The "Wright" question

Barack Obama has caught more flak than a B-29 over Ploesti over his association with Jeremiah Wright (I can't bring myself to use the title "Reverend" with such). If that wasn't bad enough, Father Michael Pfleger of a black, liberation-theology Catholic Church continued the stream of vitriol against America and sent the Illinois senator scrambling for media cover once again.

The onslaught could not be avoided. Obama finally jettisoned his membership in the church whose doctrines you by this time know full well. It is interesting to note that he resigned the membership not because of what Wright or Pfleger preached but because he did not want to be a further distraction to the church. He doesn't denounce the church or its doctrine at all.

While that's an eye-popper worthy of a post all by its lonesome, that's not my subject. Here's what's rattled my cage these these last three months: the media and most of America have accused these orators (they're not preachers) of bigotry and treason, of hate-speech and coddling terror. The one thing they've not been accused of, at least in print, is being heretical.

You see, media opinion is not the standard. Public opinion is another poor yardstick (lemmings, anyone?). What matters is the ultimate standard, the unchanging, inspired, inerrant Word of truth, the Bible. Are these gentlemen adhering to God's word. If they are (I actually typed that with a straight face), then God is pleased. If they aren't, then God is way distressed.

In post-Christian Americana, in the land of engorged tolerance, we have no viable reason to target Wright and Pfleger other than we don't like what they're saying. If God's word is true, unchanging and unalterable, then we can say with absolute clarity that these two men are fruit loops.

That's why Obama should have shunned them...20 years ago!!