I Want Manna, Not Mammon

jerrylogo.jpgI’ve been listening to the Jerry Bowyer Program on WORD-FM fairly often these days. Jerry replaced Marty Minto, who was fired under contentious circumstances. On the whole, I like the show. I like tone and style and I think Jerry handles callers well. There’s a good balance between charity and patience on the one hand and avoiding time-wasting arguments with nuts on the other. When he talks about Christian topics, I enjoy listening to him and calling the show. Something worries me, though.

Politics and economics are crowding out other topics. Jerry seems to have drunk too much Republican kool-aid. Some of his recent interviews, for instance, have had absolutely nothing to do with faith or Christian living. What do Steve Forbes’ tax obsessions or Pat Toomy’s healthcare reform crusade have to do with Christ?!

If you’re going to bring up a political or economic topic on your show, Jerry, try to make it relate it to Christianity.

This entry was posted in government, law, and politics and tagged , , , , , , on by .

About Funky Dung

Who is Funky Dung? 29-year-old grad student in Intelligent Systems (A.I.) at the University of Pittsburgh. I consider myself to be politically moderate and independent and somewhere between a traditional and neo-traditional Catholic. I was raised Lutheran, spent a number of years as an agnostic, and joined the Catholic Church at the 2000 Easter Vigil. Why Funky Dung? I haven't been asked this question nearly as many times as you or I might expect. Funky Dung is a reference to an obscure Pink Floyd song. On the album Atom Heart Mother, there is a track called Atom Heart Mother Suite. It's broken up into movements, like a symphony, and one of the movements is called Funky Dung. I picked that nickname a long time ago (while I was still in high school I think), shortly after getting an internet connection for the first time. To me it means "cool/neat/groovy/spiffy stuff/crap/shiznit", as in "That's some cool stuff, dude!" Whence Ales Rarus? I used to enjoy making people guess what this means, but I've decided to relent and make it known to all. Ales Rarus is a Latin play on words. "Avis rarus" means "a rare bird" and carries similar meaning to "an odd fellow". "Ales" is another Latin word for bird that carries connotations of omens, signs of the times, and/or augery. If you want to get technical, both "avis" and "ales" are feminine (requiring "rara", but they can be made masculine in poetry (which tends to breaks lots of rules). I decided I'd rather have a masculine name in Latin. ;) Yeah, I'm a nerd. So what? :-P Wherefore blog? It is my intention to "teach in order to lead others to faith" by being always "on the lookout for occasions of announcing Christ by word, either to unbelievers . . . or to the faithful" through the "use of the communications media". I also act knowing that I "have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors [my] opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and [I] have a right to make [my] opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard to the integrity of faith and morals and reverence toward [my and their] pastors, and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons." (adapted from CCC 904-907) Statement of Faith I have been baptized and confirmed in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I, therefore, renounce Satan; I renounce all his works; I renounce all his allurements. I hold and profess all that is contained in the Apostles' Creed, the Niceno- Constantinopolitan Creed, and the Athanasian Creed. Having been buried with Christ unto death and raised up with him unto a new life, I promise to live no longer for myself or for that world which is the enemy of God but for him who died for me and rose again, serving God, my heavenly Father, faithfully and unto death in the holy Catholic Church. I am obedient to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. That is, I promote and defend authentic Catholic Teaching and Faith in union with Christ and His Church and in union with the Holy Father, the Bishop of Rome, the Successor of St. Peter. Thanks be unto Thee, O my God, for all Thy infinite goodness, and, especially, for the love Thou hast shown unto me at my Confirmation. I Give Thee thanks that Thou didst then send down Thy Holy Spirit unto my soul with all His gifts and graces. May He take full possession of me for ever. May His divine unction cause my face to shine. May His heavenly wisdom reign in my heart. May His understanding enlighten my darkness. May His counsel guide me. May His knowledge instruct me. May His piety make me fervent. May His divine fear keep me from all evil. Drive from my soul, O Lord, all that may defile it. Give me grace to be Thy faithful soldier, that having fought the good fight of faith, I may be brought to the crown of everlasting life, through the merits of Thy dearly beloved Son, our Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen. Behind the Curtain: an Interview With Funky Dung (Thursday, March 03, 2005) I try to avoid most memes that make their way 'round the blogosphere (We really do need a better name, don't we?), but some are worth participating in. Take for instance the "interview game" that's the talk o' the 'sphere. I think it's a great way to get to know the people in neighborhood. Who are the people in your neighborhood? In your neighborhod? In your neigh-bor-hoo-ood...*smack* Sorry, Sesame Street flashback. Anyhow, I saw Jeff "Curt Jester" Miller's answers and figured since he's a regular reader of mine he'd be a good interviewer. Without further ado, here are my answers to his questions. 1. Being that your pseudonym Funky Dung was chosen from a Pink Floyd track on Atom Heart Mother, what is you favorite Pink Floyd song and why? Wow. That's a tuffy. It's hard to pick out a single favorite. Pink Floyd isn't really a band known for singles. They mostly did album rock and my appreciation of them is mostly of a gestalt nature. If I had to pick one, though, it'd be "Comfortably Numb". I get chills up my spine every time I hear it and if it's been long enough since the last time, I get midty-eyed. I really don't know why. That's a rather unsatisfying answer for an interview, so here are the lyrics to a Rush song. It's not their best piece of music, but the lyrics describe me pretty well.

New World Man He's a rebel and a runner He's a signal turning green He's a restless young romantic Wants to run the big machine He's got a problem with his poisons But you know he'll find a cure He's cleaning up his systems To keep his nature pure Learning to match the beat of the old world man Learning to catch the heat of the third world man He's got to make his own mistakes And learn to mend the mess he makes He's old enough to know what's right But young enough not to choose it He's noble enough to win the world But weak enough to lose it --- He's a new world man... He's a radio receiver Tuned to factories and farms He's a writer and arranger And a young boy bearing arms He's got a problem with his power With weapons on patrol He's got to walk a fine line And keep his self-control Trying to save the day for the old world man Trying to pave the way for the third world man He's not concerned with yesterday He knows constant change is here today He's noble enough to know what's right But weak enough not to choose it He's wise enough to win the world But fool enough to lose it --- He's a new world man...
2. What do you consider your most important turning point from agnosticism to the Catholic Church. At some point in '99, I started attending RCIA at the Pittsburgh Oratory. I mostly went to ask a lot of obnoxious Protestant questions. Or at least that's what I told myself. I think deep down I wanted desperately to have faith again. At that point I think I'd decided that if any variety of Christianity had the Truth, the Catholic Church did. Protestantism's wholesale rejection of 1500 years of tradition didn't sit well with me, even as a former Lutheran. During class one week, Sister Bernadette Young (who runs the program) passed out thin booklet called "Handbook for Today's Catholic". One paragraph in that book spoke to me and I nearly cried as I read it.
"A person who is seeking deeper insight into reality may sometimes have doubts, even about God himself. Such doubts do not necessarily indicate lack of faith. They may be just the opposite - a sign of growing faith. Faith is alive and dynamic. It seeks, through grace, to penetrate into the very mystery of God. If a particular doctrine of faith no longer 'makes sense' to a person, the person should go right on seeking. To know what a doctrine says is one thing. To gain insight into its meaning through the gift of understanding is something else. When in doubt, 'Seek and you will find.' The person who seeks y reading, discussing, thinking, or praying eventually sees the light. The person who talks to God even when God is 'not there' is alive with faith."
At the end of class I told Sr. Bernadette that I wanted to enter the Church at the next Easter vigil. 3. If you were a tree what kind of, oh sorry about that .. what is the PODest thing you have ever done? I set up WikiIndex, a clearinghouse for reviews of theological books, good, bad, and ugly. It has a long way to go, but it'll be cool when it's finished. :) 4. What is your favorite quote from Venerable John Henry Newman? "Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt." 5. If you could ban one hymn from existence, what would it be? That's a tough one. As a member of the Society for a Moratorium on the Music of Marty Haugen and David Haas, there are obviously a lot of songs that grate on my nerves. If I had to pick one, though, I'd probably pick "Sing of the Lord's Goodness" by Ernie Sands.

14 thoughts on “I Want Manna, Not Mammon

  1. Funky Dung

    What’s partisan about disagreeing with their positions? I think you’ve jumped to the conclusion that I agree with polar opposites. I haven’t. If Bowyer were spouting rhetoric about socialized healthcare, ousting Tom Delay, or some other obsession of the Left with nary a reference to the Gospel, I’d decry that as well. I’m a fan of neither the Right nor the Left and would prefer more political variety on a Christian radio program. Even if the Right had a monopoly on the Gospel (HA!), I’d expect the Right’s platform positions to be related to, and preferrably supported by, the Gospel. Chit-chatting about supply-side economics might have been appropriate for Jerry’s old gig, but expectations are different at WORD.

  2. Ernesto

    It is interesting to note how many religion blogs (not implying this one at all fits into this category) tend to merge religious positions and political partisanship — fairly orthodox believer, politically right leaning blog, more liberal in theology, politically left leaning blog. But it doesn’t seem like one necessarily follows from the other … does it?

  3. Funky Dung

    As distasteful as I find certain political ideals going hand-in-hand (and unquestioned) with certain schools of theology, I don’t hold bloggers to the same standards as a paid radio personality. Bowyer’s job is to converse with Pittsburgh’s Christians about interesting topics relating to the Gospel. If politics come up on the show, fine. I just wish an effort was being made to relate them to Christian faith and practice in some way.

  4. AHerald

    There’s a tin can clang sound to your defense, friend. If you’d merely objected to “nary a reference to the Gospel,” regarding Bowyers’ interviews with political guests, then perhaps your self-professed claim of ‘neither Right nor Left’ political independence and desire for overt Christian themes in political interviews might ring truer to my ears.

    Your partisanship (which, by the way is not something I say in a pejorative manner, for I’m a proud Catholic partisan of the Right) is revealed not in the disagreement per se, but in the manner in which you disagreed. The descriptive labels you applied–“Republican [not merely political] kool-aid,” “obsessive,” “crusade”–are clear partisan value judgements, reductive and dismissive caricatures which commonly originate on the Left and reveal your own political biases.

    If your concern and complaint was solely about the lack of a “Christian connection,” then one wonders why you felt compelled to go beyond that specific complaint to also disparage Republicans and their ideas. After all, what did your opinions about Republicans and their politics have to do with the substance of your complaint regarding an absence of Christian themes in political interviews?

    Finally, does an obviously intelligent Christian like yourself really need a talk show host to connect the dots on how public tax and healthcare policies intersect and relate to faith or Christian living?

  5. howard

    He might not need that, but I think I do. Because there are many positions embraced on religious talk shows that have no obvious correlation to Christian principles.

    So for my benefit, could you explain the intersection between Forbes’ tax ideas or Toomey’s healthcare policies and the a compassionate Christian lifestyle?

  6. Funky Dung

    “Finally, does an obviously intelligent Christian like yourself really need a talk show host to connect the dots on how public tax and healthcare policies intersect and relate to faith or Christian living?”

    Yeah, apparently I do. I fail to see how the political ideals he presented jive with Jesus’ teachings regarding wealth and salvation (poor in spirit, eye of a needle, etc). I believe intelligent arguments can be made from all parts of the spectrum regarding how best to incorporate the Gospel into secular life. I may disagree with a lot of them, but I can respect a well-constructed argument. Bowyer presents no such arguments. He unapologetically presents a narrow band of the political spectrum without any Christian justification whatsoever. If I seem to take a jaundiced view of the Right, it’s because I’m tired of orthodox/traditional/conservative Christian being synonymous with Republican. Countless conservative Christian leaders talk about conservative Republican policies as though they obviously and automatically agree with the Gospel. Christians should support or oppose policies, not parties. Otherwise, we’ll be used, abused, and taken for granted just like blacks and unions are by the Democratic Party.

  7. AHerald

    Questions of taxation have an inherently moral component, most particularly with regards to justice. Likewise, virtually all government expenditures invoke explicit or implicit questions of morality. And any questions of morality and justice quite naturally and plainly intersect with God, the ultimate author and arbiter of justice and morality. Hence, the relation to Christianity appears evident.

    I fail to see how the political ideals he presented jive with Jesus’ teachings regarding wealth and salvation (poor in spirit, eye of a needle, etc).

    A revealing connection you’ve reflexively made here. The subject of tax policy seems to automatically connote for you images of rich men and wealth, as if lower and middle-class working Joes somehow aren’t affected or concerned about such matters.

    More to your point, though, the specific teachings of Jesus you mention are about the power of wealth and worldly treasures to turn weak and fallen man away from his true good which is God. Why you would think that truism should somehow “jive” with any formulation of tax or government policies is puzzling. (I hope you’re not implying you would be supportive of a policy which would make rich people poor through taxation ‘for their own good’, so to speak, in order to bring them into complience with Christ’s teachings?)

    Jesus was teaching the truth about the greedy nature of man and the dangerous temptation of misplaced priorities (cf Matt 6:19-21). He wasn’t advocating the good of poverty for its own sake; or poverty enforced upon the wealthy by government confiscation of earnings through taxation.

    I believe intelligent arguments can be made from all parts of the spectrum regarding how best to incorporate the Gospel into secular life. I may disagree with a lot of them, but I can respect a well-constructed argument.

    Given that a “random thought of the moment” appears on your site which reads, “Vote Republican — it’s easier than thinking,” I’m gonna take that boast of intellectual fairness (along with your earlier claim to be a “fan of neither the Right nor the Left”) with a large grain of salt.

    If I seem to take a jaundiced view of the Right, it’s because I’m tired of orthodox/traditional/conservative Christian being synonymous with Republican.

    See above: Tendentious would seem to be a more apt description than jaundiced, but that’s purely deductive speculation on my part.

    You may be tired of the synonymous relationship Republicans and “orthodox” Christians, but it’s a seemingly inarguable fact of life in America today: Poll upon poll consistently reveals that those whom actively practice their faith (regular Churchgoers, scripture readers, etc.) are overwhelmingly inclined to identify themselves as Republicans. Conversely, nominal or non-practicing Christians and other peoples of faith, as well as agnostics and atheists overwhelmingly identify themselves with Democrats.

    Facts is facts and demographics is demographics. Appealling to the prevailing Christian Right demographic is just plain smart business. If traditional Christians were Lefties, Christian-themed talk radio would likewise be slanted toward the Dems.

    Christians should support or oppose policies, not parties.

    Hard to disagree with that sentiment. But as a practical matter, of course, it’s a bit of a false dichotomy. Policies are put before the voters by parties, most notably in their respective platforms.

    It’s also not terribly realistic for Christian voters to parse out the policies from the party or from a candidate. After all, how does a good Catholic, for example, vote for virtually any modern Democrat without violating the Church’s clear teaching against voting for a pro-abortion politician in lieu of “proportianate reasons” (keeping in mind that national security, the war in Iraq, Social Security, or taxes, taken singly or in any combination don’t add up to proportinate reason).

    Forgive the long response. I went to write something brief and it turned out not so brief.

    Yours in Christ,

    Aaron

  8. Funky Dung

    Given that a “random thought of the moment” appears on your site
    which reads, “Vote Republican — it’s easier than thinking,” I’m
    gonna take that boast of intellectual fairness (along with your
    earlier claim to be a “fan of neither the Right nor the Left”) with a
    large grain of salt.

    For the record, another random thought reads “Vote Democrat — it’s eaier than thinking”. Perhaps I should combine the two into “Vote Republicrat — it’s easier than thinking” and end any confusion.

    BTW, I regularly practice my faith – attend mass almost daily, participate in bible studies and faith discussion groups – and I voted for neither Tweedle Dumb nor Tweedle Dumber in the last two (farsical) presidential elections.

  9. Funky Dung

    “Questions of taxation have an inherently moral component, most particularly with regards to justice. Likewise, virtually all government expenditures invoke explicit or implicit questions of morality. And any questions of morality and justice quite naturally and plainly intersect with God, the ultimate author and arbiter of justice and morality. Hence, the relation to Christianity appears evident.”

    Well, humor the unlearned masses and explain the relation between taxation and morality. We’re discussing a talk show, so lets *gasp* talk about the questions of morality and justice that are brought up in connection with issues. Presenting them as unchallengable fact is ridiculous. If an issue brings up questions, ask them on the air. Start a discussion. If someone’s views (Left or Right) are so unassailably correct, the failure of opponents to argue convincingly will make that apparent (or at least plausible). I really doubt I’m the only orthodox Christian not in love with one party or the other, so apparently the correctness of Bowyer’s positions, for instance, isn’t so obvious.

  10. AHerald

    Well, humor the unlearned masses and explain the relation between taxation and morality. We’re discussing a talk show, so lets *gasp* talk about the questions of morality and justice that are brought up in connection with issues.

    I’m a card-carrying member of the unlearned masses (a Wal-Mart shopping, college-dropout blue collar rube) if ever there was one. And if someone like myself doesn’t need babysitting remedial education from a talk show host to explain to me why and how issues of tax policy–or virtually any government policy, federal, state or local, for that matter–relate to Christian life, it’s hard to see why an intelligent, Catholic-who-attends mass-almost-daily-participates-in-bible -studies-and-faith-discussion-groups-spouting-opinions-on-everything-blogger needs to have the pictures and lines colored in for him in order to make the the same connection.

    Back to where we started: You could have simply criticized the political content of the show, which for you lacked a Christian context. But you didn’t, instead you took snarky little partisan shots at Republicans and their ideas, while at the same time implicitly criticizing the display of partisanship of the show and his host. Bully to you for not voting for either prez candidate (I’m inferring that means you don’t vote for pro-aborts). But whether or not you voted for any member of any party is irrelevant–what you did evidenced your own brand of partisanship, which is not a word which exclusively applies to mere adherence the ideas of political parties.

    Your words betray you as a partisan. But you don’t have the courage to admit as much and confess that what really frosts you is not that they’re talking politics sans Christianity on Bowyer’s show, but that they’re talking Republican politics.

  11. Funky Dung

    If I could make this show up in big neon letters I would:

    I hate when Republican policies are presented as synonymous with the Gospel without any attempt to defend that connection with either scripture or Church tradition.

    HOWEVER: That’s a side issue and a red herring. You are absolutely correct that I muddied things up by expressing my own policial leanings in this particular post. What I meant to convey was that a loyal listener to the show very much disagreed with the aforementioned connection and perhaps there might be more like me.

    “I’m a card-carrying member of the unlearned masses (a Wal-Mart shopping, college-dropout blue collar rube) if ever there was one. And if someone like myself doesn’t need babysitting remedial education from a talk show host to explain to me why and how issues of tax policy–or virtually any government policy, federal, state or local, for that matter–relate to Christian life, it’s hard to see why an intelligent, Catholic-who-attends mass-almost-daily-participates-in-bible -studies-and-faith-discussion-groups-spouting- opinions-on-everything-blogger needs to have the pictures and lines colored in for him in order to make the the same connection.”

    Well cookie for you, pal. Ever think that I might have been concerned for more than myself? There are thousands of people listening to Jerry’s show daily. How many of them could draw the lines and color the pictures in? Again, because of my political and theological beliefs, the connection between Republicanism and Christianity is not only not obvious, it is counterintuitive. Thus, I – and I’d guess a large section of overwhelmingly Democrat Pittsburgh – would like to be humored with at least a defense of such a connection. Even better would be a chance to discuss the issue on air.

    “Your words betray you as a partisan. But you don’t have the courage to admit as much and confess that what really frosts you is not that they’re talking politics sans Christianity on Bowyer’s show, but that they’re talking Republican politics.”

    Am I “frosted” by Republican politics unapologetically spouted on a Christian station? Yes. Is that the biggest reason I’m “frosted”? NO. I’d be just as tweaked if Penn Gillette, Bill Mahr, or Al Franken attempted to treat Democractic policies as natural extensions Christian doctrine. I think I’ve said that every way I can without resorting to foreign languages. To drive the point home:

    Show me a Christian radio host spewing Democratic propaganda as though Christ Himself taught it and I’ll be happy to get duly frosted for you. K?

  12. Pingback: Ales Rarus - A Rare Bird, A Strange Duck, One Funky Blog » Taking Stock

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *