 |
 |
 |
|
| |
| |
| |
 |
January 6, 2010 |
| Ignorance or Arrogance? |
 |
Posted by Jim Lichtman | What do you think?
On Fox News Sunday (Jan. 3) former anchor, current pundit, Brit Hume made the following statement regarding Tiger Woods:
“He's said to be a Buddhist; I don't think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. So my message to Tiger would be, ‘Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world.’”
That statement must come as a surprise to the almost 400 million Buddhists around the world. More surprising is the fact that Hume, someone I have long respected as a news professional, has not only moved into the pundit seat but would assume the role of authority on “forgiveness and redemption” regarding other religions. Even more startling is his jump to proselytization; telling Woods, in essence, “Come over to our side and receive ‘the kind of forgiveness and redemption... offered by the Christian faith.’”
“All major religious traditions carry basically the same message,” Buddhist leader the Dalai Lama has said in speeches, “- that is love, compassion and forgiveness – the important thing is they should be part of our daily lives.”
Welton Gaddy leader of the Interfaith Alliance wrote, “Having served as a Christian minister for 50 years, I am delighted to see my faith discussed in public. However, I am not pleased to see my faith used in a utilitarian manner whether the issue is personal forgiveness or national politics. Unfortunately, the manipulation of faith has become so common that to many it now seems acceptable.”
I am surprised and disappointed by Hume’s statement because it appears to show either an ignorance of Buddhism or an arrogance regarding his own path towards forgiveness. The true rewards of forgiveness and redemption in the Christian faith cannot be denied, but it is neither fair nor respectful to claim that one path is better than another. The intolerance reflected in a statement like that creates more discord than harmony among people of different faiths.
In a 1985 address at Westminster Abbey, the Dalai Lama said, “The world’s religions can contribute to world peace if there is peace and growing harmony between the different faiths. It would be tragic if inter-religious rivalry and conflict undermines world peace in the twenty-first century. In this regard, I have always encouraged and supported efforts towards better understanding among our different faiths.
“It is my firm belief that this better understanding will enhance the ability of different faiths to make positive contributions to world peace... Religious and spiritual leaders can play a pivotal role by making a sustained effort to explain to their respective followers the importance of respecting the beliefs and traditions of other faiths.”
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Comments by Richard, California, January 8, 2010
Brit Hume shows both ignorance and arrogance in his initial remark, as well as in his subsequent remarks, where he is trying unsuccessfully to extract his foot from deep in his throat.
His statement about Buddhism not providing redemption or forgiveness shows his ignorance of the very diverse varieties of Buddhism, which definitely offer and nurture healing, reconciliation, and rejuvenation of the individual and his relationships. As with any religion, it's all about how and whether one applies the solutions. One need only look at high profile Christians shedding their crocodile tears when caught in similar scandals, but then going out and repeating the same or worse transgressions, to know that no guarantee comes with the product that Hume is selling.
Hume's arrogance is shown in the very fact that he made such a statement on Fox News as a commentator. While he is within his rights to tout his favorite brand of faith like an farmer s market hawker of melons, it is inappropriate for him to play the role of the network s resident preacher. However, on Fox News, this is not surprising at all.
He is also arrogant in implying that a conversion to Christianity will so easily solve Wood's conflicts, both intrapersonally and interpersonally. Hume seems to be hoping for a public and flashy Christian conversion that will be less about healing Wood's conflicts and more about glorifying Hume s favorite religion. Jesus, if I remember correctly, repeatedly condemned public displays of piety and faith, saying that such affectations were about pride and status, rather than a humble reconciling with God.
Replace in Hume s remarks the word Buddhism with Islam, or Judaism, and imagine the firestorm that he d be facing if Woods were from one of those faiths. Hume assumed he could get away with it because Buddhists tend to be peaceful and tolerant. In this way, he s inadvertently illuminating one of Buddhism s virtues.
I wonder how narrowly divisive Hume would be willing to be in delineating one religion over another as a solution for Wood's difficulties? Would just any flavor of Christianity do? What if Woods were a Catholic, and Hume were an Evangelical Baptist? People in both of those camps have been denouncing each other as not true Christians for centuries, and the mutual enmity continues.
Sadly, Hume has demonstrated that while religions may provide some benefits for individuals who need to bring their lives back together, the most powerful effect religions have is to divide people from each other and from themselves more quickly, more deeply and more permanently than any other cause of human conflict
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|