He called the attacks against Gibson “pure venom, a hatred that goes far beyond any critical disagreement as to the merits of the movie. The attacks have been vicious and personal. He’s been called an anti-Semite, a sadomasochist, a wacko and Lord knows what else.” Reese concluded that the attacks are “far more revealing of the nature of his critics than of him.”
Leo calls our attention to the fact that the liberal critics and columnists who are taking Gibson to task are the same people who defended movies that depicted Christ as lusting after Mary Magdalene (The Last Temptation of Christ) and as a clown-like character (Godspell) and the Broadway play Corpus Christi, which portrayed Jesus as a homosexual. They also defended Andres Serrano, the artist who placed the image of Jesus in a jar of urine. It seems as if the only acceptable way to tell the story of Christ’s death for these critics is one that makes a mockery of the Gospels.
There have been other incidents in the news in recent weeks that reveal a contempt for Christians who take the Bible seriously. The Wall Street Journal (March 24th) gives an account of an interview given by the chairman of Duke’s philosophy department to a student reporter. You want to know why there are so few conservative Christian professors at Duke? Because the university prefers to hire smart people, says the professor. He explained, “If, as John Stuart Mill said, stupid people are generally conservative, then there are lots of conservatives we will never hire. Members of academia tend to be a bit smarter than average.”
Another case in point is the reaction of the American Civil Liberties Union and various teacher groups to the decisions by the Ohio State Board of Education and Alabama Senate Education Committee to permit students and teachers to engage in classroom discussions that challenge the theory of evolution. The Ohio Board voted to permit a teacher to introduce creationist objections to evolution for the purpose of classroom discussion.
The Alabama Committee stated that no teacher in public schools or universities may be fired, denied tenure or otherwise discriminated against for presenting “alternative theories” to evolution, and that no student would be penalized because he held a “particular position on biological or physical origins,” as long as the student demonstrated an “acceptable understanding of course materials,” which include evolution.
This last point must be stressed. Under the new guidelines, students and teachers in Ohio and Alabama will still be expected to acknowledge that evolution is the consensus theory among scientists at this moment in history. All that has changed is that teachers will not be fired if they permit a discussion of why there are some who dissent from the consensus. And students will not fail their science classes if they admit to being among the dissenters. Nonetheless, Patricia Pricehouse, a professor from Case Western Reserve, called the Ohio decision a “sad day for science in Ohio.” The ACLU is threatening the Ohio officials with a lawsuit. Florida State University law professor Steven Gey flew into the state to warn Ohio residents that the new policy is unconstitutional and would be struck down by the Supreme Court.
The irony is manifest. Mel Gibson, conservatives applying for teachings positions in Duke philosophy department and Christian students in Ohio and Florida are being criticized for doing precisely those things that the secular liberals have been praising as the hallmarks of a free society for the past fifty or more years: for marching to the beat of a different drummer, for challenging the establishment, for thinking independently, for looking at both sides of an issue, for taking non-conformist positions. It looks as if the champions of tolerance, open-mindedness and diversity do not see Christians as a cherished segment of the grand mosaic of our multicultural society. I guess our views are not welcome in the marketplace of ideas.
Some will object at this point. They will point out that Catholics and other Christians who take Sacred Scripture seriously present a problem for those who see the free exchange of ideas as the essence of a democratic society. Their point is that Christians do not participate in the democratic marketplace of ideas with a willingness to change our convictions on the basis of what we hear in the give-and-take over cultural values.
They have a point. Committed Christians are not open to the suggestion that there is no God, that Jesus is not His only-begotten Son, that Jesus is not the Way, the Truth and the Life. It is true: Since we are convinced that Jesus is Lord, we do not view all religions as equally valid. We do not view those who disagree with us on these things as merely participants in an alternative lifestyle. We think them in error. No doubt the secularists find us more inflexible than other people they meet on issues such as abortion and the sexual revolution. But does any of that mean we are a threat to the democratic process? Come on — that’s absurd.
Two points: First, the fact that we are convinced that those who do not accept Jesus as Lord and Savior are in error does not mean that we think them evil; it does not mean that we think their souls are condemned to hell. The popes have spoken repeatedly on this theme. Grace is a gift; God’s method of distributing it a mystery. Every Catholic I know understands that there are many nominal Christians who are not virtuous people, and many non-Christians who are very virtuous people. The fact that we are convinced that Jesus is Lord and that the Roman Catholic Church is the Church He founded does not mean that we have any intention of treating fellow citizens outside the Church without decency and respect. We do not seek political power in order to effect forced conversions on them. One would think the track-record of Catholics in the United States would make it unnecessary for us to even have to say that.
But there is an easier way to make this point. Our critics say we are too dogmatic and close-minded about our Christian beliefs; that we are unwilling to engage in a sincere democratic exchange on matters important to us. OK. But in comparison to whom? Are Marxist professors open to the idea that capitalism works best for the common man? Are homosexual activists open to the suggestion that sodomy is a perversion and a sin? Are Jews serious about Judaism open to the idea that they are not the Chosen People? Are feminists open to the proposition that the woman’s movement has done more harm than good?
Catholics are too close-minded for a democratic society? How can anyone say that with a straight face, considering what has happened to Mel Gibson and the long roster of conservative and Christian speakers who have been shouted down by the politically correct liberals when they try to give a talk on a college campus?
James Fitzpatrick's new novel, The Dead Sea Conspiracy: Teilhard de Chardin and the New American Church, is available from our online store. You can email Mr. Fitzpatrick at fitzpatrijames@sbcglobal.net.
(This article originally appeared in The Wanderer and is reprinted with permission. To subscribe call 651-224-5733.)
