Brit Hume’s Tiger Woods remarks…

   FILE - This undated photo provided by Fox News shows news analyst Brit Hume. When Hume suggested Sunday Jan. 3, 2010 that Tiger Woods _ a Buddhist _ turn to Jesus to deal with his sins, Hume showed little knowledge about the 2,500-year-old Eastern faith. Hume's remarks rankled many American Buddhists.  Need some thoughtful response to Brit Hume’s expressions of concern for Tiger Woods? Something more than typical knee-jerk reactions? Michael Gerson’s column in The Washington Post, (Brit Hume’s Tiger Woods remarks shine light on true intolerance, 1-8-2010), is the place to go.

“Attacking Christian religious exclusivity is to attack nearly every vital religious tradition. It is not a scandal to believers that others hold differing beliefs. It is only a scandal to those offended by all belief.” (Gerson)

“True tolerance consists in engaging deep disagreements respectfully — through persuasion — not in banning certain categories of argument and belief from public debate” (Gerson).

For Hume’s comments:

To read Gerson’s column:

My letter to the editor in response:

Michael Gerson’s piece, Brit Hume’s Tiger Woods remarks shine light on true intolerance, 1-8-2010, was brilliant! Nice to see it on the left side of the editorial section. Critics of Brit Hume’s comments about faith in Jesus Christ probably consider themselves to be open-minded. But, as Gerson masterfully displays, they actually foreclose on the very open-mindedness they profess. And the plot thickens as their fierce intolerance of Hume’s thoughtful expression is offered in the name of tolerance. The fundamentalistic dogmatism belongs not to Hume, but to the angry tirades against him for sharing his faith.

Steve Cornell
senior pastor
Millersville Bible Church
58 West Frederick Street
Millersville, PA. 17551

About Wisdomforlife

Just another worker in God's field.
This entry was posted in Brit Hume, Christianity, Criticism, Culture, Discernment, Evangelism, Fear of religion, Fox News, Michael Gerson, Tiger Woods, Tolerance, Washington Post, Witness, Worldview. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Brit Hume’s Tiger Woods remarks…

  1. Jean Lintner says:

    It was so refreshing to hear the name of Jesus Christ used in such a wonderful way. Praise God there are some Christian people in the media.

  2. JohnC says:

    Gerson misses the point on why people are upset with Hume’s comments. I don’t care what Hume’s beliefs are, and I couldn’t care less if he wishes to convert other people. That’s not the point. I also don’t care who he wants to convert. What bothers me is that he and his apologists seem to think a serious network news show, which by interviewing public officials serves something of a public purpose, is the proper place for such behavior. I also think Hume’s supporters are practicing situational ethics. Had Hume argued Woods should convert to Islam or become an atheist, these same people who proclaim free speech and tolerance would be demanding he be fired.

    • thinkpoint says:

      Here too is a problem that reflects cultural assumptions and arrogance (albeit unintentional in some cases). Why is discourse that includes reference to faith deemed unacceptable in certain places? Who gets to decide such things? On what basis? I doubt their would be as much fury over Islam and atheism as you suggest. These faiths have had their moments in the news. I don’t think they receive the same arrogant condescending ridicule that has been aimed at Hume.

      As Gerson wrote: “True tolerance consists in engaging deep disagreements respectfully — through persuasion — not in banning certain categories of argument and belief from public debate.”

      • JohnV says:

        @thinkpoint. . . Well said.
        JohnC, your generalizations and predictions about the converse situation might indeed raise objections (there’s always someone to object). And some of those objections may not reflect the best of social conservative philosophy but I suspect (and this would be so in my case at least) the greatest weight of the objections would be centered upon the inequity in which comments on Christianity and Islam (for example) are received, not the right or freedom of the commentator to make such a statement. The latest illustration of PC inequities would be the attention and political consequences given to Harry Reid’s quasi-racial quips compared to the media and political crucifixtion of Trent Lott a few years ago.
        The challenge of these discussions is to remain focused upon substance rather than form, and to approach them with objective openness rather than emotional defensivism.

  3. Michael Gerson says:

    Steve, thanks for you kind mention. I received a lot of good reaction to this one.

  4. That was the best message that Tiger needs and I pray that he obeys it. Christ came not to condemn but to save sinners who are willing to obey. We all need that message. May God bless My Hume for not being ashamed of the gospel and the saving power of the cross of Jesus Christ.

    I like what Mr Hume said, ‘I don’t like to practice a faith that I’m afraid to proclaim’.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s