More from Brit Hume on Christianity and Redemption

Stunning! Can we make him PB or ABC?

GO BRIT!!
He is one of the MAIN reasons I watch Fox News!!!

In all fairness then ...should we recommend that lapsed Christians try Budhism? 

“...The teachings of Buddhism include the noble eightfold path, involving a prohibition against sexual misconduct. All Theravada and most Mahayana Buddhist orders of monks and nuns are expected to be celibate…”

It does not seem Tiger was very good at following the tenets of his religion, which prohibit the behaviour he exibited! What makes Brit think he would be any more sincere a Christian? It isn’t like Christians have no trouble keeping their pants on…

Blessings

What I like about this is the bigger picture. We’d gotten to a point in this country where people—like my students—were more and more thinking that the First Amendment = separation of Church and state = no mention of religion or religion-based morality in the public square = it’s impolite and unseemly even to mention Christianity (let alone Christ) in ordinary conversation. But the refreshing meta-take on this show has got to be, Why not have this kind of conversation on television?

Well, I do like one aspect of the smaller picture too: Brit and I are fellow ‘Hoos!

Thank the Lord for Brit Hume.  We need more like him on television. God Bless You—Brit.

I can’t imagine another major network that would allow this.
I agree with drjoan’s high opinion of Hume, but I also point out that it was O’Reilly that brought him into prime time for an extended discussion.

#4, just to be sure:  I hope you have told your students that no where in the Constitution of hte United States will you find the phrase “separation of Church and State”.  In is not there, never was there, and those who claim it is are either lying to you or ignorant of what the document does say.

No. 7: Absolutely; of course. That’s why I portrayed it—or tried to—as a slippery slope, where “=” means “and some people think that that [where “that” = the foregoing] means the following….”

Hey, you’re always welcome to sit in and set us straight! In fact, in my American Religious History class, we actually read an essay by Ralph Reed that Conrad Cherry has in his new edition of God’s New Israel, and Reed’s essay is on exactly this point.

David,
You must have graduated from the Curry School before it got overtaken by runaway PC culture, just like the rest of the University.  I recently had a call from a student on the phone bank trying to get donations for A&S from the alumni.  I told her to take me off the list until things like the anti-religious comments in the Cavalier Daily were discontinued.  She was somewhat contrite and said she understood, adding that “you are not the first person who has told me that.”

#3, you said “What makes Brit think he would be any more sincere a Christian?” Which I think is largely beside the point. Brit Hume was talking about what could benefit Tiger (the saving grace of Jesus Christ), not how good a Christian he would be…though he was speculating what a pleasure it would be to see him turn his life around through Christ, and what fine evangelism that would be, in the event. Buddhism offers no consolation whatever to those who have failed miserably to live up to their ideals, just the counsel to (to summarize a few thousand years of teachings) “straighten up and fly right.” Trouble is, most of us can’t do that without some help. Which help is forthcoming—where?—in the Christian faith.

FYI, Brit was on the local news radio station in town, WTOP.  He did an excellent job of explaining his position.  Rarely have I heard a better, succinct explanation of the Christian faith.

The world is offended by proclamations of Christ because the world demands that redemption be found within a man, and not without.  Any religion or non-religion will facilitate the process of self-redemption.  It simply becomes the language in which self-redemption may be expressed.  But orthodox Christianity does not allow for self-redemption.  It requires submission.  It demands abnegation.  It demands that man sacrifice his most precious commodities - his pride in his own autonomy and his confidence in his own goodness.  And thus it is that people gnash their teeth at the very mention of it.  Men do not abide exclusive truth claims that simultaneously bind them to a self-image of hopeless sinner, and helpless beggar.

carl

kay4, thanks for the reference. I found the actual mp3 file:

http://wtop.com/emedia/173519.mp3

“Jesus Christ offers something that Tiger Woods desperately needs.”  If that’s not a money quotation for a sermon, I don’t know what is!  Good to see the Brit is in no way backing down, not that I think he would.

No. 9: No, the Curry School is UVa’s school of education. That probably would not have equipped me for a post as a humanities professor at a four-year liberal-arts college or university.

My BA (‘76) from the University is in English and Religious Studies; my PhD (‘82) is in Religious Studies (diss.: “Abraham Lincoln’s Theological Outlook”). And I have an M.A. from the University of Chicago Divinity School.

I did, though, recently sit in as a member of a PhD thesis committee at UVa’s Curry School. The thesis was in American Religious History, but it concerned the development of W. A. Muhlenberg-related church schools. A fine job, done by an able priest-scholar named Chip Prehn. He did his doctorate in Curry because his subject was in the history of education. But they called me in because I had done some work on church schools.

Love Brit Hume even more now! When I saw him say that on Chris Wallace, I was impressed.  I was even more impressed when he doubled down on O’Reilly!

No. 9: P.S. What comments did you mean when you said, “I told her to take me off the list until things like the anti-religious comments in the Cavalier Daily were discontinued.”

Wouldn’t it be amazing if all of us who call ourselves Christian could be as comfortable as Brit Hume in discussing the redemption and forgiveness offered by Jesus Christ.  He makes most of us look paltry and unconvincing in any discussion of faith.  Short, to the point and utterly convincing.  I wonder how many priests and preachers will use his quote in next Sunday’s sermon?  You Go, Brit!

I am very impressed by Mr Hume’s unflappability and the clarity with which he spoke.  He did not have to say what he did in his first discussion, but he did say something we Christians know is true - other religions offer us teachers and information, but Christianity offers us transforming grace.  Tiger Woods needs that - as do we all!

To Daniel and David - I was graduated from Virginia in 1969, A&S.  I was active in Inter-Varsity during my time there.  The Cavalier Daily was not hostile, and it would publish announcements of special events - but on the whole, while not hostile, the administration paid little attention to religous groups.  On the whole, it simply treated I-V like any other interest group.

I have had some contacts with the work of I-V and the wonderful Christian Study Center, and even if the Cavalier Daily is snarky regarding Christianity, Christian fellowship and learning seems to be much stronger now that it was in the late 60’s - a larger percentage of active Christians among the students and the faculty, and quite a few organized groups, nearly all of whom work together with the common goal of sharing Christ and promoting a biblical worldview.

The University is a lot different than when I was there, in the waning days of students wearing coats and ties and an all mens’ College of Arts and Sciences.  It problably has become a lot more relativistic and “politically correct.”  But the Light is shining strongly on Mr Jefferson’s “Academical Village” and many students are learning what it means to have an intelligent, biblically sound faith.  Would that all universities were having such a spiritual presence!

No. 19: There was a sense in the early 1970s that very conservative Christian groups on the Grounds [i.e., the UVa campus] were urging their members not to take courses in the University’s Dept of Religious Studies, deeming it insufficiently orthodox.

I am not saying for sure whether they did or not—and I certainly don’t remember, if I ever knew, the names of the group.

What I would point out is simply how good the religious studies dept was then. Estimable—and thoroughly orthodox—Christian theologians like David Baily Harned worked closely with President Edgar F. Shannon to build the strongest undergraduate religious studies program in the United States. Students flocked to the opportunties offered. It’s all a bit ironice, this being Mr. Jefferson’s University and all, but there we had a great deal of Christian theology and history of Christianity being taught. It was a very popular major.

There are still many excellent faculty in that department. I recently did a book on Austin Farrer, Captured by the Crucified, and two contributors were affiliated with the UVa dept: William McF. Wilson and Julian N. Hartt.

Hi, I am a conservative working with Rediscovering God in America I and II. If you want to teach your kids about our country’s (Judeo)-Christian heritage, you might want to consider visiting this website, it offers a great perspective on Christianity in America.  http://bit.ly/RediscoveringGod1

#18, You better believe I’m using it in my sermon on Sunday.  As soon as the post went up on SF, I said bingo, that’ll preach on this first Sunday after the Epiphany.  Not to mention the added info. from his interview with O’Reilly.

Let’s remember that if you work for Rupert Murdock you walk the Murdock line. You are nothing more than a shill for his particular brand of conservatism. Likewise, be it Hume, Beck or O’Rielly one can speculate that sponsors are also telling those three what programming they want pushed. I don’t recall Hume was ever a columnist whose forte was Christianity or any other religion for that matter. Of course he could have had a religious revelation but I seriously doubt that was the motivation here, more likely it was what payday brought him.

Robroy,

Thanks for the link!  I shall pass it on.  BTW, I love the comment that the two most controversial words in the English language are “Jesus Christ.” 

ruauper2,  perhaps I should ignore you as others are doing

Listening to Brit Hume I felt quite certain that he meant exactly what he said. 
I don’t believe he was instructed to say this at all. 
Of course he may well know that he will not be fired for saying it on Fox, or even that Fox will look well upon him for saying it.  But that he said it to be paid for it is really insulting to him and painfully cynical.  It is as if you can’t imagine someone speaking like this for any other reason.  And that is really too bad.
Susan Peterson

ruauper2 is a way, a truth, and a life yet to know his Lord and Savior. As a child of God, pray for ruauper2 as we do our presiding bishop.

The emotion Brit Hume engenders in me is respect. Respect for him as a man and respect for his forthright proclamation his Christian faith.

ruauper2, do you also think that analysts and reporters appearing on CNN, MSNBC, and ABC/NBC/CBS are paid to say what they say on those outlets?

Robroy, thanks for the link.  After listening to the weather reports all morning projecting lots of snow (and lots of shoveling), it was a lovely thing to listen to.  Go Brit!

Always liked Brit Hume. He always seemed straightforward and genuine. Ruarper2, have you not noticed that there are some commentators on Fox who are most definitely <i>not<-i> conservative? Some of the opinions expressed are far from the conservative line. In fact, sometimes I’ve thought that Fox goes too far in its attempt to be fair and balanced, considering that the other news networks are so disgustingly biased toward the left. I think Brit Hume was being completely sincere in his comments.

[25], [26], {28]

Being ignored in the minds of some doesn’t bother me. I view such critism as an acceptance of the fact my remarks have made an impact on the minds of those who seem intolerant of dissent here.

As for #28’s suggestion I’d rather he find someone willing to do so for him. Maybe then he will realize we live in an open society, not a closed one intolerant of the views of others.
A prayer asking for deliverance from intolerance for all who blog here would be far more appropriate.

ruauper2, I read #28’s post and saw no suggestion - only a question. I can’t figure out what suggestion you are talking about but #28’s question is quite interesting and I hope that you will answer it.

ruauper2. I only offer prayer for you, that you may be a son of your Father in heaven.

ruauper2, #31, your reference to my #28 makes no sense.  I asked if you think the talking heads at the mainstream media are paid to say what they say, as you think Murdoch employees are.  It is “intolerant,” to use your favorite word, to assume that those who don’t agree with you must be taking money to say what they say.  You don’t seem to allow for the sincerity of opinions different from your own.

If I remember correctly Brit Hume used to work at ABC and got in trouble because of his outspoken Christianity there. He is low key, articulate, intelligent, experienced and kind. God bless him.

I feel compelled to respond to ruauper2 #23 on this one. 

Brit Hume recently retired as a fulltime anchor for Fox News and now serves only as an occasional commentator.  Among the reasons he listed for retiring were that he has grown tired, he wants to spend more time with his grandchildren, and, specifically, that he wants to devote more time to his faith.  He has become more outspoken because his priorities have changed and he is no longer thinking just like a professional journalist worried about what his employer may think. 

This appears to follow a decade of transition for Hume following an event of immense pain and grief.  Hume noted in a fall 2008 interview that he became a committed (i.e., non-nominal) Christian only after his son’s tragic suicide in 1998:

“I want to pursue my faith more ardently than I have done. I’m not claiming it’s impossible to do when you work in this business. I was kind of a nominal Christian for the longest time. When my son died, I came to Christ in a way that was very meaningful to me. If a person is a Christian and tries to face up to the implications of what you say you believe, it’s a pretty big thing. If you do it part time, you’re not really living it.”

Here is a man who found saving grace in Christianity in the midst of great pain following uncharitable and catty gossip about the circumstances of his son’s death.  The Gospel changed his life and he recommended that Tiger Woods who is subjected (however well deserved) to uncharitable and catty gossip on an hourly basis.  Hume’s remarks are not judgmental, they are the view of a man who found solace in the Gospel and recommends salvation in Christ to another.

If a man clutches onto a life preserver in a turbulent sea, climbs into the safety of boat (the Church), and tosses that life preserver out to another with the recommendation that another drowning man grab onto it, it is not an arrogant or judgmental act.  If one had actual knowledge that the life preserver worked, it would be cold-hearted not to throw the life preserver into the ocean and callous at best not to urge those drowning to grab tight onto it.

Jesus Christ, and His Gospel which we are supposed to extend to the world, are that life preserver.  There is no other.  The Church is an ark in a turbulent sea and we sit in soteriological safety.  We are cold-hearted indeed if we do not tell the Gospel to others and urge drowning men to grab tight onto salvation in Christ.  The Lord is already reaching out to pull them into safety, the same way he lifted Peter out of the water when he began to sink in the Sea of Galilee.

Sometimes, every now and then, a person makes a comment on television that is for a purpose other than material gain.  Hume is imperfect like the rest of us, but his words resonate because they were spoken from the heart and they are born out of personal tragedy.

Peace in Christ and may God manifest Himself to all of us in this Epiphany season.

Dcn. John

Sorry, I need to add an edit for clarity:

“he recommended that [same Gospel to] Tiger Woods[,] who is subjected (however well deserved) to uncharitable and catty gossip on an hourly basis.”