Wow. What a great sermon. And what idiocy recently. Now THERE's a mystery: how someone who can present such inspiring insights from God's Word at one point in life can later be so bitter, angry, and mean.

I know that there have been times that I do not agree with my mentors. Yet, at the same time I have been shaped by my mentors.
I don't know if wright's statements are part of his core message, but still, if he is preaching hate from the pulpit, it raises questions of integrity. The sermon link above is not the sermon I would preach, but it is well written, and not as Christocentric as I would like to see. Paul is mentioned but I don't recall any mention of Jesus, and while I clearly don't agree that it is hope that saves us, as I understand it is Jesus. But I will agree that hope is important for believers.
It also raises questions of judgment on the part of senator Obama for picking a person who preaches racial hatred for a mentor and adviser. I have read only one of Wright's sermons, but I find the whole connection troubling and suspect. Was Wright included to prove senator Obama's Christian credentials, and is now creating new problems?

I had heard all I needed to hear from Barak Obama when he justified his support for homosexual marriage by rejecting that "obscure passage in Romans."

Now, as illuminating as Pastor Wright's sermons are, it is even more revealing to watch Senator Obama this past weekend try to distance himself from this man he has called a mentor. Obama claims to have never heard or been present for any of the pastor's controversial sermon's. How convenient it is that he was away from church all of those Sundays. And he never watched the sermons on video and no one in the congregation ever told him mwhat he missed. Pastor Wright has suddenly gone from being Obama's pastor, spritual advisor and mentor to being the uncle no one wants to talk about.

Obama's statements have been very calculated and parsed. If you were looking for someone fresh and different who would break the mold of the slick, well-rehearsed politician, you've been disappointed.

I'm not playing devil's advocate here. I am also an Obama supporter. Needed to get that out of the way.

But is there anything truly wrong with saying, "God damn America"? I understand that the wording is really harsh. But I do believe that American Christianity has co-opted its "kingdom not of this world" with believing that America is almost the chosen nation. We founded this country on very un-Christian actions like mass murder of innocent people groups and slavery.

Isn't it appropriate for us believers in Jesus Christ to not value American patriotism so greatly, but rather esteem the redemptive work of Jesus Christ?

Southern senators judging Barack because he doesn't have a lapel pin on his jacket is an absurdity. I'm stereotyping but I would assume these southern politicians are "evangelicals." Why do these politicians then run for office and force others to wear the American flag lapel? Why not leave the office and live amongst the poor as Jesus did?

There's a disconnect in my mind.

an amazing sermon. truly amazing.
the audacity of hope is a beautiful phrase.

. . .Who is this unheard of black man with a message of hope? The new Black Messiah; of wanting to bridge the divide over racial inequality and meld the masses into a one unified people? From the white underclass, young changlings, to the anti-war re-runs of the 60's, Obama is indeed the Champion.. .. .Then along comes a hate-mongering, black supremist pastor, to skewer the dreams of 'Change'and nail the unfortunate Obama to the crucifix. . . .But when the lie is finally told; white Amerikka brought down the Black Messiah . . . All hail the Reverend Wright, for dashing the hopes of millions of Black Americans.

@Dan,

Yes, you're right that the gospel has to stand in judgment over any nation or church. But for what reasons does Wright see God standing in judgment on America? That we brought 9-11 on ourselves, that whites invented AIDS to devastate people of color, that the government has declared war on young black men by incarcerating them for drug crimes, and on and on.

Patriotism isn't always right and criticism isn't always wrong. But Wright's criticisms are simply angry restatements of race hatred and grievance politics, not gospel-centered challenges of real idolatry.

After watching Pastor Wright preach what amounted to a "hate speech" on Christmas Day in 2007 on television and then reading the sermon posted here, one is reminded of these verses from the book of James: "With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God's likeness." When both of those things come from a pulpit it sure makes you wonder. Pastor Wright called black Republicans and even Hillary Clinton terrible names from the pulpit. I've never heard venom of this nature from any pulpit anywhere. If Pat Robertson was Obabma's pastor would anyone allow him to brush it off and move on?

I think Dr. Johnathan Walton helps frame this topic, particularly for folks who aren't familiar with the stream or the historical context that Dr. Wright serves in.

http://www.religiondispatches.org/Gui/Content.aspx?Page=BL&Id=135

I've found two blog posts on this story to be very insightful. Edward Gilbreath asks, Does Obama Have a Prayer? And Jonathan L. Walton writes about The Politics of Patriotic Treason. The perspectives of these two men seem to be underrepresented in many of the responses to this story.

So can any one tell me the name of John McCain's pastor or Hillary Clinton's pastor or G.W. Bush's pastor? Why not? Should it matter? Or does it matter only in Obama's case?
BTW, I don't always agree with the man who is currently my pastor nor did I always agree with any of the pastors whose teaching I have sat under....Count me out of ever running for office I guess...
Of course none of this will matter in the long run for the United States of America if we continue on the course we are now. The USSR bankrupted itself by invading and "staying the course" in Afghanistan. Unless we change course, the US will follow the same path.

It seems to me that Rev. Jeremiah Wright was simply trying to echo the words of Jesus who echoed the words of his name sake, the prophet Jeremiah. Jesus called out for God to "damn" (destroy) the temple. He said not one stone would be left standing. He also quoted Jeremiah who called the Temple system (their church, city council, government, and banking system) oppressive, unjust, a prostitute and even a donkey in heat!

So Rev. Wright was pretty light on America. He could have just read them the bible and he would have been saying much worse to us. Bravo Rev. Wright for being a prophet. Nobody likes a prophet.

http://www.faithprogression.com/2008/03/should-god-damn-america.html

Obama has his hands full. He has attended Wright's church for 20 or so years and sat under this guy's direction and preaching. Oprah Winfrey went to the same church for a few years but left when she found Wright's rhetoric and preaching racist.

Barak Obama is not a stupid man. But his choosing to remain in this church indicates possibly one of two things; (1) he is behaving stupidly w/ or w/o political purposes or (2) he agrees with Wright.

Wright's rhetoric has nothing to do w/ the gospel. From the pulpit he blames the problems of Black America on governement, big corporations, whites, etc. He has said HIV was spread by whites to infect blacks. If it was a white pastor saying these kinds of things, he wouldn't sleep. However, the press goes light on black racism (which is what this is) and perhaps black racism is much worse than it appears.

Would Obama play the race card by saying Wright does not really mean what he says; he means something else? So if you criticize Wright you are a racist. It might happen...I don't know.

Bottom line: Wright is sinning by spewing this stuff from the pulpit just as much as a white would be sinning if he said the same things about blacks. Wright needs to step down if he doesn't change his heart. I don't care if Obama is a Christian. Obama deserves to be derailed if he does not repudiate Wright and his stance in the firmest way possible.

Debbie:

As to the question, "Should it matter? Or does it matter only in Obama's case?"

It is Obama who made his faith, his church and his pastor an issue. Obama is the one who has claimed them to be foundational to his campaign. Now, he wants to back away from that. he can't have it both ways.

The Rev. Wright is only pointing out that we are the authors of our stupidity. And if he embraces hyperbole to reinforce his message...perhaps he's trying to get your attention...to at least think about what we are doing in the name of G-d.
Tbh, I don't see Jesus in the American Church, I see man...in all his corrupt splendor shaking off the memories and restraints of a past love to forge his vision of what Churchianity is about: Political Power, social re-engineering, and the Money to buy it all.

Oh...we're damned alright, but unlike the Rev. Wright, I know what is happening and it's not G-d who is damning us...it is us, and our unrepentant idiocy.

No, G-d's just giving us the rope to hang ourselves with, and considering the direction of the Church in America is taking...thats a mighty fine noose we're tying.

btw: For those of you who like "Prophetic Words" heres one for you, right from the seat:
"You willingly and knowingly sow the wind with your evil deeds, you honor those who dishonor me, revile and curse those I send who tell you to stop, and now you're praying to me for a crop failure? Balls, son, you have balls I'll give you that."

If memory serves me right, I checked and it does. About 8 years ago President Bushed pastor was also examined and his messages and connection were looked at by the media. Of course the comments made by his pastor were different at the time.

While this does not seem unusual for this relationship to be examined, it is however indicative of the depth of pain of ethnic justice and injustice and and the shallowness of our understanding of that pain.

I would have less respect for Obama for if he tries to create too much distance between he and his pastor. Not because I believe his pastor is right but because I believe his pastor understands the depth of the pain.

Richard,

Let's be realistic here. It was millions of Christians who have made a person's faith an issue in this campaign - and his political opponents who spread ridiculous and unfounded rumors that he was a Muslim - so its a little dishonest to turn around and say, "Well, he chose to make his faith an issue."

But its absolutely true that no other candidate has had to answer for their Pastor's views. And Obama has answered - he has unequivocally rejected Wright's extreme statements.

I'm curious how many of those criticizing Obama here have taken the time to read either of the articles David Swanson suggested above. I'd particularly recommend John Walton's "The Politics of Patriotic Treason" (http://www.religiondispatches.org/Gui/Content.aspx?Page=BL&Id=135). It helps to place Wright's rhetoric and message within the historic trends of black theology - we need to do so, and that perspective has been noticeably absent from discussions of Wright and Obama. Does it excuse his more extreme statements? No - and Obama was right to repudiate them. But it is important to note the context of many of Wright's statements. If we're willing to take a hard look at the actions of the United States and how they affect many both in our country and around the world, then his points are often not far off, even if he doesn't say it very well.

Regardless, I'll be glad when (if?) this campaign actually gets back to actually discussing the candidates views on the issues facing our country.

The more of the debate I read the more I think we all ought to be reading, Jesus for President: Politics for Ordinary Radicals by Shane Claiborne

A different kind of campaign.
A different kind of party.
A different kind of Commander in Chief.

"When I feed the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they're poor, they call me a communist." Archbishop Romero of El Salvador

The diatribe in this debate & comment section is proof of point #4 of Gordon McDonald's article, "Trouble Brewing".

http://www.christianitytoday.com/leaders/newsletter/2008/cln80317.html

Jake:

There is nothing dishonest here. Barak Obama has talked about his faith more than the other candidates. Hillary Clinton was talking about it for awhile but in such generalized terms, there was really no point to it. John McCain, while he has not displayed the hostility, which he expressed for Christians, like he did in 2000, has not pandered either. No, Barak Obama is the one trying to wedge himself into the left wing of the Evangelical community. Conservatives aren't fooled but the Tony Campolos of the world are thrilled with his class warfare (called covetousness in the Bible) rhetoric. And from many of the comments on this blog, Campolo has alot of company.

Thanks Jake for your comments.
So Richard it is enough for a candidate to call themselves a Christian and be "pro-life" according to those for whom that issue is most important or "pro-marriage" for those whom that issue is most important and say that they pray but rarely darken the door of a church or make policy decisions that seem to be diametrically opposed to Biblical values in the areas of caring for the poor or respecting all human life or have "their pastor" thoroughly vetted on all issues? The media and the American electorate have made this an issue. It seems all we really want from presidents or presidential candidates is someone with enough "cheap grace" that we agree with them on all the issues that are important to us individually but don't challenge our prejudices or comfort zones too much.
Too bad I don't hear the same people extoling Hillary Clinton for upholding her marriage vows (as far as we can see) instead of doing what about 50% of Christians and nonChristians do and divorcing an unfaithful spouse. Or calling out John McCain who apparently was having an affair with Cindy while still married to his first wife....or does the fact that he married her erase 'the sin'---or b/c it was so long ago it doesn't matter anymore or b/c you support him, you will overlook that? Double standard? Hypocrisy? I have only read one post from someone for whom this issue has caused them to say that they now would not vote for Barack Obama. My suspicion is that for most, we have already decided one way or another and are using this as an excuse to say "See, I knew he was no good" or "See, this is an example of just what Wright was talking about".

When Barack Obama was trying to dispel rumors that he was a Muslim, he often appealed to his full involvement in the Trinity United Church of Christ to counter the rumors.
However, now that the hate-filled sermons of Rev. Jeremiah Wright are being exposed, Barack is saying he missed many services because he was tending to his baby by serving in the nursery? Huh?
He cannot have it both ways, was he fully involved in the life of this church, as he once claimed, or was he not?

I really don't get it.

Where is the hate speech by Wright? What is so hateful about what he's said?

The worst thing I can accuse him of is terribly bad judgment in the timing of his message after 9-11. His accusatory message left no time for the grieving of his congregation.

Sean Hannity has said that if the language that Wright uses were used by a white pastor in a white church that it would be considered hateful and racist. Which is true, but the fact is that it is not the same in the black church. Hannity and the rest of the media have made no effort to put his comments about the black struggle into perspective. They make no effort to understand "liberation theology." Hannity claimed that Wright's church is drawing comparisons to "branch Davidians" but as far as I can see, Hannity is the only person making that connection.

There is a context for the speech of Jeremiah Wright. The media refuses to see it, study it or acknowledge it, and only is trying to turn this into inflammatory speech.

About Wright's comments on 9-11 where he talks about us being the only country who dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and still participates in state sponsored terrorism; I agree it was way to early 5 days after 9-11 to make this a big part of his message, but these are not hateful statements. Many people agree with this point of view, or at least can see the thought that leads to this point.

I'm actually personally sad that Obama didn't do more to defend his pastor, or at least point out the irresponsibility of the media for using these comments so far away from the original context that Dr. Wright intended. Check out the youtube of Hannity and Wright. Hannity refuses to give Wright the opportunity to surround his statements with context. Hannity knows that he can conceivably lose the argument if he lets Wright make a point. Frustrating video. Frustrating issue. But certainly not unexpected from a media that has made the full switch to reactionary pandering with no attempt to responsible journalism.

Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright's blaming of American violent policies for the 9/11 attacks especially as it relates to the use of the A-bomb to end World War II show a complete ignorance of the factors surrounding the end of that war. It has been estimated by reputable historians that the invasion of Japan would have produced one million casualties among the American forces and an even greater number among the Japanese. I guess Rev. Wright would have preferred that outcome. How dare the man say that we just forgot the people killed in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. I remember as a young women in the late 50's still debating the dropping of the bombs and wishing there could have been another way to force the end of the war. There wasn't, and if Rev. Wright had done any reading of history instead trying to paint the United States in as bad a light as he could, he would have known that. The man will say anything to malign the United Sates. What a demagog!
Let's hope that if Obama is elected president, he is more aware of the facts of history than his "moral compass."

One of the problems you can see here in these comments is that Modern Western Christanity still has problems with the concept of literary hyperbole. This is why 48% of all American's reject evolution and many think creationism should be taught in school. This is why so many people buy those crazy left behind books. They still read the Bible as if the only way to take something seriously is to take it literally.

Rev. Wright's comments are hyperbole. He doesn't hate America and he never said he did. His comments were aimed at saving America from damnation. Jesus didn't hate the Temple when said it was damned and no stone would be left untured. He was trying to give them a path to salvation. Wright is following in good footsteps.

Great interview by Collin Hansen at the Christianity Today site on Friday. Gave a very balanced look at this controversy and the history of strong rhetoric in the black pulpit. I do not fully agree with Dr.Wright's comments but I undestand the anger and frustration that may have inspired them. To call them hate speech or racist is ridiculous. How does this qualify as hate? They are strong and angry and maybe even over the top but I think the reaction to them shows that white conservatives basicallly prefer their sanitized reimagination of Dr.King to the angry rantings of a Jeremiah Wright.

One critic said Oprah used to go to the same church but left because of Wright's sermons...
Yet Oprah supports Obama! So I guess she can tell the difference between Jeremiah Wright and Obama. I suggest people open their eyes and see that its Obama whose words and policies and advocacy that we must evaluate not his pastor, his auntie or the last person he sat with at a banquet. Good grief. Why not judge McCain soley on the fact that he hugged George Bush or that one of the folks he called a spiritual advisor called the Roman Catholic Church the great whore!!

When Barack Obama refused to denounce controversial pastor and mentor Jeremiah Wright recently, he was doing something that reflected the Bible's teachings about the nature of Christian unity, according to Steven Harmon, associate professor of Christian theology at Campbell University.

As Campbell's Staley lecturer for 2008, Harmon used the analogy in the third lecture in the series, "One Life With Each Other: The Theology of Ecumenism," to illustrate the spiritual meaning of Christian unity as explained by scripture.

A specialist in patristics, or the study of church fathers, and ecumenical theology, Harmon is the author of several books, "Towards Baptist Catholicity: Essays on Tradition and the Baptist Vision," and "Every Knee Should Bow: Biblical Rationales for Universal Salvation in Early Christian Thought." His research interests focus on ways in which Baptists and other evangelical Christians may find resources in post-biblical early Christian tradition for contemporary faith and practice.

"Christian unity is no easy unity," Harmon said. "We are members of one another, but we can be angry and disagree with each other without turning it into a sin."

Paul's letter to the Ephesians illustrates the theology involved in ecumenism, which is the quest for greater visible unity among the currently divided Christian denominations. Though drawn from different backgrounds and nationalities, the members of the "body of Christ" have been called by God, redeemed and forgiven through his spirit. They are not just members of a church or a denomination, but of a "fellowship" that is directed by God.

Harmon added that the cross of Christ unifies all believers into one body. Baptists and Catholics may differ in their worship practices, but they should tolerate each other in "love" or they will forge divisiveness.

"When Senator Obama said Wright was like family to him, that he couldn't disown Wright because he was a part of him, he was precisely right. Baptism creates a new family that takes precedence over the relationships we have with the families that include parents, siblings, spouses and children," Harmon said.

Harmon has served as an adjunct professor at Southwestern and Howard Payne and as a visiting professor at Duke. He has also served as pastor and interim pastor of Baptist congregations in Texas and North Carolina. In the fall, Harmon will join the faculty of Beeson Divinity School at Samford University in Birmingham, Ala.

Rev. Wright's philosophy is based on those of James Cone, professor at New York's Union Theological Seminary. Cone says, "what we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of blacks to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer and we had better kill him." Rev. Wright declared in a recent issues of "Trumpet" magazine, published by his daughter, that Louis Farrakhan "will be remembered as one of the 20th and 21st century giants of the African-American religious experience." Farakhan has referred to Jews, Koreans, Vietnamese and others as "bloodsuckers" and has said, "White people are potential humans- they haven't evolved yet." What more will it take for people to admit that Rev. Wright is a man of hate? Obama, having him as his SPIRITUAL MENTOR,shows he is a man of poor judgement, if indeed he disagrees with Wright, but also a dangerous man. I pray that Obama will be soundly defeated should he win the Dem. nomination. There is enough hate in this world, do I need a President who has been steeped in it for 20 years, and never objected to it? Neither does the country. We'll see what God has in store for the US.

Overlooked in all of this: Do the snippets presented in the media accurately represent Rev. Wright' views? Rev. Wright was pastor of Trinity UCC for 35 years. He was reported to have given 3 - 4 Sermons each week. At a minimum of 45 weeks per year, he gave Over 6000 sermons. I found a complete audio recording of his sermon of 09/16/01 which lasted 37 minutes. If each sermon averaged 25 minutes, then he preached for over 150,000 minutes. The Controversial video clips present, at most, perhaps 5 minutes (split between several different clips). So we have seen about 0.003 % of the Rev. Wright's sermons. Would you feel your ministry was Fairly represented If someone went through your sermons and selected a similar percentage of quotations out of their contextual settings and Judged You, a member of your congregation, and indeed, your entire Church, by those excerpts?

It is my opinion that the "Main Stream Media" as a whole does a very poor job of reporting on Religious matters. Seldom, if ever, do I see commentary from a minister from My denomination (Presbyterian), Yet the MSM portray ALL Christians as being represented by those few THEY select.
Do you feel that Mainstream Media fairly and Accurately represent Your Church's vision and ministry? Considering your answer, How much trust do you place in the MSM's portrayal of Rev. Wright and Trinity UCC?

For your information there is a recording of Rev. Wright's complete sermon of 09/16/01 ("chickens coming home") at Roland S. Martin's Blog. Listen and judge for yourself whether this man is an unpatriotic bigot.

The smear clip was taken from a part of the sermon ILLUSTRATING the natural emotional reaction to the 9-11 tragedy as rage and a wish for "pay-back". The TRUE THEME of the sermon was about how that reaction was "Very Dangerous" because it could lead a people from "Faith....to War" and that the Proper reaction for a Christian was to honest "self-examination". Not at ALL what the excerpt seemed to portray.

I'm a white Christian married to a black African Christian lady and we have Christian mixed race children - and we're British.

As I watched the events unfold on 9/11 I said to my family, "This day will change the world. In what way it will change will depend on whether America chooses repentance or revenge."

So I was in front of Jeremiah Wright and America chose revenge, deliberately turning it's back on God's message in Old and New Testaments.

Did the prophetic Christian church in the USA stand up for Jesus and denounce this national policy? NO, it encouraged it.

Most American "Christians" are Americans first and Christians a long way back - and America was founded and has continued to this day on hypocrisy and bloodshed. To be against those things is to be "unpatriotic."

Doesn't the prophet Jeremiah's critique of Judah's society apply equally to capitalist USA right now? Why should it receive a lesser judgement?

By the way, wasn't Jonah's initial refusal to go and tell the truth to Nineveh founded on his hatred of the place? So how can those who DO preach the truth be accused of hating their hearers?

What part of what Rev. Wright said was not the truth.