Doonesbury Say What?

[thewayne]

"This guy isn't a serious Christian. He's a devoted New York Times reader, and he's an extremely well-read guy."
— Mark Steyn on Anders Breivik

HUH? Christianity is based on self-identifying as a follower of Christ's teachings and performing certain rituals. So I guess Steyn's standard is that a literary and well-educated person can't be a Christian? Christianity requires self-imposed ignorance? Looking at Steyn's bio page on Wikipedia, his political views on Eurabia seem to converge nicely with what Breivik was claiming was going to happen. Maybe he's disappointed that Breivik didn't score a higher body count and didn't kill any actual Muslims.

Comments

[vaudy.livejournal.com]

That's okay, seems Steyn comes from a Catholic/Anglican background, which according to my Baptist relatives, isn't really Christian, either. Something I never could wrap my head around.

[thewayne.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I found that Catholic/Anglican thing kind of curious: Papist and Anti-Papist, all in one convenient package! Considering the Protestant Reformation was to renounce the Mouth of God status of the Pope, and the Anglicans/C of E were founded for the same reason, you'd think they'd still be Christian.

From what I can see, Steyn has no formal college education, so I guess he's fully qualified to revel in ignorance. How he's been able to perpetuate a career in 'journalism' becomes an interesting question.

[silveradept]

Since when does reading a paper count as not being Christian? One would think there has to be some apostasy involved... or perhaps, he could say "Because the dude killed people, he's no Christian" - although there's lots of documentation that the very best Christians are the ones that kill lots...