Obama’s Church Accuses Media of Character Assassination

March 17th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

The new pastor of Trinity United Church in Chicago, Otis Moss II, has accused the American media of character assassination and “crucifixion” of former pastor Jeremiah Wright. A couple of days ago, Rev. Wright made the news; Fox news broadcasted videos of the man who Obama calls his spiritual guide saying that blacks who kill each other are “fighting the wrong enemy,” that the US government invented the HIV virus and spread it among blacks in order to kill / oppress them, and that American had 9/11 coming.

Several news outlets suddenly also decided to spend some time to Rev. Wright’s teachings and, in the end, Barack Obama felt forced to distance himself from his ’spiritual guide.’ Wright even resigned from Obama’s campaign (where he was working as a religious adviser).

The Trinity United Church believes that the media attention and reports were nothing but an attempt to ‘crucify’ Rev. Wright. “We have listened and watched as the wonderful work of our church has been vilified this week,” Moss said. “This week should be special for us because I guess we know a little something about crucifixion.”

The church also released a statement that began: “Nearly three weeks before the 40th commemorative anniversary of the murder of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the Reverend Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.’s character is being assassinated in the public sphere because he has preached a social gospel on behalf of oppressed women, children and men in America and around the globe.”

One can wonder in how far the comparison is valid, of course, since the US is no longer a segregated society and since MLK was a man of peace and reconciliation, and not of racial bigotry and divisiveness.

Moss also said in a sermon titled “Why the Black Church Won’t Shut Up”: “Our very sanity is connected to the church. If it hadn’t been for the church we would have lost our minds in the insanity of racism.”

The view of the Church, then, is that Rev. Wright didn’t do anything wrong and that, instead, it are outside forces who to try to smear Wright and destroy “the Black Church.” One wonders whether this attitude will have any impact on Barack Obama’s campaign, considering the fact that he still belongs to this particular Church.

Others blogging:

Ed Morrissey:

This is just a tone-deaf way of fighting back against the exposure of Trinity’s senior pastor as raging demagogue and a hater. It isn’t the media delivering that message; it’s the Reverend Wright himself. It doesn’t count as an assassination when the victim exposes his own character, and the media simply rebroadcasts the suicide.

Jimmie:

You know what I don’t see there? I don’t see one single thing about winning people to Jesus. I don’t see anything there about preaching the Bible and leading people to the saving knowledge of Jesus’ immeasurable sacrifice for them. I see nothing there about salvation or atonement. I see nothing there that comes anywhere close to the Great Commission that Jesus Christ gave to all believers, everywhere.

Justin Gardner:

While I think what Reverend Moss says is a fair defense of Wright, it doesn’t matter. Those sound bites were incredibly inflammatory and the damage is done. If Obama gets the nomination you will see Wright in commercial after commercial, in an attempt to “swift boat” him as being anti-American. Because, if you haven’t noticed already, that’s the meme.

Big Tent Democrat:

In my view, this is the wrong approach for the church to take, as it is false and fails to condemn Wright’s offensive remarks…

The Trinity UCC appears unwilling to reject Rev. Wright’s offensive comments. Instead it chooses to falsely smear those offended by the Rev. Wright’s remarks.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. Sy
    March 17th, 2008 at 14:50
    Reply | Quote | #1

    When CNN first started covering this live, they couched it as an attack on Obama, and kept on citing the "narrow political interests" part of the letter.  This was covered with "Many black pastors are coming out against Obama’s rejection of his former pastor" (both paraphrased).  Interesting now that they have it as an attack on media exclusively and not an indictment on Obama - someone in the editorial room read it incorrectly? 

  2. Sy
    March 17th, 2008 at 15:09
    Reply | Quote | #2

    From the transcripts (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0803/16/cnr.04.html):

    "Barack Obama has repudiated some of those comments, saying that if he had heard such comments, if he was sitting there in the pews, that he would not, if he had heard them repeatedly, stay within the congregation. But he decided because of his relationship with his pastor, some nearly 20 years or so — this is someone who officiated his wedding, baptized his daughters, that he is compared to like an uncle — that he felt that he did not need to leave the church, nor does he personally repudiate the man.

    But he has made some comments distancing himself from the pastor, while clearly the pastor, as well as the Trinity United Church of Christ is hitting back defending Wright’s comments, as well as the legacy of his service.

    They just put out a statement from Chicago, it reads in part, "It’s time for us to say ‘no’ to these attacks and declare that we will not allow anyone to undermine or destroy the ministries of any of our congregations in order to serve their own narrow political or ideological ends." Obviously, responding to Barack Obama’s campaign, as well as perhaps media reports. "

  3. Andrew Ian Dodge
    March 17th, 2008 at 18:13
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Yes, you are in a corner… trash the media. That is a great way to make sure they are not going to be dogging the Church from now until Obama is defeated. 

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500