AmericanPapist Comments
The quote's in Cathleen Falsani's blog, but not in the article from the Sun-Times archives. However, there's a fair amount of material from the interview transcript that didn't make it into the final article.
Have you read her book ("The God Factor") yet?
S-T article (04/05/04)
http://www.suntimes.com/news/
fal...i040504.article
I would think a report by the reporter who conducted the interview is as credible if published on that reporter's blog as it would be if reprinted in the NYT.
Hello Mike Petrik,
I missed your tone in the text-only post above. Are you saying that the New York Times is credible and therefore the reporter's blog is too? Or are you saying something like, "Since the New York Times is not credible, then neither is the reporter's blog"?
Fair question, GW. In this case I was giving the NYT the (admittedly unearned) benefit of the doubt. I probably should have instead referenced the Chicago Sun-Times, since I understand that was where the edited version of the interview was originally published. My point was only that I don't see why the interviewing journalist's publication of the unedited interview on her own blog should present credibility questions that are greater than those that were present in connection with the edited account originally published by the traditional newspaper.
Here's an excerpt from the same interview, where Sen. Obama explains his understanding of who Jesus is:
GG:
Who’s Jesus to you?
(He laughs nervously)
OBAMA:
Right.
Jesus is an historical figure for me, and he’s also a bridge between God and man, in the Christian faith, and one that I think is powerful precisely because he serves as that means of us reaching something higher.
And he’s also a wonderful teacher. I think it’s important for all of us, of whatever faith, to have teachers in the flesh and also teachers in history.
Note the lack of any reference to the divinity of Jesus, or to his being the Second Person of the Trinity (this from someone who spent 20 years as a member of a church called "Trinity").
I have posted on other aspects of this interview here.
Brassband is quite correct, and Obama's response regarding sin is equally revealing, as he describes it, more or less, as his acts that are not in alignment with his values. Note -- not God's commandments, not natural law, or not any objective standard whatsoever, but *his* subjective values. But in all fairmess, I think outside Catholic and certain evangelical circles, his statements would probably be regarded as quite mainstream among Christians.
Oh, really???
Yeah, I'm afraid so.
Wonder whether Sen. Obama considers Marxism/Socialism/Communism to be "out of alignment with his values?"
Maybe not, if this page is welcome on his website.
And later in the interview he aboslutely fumbles a question on the hypostatic union.
I don't recall that, Katherine, but you would know Obama's positions better than I do. Anyway, his blowing a question on the hypostatic union wouldn't surprise: Obama can't reason his way out of jabbing scissors into baby's skulls as they are being born, so he's not very likely to think clearly about Christology either.
brassband - the group wasn't found when I clicked on your link. Maybe someone tipped them off?
Senator Obama isn't a Catholic, so I don't expect him to know the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I think the "definition" he gave was more existential, in line with most non-Catholic Christians. I don't fault him for that any more than I fault Senator McCain for not being baptized in any Christian eccelesial community.
Yes, it appears that the campaign has recognized that it doesn't look good to be providing space for such groups.
Check this out.
Much as I'm not a fan of Obama, I'm afraid some of the commenters are right: taking the Catholics, Orthodox, and more conservative Protestants out of the equation, Obama's definition of sin is probably not all that unusual. Perhaps a lot of folks wouldn't formulate it quite that way, but it's pretty much the gist of what I've heard from a lot of "mainline" Protestants.
Although I just HAVE to follow up and ask: how big a step does anyone here think it is from:
"Sin is [me] being out of alignment with my values"
to
"Sin is [you] being out of alignment with my values"
??
Kasia,
Good points.
The quote, if accurate, merely indicates that Obama feels that he himself sins when he performs actions that fall short of his values.
It does not mean that his values are the criteria by which all are judged.
Nor does the quote indicate the source of his values. Are they his own made up , dictatorship of relativism values, or are they the Judaeo-Christian values he has inherited and grappled with in church?
Ed --
No more than McCain can understand that carrying on with several women before dumping his wife because she put on few pounds while raising his children alone is adultery. At least he did eventually marry one of his mistressess (in the mind of those of you who believe marriage is a temporary arrangement and be dissolved at will).
Commenting by HaloScan
