right, I’m willing! As Neuhaus also wrote:
When I meet God, I expect to meet him as an American. Not most importantly as an American, to be sure, but as someone who tried to take seriously, and tried to encourage others to take seriously, the story of America within the story of the world. The argument, in short, is that God is not indifferent toward the American experiment, and therefore we who are called to think about God and his ways through time dare not be indifferent to the American experiment.
And that, perhaps, is an even better answer: not so much, “Where is our Washington?” but “Who is our God?”
Elizabeth Scalia is a contributing writer for First Things. She blogs at The Anchoress.
Comments:
8.31.2010 | 7:45am
Ars Artium says:
An interesting question. The first thought that comes to mind is this: The basic moral concepts that shaped our national ethos came from the ancient moral philosophy of the Jews. The Ten Commandments and other moral (not political) holdings of the culture that related to them provided a "buckler and a shield" from moral chaos. In our political formation, no particular doctrinal God was specified; no creed was imposed. Our law reflected understanding of the proper role of the laity as good stewards of secular life. We had a moral heritage. Our law reflected the founders' understanding that, "If there is no standard but only subjective conscience, then there can be no common good," no "commonwealth" of fundamental ideas held in common other than a "freedom" that abandons young (and sometimes much older) people to their impulses and unintegrated passions. When those entrusted with the care and protection of our common life allow it to fall into disorder, false leaders arise. Some are well-meaning but do not possess the necessary resources, intellectual or otherwise, to inspire a return to order. Others consider themselves an enlightened elite, above the common person, and these often do possess the resource of a mistaken understanding of their position as delegates of the citizenry. Rather, they regard themselves as "moral teachers and guides," designers of a new moral order. It is to this task that they are passionately, "religiously" devoted. They will "propose" their teaching. If it is not properly accepted by the citizens, they will "impose" it - using all the means and power that has been vested in them by the electorate.
8.31.2010 | 8:35am
Jansci says:
... You've got to be kidding me these hate mongers are using the name of God the way so many fascist regimes have used art in the past to legitimize themselves ... lady where are you coming from; what about the separation of church and state for starters ... you're as wrapped in self delusional sentimentality as any of them ...
8.31.2010 | 8:46am
Roger Garner says:
You and Joe Carter are tone deaf about Beck, and your "friend" was less "vague and inarticulate" than you. Since the Body of Christ is comprised of souls who have feelings and political leanings, Chesterton was right - and that is not a particularly Protestant idea. Restoring integrity in government is a movement that should command the attention and support of the Faithful, rather than your puerile comments.
8.31.2010 | 9:18am
James Smith says:
If you did not attend the event nor see it in its entirety, you really should not comment on it.
8.31.2010 | 9:46am
Manhattan says:
Very well put, Ars Artium: "Rather, they regard themselves as "moral teachers and guides," designers of a new moral order. It is to this task that they are passionately, "religiously" devoted. They will "propose" their teaching. If it is not properly accepted by the citizens, they will "impose" it - using all the means and power that has been vested in them by the electorate." Scorn and disdain are also relevant here -- as in the lectures of that moral teacher and guide, Mayor Bloomberg.
It is only with the rise of rationalism that we lose the insight that emotion plays a vital role in the formation of judgment. I do not find the explanation of “He wants to restore honor and integrity to the country, because things have gotten off track, everyone can feel it!” to be vague or nonsensical. I find it accurate and sharply attuned to the current predicament of this country.
It is only with the rise of rationalism that we lose the insight that emotion plays a vital role in the formation of judgment. I do not find the explanation of “He wants to restore honor and integrity to the country, because things have gotten off track, everyone can feel it!” to be vague or nonsensical. I find it accurate and sharply attuned to the current predicament of this country.
8.31.2010 | 9:59am
Shan Gill says:
The Truth that is eternal does not need to be re-invoked (God is love). On the other hand, the truth that is born in time can need re-mediation - a course correction.
The United States was born without a family, having cut the umbilical cord with England using the separating knife of war and building its home on this shore far away. The foundation of the United States is the recognition of that power that comes to us through the Creator at our births, and that we bequeath somewhat of that power to the state to sustain social intercourse. We must move back to that understanding. Beck gets it, as do the people who crowded the mall on Saturday.
The United States was born without a family, having cut the umbilical cord with England using the separating knife of war and building its home on this shore far away. The foundation of the United States is the recognition of that power that comes to us through the Creator at our births, and that we bequeath somewhat of that power to the state to sustain social intercourse. We must move back to that understanding. Beck gets it, as do the people who crowded the mall on Saturday.
8.31.2010 | 10:10am
Erin says:
Thank you, Mrs. Scalia, for your measured comments on Beck and the Restoring Honor rally. As a Beck fan and someone who wished she could have attended, I was grateful to read in it an understanding of the positive aspects that could be drawn from attempts to, as you say, vaguely "restore honor" to the country, which in reality means placing God back within the discussions taking place in the public square, something Fr Neuhaus would surely advocate, God bless him.
Of course, as a Catholic I understand that salvation will not be found in any form of government; but I appreciate that as long as we wait in eschatological hope, the waiting should take place within the tensions that exist between the society that seeks to serves itself and the a society that seeks to serve God through itself.
Of course, as a Catholic I understand that salvation will not be found in any form of government; but I appreciate that as long as we wait in eschatological hope, the waiting should take place within the tensions that exist between the society that seeks to serves itself and the a society that seeks to serve God through itself.
8.31.2010 | 10:16am
swisswiss says:
There's a whiff of Manicheanism in this kind of conservative rally fervor--think good thoughts, think good thoughts, politics is dirty, politics is dirty. Meanwhile, the progressive/liberal axis spends its energy in getting people to do what needs to be done. It's the physical connection--precinct by precinct, door by door, paycheck by paycheck--that makes the difference.
8.31.2010 | 10:17am
J. Bob says:
The comment "Sentimentalism and an over-emphasis on feelings, in general, have weakened the nation’s critical-thinking skills and our political processes."was all the author got out of watching the event, may speak a great deal of the atmosphere one lives in.
It reminds me of the "teachers" in Jerusalem, looking down their noses at the ignorant Apostles. Their heads were so far in the clouds, they could not see their own feet.
It seems one the the messages of the rally was to think for yourself, and not be lead by those who would pat you on the head and say they know what's best for you, and will take care of you.
It reminds me of the "teachers" in Jerusalem, looking down their noses at the ignorant Apostles. Their heads were so far in the clouds, they could not see their own feet.
It seems one the the messages of the rally was to think for yourself, and not be lead by those who would pat you on the head and say they know what's best for you, and will take care of you.
8.31.2010 | 10:33am
Ken says:
"in fairness to Beck, he and Sarah Palin and the rest managed to craft something nearly unthinkable in 21st Century America: a political event so infused with a higher sense of purpose as to eschew the political, or at least to not name names."
Not to name names, is correct. Who is it that besmirched America, making it necessary that her honor be restored? Everyone knows how Beck and his faithful would answer. Their purpose is political, and they conflate conservative ideology with holiness.
Roger Garner writes: "Restoring integrity in government is a movement that should command the attention and support of the Faithful"
When do you think we last had integrity in government? What party or administration has ever not lied or at least cherry picked the facts?
Manhattan writes: "they will 'propose' their teaching. If it is not properly accepted by the citizens, they will 'impose' it - using all the means and power that has been vested in them by the electorate." "
The electorate did indeed give them power to govern and to make law.
Not to name names, is correct. Who is it that besmirched America, making it necessary that her honor be restored? Everyone knows how Beck and his faithful would answer. Their purpose is political, and they conflate conservative ideology with holiness.
Roger Garner writes: "Restoring integrity in government is a movement that should command the attention and support of the Faithful"
When do you think we last had integrity in government? What party or administration has ever not lied or at least cherry picked the facts?
Manhattan writes: "they will 'propose' their teaching. If it is not properly accepted by the citizens, they will 'impose' it - using all the means and power that has been vested in them by the electorate." "
The electorate did indeed give them power to govern and to make law.
8.31.2010 | 10:38am
Umberto Sanchez says:
As I've said before in these comments, I think Beck deserves the benefit of the doubt. It's curious that First Things has been devoted to protecting religion's place in the public square, and then when someone is successful at bringing religion to the public square, there is a great deal of hand wringing and not a speck of optimism.
I consider myself a fairly well-catechised Catholic, and for the life of me, I can't muster up any worry about Glenn Beck. As several others have said, his approach is totally in keeping with the spirit of America, i.e., you're not going to have a grassroots religious revival led by theologians. Beck is doing a fairly good job of promoting the following very simple message: faith is essential to the democratic experiment. Period.
And what is this talk of the end times? It is not for us to know, and we certainly should not order our temporal or political affairs to make allowance for the return of Christ, any more than we should have in any other time or place. Is the message of a restoration to foundations really out of place? Is this unprecedented? Are there other social or cultural paths that could have led us to this place that cannot be retraced? Is Beck's call to "pray on our knees" and to "ask for mercy" somehow not satisfying the repentence that God calls us to?
All in all, I'm truly amazed that First Things can't summon up a shred of enthusiasm, however reserved, for Mr. Beck's project. It's curious, and smells of either intellectual snobbery, or perhaps of jealousy at his success. Maybe a combination? I don't know. But it is curious, and I'll leave it to the writers of First Things to come up with a single piece of substantial criticism for Mr. Beck to support their reticence.
I consider myself a fairly well-catechised Catholic, and for the life of me, I can't muster up any worry about Glenn Beck. As several others have said, his approach is totally in keeping with the spirit of America, i.e., you're not going to have a grassroots religious revival led by theologians. Beck is doing a fairly good job of promoting the following very simple message: faith is essential to the democratic experiment. Period.
And what is this talk of the end times? It is not for us to know, and we certainly should not order our temporal or political affairs to make allowance for the return of Christ, any more than we should have in any other time or place. Is the message of a restoration to foundations really out of place? Is this unprecedented? Are there other social or cultural paths that could have led us to this place that cannot be retraced? Is Beck's call to "pray on our knees" and to "ask for mercy" somehow not satisfying the repentence that God calls us to?
All in all, I'm truly amazed that First Things can't summon up a shred of enthusiasm, however reserved, for Mr. Beck's project. It's curious, and smells of either intellectual snobbery, or perhaps of jealousy at his success. Maybe a combination? I don't know. But it is curious, and I'll leave it to the writers of First Things to come up with a single piece of substantial criticism for Mr. Beck to support their reticence.
8.31.2010 | 10:45am
Paul says:
I mean this as no comment on Beck but only on Scalia (it's not that I'm a fan or opposed to him but rather that I don't pay any attention to him at all--or Palin, for that matter). Scalia reads eschatology against restoration. While I wouldn't go all the way down with N. T. Wright on this front, there seems to be something to his argument--especially in light of the Jewish understanding of the eschaton as a restoration. Read against that backdrop, the New Testament statements about all things being made new could be read as talking about God's good creation being renewed, which is to say restored. To be sure, given the resurrection of Christ as a pattern for the resurrection of the body, then the consummation of all things must be more than the restoration of all things--but it certainly, given a reading of the New Testament in light of the Old, NOT less or other. One thinks Scalia might have been more careful in treating this dual aspect of the eschaton. Lest I be accused of agreeing with Beck--to reiterate, I don't pay any attention to what he says. And I certainly think it's ridiculous to displace the Kingdom of God with America (though I think only a supercilious reading of the Puritans--who I by no means intend to endorse--would arrive at they conclusion that they began America in a way that did).
8.31.2010 | 11:16am
Ars Artium says:
Re: "the power to govern and make law." In a republic, those elected to office are representatives of the people, not kings and queens or dictators. They do propose and pass legislation and that legislation is expected to be in conformity with the Constitution. That was the previously understood reason for the existence of the Supreme Court - to decide whether or not legislation was conformed to constitutional law and not the personal opinions of the elected representatives. When those in government overstep the bounds of their authority - as we are well aware has happened throughout history and is happening now - they are out of order and have misunderstood their mandate. In the United States, the remedy for this imbalance in government is frequent elections. The ability of the government to manipulate education and communications to its own advantage is new at least in scope. Many people of good will are frightened and rightfully so.
8.31.2010 | 12:21pm
Richard says:
I like the introductory measured comments here. I think Fox News is a very dangerous phenomenon. Someone has appropriately called it "group therapy for losers." And Beck is the chief demagogue there. But I was surprised to see that this rally was pretty much as this author has noted and I agree with her comments.
But if really restoring America is important morally and spiritually which is a good cause, these folks would have held the rally in Las Vegas and decried the basic culture there that permeates this nation at present. They would have also slammed many elements of corporate America. Have any of you really looked at the behind the scenes honchos that actually pay the bills for things like this? They are big corp, big oil and big pharma tycoons.
But if really restoring America is important morally and spiritually which is a good cause, these folks would have held the rally in Las Vegas and decried the basic culture there that permeates this nation at present. They would have also slammed many elements of corporate America. Have any of you really looked at the behind the scenes honchos that actually pay the bills for things like this? They are big corp, big oil and big pharma tycoons.
8.31.2010 | 12:33pm
Thomas Aquinas says:
Jansci writes:
"You've got to be kidding me these hate mongers are using the name of God the way so many fascist regimes have used art in the past to legitimize themselves ... lady where are you coming from; what about the separation of church and state for starters ... you're as wrapped in self delusional sentimentality as any of them ..."
Did they call their opponents intolerant bigots and force their opponents' children to attend government schools (and only permitted them to attend religious schools if they continued to help pay for the government schools)? Did they use the law to remove their community's most sacred symbols to honor their dead because a few dissenters found it offensive? Did they then jettison the principle of offense when it came to pornography, allowing the unrestrained proliferation of that while limiting political speech and eliminating sacred symbols from the public square?Did they use the law the force Christians to purchase contraception in violation of their moral theology?
Fascist, indeed. It seems to me that the real fascist has two left hands with one in my pocket and the other in his pants.
"You've got to be kidding me these hate mongers are using the name of God the way so many fascist regimes have used art in the past to legitimize themselves ... lady where are you coming from; what about the separation of church and state for starters ... you're as wrapped in self delusional sentimentality as any of them ..."
Did they call their opponents intolerant bigots and force their opponents' children to attend government schools (and only permitted them to attend religious schools if they continued to help pay for the government schools)? Did they use the law to remove their community's most sacred symbols to honor their dead because a few dissenters found it offensive? Did they then jettison the principle of offense when it came to pornography, allowing the unrestrained proliferation of that while limiting political speech and eliminating sacred symbols from the public square?Did they use the law the force Christians to purchase contraception in violation of their moral theology?
Fascist, indeed. It seems to me that the real fascist has two left hands with one in my pocket and the other in his pants.
8.31.2010 | 12:35pm
mcon says:
Umberto Sanchez is right on in his comment. He has correctly read and commented on Scalia's bias.
8.31.2010 | 12:39pm
Kamilla says:
There is a difference between bringing religion into the public square and getting down on our knees in the square and praying to Allah, Kali or even the false Jesus of the LDS, the spirit-brother of Lucifer.
I have no problem with Beck's involvement, I even have some appreciation for his program on the dreaded FOX network and I am am glad isn't afraid to look the fool. But I am deeply, deeply troubled by Christians getting down on their knees and praying with him.
I have no problem with Beck's involvement, I even have some appreciation for his program on the dreaded FOX network and I am am glad isn't afraid to look the fool. But I am deeply, deeply troubled by Christians getting down on their knees and praying with him.
8.31.2010 | 12:43pm
Mike says:
Well ,there are some interesting points in the article. But the ruminations on the "End Times", and somehow trying to make her view of those times fit in the narrative, seems forced, not to mention confused.
I suppose to a Protestant she makes more sense. But with a Catholic view of the "End Times", she borders on incoherent at times.
We have been in the "End Times" since Jesus' ascension to the right hand of God. Anyone waiting for a Tim Lahaye-like "End Times" will be surely disappointed.
I suppose to a Protestant she makes more sense. But with a Catholic view of the "End Times", she borders on incoherent at times.
We have been in the "End Times" since Jesus' ascension to the right hand of God. Anyone waiting for a Tim Lahaye-like "End Times" will be surely disappointed.
8.31.2010 | 1:04pm
Copperhead says:
Good grief! Elizabeth, you should have used your writing skills on something else. This amounted to a lot of words that really didn't say much about anything
8.31.2010 | 1:34pm
Edward Alleyn says:
Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won't come again
And don't speak too soon
For the wheel's still in spin
And there's no tellin' who
That it's namin'.
For the loser now
Will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin'.
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won't come again
And don't speak too soon
For the wheel's still in spin
And there's no tellin' who
That it's namin'.
For the loser now
Will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin'.
8.31.2010 | 1:59pm
Signe says:
Beck's focus has never been merely on the current incumbent. He has criticized George Bush and other "Big Government" Republicans just as harshly. His problem is with a government that wants to grow and grow and steamroll all in its path. He is also concerned about the president's embrace of "liberation theology" with his belief that his salvation is dependent on group salvation and that government is the source of that salvation.
8.31.2010 | 2:23pm
Ken says:
"[Beck] is also concerned about the president's embrace of "liberation theology" with his belief that his salvation is dependent on group salvation and that government is the source of that salvation."
Can you quote Obama in context saying he believes in liberation theology and/or group salvation? Better yet, provide a link. Thanks.
Can you quote Obama in context saying he believes in liberation theology and/or group salvation? Better yet, provide a link. Thanks.
8.31.2010 | 3:10pm
david says:
Mr.Sanchez is "most right" in all this blather. I am very dissappointed in
First Things for their weak and seemingly condescending article that I should
not have wasted my time reading. Ms.Scalia seems to have overtalked and
both under thought and performed on this one badly. My time would have
been more meaningful flying, driving and attending the rally. I always wanted to see Washington anyway.
First Things for their weak and seemingly condescending article that I should
not have wasted my time reading. Ms.Scalia seems to have overtalked and
both under thought and performed on this one badly. My time would have
been more meaningful flying, driving and attending the rally. I always wanted to see Washington anyway.
8.31.2010 | 3:26pm
Matt says:
It seems that, on this blog more than most, commenters complain that pieces are written at all. If you don't like the topics, there are now millions of other venues, no?
8.31.2010 | 3:52pm
Maria V. says:
Ouchy ..ouch ..well, may you be blessed Ms.Scalia for being persecuted in His Name for , if I guess right , expressing concerns about persons loosing out their deeper , everlasting callings ... that you are trying to indirectly warn of the false prophets of 'last times' , how a people who elected someone for the sake of pocketbook last time might sell out even worse with far far reaching consequences this time , how persons who want to ead in name of what is sacred seem so misled in their own choices and thus dangerous , esp. to young who are still being formed in these sacred areas !
Our Lord has revealed to mystics such as St.Faustina how the universe will be folded up when the number of fallen angels is filled up in heaven ...(thus population control experts need not worry that Catholics do not understand economics - they understand it too well , that as long as we do not give in to enemy powers of lust , greed, hoarding, destructions etc : , a loving Father would provide as He has shown time and again in history of the world !)
He also asks to bring all - to His mercy ..fallen away , the sinner ..all ..may be the best way to hasten those words - " Come Lord Jesus " !
Our Lord has revealed to mystics such as St.Faustina how the universe will be folded up when the number of fallen angels is filled up in heaven ...(thus population control experts need not worry that Catholics do not understand economics - they understand it too well , that as long as we do not give in to enemy powers of lust , greed, hoarding, destructions etc : , a loving Father would provide as He has shown time and again in history of the world !)
He also asks to bring all - to His mercy ..fallen away , the sinner ..all ..may be the best way to hasten those words - " Come Lord Jesus " !
8.31.2010 | 4:02pm
Gail F says:
Anchoress, you should be paying attention. It's quite clear. Glenn Beck is aiming for a new Great Awakening -- not a crazy goal, considering that American society has been transformed by Great Awakenings before. I think he may be reading what's in the air correctly, but I don' t know that anyone can make a Great Awakening happen if it isn't time yet.
The people who are troubled by his being a Mormon really astonish me, and I have absolutely no sympathy for Mormon theology. Glenn Beck is not trying to convert the country to Mormonism, he's calling for a straight-up, country-wide, good old Protestant revival. Yes, you've got to be careful about what you ask for -- I'm not sure how a Protestant revival would treat Mormons (or Catholics, for that matter). But he is calling for religious revival among all faiths, for religion in the public square, and for the principles of the Founders. The name of the rally comes from Declaration of Independence: "we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." He is asking people to pledge those things, to pray, and to vote.
About half a million people showed up Saturday. Friday night was an all-clergy event at Lincoln Center. Beck has millions of listeners and viewers. You should pay attention.
Beck does not endorse candidates, although he does denounce them. He does not endorse religions although he rightly (although not always accurately) denounces liberation theology. If you haven't been paying attention to them either, the Tea Party folks -- he is not a member of any Tea Party groups -- are going after all that ground-level stuff (a neighbor of mine started out registering people for precinct captains and is now running for office himself). It's happening.
Where is this all going? I don't know. But the Democrats are fools for dismissing it, and the rest of us are foolish not to notice what is happening all around us. Pay attention. I think this is important.
The people who are troubled by his being a Mormon really astonish me, and I have absolutely no sympathy for Mormon theology. Glenn Beck is not trying to convert the country to Mormonism, he's calling for a straight-up, country-wide, good old Protestant revival. Yes, you've got to be careful about what you ask for -- I'm not sure how a Protestant revival would treat Mormons (or Catholics, for that matter). But he is calling for religious revival among all faiths, for religion in the public square, and for the principles of the Founders. The name of the rally comes from Declaration of Independence: "we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." He is asking people to pledge those things, to pray, and to vote.
About half a million people showed up Saturday. Friday night was an all-clergy event at Lincoln Center. Beck has millions of listeners and viewers. You should pay attention.
Beck does not endorse candidates, although he does denounce them. He does not endorse religions although he rightly (although not always accurately) denounces liberation theology. If you haven't been paying attention to them either, the Tea Party folks -- he is not a member of any Tea Party groups -- are going after all that ground-level stuff (a neighbor of mine started out registering people for precinct captains and is now running for office himself). It's happening.
Where is this all going? I don't know. But the Democrats are fools for dismissing it, and the rest of us are foolish not to notice what is happening all around us. Pay attention. I think this is important.
8.31.2010 | 4:29pm
R Hampton says:
Voting Republican or Democrat is not going to restore honor. Then again, this kind of theocratic populism is nothing new. Thomas Jefferson was the subject of a similar sentiments prior to his election in 1800:
...In 1798, Timothy Dwight, a Congregationalist minister and the president of Yale College, warned that the election of Jeffersonian Republicans might usher in a Jacobin regime in which "we may see the Bible cast into a bonfire, the vessels of the sacramental supper borne by an ass in public procession, and our children … chanting mockeries against God … [to] the ruin of their religion, and the loss of their souls."
In an influential pamphlet published in 1800, William Linn, a Dutch Reformed clergyman, warned that a vote for Jefferson "must be construed into no less than rebellion against God." He added ominously that the promotion of an infidel to high office would encourage public immorality and lead to the "destruction of all social order and happiness."
Presbyterian minister John Mitchell Mason similarly declaimed that it would be "a crime never to be forgiven" for the American people to confer the office of chief magistrate "upon an open enemy to their religion, their Redeemer, and their hope, [and it] would be mischief to themselves and sin against God." Jefferson's "favorite wish," Mitchell charged, is "to see a government administered without any religious principle among either rulers or ruled." He repudiated the notion gaining currency among Jeffersonians that "Religion has nothing to do with politics."
...The campaign rhetoric was so vitriolic that when news of Jefferson's election swept across the country, housewives in Federalist New England were seen burying their family Bibles in their gardens or hiding them in wells because they expected the Scriptures to be confiscated and burned by the new administration.
...In 1798, Timothy Dwight, a Congregationalist minister and the president of Yale College, warned that the election of Jeffersonian Republicans might usher in a Jacobin regime in which "we may see the Bible cast into a bonfire, the vessels of the sacramental supper borne by an ass in public procession, and our children … chanting mockeries against God … [to] the ruin of their religion, and the loss of their souls."
In an influential pamphlet published in 1800, William Linn, a Dutch Reformed clergyman, warned that a vote for Jefferson "must be construed into no less than rebellion against God." He added ominously that the promotion of an infidel to high office would encourage public immorality and lead to the "destruction of all social order and happiness."
Presbyterian minister John Mitchell Mason similarly declaimed that it would be "a crime never to be forgiven" for the American people to confer the office of chief magistrate "upon an open enemy to their religion, their Redeemer, and their hope, [and it] would be mischief to themselves and sin against God." Jefferson's "favorite wish," Mitchell charged, is "to see a government administered without any religious principle among either rulers or ruled." He repudiated the notion gaining currency among Jeffersonians that "Religion has nothing to do with politics."
...The campaign rhetoric was so vitriolic that when news of Jefferson's election swept across the country, housewives in Federalist New England were seen burying their family Bibles in their gardens or hiding them in wells because they expected the Scriptures to be confiscated and burned by the new administration.
8.31.2010 | 4:42pm
Ken says:
"the Democrats are fools for dismissing it"
They would be if they were, but that's the last thing they're doing.
They would be if they were, but that's the last thing they're doing.
8.31.2010 | 4:42pm
charles says:
I think you mistake a thing: Glenn is not restoring as a biblical profecy, he is restoring what America once was before the progressives toke place, a religious free place with respect to individual rights that come from God. He knows America is running down the hill with Obama and progressives and will face his near end, but he hopes someday with a religious strong background a new hero will appear in America to rebuilt it again.
His mission is not with the gospel as a whole, but only in America, believe me, some people wrote that gospel will live on other countries, but what these people don't ask is "we want it?".
Glenn is very courageous, if he was the biggot people think he is why he would put his face to be hit so hard like he does in the so confortable position he is now? Why he just don't sell more books and do his little program? With all his talent, why he doens't sell his soul to the left? I think is wrong for conservatives to try to attack his man.
His mission is not with the gospel as a whole, but only in America, believe me, some people wrote that gospel will live on other countries, but what these people don't ask is "we want it?".
Glenn is very courageous, if he was the biggot people think he is why he would put his face to be hit so hard like he does in the so confortable position he is now? Why he just don't sell more books and do his little program? With all his talent, why he doens't sell his soul to the left? I think is wrong for conservatives to try to attack his man.
8.31.2010 | 4:54pm
pete says:
Funny... I don't think this is about end times kind of stuff. I think it is about a continuation of a good society. One that will be dead to our children if we do not tend to it.
Why as a society do we always feel the need to run to a judge or write a law to solve a problem. These are solutions governments "peddle" as a means to gain control of us. We need to look back at what made us so successful and emulate it.
If there is no awakening, we will simply slide into the crowd of decaying western countries. Our federal gov will consume every bit of power in sight at a faster and faster pace until we cease to be self governing.
Why as a society do we always feel the need to run to a judge or write a law to solve a problem. These are solutions governments "peddle" as a means to gain control of us. We need to look back at what made us so successful and emulate it.
If there is no awakening, we will simply slide into the crowd of decaying western countries. Our federal gov will consume every bit of power in sight at a faster and faster pace until we cease to be self governing.
8.31.2010 | 4:58pm
Peter says:
Your observation that the rally mirrored those of Obama is astute. They used a similar message of people feeling things are not right and the need for change. The image of the Lincoln Memorial which they displayed was almost identical to the Obama posters in its design and color scheme. Sarah Palin looked and sounded like she was on the verge of leading a chant of "Yes We Can". That is the problem with Obama's mostly vacuous campaign message. Anyone can recycle it.
8.31.2010 | 5:24pm
Nancy says:
My question is why are some of the commentators on this post so afraid of those who espouse good behavior and self-regulation? Is it not something that we should all aspire to?
Beck's message was nothing like Obama's Hope and Change mantra. Whether you like him or not he hits the nail on the head with the truth of our history and the lies of our media. I pray for Mr. Obama's realization that he lives in a nation built on Judeo-Christian values and traditions. Values and traditions that allowed him to rise to the height of power that most men and not yet a woman can achieve in this country.
Beck's message was nothing like Obama's Hope and Change mantra. Whether you like him or not he hits the nail on the head with the truth of our history and the lies of our media. I pray for Mr. Obama's realization that he lives in a nation built on Judeo-Christian values and traditions. Values and traditions that allowed him to rise to the height of power that most men and not yet a woman can achieve in this country.
8.31.2010 | 5:59pm
Todd says:
"It is a moment of cognitive dissonance for the faithful: everyone wants the resurrection, but nobody wants the crucifixion. Everyone wants ..."
My sense is that this Tea Party nonsense is the conservative half of American populism, stoked by a few select media billionaires, and aimed for political advantage. While I appreciate your (desperate?) search for something in Republicanism in all this, I don't think you'll find it.
Mr Beck might as well be rallying against your favorite president. Mr Bush couldn't muster an inspirational shared sacrifice on 9/12 either. Let alone crucifixion. And Mr Cheney was fine with "deficits don't matter" as long as his peeps stayed in the gravy train.
As for the answer to “Who is our God?” you're more likely to find it in liberation theology than Mr Beck's party.
My sense is that this Tea Party nonsense is the conservative half of American populism, stoked by a few select media billionaires, and aimed for political advantage. While I appreciate your (desperate?) search for something in Republicanism in all this, I don't think you'll find it.
Mr Beck might as well be rallying against your favorite president. Mr Bush couldn't muster an inspirational shared sacrifice on 9/12 either. Let alone crucifixion. And Mr Cheney was fine with "deficits don't matter" as long as his peeps stayed in the gravy train.
As for the answer to “Who is our God?” you're more likely to find it in liberation theology than Mr Beck's party.
9.1.2010 | 10:05am
Charlene says:
Elizabeth: I really think you totally missed the point of the rally, as did a lot of the commenters. To read someone who got it, check out Chicago Boyz "I Think I See What Glenn Beck's Doing." (I'm sorry - I don't know how to imbed a link...)
9.1.2010 | 10:32am
Gail F says:
"It is a moment of cognitive dissonance for the faithful: everyone wants the resurrection, but nobody wants the crucifixion."
I don't think this is a correct reading of the crowd or Glenn Beck's fans at all. For one thing, this rally (and an online auction that had been going on for months) were fundraisers for a charity benefiting families of dead soldiers -- together they raised $5.5 million. Many of the people there seem to have been families of soldiers from many different wars. They are not people who aren't prepared to pay even the ultimate price for what they believe -- it is not just a feel-good group of folks. Again, it seems like the standard American mix of patriotism and Protestantism to me.
I have no idea what Elizabeth means by mixing restoration and the end times. As a long-time observer of Glenn Beck, I haven't heard any End Times rhetoric from him. What i have heard is a continually more religious bent to his program, and a continually more explicit call for people to "turn to God" and "return to our country's principles." The man teaches classes on the air about the Constitution. Check out his website -- there are all sorts of things about Faith, Hope, and Charity. None of this stuff is a secret. He is at it every day for four hours a day. It's not hard to look it up.
I don't think this is a correct reading of the crowd or Glenn Beck's fans at all. For one thing, this rally (and an online auction that had been going on for months) were fundraisers for a charity benefiting families of dead soldiers -- together they raised $5.5 million. Many of the people there seem to have been families of soldiers from many different wars. They are not people who aren't prepared to pay even the ultimate price for what they believe -- it is not just a feel-good group of folks. Again, it seems like the standard American mix of patriotism and Protestantism to me.
I have no idea what Elizabeth means by mixing restoration and the end times. As a long-time observer of Glenn Beck, I haven't heard any End Times rhetoric from him. What i have heard is a continually more religious bent to his program, and a continually more explicit call for people to "turn to God" and "return to our country's principles." The man teaches classes on the air about the Constitution. Check out his website -- there are all sorts of things about Faith, Hope, and Charity. None of this stuff is a secret. He is at it every day for four hours a day. It's not hard to look it up.
10.9.2010 | 5:09pm
Ellen Irby says:
There is a difference between bringing religion into the public square and getting down on our knees in the square and praying to Allah, Kali or even the false Jesus of the LDS, the spirit-brother of Lucifer. Why as a society do we always feel the need to run to a judge or write a law to solve a problem. These are solutions governments "peddle" as a means to gain control of us. We need to look back at what made us so successful and emulate it.
