Monday, December 22, 2008

Why Such Agitation Over Rick Warren ?

There has been much complaint coming from American Democrats and others during last week. They don't like our President-elect's choice of Pastor Rick Warren to give the invocation at the inauguration ceremony in January. The unease stems mainly from Pastor Warren's stances on gay marriage, pro-life and his generally conservative leanings. PE Obama has said from the start that he will be inclusive, a President of "all America". He warned his supporters on this long ago, supporters who now, at an early hint that he will keep his word, choose turn on him. This is not loyalty! Don't Liberals understand loyalty? Yes, I know Americans have been let down before by their presidents. We've all, American or not, experienced let-downs in both personal and political spheres. Must we remain forever bitter and paranoid though? If Obama supporters cannot handle this, very minor, eventuality they are in for some serious shocks in the future.

I've only seen Rick Warren once, when he moderated a presidential debate on TV. He came over as a nice enough guy. His stances, as mentioned above, are opposite to my own - but that doesn't make him a bad person ! The issues are open to argument, in both directions. Surely part of the Christian message is tolerance of views different from one's own? Argument and debate can be had at a later date. I admire Obama for what he's doing here. After all Pastor Warren is simply leading a short prayer, he's not dictating policy or advising the president. The person chosen to lead the benediction comes from the other side of the US dichotomy: Reverend Dr. Joseph E. Lowery, a civil rights leader whose stances are more in line with those of PE Obama.

Let's have a quick look at Rick Warren's natal chart. A 12 noon version will have to suffice as I don't know his time of birth. He was born 28 January 1954 in San Jose California. Ha! He's an early Aquarian, like me! And that still doesn't make him a bad person (wink).




Sun and Venus conjoined, with Mercury 10 degrees away - a hearty helping of Aquarian humanitarianism and social concern. At 12 noon Moon was in Scorpio, a late-ish time of birth, after 7pm, would put Moon in Sagittarius, and link to his pull towards religion, but Scorpio moon with its intensity could fit too - in any case there's also Mars and Saturn in Scorpio, dishing out a good dose of passion.

Jupiter in Gemini trines Mercury in Aquarius and Neptune in Libra forming a Grand Trine in Air. This configuration could aid a writer, or as in Pastor Warren's case a direct communicator - Mercury (communication), Jupiter (religion and/or publishing) and Neptune (creativity and mysticism). A helpful circuit in his chosen lifestyle.

Two oddities I'll note here - North Node of the Moon is conjunct Chiron - The Wounded Healer, South Node is just 3 degrees from Uranus. The two Nodes form a sensitive axis, planets conjoining the two points have extra significance. Chiron's reputation as Healer seems very apt for a Pastor, and the Uranus proximity to South Node links to his three Aquarian planets - Uranus being ruler of Aquarius.

Mercury and Pluto are in opposition (Aquarius/Leo), and linked by two squares (90 degree aspects) to Mars in Scorpio (a T-square). This looks to me as though his passionate intensity is challenged at times by a cooler Aquarian pull towards a more logical, less dramatic and emotional approach. He obviously has deeply seated opinions, but I'd guess that even he questions them, and himself, at times. Which, in my book, would make him an honorable man.


Well, there he is! A complex individual, and, as I see it, a man of good intention. The opinions he holds come about via his own unique experiences in life. Those who hold opposite views are not entitled to question or dictate about them. It is to PE Obama's credit that he is open minded enough to appreciate this and refuse to treat people of differing views as pariahs. Haven't we seen enough of divisive cronyism from the outgoing president and his men? Aren't Americans sick to the back teeth of it all? Then why so unwilling to try a different tack with their new president?

10 comments:

R Phoenix said...

Nicely done Twilight. I watched the McCain/Obama debate/discussion that Warren moderated and was pretty impressed. He's a bright guy and I give Obama credit for challenging his charges early on. The grand trine and t-square is pretty formidable.

Things are looking dicey for Emmanuel. When Yahoo! posts an article that highlights his challenges and how connected he was with Blago via the phone, there is likely fire beneath the smoke.

I see him weathering this, but having a much more severe challenge in 2.5 years in normal, linear time, but in 1 to 1.5 years in the new timescale. His next crisis will be of epic proportions.

Wisewebwoman said...

I would disagree with you there, T. And we don't often disagree ;^)
but to exclude perhaps 10% of the families of the US (I'm referring to the GBLT+their families) who are outraged by his choice of this hate-spewing Invisible Cosmic Housekeeper interpreter, does not bode well for other marginalized peoples under his watch.
I think the best choice would have been an aboriginal, First Nations shaman.
XO
WWW

Twilight said...

R. Pheonix - Thanks Robert.

I'll take a look at the tarot cards re Emmanuel after Christmas, see if they have anything dire to say. ;-)

Twilight said...

WWW ~~~ No, not often. :-)

I don't see that anyone is being excluded here though. There are two "men of God" involved, one from each side of the great divide.

Perhaps I've missed something on Warren, but I really don't see him as hate-spewing.

Ideally, as I see it, there'd be no 'men of God" involved in this political bunfight at all - but this is how things are and how we have to accept them. Yes, Native American input would have been great - now if anybody is excluded in all this it's that minority group, whose land this was. :-(

R Phoenix said...

My first introduction to Christianity in this lifetime occurred when I was four and being walked into Sunday schiil. The big doors of the church swung open. I was hit by swelling waves of organ music at the same time I was struck the illuminated image of a man on a cross, streaming at me through the stained glass window.

I cried and refused to enter.

From that moment forward, it informed my feeling about church to a very large degree. I was anti-church and to this day, I have real issues with organized religion in general, but I can also dispassionately view what I believe is a blanket assault on Christian values, so that someone like Warren getas viewed as "hate spewing" simply by association.

While Warren may not agree with Obama on the stance of same sex marriage, it is within his purview as an American, gifted by the last shards of the constitution to hold such a view.

if it is not expressed in a disrespectful manner, then dialog should be the most potent force that we can embrace to understand one anothers viewpoint. For many the breach may be too wide, exclusionary and reactive, but it's an important discussion to have.

As far as Obama bringing Warren in for this. It's cagey and symbolic, showing that he wants a more centrist scope.

A calculated risk.

Donna said...

Rick Warren was a very poor choice in my opinion also. His church and he have given so many statements about homosexuality, including banning gay people from membership at his church, he is just too controversial. I found this post discussing it more http://www.thelucrativeinvestor.com/rep-barney-frank-isnt-so-happy-about-obama-picking-rick-warren/

Twilight said...

R Phoenix~~~ Robert - We're in agreement on this. I belonged to the Church of England during my early years, taught Sunday School, helped to run a church youth group. I became disenchanted and soured when the vicar forbade me to read the lesson at our local Methodist church on Youth Sunday.
"How can that be Christian ?" I asked myself. Methodists are just the same as all of us, and Catholics, and Jewish people, and all people. I read the lesson then left the church, for good. Perhaps I was too hasty, but that's how I felt, and remain much the same to this day.

In Obama's choice I feel a little of what was absent in that vicar years ago - an inclusiveness, which really is more true to Christianity.

I have issues with gay haters myself. Especially when they try to impose their views on others by removing books which touch on gayness from libraries - or as a would-be Gov. of Oklahoma believes that gay people should be "sent for treatment".
Those things send me into a fury.
Obama's choice doesn't, he is not endorsing any of Warren's views, he is including them as part of the American scene, which they undoubtedly are, like it or not. :-)

Twilight said...

Hello Donna - thanks for the link, and your comment.

I try to understand why people feel so passionately about this, but I just can't see it in the same light as they seem to.

We all have our right to our own opinions, and they'll all be very different, that's for sure. It's interesting to read what others think, and to try to understand.

For me this seems like a storm in a teacup, but to others it's a personal affront. That's life!

anthonynorth said...

Well, when you go for a broad church, you have much discontent. And it will take some monumental diplomacy to keep it together. Hopefully he can do it.

Twilight said...

AN ~~~ Yes, I hope so. It's good that he's starting as he means to go on. :-)