Obama at Georgetown…Symbols of Catholicism Not to be Found
posted at 8:43 am on April 16, 2009 by coldwarrior
When President Obama gave his speech at Georgetown University on Tuesday, something was missing.
According to the Washington Times, “that “something” was an ancient monogram — the letters IHS — that symbolizes the name of Jesus. It was missing from a wooden archway above the dais in Gaston Hall where the president delivered his 45-minute speech.
The gold-lettered monogram appeared near a painting of three female figures — symbolizing morality, faith and patriotism — and decorative edging along the wall that spelled out the Jesuit motto “Ad majorem Dei gloriam”—”To the greater glory of God.” Georgetown was founded by the Jesuits.”
Imagine if Obama were to give a speech at the Islamic Center of Washington, DC. Would members of that community approve the covering of the Shahada?
Not only was this step taken by the White House advance team, Obama himself mangled a parable from the Sermon on the Mount about two houses, one built on sand only to be blown away in a storm, and another built on rock impervious to the swirling winds.
Obama apparently explaining why he wants not only to revive the sagging economy but to completely reinvent it, certainly used the wrong analogy.
What Obama, who is a Christian, fails to realize that what the parable from the Sermon on the Mount meant had to do with spiritual foundations, not physical foundations.
On the one hand, an obvious symbol of Catholicism is covered up, inside the oldest Catholic institute of higher learning in the Nation, while at the same time, a well-known Christian parable is used to make a very sectarian point…and a flimsy one at that.
Not wanting to get into this separation of Church and State, but when it is convenient for a politician to invoke religion, an experienced politician would get it right. Or is that Wright?
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
The reason the White House got away with this concession, is because there was a reasonable assurance that it would be made. Such would never be the case with the covering of a Shahada at an Islamic Center. Muslims would be rightly offended. The ostensibly Catholic Jesuits at Georgetown would have had the right to be offended, but chose not to be, which is consistent with the pattern of Catholic academia for the last forty years.
Is this administration trying to marginalize Catholic influence? The answer would depend on which Catholics are doing the influencing. Apparently there’s no problem with the Jesuits of Georgetown.
manwithblackhat on April 16, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Rush explains it here in his own words.
In my case I was extending the joke to those who remain intentionally oblivious to Obama cleverly using Islamic concepts as the new foundation for society. Not everyone should have been aware that Five Pillars comes from Islam because it’s rarely discussed in the West. The problem is the intentionally oblivious also worship at the altar of political correctness, so that knowledge is not shared with laypeople.
econavenger on April 16, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Obama said there are five parts to his plan (drawn from the Bible). Could he actually have reached back to his muslim faith and been influenced by the Five Pillars of Islam?
scullymj on April 16, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Thanks, now I know.
Jvette on April 16, 2009 at 12:16 PM
We, as Catholics, are no longer the Church “Militant.” We have become the Church “wimp.” And we have become so because we would rather offend God than offend man. The Lord has spoken of this and how He is angry with the religious leaders and that He intended to let them go the way of the lost (and the scandal is proof of that). For those who want to know what He said to the person who was made the first Saint of the 3rd Millennium, here is the story: http://www.greatspiritualbattle.com/greatest20centuryprophet.html It really does explain why we are where we are.
simeon on April 16, 2009 at 12:20 PM
I am amazed Obama used the Five Pillars statement in his speech at Georgetown. There is no way Obama could not be aware of the Islamic inference because that along with the Shahada (there is not god but allah and mohummad is his messenger) are the first two things any child is taught and Obama attended islamic school as well as attended mosque in Indonesia.
This had to be intentional
The covering up of the name of Christ was astounding. When do Presidents require a host to cover up a symbol of their organization? The symbol represents the organization and not the guest
This was a direct rejection of Christianity as an obscenity and a direct move towards islam as the foundation of Obama’s new world
Obama either twisted Christ’s parable to pervert the meaning or he did not understand it.
IMHO when Obma acted to cover the name of Jesus, and when Obama spoke to turn the rock into the Five Pillars, he revealed himself.
This is the value of the parables.
The house built on rock was the house built on Christ, and Peter was declared by Christ to be the Rock on which He would build His church. Did Obama listen and not hear, or did Obama seek to creat a new rock? The Five Pillars. Did Obama seek to steal the Five Pillars or did Obama seek to install the Five Pillars in our beloved nation?
I understand the anti-Christ more and more. The more correct translation of that title is ‘the other Christ’ , Christ being a title (the annointed one) and not a surname
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand Matthew 13:13
Thank you Lord for providing the Word that can reveal a man to all who would see
entagor on April 16, 2009 at 12:34 PM
At The Corner, Kathryn Jean Lopez provides an image and link showing First Lady Laura Bush speaking at GU in 2006. The Christ symbol was not covered for her speech.
Loxodonta on April 16, 2009 at 12:48 PM
AtlasShrugs has details: OBAMA’S FIVE PILLARS OF …………
econavenger on April 16, 2009 at 1:10 PM
The Five Pillars of Islam are treated as obligations by Sunnis. Imagine if Bush had proposed an economic plan and then referred to it as The Ten Commandments of his economic plan? There would be a furor. Yet, I have not seen any concern in the MSM about the religious connotations of Obama’s speech, or even any connection between his use of the Five Pillars term is related to Islam.
I find it interesting that Five Pillars can also refer to a puzzle, that is sometimes called The Devil’s Staircase. A curiously meaningful coincidence.
coldwarrior:
Obama’s expropriation of Christ’s Building on a Rock parable to promote his economic plan is a desacralization of Christ’s teachings. It’s anti-religious.
Even if you strip it of its religious meaning, the parable doesn’t fit his policies. Obama is building a mountain of government programs not on a solid foundation, but on the quicksand of massive debt.
Loxodonta on April 16, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Judica me, Deus, et discerne causam mean de gente non santa.
Judge me God,and sort out my cause from a nation that is not holy.
Fuquay Steve on April 16, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Obama’s house is built on sand.
INC on April 17, 2009 at 11:26 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2