IRD attacks Mel White

[schoolboi]

If you do not know about the IRD (http://www.ird-renew.org/site/pp.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=278604)I would encourage you to get acquainted. It is a heavily funded conservative group set on taking control of mainline denominations. They are well on there way at succeeding.

The following article was in a resent email alert from the IRD:

Mel White: Missing Person

Jim Berkley

In following the story about Soulforce and the White House Easter Egg Roll, I came across a news clip featuring Soulforce founder Mel White being interviewed by Tucker Carlson on MSNBC. Or maybe I should say, "A spin-doctoring Mel White being exposed and left without excuse by Tucker Carlson."

It was not a pretty sight, and Mel's disgusted snort in the final seconds spoke volumes. He had been tried and found wanting. Stretch as hard as he could while keeping a straight face, Mel could not successfully paint a slyly plotted political action as a family walk in the park. Nor should he have tried. It simply wasn't honest.

This present Mel White, the Soulforce publicity-seeking activist for all things homosexual, is not the one I remember as my professor and boss. I first met Mel in 1972, when he both taught my initial communications and preaching classes at Fuller Seminary (in Pasadena, CA) and supervised my labor as an audio-visual geek. He had come to Fuller as a former Youth for Christ director in Portland and an up-and-coming producer of innovative Christian films. The guy could communicate, and he taught a generation of Fuller students well.

The theme I remember most from his lessons is that any communication shouldn't be proposition, proposition, proposition. A single proposition needs support - illustrations, stories, restatements, quotations - before one goes on to the next proposition. So the form of a communication should be proposition and then support, support, support. And then another proposition, with supports.

In Mel's life that he allowed us to see at that time, the single most salient proposition seemed to be that Jesus Christ is Lord. He proclaimed it. He lived it. He taught it. He preached it as co-pastor with his wife at the local Covenant Church. He creatively unpacked it in his film ministry. Mel White was pretty much about the proposition that Jesus Christ is Lord. What he did with his life, then, provided support, support, support to that proposition.

But then something changed. I first got wind of it when Mel graciously but a little mysteriously suggested that I as editor might not want to use him in a project I had proposed. Soon after that in 1994, Mel came out as an active, unrepentant homosexual in his book Stranger at the Gate.

I read that book on a long plane flight that included brushing tears from my eyes a few times. Here I was seeing a new major proposition dominating Mel White's life and communication. What he was saying most of all was this: "I am gay, and that takes precedence over everything else."

Since that major shift in propositions, I have with sadness and dismay watched Mel put into place support after support to illustrate his new major proposition: the claim that he could not resist acting on his sexual orientation, an obsessive narcissism that puts Mel's wants ahead of God's will, a pugnacious activism to get in people's faces, and now a dismal, duplicitous, failing effort to try to paper over the fact that his political shenanigans were exposed.

It is a sad thing to have lost the Mel White who brought people to faith in Jesus Christ and so ably communicated the message of Christian discipleship. The only Mel White we seem to have left is the one lamentably flailing around to find self-justification. This Mel is looking for love in all the wrong propositions.

How I miss the Mel White I once knew!


Date: 1/31/2006

[Jennifer5]

I'm sorry... What would need to happen to help bring back the Mel you once knew? What is the really the big thing you miss?

[Joe Brummer]

we will always have adversaries who are not negotiable. This may be one of those. In the scope th te whole public spectrum, they are far, few and inbwtween. The best you can do is ignore them. That is what most mainstrean people do with extremists. I would let them say what they want.

Don't think for a nanao-second these type of people didn't critique gandhi or MLK or Jesus. They did, but no one listen and those that did were too small to mean much. I know it is disturbing, but let it sleep and that is where it will stay! Sleeping!

[SolInvictus]

Yikes! The name of the organization is even a joke - religion & democracy...
Religion - belief in a higher power & associated with rites, rituals, and etc.
Democracy - the ability to have elective representation to affect or amend laws as required by the people and/or citizens.

Thus, religious democracy should be advocating religious freedom & freedom to worship in whatever religion decided - not one religion, one viewpoint, one choice... Here I go ranting again LOL

Definitions were paraphrased by myself in case I was in error.

[NonLemming]

In following the story about Soulforce and the White House Easter Egg Roll, I came across a news clip featuring Soulforce founder Mel White being interviewed by Tucker Carlson on MSNBC. Or maybe I should say, "A spin-doctoring Mel White being exposed and left without excuse by Tucker Carlson."

It was not a pretty sight, and Mel's disgusted snort in the final seconds spoke volumes. He had been tried and found wanting. Stretch as hard as he could while keeping a straight face, Mel could not successfully paint a slyly plotted political action as a family walk in the park. Nor should he have tried. It simply wasn't honest.

I don't know about his relationship with Dr. White before, but believe that this is an adequate description of how his talk with Tucker Carlson came off. We have to be very careful not to be caught being deceitful.

[Zerbie]

Very sad, what a shame.

[Steven E. Webster]

IRD accusing Mel White of "spin doctoring" is an example of the classic "pot calling the kettle black." I have not seen the Tucker Carlson interview (is it on line anywhere?), but notice that IRD seems to present nothing of substance. Their critique seems to rely totally on the reference to a "snort" and the assertion that the Easter Egg roll is merely a "sly" political stunt and not a serious attempt to integrate our families into a "family tradition."

The comments at the beginning of this thread were "spot on"--IRD is not to be ignored--they are not Fred Phelps and his rag tag band of family members from Kansas, they are part and parcel of that Washington DC network one author has titled "The Republican Noise Machine." IRD is closely tied to the neoconservative movement that brought us the war in Iraq. Their long-term goal (they've been at it for 25 years) is to prevent the mainline protestant churches (especially the Methodists, Presbyterians and Episcopalians from ever challenging our governments foreign policy ever again as they so powerfully did towards the end of the Viet Nam War and especially during the Iran-Contra era in Latin America in the 1980's. The "homosexual issue" is at the heart of their strategy to divide and weaken (if not take over) these denominations.

Neoconservatism (we need to study it) is the philosophy of the late U of Chicago professor Leo Strauss and his disciples (they are many). Neoconservatism, as taught by Strauss, holds that religion is merely a pious fraud, but is religion is essential as a tool of control of "the masses." IRD lives out this philosophy, and its connections to prominent neoconservatives is undeniable.

This is scary stuff, but I believe it also shows that Soulforce has "arrived." We are getting to the the powerful core of evil here. (Forgive me if that sounds a little exagerated--I am serious here).

Please note the other "accomplishment" that IRD was boasting about this week. IRD, with their other power-hungry religious-political allies like Dobson and Falwell) have successfully prevented the National Association of Evangelicals from taking a stand on the issue of Global Warming. Here you can see how IRD is acting to prevent religion from taking a position that would not be advantageous to neoconservative oil an energy interests--just as they seek to promote the not unrelated neoconservative foreign policy.

Steven Webster

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,
Just so you know I wasn't making it all up, I have the following book list:

On neoconservatism:

The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (205 updated eddition) by Shadia B. Drury (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005). This woman is a great speaker and engaging writer. She spoke on the campus of the University of Wisconsin-Madison a few months ago, and I found her funny and very informative about a deadly serious topic. She is deeply concerned about neoconservatism and the war in Iraq (the whole idea of going to war against Iraq was a neoconservative project which the Institute on Religion and Democracy supports whole-heartedly, attacking the peace movement within the mainline denominations).

On the "Republican Noise Machine" two books:

Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative by David Brock. This is a Washington memoir. Brock is a gay man who was near to the center of the Washington right-wing network. He played a role in smearing the reputation of Anita Hill (who testified against Justice Clarence Thomas) and the smear campaign leading to the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. Eventually it occurred to Brock that he was not on the "right side." He now operates the website "www.mediamatters.com" (I reommend it.)

The Republican Noise Machine: Right-Wing Media and How it Corrupts Democracy by David Brock. This is David Brock's research on the media/propaganda/political machine that he was once part of, but now exposes. The Institute on Religion and Democracy is mentioned on page 164.

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

Tucker Carlson is listed in the index of David Brock's The Republican Noise Machine: Right Wing Media and How it Corrupts Democracy no less than ten different times. I'll do a little read-up on those entries, but I think it indicates what is going on. Mel's mistake, if he made one, was to grant an interview to a member of this "Noise Machine."

The whole Easter Egg Roll flap is essentially a "non-story" that has been latched on to by IRD which has been working hard to turn it into a newstory that benefits their agenda. The story is then spread about and "echoed" through the rest of the noise machine--Tucker is part of the echo.

Again, I want to see or read this interview with Tucker & Mel, but my impression from IRD's article is that there is nothing substantive to their attack on Soulforce and Mel. It's just like the charge that Soulforce is "nothing but publicity driven street theater." Remember the scene from the movie Gandhi where Gandhi's volunteers submit to systematic beatings by the authorities at a well-disciplined direct action while the press looks on from their own well-positioned and well-organized press tables with telephone lines directly to the media centers of the world (and Gandhi's media-savy friend close at hand). Mel has referred often to "publicity driven street theater" as an ironic, unintended compliment of what Soulforce does.

What we must not do is allow the "noise machine" to drown out the essential message that the Easter Egg Roll action is about--we are American families too, our children deserve to participate in civic events at OUR White House the same as other children. If we are allowed into the White House on the same basis as other families, there is no story--other than Bush looks like a fair man and a President of ALL AMERICANS. If the White House allows only "one man, one woman" families with children in, then the Religious Right gets to feel good, but Bush should then be seen as unfair and merely seeking to please "his base."

Is Soulforce "turning a family event into a political statement"? Not if LGBT people get included like everyone else. If LGBT people are rejected that is a right-wing political statement that we are not "real" families, and Soulforce has a legitimate public complaint to make.

Steven Webster

[NonLemming]

Steven: You make some great points. I guess my point was, "let's just shut up, show up and roll our eggs." We don't need to make anything more of it than it is. If we're prevented, then we have a story. Mel needs to be careful not to let himself get hoodwinked into doing "interviews" with the Tucker Carlsons of the world without a clear understanding of what the questions will be. It can backfire, as was evidenced here. Again, let's pick our battles carefully and intelligently.

[Steven E. Webster]

I will say that I agree with NonLemming (quoted below). I also agree with much else that I have read on this thread and another that Jamie helpfully pointed out to me where the Tucker Carlson interview was discussed. I thought it was particularly helpful that Jaimie pointed out the use of language by Tucker. IRD was the first to use the term "crash" which calls up the image of an assault or, at least, uninvited entry. They took our word about keeping our plans "discrete" and made it sound like some nefarious plot to mug the Easter Bunny. Again this right-wing media machine that David Brock has called the "Republican Noise Machine" is constantly playing with language to shape and manipulate people's mental images. It's what folks mean by the term "framing." And, by the way, the best book on the subject of "framing" in political discourse is the book Don't Think of an Elephant.

By the way, I don't mean to trash the Republican Party as a whole. We are dealing with the neoconservative and theoconservative elements that are now controlling that party to a large extent. And that's not to trash traditional conservatives either--these neocons and theocons are something else!

Interviewing with Tucker Carlson may have been a mistake--but we are going to make mistakes. Don't let that deter or dismay us. Let's "keep our eyes on the prize!"
Steven Webster

Steven: You make some great points. I guess my point was, "let's just shut up, show up and roll our eggs." We don't need to make anything more of it than it is. If we're prevented, then we have a story. Mel needs to be careful not to let himself get hoodwinked into doing "interviews" with the Tucker Carlsons of the world without a clear understanding of what the questions will be. It can backfire, as was evidenced here. Again, let's pick our battles carefully and intelligently.

[NonLemming]

I agree, Steven, let's keep fighting. Let's make sure we don't lose the message in the mistake, though. We should not hold back, just be above reproach in our dealings. That will demonstrate the path.

[revtj]

I seem to remember Jesus had some bad interview experiences by the Tucker Carlson's of his day. Like Jesus, we must be willing to be broken and continue to be God's vessel when we are broken.

You can't choose how your friends or enemies will spin your actions. You can only consecrate your actions and your whole life to the glory of God.

I agree, keep acting, keep speaking up, and go with our families to roll eggs no matter what they say about you.

:o