Tag: Mother Theresa

Posted on

Elmer Gantry 2006

Larry Ross is a PR man. He is a spin-master. He is a man who makes a very good living selling his ability to manipulate and control the mass media..

If Larry Ross had been around in 33 AD, perhaps Jesus himself might have ended up as one of King Herod’s top advisors, instead of on the cross. Larry Ross might have pointed out that the comment about tearing down and rebuilding the temple in three days would not go over well.

And Jesus doesn’t mean that the Pharisees are actually hypocrites. He means that some Pharisees hold views which could lead to misunderstandings if not received within the correct context.

And if he hadn’t been able to stop Christ from actually speaking those mistakes, he might at least have stepped in front of Jesus and declared to the crowd, “What the lord is saying is that, metaphorically, he hopes that all of us can renew our spirits after divesting ourselves of the residue of our sinful inclinations.”

Reporter: Does your client claim to be the son of God?
Larry Ross: I think that all Jews will be able to draw their own conclusion about who the messiah is once all the facts are in and the prophecies have been examined by qualified scribes and Pharisees.

Larry Ross has worked for Billy Graham and helped him straighten out the general public after tapes showed that he thought Jews were ruining the country. I say he had to straighten out the general public, which had perhaps obtained the erroneous impression that Billy Graham had said something offensive.

The idea was not to admit that it was offensive and that Graham– and Nixon– had held racist beliefs. No, no, no– the correct idea is that Billy Graham, a long time ago, used unfortunate language to make comments he could not remember having made but which, taken in the correct context, and understood within the larger framework of Billy Graham’s ministry, really shouldn’t disturb anyone. So I did nothing wrong, I don’t admit I did anything wrong, but if you think I might have done something wrong, that’s your problem.

Just as I am, without one plea. No no no! My client means that he approaches God as a humble man who may have made mistakes in the past but only wishes to devote himself now to end abusive sinfulness and it’s tragic effects on individual salvation.

Mel Gibson hired Larry Ross to help market “The Passion”. He chose wisely. Larry Ross had already had the distinguished opportunity to promote “Veggie Tales: The Movie” by getting Pastors to view it first, and then promote it within their congregations, before promoting to the general public and allowing movie reviewers to see it. Veggie Tales. Jesus Christ. It doesn’t matter which.

He had one clever idea. He got Mel Gibson to record messages that could be send to Pastor’s recording machines while they were likely to be out. That way, a pastor could casually remark to a member of his congregation: “Yeah, got another message from Mel Gibson the other day. Geez, the guy won’t leave me alone. Maybe I will show his film in church next week, just to get him off my back…” That’s Christian PR.

Ross has also worked for controversial evangelist/faith-healer Benny Hinn and Promise Keepers and the makers of the film “Left Behind”. And his biggest star, Rick Warren, author of the “The Purpose-Driven Life”.

When asked by a New York Times reporter if he had ever made a mistake, he couldn’t think of any. Of course, he also denied, at first, having provided Benny Hinn Ministries with the benefits of his expertise.

I’m not sure anybody really cares that some of our so-called religious leaders make use of modern, cutting-edge public relations techniques in getting their message out. The argument would be that using the best methods to save souls for Jesus is a good thing.

But then, how difficult is it to turn around and beseech our young people not to compromise with the values of “the world” but stand firm and true and faithful to the values of the gospel? If the Christian values and Biblical principles are enough, why on earth would you need a spin doctor? If you really believed they were– you wouldn’t. You just wouldn’t. So if you tell young people not to surrender to the ways of the world while you’re consulting your spin doctor, you are a hypocrite.

How credible is the gospel message itself, if we know that it is now being test-marketed?

How credible is Graham when he responds to this documented exchange with Nixon with “I don’t remember the conversation”? Is it really possible? Even if he has forgotten this particular conversation, is it possible he could have forgotten that he hated the Jews? Or that he loved the status and the glory of visiting the White House?

Billy Graham’s conversation with Nixon about the Jews.

This stranglehold has got to be broken or the country’s going down the drain,” the nation’s best-known preacher declared as he agreed with a stream of bigoted Nixon comments about Jews and their perceived influence in American life.

You believe that?” Nixon says after the “stranglehold” comment.

Yes, sir,” Graham says.

Oh, boy,” replies Nixon. “So do I. I can’t ever say that but I believe it.”

“No, but if you get elected a second time, then we might be able to do something,” Graham replies.

Mother Theresa had a lawyer.

Billy Graham’s remarks, followed by  rather distressing attempt to suck up to Nixon after a prayer breakfast.  Can you trust anybody nowadays?  No  Can’t trust the website above either.  If it worries you, try the BBC instead..

Marginal stuff..

Posted on

Spinning Mother Theresa

Can you count the number of times you have heard the name of Mother Theresa given in conversation as a veritable paragon of virtue and holiness and kindness? Stuff it.

I was fooled. I remember the first articles I read about this devout, holy, self-sacrificing woman living in the worst slums of the poorest city (Calcutta) in the world offering only kindness and care and love to the lowliest outcasts, the vulnerable, the helpless. Malcolm Muggeridge, Christendom’s most pompous twit before he passed on, groveled before her with all the enthusiasm those who think their groveling will be taken for virtue can muster.

I even remember a SCTV skit in which a loud, bombastic “Lola Heatherton” (Catherine O’Hara) interviewed Mother Theresa and sang her Broadway Tunes. SCTV confined the parody to Heatherton– Mother Theresa was depicted (by Andrea Martin) with reverence. The point was that Mother Theresa was so holy that not even SCTV dared impugn her sanctified honor.

And then I stumbled into a crazy article somewhere– I can’t remember what magazine it was — that described how Mother Theresa inspected a home that had been donated to her order, for her novitiates, and I remember how she sternly ordered the hot water tank removed, and the mattresses and beds (they can sleep on the floor), and anything else that might make it a pleasant place to live.

I think the article was generally favorable to her and meant to celebrate her purity and austerity. I remember thinking a lot about it. What’s wrong with making a sacrifice, if it helps the poor? But getting rid of the hot water and the mattresses didn’t help the poor. It simply spread the suffering around. It was as if the point was not to alleviate suffering, but to increase it, out of some twisted sense of masochistic self-sanctification. A few years later, she was quoted as saying that the suffering the poor was “beautiful”. Not beautiful enough for herself, however. When she became ill, she checked into a nice, western hospital and received the best care available.

That bears repeating. While raising millions of dollars to preach to people who are dying and while making no effort to provide them with any kind of medical care, because, she says, their suffering is “beautiful”– she herself has accepted some of the finest medical care available from clinics in California.

Later on, I read more about Mother Theresa, and grew more and more disturbed by what I read. While she was receiving tens of millions of dollars in donations from thousands of benefactors around the world– and the Nobel Peace Prize– she was also appearing in public with Haitian dictator Papa Doc Duvalier, to defend his regime against charges of corruption, and with Albanian dictator Enver Hoxha. And of course, as an unrepentant traditionalist, Mother Theresa fought fanatically against the very idea of any form of birth control.

Ironically, she was embraced by some in the Christian right in America, including Ralph Reed, as representative of “family values”– as if she had never taken a vow of chastity. And as if Ralph Reed, and Pat Robertson, and Jerry Falwell, had anything but contempt for Catholicism. She was politically useful to them.

According to Hitchens, after intervening in the referendum in Ireland to allow divorce, (she was opposed), she told the Ladies Home Journal that she was glad her friend, Princess Diana, was getting a divorce because she will be happier. Clearly, there is one set of rules for the poor….

What kicked it for me, though, was when I realized that what she was actually doing in the slums of Calcutta was not “helping”. She provided some comfort, yes, to the dying, but she did almost nothing to alleviate suffering or to make people’s lives better when she clearly could have. In fact, she actively opposed efforts to provide the poor with medical care and food, because, she said, it did not further the advancement of Catholicism. It merely distracted people from the real issue, which was, saving souls.

That’s not the gospel.