The Emergent Church-Al Qaeda Connection
Last Sunday, Frank Pastore’s expose on Townhall.com, “Why Al Qaeda Supports the Emergent Church”, broke it wide open.
In a blistering but hastily-researched account, Pastore explains how terrorists revel in the downfall of the Conservative Christian empire, and how the Emergent Church, with all its namby-pamby, pansy Christianity, is playing right into Islamist hands. I received a few emails about the piece this week, each sender expecting me to be angry. I’ve never felt Burnside was a part of the Emergent Church, but I guess some might see us that way.
I am angry, however. I’m angry because I’ve been following this trail for over a year, and Pastore went and blew everything.
Because of Frank Pastore’s half-assed journalism, my sources are exposed, their lives in danger. This is about so much more than the Emergent Church being a chick version of Christianity. Oh, no. Beneath a thin veneer of “love and patience and understanding”, the Emergent Church is actually a ruthless bunch of militant Muslims, as quick to slit your throat as they are to hand you a copy of The Message.
If those sources are reading this: It’s over. Use the accounts I’ve set up for you and get out. Now.
Since the safety of almost a dozen men and women has been compromised and years of painstaking research blown, I feel the need to at least correct some of Pastore’s assertions.
1. Pastore’s title is “Why Al Qaeda Supports the Emergent Church”
Like I said above, the Emergent Church isn’t just aiding and abetting the enemies of America. The Emergent Church isn’t just leeching power from the Christian Right. The Emergent Church isn’t just sipping coffee and pretending coffee is hardcore.
The Emergent Church is the American arm of Al Qaeda.
It’s hard to believe, I know, but think about this: if Radical Islam’s sole goal in life is to usurp the power of its enemy (in this case, the Far Christian Right), why not pose as that enemy, but a less violent version?
It may seem on the surface Extreme Conservative Christianity and Radical Muslims share the same goals. The both want to run governments. They both want to make laws that make people not gay and keep people from stealing. They’re both understand innocent people sometimes have to die to bring about these ends. They both want control of resources like oil. They both understand only men can effectively govern and women should be subservient. They both think Jesus was alright, but he didn’t kick enough ass.
But Conservative Christians are predominantly white and Radical Muslims are Middle Eastern. For both sides, that’s a big difference.
2. Pastore asserts the United Nations is irrelevant.
He’s so dangerously wrong about this I want to punch him in the balls. The United Nations, like the Emergent Church, are Al Qaeda. Current President of the General Assembly, H.E. Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa, is actually Osama Bin Laden’s right hand man. How do I know this? Muslim name. What more do you need? What’s that? She’s a woman, and Muslims would never allow a woman to rise to such heights of power? Look again.
3. Pastore asserts that “only the conservative, evangelical Christians of American are who stand between radical Islam and their quest for global domination” (sic)
According to his Wikipedia entry, you may think Frank Pastore was just a Major League pitcher who then went to college for a while. You’d be dead wrong. Pastore is actually a trained killer and part of the “Persecution Force” (there were copyright issues with Tribulation Force), a hard-nosed but well-respected First Sergeant who specializes in heavy weaponry. Pat Robertson is the team’s pilot, darting through the skies in an F-22 fighter, an ever-present unlit cigar stub in his mouth.
Before President Bush was elected, they worked as soldiers of fortune, all the while on the run from the military for a crime they didn’t commit. Post-9/11, President Bush pardoned them. They were unleashed as a secret commando unit to combat the Muslims, capable of infiltrating any organization and killing any foe, all the while ready to die in the name of America. Jerry Falwell’s heart attack? It occurred not in his office, but at a safehouse in Islamabad, the result of poisoning from Al Qaeda agents. “Colonel Jerry”, as he was called, was an accomplished interrogator, and was fluent in seven languages.
When Pastore says Conservative Christians are our only hope, he knows what the hell he’s talking about. The Persecution Force doesn’t allow any Liberals. Or gays. And that makes them strong.
4. Pastore asserts “the Emergent Church is an ally in the war against radical Islam - Al Qaeda’s ally.”
I’m not picking Frank apart on this point, I just wanted to point out how well he worded that sentence. At first, maybe you thought he was saying the Emergent Church was America’s ally. “What, Frank? I thought this article was about how the Emergent Church is bad!” But then he twists it around at the end by saying “Al Qaeda’s ally” with a dash in front of it, totally throwing you off. That’s top-notch writing, my friends. Top notch.
5. Pastore mentions the Emergent Church is “Christianity for Postmoderns who don’t like the truth, knowledge, science, authority, doctrines, institutions, or religion”.
Pastore got almost everything right here, because I once heard Brian McLaren tell a crowd in Toronto, “You know what I really hate? Truth. And knowledge. I also hate science, authority, religion, doctrines and institutions,” he said while ticking off his fingers. Pastore got one thing wrong: the order.
(Note: Brian McLaren may or may not have said this, because I don’t have a recording, but I do know I don’t trust Brian McLaren because he seems to do good things and be too much of a good guy. Some non-Conservative Christians call this “good fruit”, but they’re taking that verse out of context, just like they always do.)
Posted on July 30, 2007 12:00 AM
Comments
I read the TH article. I didn't realize that termites leave droppings.
Guess I learn something new every day.
Posted by: Kim Gottschild | July 30, 2007 6:08 AM
Love it! I couldn't believe it when I read his article. It's really a sad way to live, isn't it?
I wrote my own response here.
Ruanima.com
Posted by: Chris | July 30, 2007 6:49 AM
Not to blow anymore of Jordan's cover, but this implicates the Church of England also, given the role of N.T. Wright's work in Emergent Church "theology".
God bless you, Frank. You and your 72 ounce steak holding stomach.
Posted by: Paul | July 30, 2007 7:50 AM
Great article. I must say, I never saw the connection. I also didn't know my church was actually a mosque/islamic extremist base.
Maybe I should have taken another look at my pastor's glasses...
Posted by: Kaitlin Morrison | July 30, 2007 1:19 PM
I'm all for satire, but for future reference, I would like to see an intellectually response to his article (or other similary articles). Please look at his description of the Emergent church and explain where he is wrong. These were some pretty heavy accussations, but you created a joke. Why is his article false?
Posted by: Chris | July 30, 2007 1:51 PM
Chris,
I responded with absurdity because Pastore's article is absurd.
Pastore has no concept of what the "Emergent Church" actually is, because the Emergent Church doesn't have set theological values that determine if one is Emergent or not. It's not a denomination. What Pastore refers to as "Emergent" is just a knee-jerk response. If he'd ever spoken with folks like Brian McLaren, or if he'd ever done research into what Emergent Churches actually are, he would know that.
I don't think his article warrants an intellectual response. Pastore doesn't use Scripture to refute "Emergent" doctrine, he doesn't use verses to support his claims. He doesn't mention Christ once. Instead, he brings up "post-Christian Europe", "The United Nations" and the "ACLU" because he knows those words push buttons in Conservative minds ("ACLU? Yeah, those guys are bad! I don't like the Emergent Church!").
His concept of Christianity is so convoluted by his political beliefs that to intellectually debate would be like a college professor arguing with a 14 year-old.
Plus, I'm not that college professor, i'm just the clown trying to point out the absurdity of it all. I'm sure you'll find intellectual responses elsewhere, but I doubt any theological mind worth his salt (Emergent or otherwise) would take the time to respond to such tripe.
Posted by: Jordan Green | July 30, 2007 2:13 PM
I don't think the TH article is even worth an intellectual response. (My jaw was on the floor the entire time I read it.) I personally wouldn't want to waste my energy on that. The humor was greatly appreciated after the schlock of Pastore's opinion and accusations.
Posted by: Kim Gottschild | July 30, 2007 2:25 PM
Jordan-I laughed so hard that coffee came out of my nose (expect to hear from my lawyer).
Chris-I totally agree that it is important for people to understand what is meant with the phrase "Emergent Church" before we start praising or knocking it. There was an article in CT a while back by Scot McKnight that I thought was really helpful, you should check it out.
http://www.ctlibrary.com/40534
Posted by: Melody | July 30, 2007 2:34 PM
Jordan, you say that you will not respond to absurdity. Obama says in his first year he will meet with leaders that do nothing, but speak absurdity (Castro, Chavez and Ahmadinejad). GWB agrees with your approach when dealing with people. I believe we have first, you agree with GWB's foreign policy! (ok that was joke and I totally digressed).
I agree that it was a rather harsh analysis and over the top by Pastore. I disagree that these people reading this article are the "yes men" and "yes women" of the political right. The contributors of Townhall are people like William Bennett and Hugh Hewitt (Conservative and intellectual). Also, I'm not sure I would measure the "spirituality" of a piece by the amount of scripture that is noted.
I try to read BSW every week and post comments often. Your comment about his concept of Christianity being convoluted by his politics could be applied to many of the articles that I read. BSW and the Editors, specifically, go out of their way to prove their independence of conservative Christians by negativity. If the one thing that we have in common is Christ, it would be nice to hear something that brings us together.
Posted by: Chris | July 30, 2007 5:51 PM
Oh, Chris, I don't think we've ever run an article implicating the Evangelical Church in supporting world-wide terrorism.
My goal with this site isn't to bring Christians together until we find common ground. That would be a pretty boring magazine, and also impossible. No, one of our goals is to say, "This stance is supported by many Christians in the United States. Let's take some time to think about why our fellow believers feel this way. Is it because we're following Christ, or is it because we're following a nation or a leader or an ideology outside of Christ? Could some believers believe the exact opposite and still be standing on Biblical principles?"
Also, I know we run a lot of articles that don't quote Scripture, but Pastore was attacking a theological phenomenon with a political argument. That's what was so absurd.
Posted by: Jordan Green | July 30, 2007 7:09 PM
You say it is impossible to bring Christians together and I agree with you, but you arrogance towards evangelicals is apparant in the articles. See also "Funny Stories"
Again, a response to Pastore's article would have been more interesting than the satire piece. Does the Emergent Church or BSW believe that Christ's Church is a mission or an institution or both? Do you believe a people group, such as the Emergent Church, can influence a society in such a way that it would rather appeace terrorist. You response to those types of questions would have made a better piece...in my opinion.
Posted by: Chris | July 30, 2007 8:28 PM
chris...still not sure why you read BWC. there's probably a web magazine out there that would be more suited to you and you wouldn't have to express your displeasure so frequently.
as for the arrogance in "Funny Stories", I didn't author that piece, but I can understand the frustration of the writer, a full-time missionary who's daily life is often negatively impacted by American culture.
(And yes, I know American culture has done some amazing things for humanity, but that doesn't make it all good.)
here's the thing, chris: you are so engrossed and identified by conservative culture that your email address reflects your political party. When your email address has the initials "GOP" in it, it might be time to wonder if you're thinking objectively about political issues, or if you're thinking objectively about your fellow believers who may question some of your beliefs.
Posted by: Jordan Green | July 30, 2007 10:08 PM
You are probably right. Good luck to you. Fear Groupthink!
Posted by: Chris | July 31, 2007 5:54 AM
I'm confused. Are there two people named Chris who have commented or just one?
Posted by: Paul | July 31, 2007 7:48 AM
Oh and worse, when dealing with issues like "health care" and "the poor", they cite the Canadians use of Socialism as a possible solution. Canada, with their "anti capital punishment" stance. And their decision not to send their military into Iraq and follow the UN's rulings. And they have gun control. If we're not careful, we might end up like them.
Posted by: Josh Cole | July 31, 2007 10:08 AM
Hilarious, Jordan. Don't mind people who just don't get it.
Also, you, me and Brian McLaren need to be debriefed by Osama very soon. It's very difficult to schedule meetings with him these days.
Posted by: Mark Petterson | July 31, 2007 9:19 PM
I have lived in the LA area most of my life and know KKLA Christian radio station. I can stomach it in the morning, if it's Alisdair Baig or the lovely, endearing J Vernon McGee. But occasionally I turn on too late, after Minirth Myer and Hank Hannagraff have already signed off, and it's three full hours of Frank "The Bloviator" Pastore exhaling his self-important hate speech.
I have always tried to maintain an open mind about people with opposing viewpoints. but more often than not, I have to shut the man off, because he makes me angry. Why? I don't mind a good debate. Take Dennis Prager, who is able to argue his point without insulting his guest. Pastore, on the other hand, makes a point of being vituperative, mean-spirited, judgmental, and worse: he insults and demeans those who oppose him. A good sign of an egomaniac. I'm not the only one. Countless of my Christian friends despise him. Friends are over-35, evangelical, and non-emergent.
Pastore should look at his own life for examples of what strain of Christians are aiding and abetting Al-Quaeda. Those who attack each other.
Journalists argue that American presence in Iraq was going well until February 22, 2006. Al Quaeda bombed the shiite al-Askari Mosque in Samarra. For the sole purpose of inciting Shiites against Sunnis. And it worked spectacularly well. Iraq is poised for a civil war. Al-Qaeda's philosophy: divide the opposition to destroy each other.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Askari_Mosque_bombing_(2006)
This seems to be Pastore's M.O. Attack the emergent church, accuse them of destroying the Great American Christian faith. He uses big six dollar words, incendiary speech that his fans want to hear (just read the comments on townhall and you'll see, the sunni-shiite like dirty bombs going back and forth on the comments page. By both Pastore lovers and haters.
This is disgusting.
I am "emergent-friendly." I like a lot of what Brian McLaren says, and other things annoy me. For example, my husband and I have been reading "the Secret Message of Jesus." McLaren says that "the kingdom of God is not about going to heaven when you die ... The kingdom of God is about bringing God's revolution here and now." Well Bri, if there is no 'heaven' after death, then all those people who are being slaughtered in Darfur, the children who die of AIDS or gang violence are up shit creek without a paddle. There better darn well be a heaven after we die, or God has no business promising that he is going to achieve justice for the oppressed. For a good 2/3 of the world, the afterlife is their ONLY hope, because those of us living large in first World taking too long to bring that 'kingdom of God now." My husband assures me Mclaren doesn't mean there ISN'T a heaven after you die, he just means that's not the ONLY thing. Well then McLaren should qualify his statement when he writes it. Or at least, soon after. I lose respect for the writer when he leaves out huge chunks of canon theology. Now I AM going to read through the rest of the book to see what else he says. Because I like the guy.
I did like his New Kind of Christian trilogy. Things he said did annoy me, but hey he's just a guy. He's not the Pope. But from what I've of McLaren, and what I've heard about people who met him, he doesn't pretend to be. He's a genuinely NICE guy. He admits he's trying to stir things up, he doesn't proclaim himself the King of All Christian media. His head seems to be in proportion to the rest of his torso.
Pastore, on the other hand, has a head the size of the Hindenburg. He's the most al-queda friendly asshole on the radio today. And I say that as a person who has lived in the So Cal area for many years, and had many misfortunes to dial past KKLA and catch him spewing mostly about politics: not about Jesus and what Jesus said and did. Once I caught him ripping Jane Fonda a new anus because of her liberal political views. Last time I checked, when someone like Fonda becomes a Christian, which she has, I think the point is to encourage them, not give them all sorts of reasons to hate other Christians and drive her away. Like we did with Bob Dylan.
Keep it up, Pastore. If you keep inciting Christians to hate each other, the more you divide the body of Christ. And then INDEED the terrorists have won.
Posted by: susan isaacs | July 31, 2007 10:26 PM
Wait, does this mean that we're through with mean and divisive loaded questions from people? (yes, I see the irony in what I just wrote)
Susan, well said. Very well said. I dont know Pastore well, but he sounds an awful lot like Bill O'reilly. Or most people on Fox.
Posted by: Patrick | August 1, 2007 3:49 PM
Brilliant article. I logged in to the bwc when I heard about Frank's rant to see if you responded.
You did not disappoint.
Posted by: Larry Shallenberger | August 1, 2007 7:39 PM
I read and man I love it.
Posted by: Newton F | August 1, 2007 9:11 PM
"some quick ways to identify your enemies..."
wow, i had no idea... I'm an evangel-mergent-islamo-facist (minus the glasses)!
Posted by: Tj | August 2, 2007 4:28 PM
The truth hurts, TJ. The truth hurts.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to listen to a homemade mix with all of U2's most Christian songs, including:
- "City of Blinding Lights"
- "Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For"
- "40"
- "Yahweh"
But does not include:
- "The First Time" (because Bono throws away the key)
- "Mysterious Ways" (because God is referred to as a woman)
- "Mofo"
Posted by: Jordan Green | August 2, 2007 4:34 PM
Just realized, Brian McLaren's initials are BMcL. Mc is just irish for son of. So if you remove the Mc, you get B.L. Bin Mc Laden. Son of Bin Laden. Shoulda known.
Then again, Frank Pastore's are FP. Fischer Price? F'ing Pansy? Fascist Pope? You decide.
Posted by: susan isaacs | August 2, 2007 10:20 PM
I thought he had one good point in the original article, well worth talking about in late nights at a coffee shop: the tendency (not rule) native to the Emergent movement to avoid seminaries and traditional discipline.
Of course, the context made even that rather ridiculous.
On the bright side, many of last century's best Christian thinkers and writers came from England, whose "Daily Mail" has been writing this type of claptrap for well over 100 years.
The dangerous idiots we will have with us always. Fortunately, God always gives us satirists to preserve our sanity.
Posted by: ChestertonianRambler | August 3, 2007 7:25 AM
reading through the comments over at that site gave me a migrane... a bunch of adults behaving like juveniles and each claiming its due to the other side's lack of intelligence.
seesh. if only they realized there's no such thing as intelligence. it doesn't exist and neither do they. except in my mind to serve my internal play. i need to hire better actors.
Posted by: Kimberly | August 3, 2007 8:17 AM
I love this site! I come here on a regular basis to visit my brothers and sisters in cyberspace. This article was an appropriate and hilarious response to a guy who needs to put down his megaphone.
I love my church and community and am available to both on a full time basis. I am up to my eyes in pro-war, GOP equals Christianity, GO TEAM AMERICA ideology. Thank you for being an oasis.
I live in a small town in mid-Ohio and God has called me to STAY (this is missional!). By the grace of God, I am embraced by my church and community. I am allowed to do ministry here. I am different. My husband and daughter are different. We continue to be us and try to live Jesus is this odd place. I am outspoken, but try to be gentle because the people I live with are not arrogant, they were taught only one way. They usually give us grace and we try to give it back. This site lets me know there are people like me in the world who swear and drink beer and love to write and are human...The same people who love Jesus and others like crazy. Thanks. You keep me from going off on the people I love.
Jordan, you run an obscenely good magazine.
(I thought this was a good place to leave this post. The article left me feeling warm and fuzzy.)
Posted by: Kristi | August 3, 2007 8:34 AM
BSW and the Editors, specifically, go out of their way to prove their independence of conservative Christians by negativity. If the one thing that we have in common is Christ, it would be nice to hear something that brings us together.
I agree with Chris, here, to some degree. I mean, I can't say if "BSW and the editors" routinely go out of their way. But I am of the opinion this article did. It didn't make me laugh, it made me discouraged. I kept reading, hoping for a break from the sarcasm and for the author to address the serious grievances in an intellectual manner.
I'm not trying to attack you, Jordan. Please don't hear that. Just providing feedback.
Posted by: dewde | August 3, 2007 9:39 AM
My first reaction to reading Pastore's article was to get REALLY ANGRY. I started reading the comments and then I realized that people were bashing and insulting and not being very Jesus like. On either side. (I first saw the article on the burnside blog - before reading this one)
I'm honestly a little sad at the response to Chris's questions (the other Chris).
I came at it with this approach: Did Jesus just insult or make fun of the Roman Empire? Eh, not really. However, the early Christians took Roman words and phrases and "hijacked" them for Christ. Eklesia (church), some verses, and "the good news" are 'parodies' on Roman culture.
People related to these words, and then the meanings became different over time.
So I also agree that brushing people like Pastore off isn't exactly in the spirit of our Rabbi. Fear and Judgement are Pastore's defense mechanisms. This guy has been educated a lot. He's bull-headed. Like Saul. Our defense mechanisms are cynicism and sarcasm. Maybe we're a little more fool-hardy to chop an ear off. We have to be careful not to despise people. If we live by the sword, we'll die by it.
I wrote a sincere reply to Pastore on my blog.
Just a gentle response. I still thought the article was brilliant.
Posted by: Chris A. | August 3, 2007 1:01 PM
I feel bad for H.E. Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa. That was a cheap shot.
Posted by: David A. Zimmerman | August 5, 2007 6:53 AM
People who use the word "metanarrative" intimidate me.
Posted by: Crystal | August 6, 2007 10:18 AM
omg, nooma videos?? I KNEW IT!!
*brandishes "4 laws booklet" and charges off into the sunset*
Posted by: kyle | August 8, 2007 12:08 AM
Chris, I agree that sometimes we need to respond to criticism for the sake of the audience rather than the merit of of the critique, but if there is one thing I have learned in life, it is that I can either teach people what I believe in context, or be sidetracked into responding to criticism. It is a matter of which audience we will choose to focus on. Mostly, the audiences have either, 1. Chosen their Authority on the matter by association, or, 2. They are wider read than to just take an off the wall article like that seriously.
Read and discover from a wide source, teach to a focus audience! And if they are not your audience call them snakes and vipers like Jesus did. (Not very seriously engaging)
Posted by: Milton Friesen | August 16, 2007 7:47 PM
I sent this as an email to Pastore... not that I think he'll actually open his clenched up heart to read it... but you never know:
I belong to a church that probably falls under the "emergent church" label. And it strikes me that you must have very little experience with the emergent church to describe it as you do.
We very much believe the Bible is the true word of God. We very much believe in truth and lies, good and evil. We're not ashamed to stand up for the word of God, and we don't make excuses for uncomfortable truth just to keep things "conversational."
In fact, it's because we believe so strongly in the Word of God that we can see how far the institutional church has fallen from where God intended His church to be.
Beyond that, we read the constant Biblical talk of helping the poor and needy, talk of peace, talk of caring and loving people as Christ sees them--and with the weight God gave care for the poor in Biblical text, we believe that social justice is important to Him. God didn't call us to use the government to solve for these issues, but instead called us to outpour love, give of ourselves and our own resources, and work hard to help the poor and needy.
In fact, God didn't call Christians to use the government for anything. Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and then move on with your work for God. Jesus himself set that example.
I would put to you that it is the institutional church, which acts more like a corporate business than a spiritual entity... which encourages the "Sunday morning" religious Christian who puts in more time at the polls than at the soup kitchen... which encourages judgment and hatred despite the many and varied warnings against this through the Bible... which cares more about theology than unity, rightness than truth, and growth of numbers than spiritual growth...
It is the institutional church that has fallen victim to a relativistic truth. It is the institutional church that ignores the plight of the poor and the cause of love, and instead focuses on political power, judgment, warfare, and hate -- all things that Jesus spoke out against over and over and over...
Bending truth to suit your purposes and political goals... isn't that what you are accusing the emergent church of? The fact that ever increasing numbers of believers are starting to see a disconnect between what is written in the Bible and what they see in their church building does not make the emergent church weak. We stand strong in love--and there is nothing more powerful or beautiful than that.
Posted by: Claena | August 31, 2007 8:31 AM
Hey Jordan, I'm sorry I didn't read this 'till now...this is too funny. I blogged about something very similar today...but it's nowhere near as funny as this. I appreciate your setting up the safe houses for us!
Posted by: Mike Morrell | September 3, 2007 8:21 PM
Kristi (from Mid-Ohio)
I have recently moved from Jackson Hole, WY. to Mid-Ohio and your post renewed my hopes of finding a friend.
Posted by: Heather | September 10, 2007 12:56 PM