black@nisysg.DEC (03/01/85)
I always thought that religious organizations were supposed to
preach peace on earth and goodwill to Man. I found a little news
item that disturbs me quite a bit, and I thought the net might
appreciate it for further thought or clarification.
"If you're one of the millions of Americans who fills
church collection plates, you might want to check if your
denomination and congregation contributes to the World
Council of Churches (WCC). According to the Catholic
Defense League of South Africa, the WCC through its
Program to Combat Racism gave nearly $200,000 to anti-
South-African terrorist groups, including over $75,000
to the Southwest African Peoples' Organization (SWAPO)."
("Soldier of Fortune," April 1985, p. 102; Omega Group Ltd.,
Boulder, CO)
I don't understand why a supposedly Christian organization is
giving support to an Antichrist organization. There's an old axiom
that says anything that walks lie a duck, talks like a duck, lays
ducks' eggs, and hangs around with other ducks, must probably be
some kind of a duck. If this news item has any veracity, then it
would appear that the WCC is not in fact an ecclesiastic organization,
but rather a front for the collection of funds to support the
international Communist conspiracy. (Note to US readers: the US
affiliate of the WCC is the National Council of Churches.)
Have a good weekend.
Don Black
Path: ...decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-nisysg!black
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Professor Wagstaff) (03/03/85)
> "If you're one of the millions of Americans who fills > church collection plates, you might want to check if your > denomination and congregation contributes to the World > Council of Churches (WCC). According to the Catholic > Defense League of South Africa, the WCC through its > Program to Combat Racism gave nearly $200,000 to anti- > South-African terrorist groups, including over $75,000 > to the Southwest African Peoples' Organization (SWAPO)." > > ("Soldier of Fortune," April 1985, p. 102; Omega Group Ltd., > Boulder, CO) > > I don't understand why a supposedly Christian organization is > giving support to an Antichrist organization. There's an old axiom > that says anything that walks lie a duck, talks like a duck, lays > ducks' eggs, and hangs around with other ducks, must probably be > some kind of a duck. If this news item has any veracity, then it > would appear that the WCC is not in fact an ecclesiastic organization, > but rather a front for the collection of funds to support the > international Communist conspiracy. (Note to US readers: the US > affiliate of the WCC is the National Council of Churches.) > Don Black Could you please explain why 1) it is the work of an "Antichrist organization" when racism is combatted? 2) it is a symptom of a world communist conspiracy when racism is combatted? I half expect an answer along the Arndtian terms of "If you don't knwo, you're blind and stupid", but I'd like to see som substantiation for this. -- "It's a lot like life..." Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (03/05/85)
In article <605@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Professor Wagstaff) writes: >> According to the Catholic >> Defense League of South Africa, the WCC through its >> Program to Combat Racism gave nearly $200,000 to anti- >> South-African terrorist groups, including over $75,000 >> to the Southwest African Peoples' Organization (SWAPO)." [Don Black] >> I don't understand why a supposedly Christian organization is >> giving support to an Antichrist organization. There's an old axiom >> that says anything that walks lie a duck, talks like a duck, lays >> ducks' eggs, and hangs around with other ducks, must probably be >> some kind of a duck. If this news item has any veracity, then it >> would appear that the WCC is not in fact an ecclesiastic organization, >> but rather a front for the collection of funds to support the >> international Communist conspiracy. (Note to US readers: the US >> affiliate of the WCC is the National Council of Churches.) >Could you please explain why 1) it is the work of an "Antichrist >organization" when racism is combatted? 2) it is a symptom of a world >communist conspiracy when racism is combatted? I won't attempt to justify answers to these questions as they are stated. Don Black's phraseology rather loads the question, after all. When restated in less emotionally charged language, however, the problem he states is a very real one. The WCC has in fact given money to various overtly communist terrorist groups which beset South Africa, as well as some of her neighbors. These terrorists (or revolutionaries, if you choose) do not conceal their hostility towards christianity, choosing to take money from whoever gives it. Moreover, many american church leaders have questioned the morality of giving support to groups which would prefer to suppress christianity, and which in any case willfully ignore any tenet of christian morality. Rich, I understand your reaction to Don Black's rhetoric; but the problem is real. Would you like to have the U.S. government pay money to have (for instance) Nicaraugua made "safe for Christianity"? Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe
mat@hou4a.UUCP (Mark Terribile) (03/06/85)
>> . . . According to the Catholic >> Defense League of South Africa, the WCC through its >> Program to Combat Racism gave nearly $200,000 to anti- >> South-African terrorist groups, including over $75,000 >> to the Southwest African Peoples' Organization (SWAPO)." >> . . . >> I don't understand why a supposedly Christian organization is >> giving support to an Antichrist organization. There's an old axiom >> that says anything that walks lie a duck, talks like a duck, lays >> ducks' eggs, and hangs around with other ducks, must probably be >> some kind of a duck. If this news item has any veracity, then it >> would appear that the WCC is not in fact an ecclesiastic organization, >> but rather a front for the collection of funds to support the >> international Communist conspiracy. (Note to US readers: the US >> affiliate of the WCC is the National Council of Churches.) >> Don Black > >Could you please explain why 1) it is the work of an "Antichrist organization" >when racism is combatted? 2) it is a symptom of a world communist conspiracy >when racism is combatted? I half expect an answer along the Arndtian terms >of "If you don't knwo, you're blind and stupid", but I'd like to see som >substantiation for this. >"It's a lot like life..." Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr Rich, if you'd stop wagging your staff and LOOK at what you are criticising then maybe ... No, I guess I'll have to explain it. It does not good to use violence to stop racism. In fact, if it weren't for the fact that violence is the only way to resist a war, violence would never be acceptable. (note acceptable, not good) Even on THIS question there is and will continue to be debate. Racism, even South African style, is not the same as war. And terrorism against individuals is not an acceptable way to bring about social change. Why? Because it is an act of hate that channels that hate into harm against particular individuals. It is not self defense, nor is ip (possibly justifiable) anger against a tormentor. It is doing harm to others for the purpose of doing harm, with the bad excuse that somewhere else there is an injustice. That is why terror-based organizations and organizations that seek power only to expand their own control are anti-Christlike. I agree that the term Antichrist leaves one with the feeling that the author expects one of these people to beget Satan. Well, that may be going far, but in using good purpose to excuse their indulgence in violence and harm, these people are working against Jesus and the Spirit. If you cannot see that the Ends do not justify the Means in a world where morality matters, then I can't help you. If you do not accept the fact that morality does matter, then understand that the authors of the article DO. And if your point is that morality is immaterial, then say so and let us go on to other things. Mark Terribile hou4b!mat (please send mail to me on hou4b, not hou4a)
mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (03/08/85)
>>> . . . According to the Catholic >>> Defense League of South Africa, the WCC through its >>> Program to Combat Racism gave nearly $200,000 to anti- >>> South-African terrorist groups, including over $75,000 >>> to the Southwest African Peoples' Organization (SWAPO)." >>> . . . >>> I don't understand why a supposedly Christian organization is >>> giving support to an Antichrist organization. There's an old axiom >>> that says anything that walks lie a duck, talks like a duck, lays >>> ducks' eggs, and hangs around with other ducks, must probably be >>> some kind of a duck. If this news item has any veracity, then it >>> would appear that the WCC is not in fact an ecclesiastic organization, >>> but rather a front for the collection of funds to support the >>> international Communist conspiracy. (Note to US readers: the US >>> affiliate of the WCC is the National Council of Churches.) >>> Don Black > Racism, even South African style, is not the same as war. And >terrorism against individuals is not an acceptable way to bring about >social change. Why? Because it is an act of hate that channels that >hate into harm against particular individuals. It is not self defense, >nor is ip (possibly justifiable) anger against a tormentor. It is doing >harm to others for the purpose of doing harm, with the bad excuse that >somewhere else there is an injustice. > > That is why terror-based organizations and organizations that seek >power only to expand their own control are anti-Christlike. I agree that > Mark Terribile While I agree with most of Mark's comments in principle, the original author was talking about SWAPO, which is not, as I understand it, a terrorist organization. Rather, it has conducted a more military campaign against the illegal S. African hold on S.W. Africa. I don't know to what degree SWAPO is supported by the USSR, and I don't really care. S.Africa holds S.W.Africa contrary to UN resolutions and contrary to the stated policies of most nations. Why support of SWAPO should be equated with either AntiChrist or the international communist conspiracy is beyond me. Isn't this the same Don Black who was so confused that he thought accepting World Court jurisdiction meant US citizens would be subject to foreign laws? I don't see why people bother to respond to his postings; they contain no colour of fact. -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt {uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt