A beneficent God

Tony Joseph's "Angry God"

Cliff Notes version

Forgive Tony Joseph if he sounds like Jonathan Edwards.

Edwards was the Puritan preacher who delivered the sermon, "Sinners in the hands of an angry God," in 1741. He was a fire and brimstone clergyman, which was common in New England at that time.

Joseph's editorial diatribe today about God and against homosexuality focuses on how God is omniscient, but will listen to us until he should no longer listen to us. 

If that makes no sense, then read Joseph's piece in the June 3 Tribune-Democrat: <http://tribune-democrat.com/editorials/x1374706275/Tony-Joseph-Hopefully-God-isn-t-listening?fb_comment_id=fbc_182101858622399_532385_182182051947713#f1d8c74934>.

Be forewarned: His piece does not follow a logical sequence, neither inductive nor deductive. Just ranting.

Before I start, I applaud Mr. Joseph for his ministry and for his willingness to stand up for his beliefs. However, I do not condone his denigration of the people of God who inhabit this planet. Intolerance serves no purpose in a contemporary dialogue. 

Before listing many of my issues with this piece, I must talk about that "Satanic Decade." I came of age in the sixties, starting with John F. Kennedy's inaugural address when I was in eighth grade. I finished the decade and the early part of the next in college, expanding my intellectual horizons beyond my expectations and defining personal beliefs in a philosophy that I follow (or try to) today. I then moved on to grad school in the seventies. 

I simply love(d) JFK, much to my parent's chagrin (conservative Republicans). Then came the assassination in Dallas, and that ended the decade's relative calm (other than the Cuban Missile Crisis in '62), 

I have a number of concerns with Joseph's piece beyond his obsession with the sixties: First, I am curious why he does not use the word "Jesus" -- the Prince of Peace -- in this writing; Second, underneath the visage of the idyllic 1950s mother, June Cleaver of "Leave it to Beaver," was the Brown v. Board of Education case and the Cold War; Third, Satan was evident during the sixties in the guise of Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray, and Sirhan Sirhan, along with the Vietcong; Fourth, why does God let bad things happen to good people?; Fifth, Joseph should read the New Testament, not the Old; and Sixth, homosexuality is innate, not a psychosexual disorder. 

I will address each of these, albeit not in that order.

Analysis

Joseph reveals a significant amount of pent-up anger for a man of God. If his religion has not allowed him to talk with God about this dilemma, is going public with his venomous verbiage going to help with that problem? For a man in his 70s, Joseph should be able to resolve his anger through spiritual means (prayer), rather than secular ones (newspaper / dastardly media).

The first and fifth concerns that I listed above are vital to understanding Joseph's logic, or lack thereof. Jesus Christ was / is the one to whom we are supposed to turn for peace and serenity when buffeted by pain and turmoil. I would suggest to Joseph that he turn to the Book of St. Matthew (the Sermon on the Mount), not to the violent clashes in the Old Testament, which appear to be incongruous with peace. Matthew will allow that peace to enter your life, Tony.

Joseph came of age in the fifties, which were an interesting period. However, underneath the joy and "peaches and cream" of the fifties and early sixties, as conveyed to America in "Leave it to Beaver,"  "Ozzie and Harriet," and "Father Knows Best," are the Brown v. Board of Education case (1954) and the Cold War. 

Then in the sixties, the assassination of JFK unleashed forces that had been submerged during the 20 years from the end of the World War II to 1964. Vietnam became more of a problem in the mid-fifties and kept increasing until 1964. In addition, the desire of African-Americans for their civil rights, ones that had been nominally provided after the Civil War, were essentially ignored after Brown.

LBJ prodded Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act in 1964 to provide these rights to African-Americans, and then watched his reputation evaporate in tatters because of his escalation of the Vietnam conflict that started with the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution that same year. 

However, none of this has anything to do with homosexuality, which appears to be the genesis of Joseph's angst. He traces some of the Satanic turmoil to the removal of prayer from public schools. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Engel v. Vitale (1962) that prayer in school violated the first amendment prohibition against an establishment of religion.  

As a Catholic Christian, I concur with that ruling. If Mr. Joseph lived in a Jewish neighborhood and attended public schools there, the Jewish prayers for Yom Kippur and Hanukkah would probably offend him. If he lived in an Islamic neighborhood, the passages from the Koran would definitely offend him. That is the reason that Thomas Jefferson wrote that letter to the bishops in Danbury about freedom of religion in the early years of our Republic.

This piece in the TD is not really a good argument of cause and effect. Exactly how the elimination of mandatory prayer in the classrooms has resulted in more homosexuality is not evident, nor is it logical. 

As for the current stances on homosexuality in the U.S., I would refer Joseph to the Pew Forum polls of the 21st Century. Many young people today are rejecting his view of Christianity. They also believe that homosexuals should be treated humanely, just as everyone else in society is <http://www.pewresearch.org/>.

I attended private schools for nine years, so I never experienced the prayer of any other religion other than that of the Roman Catholic Church. However, as I later studied and taught in public schools, I was very happy that I did not have to listen to or read a verse from the bible each day -- nor listen to that over the p.a. system. I did enjoy the moment of silence so that all could just think or pray. That is your choice.

Finally, I have a question to Joseph of God's beneficence. If God could prevent what is transpiring in our society today, why did he give man free will? Because of that, people now have choices to make that will be different from those that their neighbor makes. 

While he paints an idyllic picture of the 50s and an apocalyptic one of the 21st Century, the truth is that the country has seen many worse periods (Depression 1930s, WWII 1940s, Civil War 1860s). The U.S. is changing philosophically, and he may not like the current direction. However, denigrating others because they differ with your beliefs and values is not a positive step for anyone. 

Finally, I read a book a few decades ago by a conservative Rabbi, Harold Kusher: "When bad things happen to good people." Mr. Joseph, that is an insightful work. Kusher was angry with God because of his son's horrific disease, one that aged the youngster as a young boy into an old man in his teens. Kushner confronted the existential question: If God is so good and beneficent, why does the world have so much violence and pain? 

It is a wonderful little book, a great read. It may help you find peace and serenity.

***