For Glenn Beck, his own Cross of Gold
posted at 7:10 pm on September 5, 2010 by Patrick Ishmael
Standing before the Democratic National Convention in 1896, William Jennings Bryan delivered what would be the most important speech of his life. For years he’d argued that American farmers were being crushed by debt due to the country’s inflation-busting, de facto gold standard. A bimetallic standard that included silver, he bellowed, would provide the necessary monetary growth needed to make rural debt repayments easier. Like most of Bryan’s speeches, the religious overtones were inescapable, but unlike most of his speeches, this one would endure.
“Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the world, supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests and the toilers everywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”
When he concluded,
…Bryan stretched out his arms in a Christ-like manner for five seconds, while the crowd remained quiet. According to the New York World, at that point everyone seemed to go mad at once and shrieked and rushed the stage. The New York Times commented that “a wild, raging irresistible mob” had been unleashed.
Bryan would go on to take the Democratic nomination for President.
Whatever you might think of William Jennings Bryan’s progressive politics — and I’m sure Glenn Beck would be hesitant to invite a comparison — there’s no doubt that a common element between the perennial Presidential candidate and Beck, his latter-day conservative counterpart, exists: the populist joining of religion and politics in a period of economic anxiety. For Bryan, the seemingly inescapable clutches of rural debt pushed a national conversation about the basis of our monetary policy; for Beck, the seemingly inescapable clutches of public debt is pushing a national conversation about the basis of our fiscal policy.
And in both cases, religion plays an important role in explaining their central figures’ rhetorical appeals. Bryan was a fervent Presbyterian congregant whose opponents described as a religious fanatic surrounded by left-wing anarchists. Beck is a fervent Mormon convert whose opponents describe as a religious fanatic surrounded by… right-wing radicals.
While sharing the same rhetorical means, Bryan and Beck starkly diverge on their policy objectives. Long gone is the Cross of Gold, whose investment as a valuable metal Beck advertises daily. Beck sees America as facing what amounts to a Cross of Debt, a national albatross weighing on the futures of his children and all of our children. Inflation is the problem, not the solution, and year after year of profligate Congresses only makes the devaluation of the American dollar all the more an acute problem.
Beck’s Restoring Honor rally was stunningly (and unexpectedly) apolitical in its tone, but its religious principles no doubt advance the ball for restoring fiscal order to our federal government, among other responsibility-related causes. And his message is entirely consistent with another closely related movement. Many causes are subsumed into the Tea Party coalition, but fundamentally they boil down to this: the retrieval of national greatness through the resurrection of personal responsibility as an ennobling and socially important value. To Tea Partiers, the power of faith — whether in ourselves, in an infinite power from which men and women draw strength, or both — is what will bring our country, and ourselves, Home.
In fact, that Christian revivalism is re-entering the public square through the person of Beck should fascinate everyone. Bryan’s Presbyterianism had long been considered within the mainstream of American religion, yet, Beck’s Mormonism has not always been so accepted, as at least one Presidential candidate appreciated. Who would have predicted two years ago that one of the most powerful Christian leaders in the country — a role that is secondary, I might add, to Beck’s role as a pundit — would be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints? To recall one of the more favorite call-backs around Hot Air, you know who that benefits? I think you do.
How Beck’s Restoring Honor rally will be interpreted by history, only time will tell, but Beck’s political and religious imprint on the American landscape, at least for the near term, seems undeniable. Beck doesn’t seem to have any illusions about his own role in the larger movement in which he’s a part; indeed, Bryan’s failure as a candidate did not negate the very real power that he commanded during the latter part of the 19th century and early part of the 20th, and Beck seems to understand that he can be more useful outside of elected office than by trying to get into it.
I have no desire to be president of the United States. Zero desire. I don’t think that I would be electable. And there are far too many people that are far smarter than me to be president. I’d like to find one with some honor and integrity. I haven’t seen them yet, but they’ll show up.
Of course, only we can answer those prayers.
—–
Oh, and another thing: I’m on Twitter.
This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
oh yeah and Isaiah 9:6
9:6 For a child has been born to us, a son has been given to us. He shoulders responsibility and is called: Extraordinary Strategist, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
right4life on September 6, 2010 at 11:28 PM
Psalm 110
Of David. A psalm.
1 The LORD says to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet.”
Isaiah 7:14 (New International Version)
14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you [a] a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and [b] will call him Immanuel. [c]
Isaiah 6:8
I heard the voice of the sovereign master say, “Whom will I send? Who will go on our behalf?” 1 I answered, “Here I am, send me!”
right4life on September 6, 2010 at 11:32 PM
Furthermore the pagan gods were often at cross-purposes with one another: if you worshiped one god instead of another god, you might provoke that other god to wrath.
However, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are working toward one goal: they don’t contradict each other, they don’t work at cross-purposes with one another, and they don’t make themselves available for separate worship.
That is one way to interpret the “oneness” statements. Your way is another way.
Jesus saves the repentant, regardless of their theology.
Or was Glenn saved from his alcoholism by the devil?
dicentra63 on September 6, 2010 at 11:33 PM
We’re polytheists, I guess, just not in the same sense as the pagans were.
Strange that you would quote “let US make man in our image,” because we claim that as evidence that God consists of more than one being.
Jesus of Nazareth, son of God and Mary, Yeshua bar Yusef, Redeemer of Mankind and the only name given whereby man can be saved.
That’s the only one there is and the only one who can save.
We’re not getting anywhere, it would appear. You’re still in the stage of your spiritual maturity where it’s important to define some people as GOING TO HELL so that you can feel secure in your place.
Someday, I hope you open your heart to the possibility that God answers everyone’s prayers, even Mormon’s prayers, and that faith in Jesus does not require adherence to a particular theology.
Good night and God bless.
dicentra63 on September 6, 2010 at 11:40 PM
Jesus didn’t save Glenn, unless indirectly. His last words to His disciples were ‘the next time you see me I’ll be coming in judgment’ (that, and ‘go forth the preach the gospel’).
We’re pretty much left to our own devices for the time being. Glenn’s faith was strong enough to help him through his troubled times, but as far as a direct zazap! intervention, my guess is, no.
Serr8d on September 6, 2010 at 11:44 PM
really? so does the muslim jesus save?
this after you claim the OT has no support for the trinity?? we don’t think we’ll become gods with celestial families.
oh yes I’m so glad you’re so much more mature…with your church defining people like me as apostate….right…
you can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig.
oh and I never said you’re GOING TO HELL…but apparently you have to lie and set up straw men to feel better about yourself.
right4life on September 7, 2010 at 8:13 AM
Quoting Bruce R. McConkie’s book, Mormon Doctrine, is NOT official LDS Doctrine of the Church nor will it ever be.
Conservative Samizdat on September 7, 2010 at 11:56 AM
One God, showing Himself in 3 different ways. Still one God. Jesus claimed to be God, which is why the religious leaders of that culture put wanted to crucify Him. You have to decide whether Jesus was crazy, lying about Who He is/was, or if He is really Who He claimed to be (God).
scottjenn on September 7, 2010 at 12:01 PM
So, when Jesus praying to God, he was praying to himself?
When Jesus says that God is greater then Himself, (John 14:28) isn’t he implying that there is another person who is higher in power than himself?
When Jesus says, that there is no one good except God himself, Jesus was clearly denying that he didn’t deserve to be called good in Luke 18:19. Clearly, Jesus wasn’t talking about himself but another person who was good.
Moreover, Jesus states that he doesn’t give honor to himself but that God, another person, gives honor to Jesus in John 8:54.
Clearly, from Jesus’ own mouth, he states that God is a distinct person from himself.
Conservative Samizdat on September 7, 2010 at 12:58 PM
no praying to the Father.
no, He is saying God the Father is first among equals.
another person in the oneness of the trinity…there is one God, in 3 persons.
John 10
30I and the Father are one.”
31Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, 32but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
33″We are not stoning you for any of these,” replied the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
Jesus is God.
right4life on September 7, 2010 at 1:53 PM
John 14:
[9] Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, `Show us the Father’?
what do you make of this one? hmmmm??
right4life on September 7, 2010 at 1:55 PM
Perhaps because Jesus looks exactly like God does the same way that Seth looked like his father Adam. (see Genesis 5:3)
In fact, if you met me, and then you met my Dad, you would see that we look almost exactly alike. In essence, if you met me, you’ve essentially met my Dad as well since we’re almost the same in appearance and looks.
So, when Jesus says, you’ve seen Me, you’ve seen the Father…that’s what he’s saying.
Conservative Samizdat on September 7, 2010 at 3:22 PM
Wow… How does one respond to that sort of ‘claim’? Honestly, it seems that you believe Jesus was either a liar or a moron? How else can this ‘claim’ be explained? Have you even read the early Church Fathers? How many were martyred for the Faith after Peter? Wow…
But your church claims that Jesus established His Church and did such a poor job selecting the men to teach His Word, or the Holy Spirit was not really with them enough as He promised, that it fell to pieces before His chosen Apostles were even gone from the earth, and it took almost two thousand years for Him to find someone else worthy to restore the priesthood? And this person was Joseph Smith? A sixteen year old boy? A future polygamist with many, including a 14 year old, ‘wives’? A gold digger (literally) who used a ‘seer stone’ to find things and later to translate the ‘golden plates’ that conveniently went back up into heaven? Really?
If a ‘prophet’ teaches a gospel other than the one taught by the Apostles, the ones who were given the commission to preach The True Gospel, by Jesus, then he is a false prophet. Your founding ‘prophet’ preached and practiced polygamy. That is a different gospel. This isn’t from some book written about LDS, it is from LDS scripture.
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.
64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.
65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take Hagar to wife.
Wow…and people erroneously say the Catholic Church is misogynistic? Please note that according to Sacred Scripture, it was Sarai who told Abram to take Agar, not God. (another contradiction) Only after Agar had become pregnant did the angel of the Lord come to her and tell her of God’s promise to multiply her seed exceedingly, through Ismael, but also that “He shall be a wild man: his hand will be against all men, and all men’s hands against him: and he shall pitch his tents over against all his brethren.” Genesis 16:12 It is through Sara’s son, the son of Abraham’s lawful wife (which God points out twice when speaking to Abraham saying ‘Sarai, thy wife’…), that God fulfils the Covenant with Abraham. Genesis 17:15-22 LDS ‘scripture’ contradicts Genesis. It is a false doctrine.
As is your claim about the doctrine of the Trinity…Again, as I pointed out in my previous post, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” – 1 John 5:7
That’s pretty clear cut and isn’t from a late council, it is from Sacred Scripture. That God and the other Persons of the Trinity are not separate entities is also revealed in Genesis, when God uses the word ‘us’ to refer to Himself. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: In Genesis 18 we are told ‘The Lord’ appeared to Abraham, but he sees ‘Three Men’ and yet he speaks to ‘The Lord’. He feeds ‘The Lord’ yet it is ‘Three’… As right4life points out, Jesus says in John 10:30 I and the Father are one.
And in Hebrews, God addresses the Son as God. How can that be, since God has already said He is the only God?
But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: They shall perish; but thou remainest; …- Hebrews 1:1-14
God is One God, in Three Persons…The Holy Trinity. Any other gospel is false.
One true thing Joseph Smith did write in his ‘scripture’ was this: 8 Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion.
Sadly, what the LDS church preaches breeds confusion. It is a great heresy. It divides the followers of Christ and leads them away from the Church founded by Christ, which He promised to protect from the Gates of Hell. He did not bury the true Church in the ground in NY for 1800 years. He never ‘shut the Heavens’ to His Church.
And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. Matthew 28:18-20
pannw on September 7, 2010 at 3:24 PM
Interesting thread. Thank you all for the education.
elfman on September 8, 2010 at 9:54 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3