Latest Articles by Sarah Canice Funke
Yesterday in Music for Film and Television, the prof talked about the McCarthy hearings (HUAC, or House of UnAmerican Activities Committee) and their effect on Hollywood. Hundreds of film makers, actors, directors were blacklisted and thrown out of work. Others resorted to revealing potential reds, in order to save their own skins. Walt Disney turned over some 1/3 of his animation staff (according to the lecture). The prof painted the HUAC as witch-hunters, and to my 21st century perspective, the Committee does appear painfully ignorant and trigger-happy, with no concern for true justice whatsoever.
However, what was interesting to me is that the prof mentioned a growing emphasis on God. Apparently, if the Communists were atheists, emphasizing religion would differentiate one from a red. The 50s were the time of The Ten Commandments, The Robe, and Ben Hur. That's also when "In God We Trust" was added to our money and "One Nation Under God" to the Pledge of Alligience.
The 50s occurred less than a half century ago. My parents were born in the 50s. Why is it that Christian America gets so uptight about attempts to take the "under God" phrase out of the pledge when it was only added as a "take that, you irreverant reds" act of defiance against Russia? It doesn't seem the phrase was ever an expression of true belief (on the part of the nation as a whole. Individuals can mean the phrase very sincerely). In fact, maybe I don't want people saying things they don't believe ("In God We Trust," for instance). Wouldn't that be blasphemy?
And that's also a reason I hesitate to invite nonbelievers to church. Sure, we invite them so they will hear the word of God preached during the sermon. But what about the other 45 minutes of the service? I really, really don't want my unbeliever friends singing "I love you, Lord," when they in fact hate His very being. It's like bringing them to the Lord's table and inviting them to eat and drink judgment on themselves.
Edit--on second thought, do any of us truly and fully believe all the worship we offer to God? Maybe I shouldn't be so exclusive. But I do know that I would not be able to participate in a Muslim service. And I hesitate to ask someone to offer public worship to a Person in whom they don't believe at all. It seems like an open invitation to commit gross blasphemy at the worst and blatant insincerity at the very least.
Posted by funke at 1.03.06 8:00 | TrackBack | Posted to Theology and SpiritualityI am commenting on this post because I can't comment on your xenga blog. I lliked the llama song and didn't realize that you have to turn it off yourself. It doesn't turn off by itself, so I have memorized it after these twenty or thrity rounds of listening to it. Who better to write such a song than Burton Earny.
Posted by: Patsy at 1.03.06 12:00You might want to find out if the information your prof is telling her impressionable students is the full truth. Reporting history as you know is so very subjective. Interesting thoughts on blasphemy. I have to think that one through.
Posted by: Patsy at 1.03.06 12:09The whole McCarthy controversy has been the rallying cry for so many groups trying to make their political points. Truth is often sidelined because it may impede the cause at hand. My opinion is that McCarthy’s claims have since been verified, especially after the opening of the Soviet Union and the public release of their records. It is unfortunate that his irresponsible antics greatly undermined the anti-communist cause, allowing communist sympathizers to discount the entire proceedings, trashing truth along with the reckless demagogic senator. It reminds me of how southern (conservative) Presbyterians, by not aggressively denouncing slavery, lost their credibility as Calvinistic theologians.
Also, on a technicality, McCarthy was a senator, so he was not in the House, nor was he a member of the HUAC. I think he was chairman on a senate sub-committee that had a similar charter.
Anyway, I don't think the "era" can be put into sound bites, nor used as the prima-facie evidence that conservatives are mean. And just a casual glance at the newspaper should convince anyone that name-calling-in-lieu-of-informed-dialog is not the sole property of conservatives.
Posted by: PapaFreak at 1.03.06 13:40Just a note of clarification: I don't believe in ostracizing nonChristians at all. The stuff on whether it was good to invite them to church was just something I've been kicking around in my head.
Okay, end clarification. Play ball.
Posted by: funke at 1.03.06 14:33My concerns in inviting non-Christians to my church is not that they might sing something they don't believe, because even the good things they do condemn them when done without faith in God(last vs. of Rom. 14), it is that the traditional religious culture of our congregation, or the ways we communicate, may offend them or obscure the clarity of the gospel.
The last non-believing friend who visited my church left offended and didn't hear much of the sermon because the opening illustration was a jabb at Hillary Clinton, and my friend was a feminist agnostic who deeply respects Senator Clinton. The text of that sermon, where Paul told Timothy women were to not have teaching authority in the church, would have offended her (and that would have been ok, because it would have been God's Word causing offense, which it does), but she never heard it because she shut down when Clinton was attacked.
That was a while ago, though, and we have a different pastor now, but the general culture of how we communicate hasn't changed much, and a biblically illiterate non-believer could really struggle to follow what goes on in a worship service.
Posted by: Joel at 1.03.06 22:12The Papa is right! It is funny how so many professors and liberals think that McCarthy was a part of HUAC (which did some good work) when he never was. You need to get ahold of a copy of Ann Coulter's book Treason. It will give you a lot of information on that era and what actually did and did not happen during "McCarthyism". I just finished reading it myself and would love to be taking a class with a teacher like yours right now!
Anyhow, when do you get spring break? I hope it is soon!
I haven't read any Coulter, though I've heard about her. I'll have to check into her book.
I've actually already had my Spring Break. I went to Georgia and spent time at Covenant. However, I should be back in Colorado by the end of April. :)
Posted by: funke at 2.03.06 23:18You raise an interesting question Sarah...what does God require of us in worship? What is worship? How should we worship? Our pastor recently finished a sermon series on worship which I found to be most benifical. You can check the first three sermons out at www.frontrangealliance.org. (Under "Sundays@ FRAC page). We will be posting the rest of the series throught the next months.
I guess one of the things that stuck with me the most is how our worship should be a part of who we are. Worship is not just a "thing" we do for 30 min on a Sunday morning, yet it should be something we strive to do in every part of our lives continually. Everything we do and say should be worship in God's eyes. Sunday morning is simply a time to come together with the body of Christ and worship with each other!
Posted by: Ben at 3.03.06 16:55