Ancient forms

The reviewer of Gothic Arches, Latin Crosses: Anti-Catholicism and American Church Designs, describes how ancient forms became a part of American Protestant architecture:

Protestant appropriation of Roman Catholic forms occurred in an America rife with Protestant anti-Catholic bigotry. When Catholic Europeans began immigrating in large numbers in the 1840s, the charge was reiterated that they were superstitious, dangerous, and inassimilable. It is only against this background that one can appreciate the irony of not only the Episcopal Church but the Methodist, Presbyterian, Congregationalist, and even Baptist churches adopting the forms and usages of an otherwise abominated popery. What motivated them to borrow so from their idolatrous neighbors?

The sheer number of those neighbors gave them a kind of irresistibility....In 1853, the General Convention of the Congregationalist Church formally approved the use of crosses for their churches by arguing that "There is no good reason why every little chapel of the Mother of Harlots should be allowed to use what appeals so forcibly and so favorably to the simplest understanding, and we be forbidden the manifest advantage which its use would often give us."....

Second, the Gothic Revival took hold..... gables, pointed arches, and vaulted roofs became all the rage....

In the Gothic style Protestants saw an ideal not only of piety but of refinement, and they were determined to make it their own.

The pictures are of the Milton Seventh Day Baptist Church. The first, of the interior, was taken about 1968. The second is more recent. The church building went up at great financial sacrifice during the Great Depression after the previous structure burned one cold Wisconsin Sabbath morning. Obviously the congregation knew what they wanted their new church to look like.

Source: Cross-Purposes - Books & Culture

The authority of Scripture

In a Washington Post article about one of the Episcopal churches that voted to separate, the writer attempted to explain that one issue was about whether "there can be more than one way to interpret scripture." This inspired Cranach to write:

... is the issue really different ways of interpreting Scripture? How many ways can one interpret the Biblical command not to "lie with a man as with a woman," a formulation that is almost embarrassingly explicit? One can believe in this teaching. Or one can refuse to believe in this teaching. But how many ways can that really be "interpreted"? More importantly, if Jesus's resurrection is just a "story," rather than history, we are, as St. Paul says, without hope and Christianity is simply untrue and churches should just disband.

Source: Cranach -- The blog of Gene Edward Veith

Pride

At Between Two Worlds there is a link to this observation at Reformation21 about Christians engaged in self-promotion.

How do we attract others to what we have that is good without drawing attention to ourselves rather than to Christ? To describe ourselves in any sense as the greatest, the soundest, the most faithful or, most self-defeating of all, the most humble, is surely to rob ourselves of the very thing we should have in this world and culture: the prophetic voice, the voice of the cross, the voice that exposes the values of this world by bringing them into collision with those of God's world, the world of the kingdom that is not of this world. In promoting ourselves, we too often give up the spirit of Christ for the spirit of this age.

We can be Emergent and puff ourselves as the church's most trendy and influential thinkers; we can be Reformed and puff ourselves as the world's greatest and most eloquent preachers; we can be confessional and puff ourselves as the soundest and most theological church leaders around; but in doing so, indeed, in the very moment we do so, we can be sure of only one thing: we are not what we claim to be; rather, we are in fact the very opposite.

Source: Reformation21 » What is a prophetic voice?

"God's omnipotence and Man's freedom"

Mark Dever has been reading the newly published, Collected Letters of C.S. Lewis, Volume 3. He found this comment about Calvinism:

I take it as a first principle that we must not interpret any one part of Scripture so that it contradicts other parts .... The real inter-relation between God's omnipotence and Man's freedom is something we can't find out. Looking at the Sheep & the Goats every man can be quite sure that every kind act he does will be accepted by Christ. Yet, equally, we all do feel sure that all the good in us comes from Grace. We have to leave it at that. I find the best plan is to take the Calvinist view of my own virtues and other people's vices; and the other view of my own vices and other peoples virtues. But tho' there is much to be puzzled about, there is nothing to be worried about. It is plain from Scripture that, in whatever sense the Pauline doctrine is true, it is not true in any sense which excludes its (apparent) opposite. You know what Luther said: 'Do you doubt if you are chosen? Then say your prayers and you may conclude that you are.'" (pp.354-355).

Source: Together for the Gospel

Diversity

GetReligion, which is a blog about reporters, their stories, and whether they "get religion" or are clueless about it, writes about an article in the Washington Post.

The story is about Danny Leydorf who attended a Christian school in Annapolis since he was in kindergarten. For college he selected the University of Maryland, a secular state school in an effort to “test his faith in a more diverse world.” This, as the article nicely outlines, is a growing trend among kids raised in Christian educational environments. For the last 30 years, kids coming out of Christian high schools were directed towards Christian colleges or the mission field and even today there remains hesitancy.

After reading the through the first five paragraphs of the article, one does not have to wonder why Christians are hesitating or are nervous:

“I feel like I exist to be interacting,” the lanky, towheaded 19-year-old said eagerly one day last summer, shortly after his graduation, “and part of that is just getting out there.”

So he’d deliberately picked a large, secular college: the University of Maryland. But the week before he was to leave, the wider world dealt him a blow.

“I hate evangelical Christians,” read the Facebook.com profile of his roommate-to-be, who had seemed so perfect on the phone. He loved politics and “The Simpsons,” like Leydorf, and they even had the same views about how to set up the room. Could it still work?

We later learn that Leydorf decided to ignore the Facebook comment, concluding that the unnamed roommate was using “evangelical” to describe people like “Jerry Falwell whom Leydorf considers intolerant.” (I guess it just depends on how you define “evangelical,” right?)

College kids are not exactly known for their discretion and this is true especially for freshmen. ...

But that doesn’t mean that the Post should simply ignore the irony that Leydorf, raised in a Christian school and is seeking to learn to live in “a more diverse world,” is facing the hate of the real world before he even steps on campus. Perhaps Leydorf’s roommate will learn a thing or two from his new Christian evangelical friend who seems as willing as anyone to embrace diverse environments.

Source: Get Religion - Hate in a story about embracing diversity

BJC Packet

Reviewing the packet sent out by the SDB Center on the BJC issue: arguments by both sides are represented, but there seems to be a certain quantitative disproportion. The pro-BJC side has considerably more space. Starting with the "Hot Button" Issues pages [which justify the BJC position in all but one instance], the pro-BJC position occupies sixteen pages, while those opposed to the BJC are given only seven [and that includes three taken from this blog - which would have been revised if their inclusion had been anticipated]. Three pages are neutral.

The attention to this blog is flattering. The only other advocate for disaffiliation musters a very strong case - but we're it, for that side. On the pro-BJC side there are three "opinions" from "SDB Members," a resolution from the BJC, our representative's testimony to his positive experience with the BJC, and the aforesaid "Hot Button" pages. That's better than two-to-one, but no doubt necessary given the strength of our arguments.

I'll have further comment on those arguments as I continue to review the document.

The end of abortion

Kathryn Jean Lopez believes that this technology will be the end of abortion:

Link: 4D imaging will be the end of abortion

"Creation or Evolution? Yes!"

The creation/evolution debate obsesses some and is a stumbling block for others. Many feel that questioning "Creationism" discredits the authority of Scripture. Every Christian affirms that God is Creator. The question of how He did it invariably arises when a non-Christian is testing the conviction of a Christian - or finding an excuse not to believe. A non-"Creationist" Christian explains how he reconciles science and faith:

Francis S. Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, reconciles his Christian faith with scientific theory, including evolution, in The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (Free Press, 2006). Stan Guthrie, CT's senior associate editor, interviewed Collins.

How does evolution fit with your Christian faith?

[Evolution] may seem to us like a slow, inefficient, and even random process, but to God - who's not limited by space or time - it all came together in the blink of an eye. And for us who have been given the gift of intelligence and the ability to appreciate the wonders of the natural world that he created, to have now learned about this evolutionary creative process is a source of awe and wonder. I find these discoveries are completely compatible with everything I know about God through the Scriptures.

If evolution is true, don't atheists have a point?

No. To simply rule out of order any questions that go beyond the natural world is a circular argument. This leaves out profoundly important spiritual questions, such as why we are here, if there is a God, and what happens after we die. Those are questions that science is not really designed to answer. You have to look in another place, using another kind of approach. And for me that's faith. [more]

Source: Creation or Evolution? Yes! | Christianity Today

The Episcopal Church is in big trouble III

Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori gave an interview to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. The entire interview can be found here. An excerpt:

ADG: I want to ask you about a couple of other things you've said in interviews. One of those was in the 10 questions in TIME magazine about the small box that people put God in. Could you elaborate a little bit on your take on "Jesus is the way, the truth and the life" [a paraphrase of John 14:16]?

KJS: I certainly don't disagree with that statement that Jesus is the way and the truth and the life. But the way it's used is as a truth serum, or a touchstone: If you cannot repeat this statement, then you're not a faithful Christian or person of faith. I think Jesus as way - that's certainly what it means to be on a spiritual journey. It means to be in search of relationship with God. We understand Jesus as truth in the sense of being the wholeness of human expression. What does it mean to be wholly and fully and completely a human being? Jesus as life, again, an example of abundant life. We understand him as bringer of abundant life but also as exemplar. What does it mean to be both fully human and fully divine? Here we have the evidence in human form. So I'm impatient with the narrow understanding, but certainly welcoming of the broader understanding.

ADG: What about the rest of that statement -

KJS: The small box?

ADG: Well, the rest of the verse, that no one comes to the Father except by the son.

KJS: Again in its narrow construction, it tends to eliminate other possibilities. In its broader construction, yes, human beings come to relationship with God largely through their experience of holiness in other human beings. Through seeing God at work in other people's lives. In that sense, yes, I will affirm that statement. But not in the narrow sense, that people can only come to relationship with God through consciously believing in Jesus.

Source: Bible Belt Blogger: Presiding Bishop

"The Episcopal Church is in big trouble I," "...II."

SDB Center - BJC packet

The packet of materials on the BJC issue sent out by the SDB Center can be found here as an Acrobat .pdf

Partisan politics and Christianity

From The Inklings. "Jack," of course, is C.S. Lewis. If our religious leaders who are inclined to dabble in politics would show the same self-restraint, it would save a good deal of embarrassment.

Shortly after the election of the new Conservative Government in 1951, Jack received a letter from the Prime Minister's (Winston Churchill) Secretary offering to recommend him for a C.B.E in the New Year Honour's List of 1952. Here is Jack's reply:

14 December 1951

I feel greatly obliged to the Prime Minister, and so far as my personal feelings are concerned this honour would be highly agreeable. There are always however knaves who say, and fools who believe, that my religious writings are all covert anti-Leftish propaganda, and my appearance in the Honours list would of course strengthen their hands. It is therefore better that I should not appear there. I am sure the Prime Minister will understand my reason, and that my gratitude is and will be none the less cordial.

The Inklings: Jack's C.B.E.

"I have a dream..."

"When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the 'unalienable Rights' of 'Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.'"
Martin Luther King, August 28, 1963

Baptist identity: believer's baptism

In a post recommending a new book, Believer's Baptism, Alex Chediak comments:

This issue is of great contemporary importance, as some baptist churches in our day have sought to downplay baptist distinctives. Dr. Albert Mohler's article on theological "triage" is helpful. He distinguishes between first order issues (on which salvation hinges), second order issue (which should determine church or seminary affiliation), and third order issues (which would not prevent Christians from joining together in a covenant community). He characterizes the bodily resurrection of Christ as a first order issue, believers baptism and the ordination of women as a second order issue, and eschatology as a third order issue. Southern Seminary actually dedicated their entire Fall 2005 magazine to Baptist identity, and why it matters.

Source: Alex Chediak Blog: Believer's Baptism - Schreiner and Wright

In an article in that Southern Seminary magazine, Albert Mohler writes about Baptist distinctives:

The first of those principles was regenerate church membership. If there is any one defining mark of Baptists, it is the understanding that membership in the church comes by a personal profession of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. The church is not merely a voluntary association of those who have been born to Christian parents — even Baptist parents — or of those who might have been moistened as infants. Rather, the church is an assembly of those who make a public profession of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and who then gather together in congregations under the covenant of Christ.

The second principle, a derivative of the first, was believer’s baptism, the conviction that baptism is to be administered only upon an individual’s profession of faith. Baptism is not only a symbol, but an act of obedience and entry into the covenant community of the church. To compromise believer’s baptism is therefore to paint a picture of the church that is much distorted.

The third principle was congregational church government. Baptists have made several and various attempts to define exactly what congregational church government should look like. At its root, however, congregationalism affirms that it is the covenanted community that must take responsibility for the ordering of the church, for the preaching of the Gospel and for everything else God has assigned to the church in this age. There is no sacerdotalism, no priestly class, no one who can be hired to do the ministry of the Gospel and no franchise to be granted. The church itself, the covenanted community of baptized believers, must take responsibility for the fulfillment of all Christ has commanded His people.

Much more could be added to Baptist ecclesiology, but these three principles are an irreducible minimum of Baptist identity....

"Casual sex is a con"

In a new book, The Thrill of the Chaste: Finding Fulfillment While Keeping Your Clothes On, Dawn Eden describes her own experience and the conclusions she has drawn from it:

I sacrificed what should have been the best years of my life for the black lie of free love. All the sex I ever had - and I had more than my fair share - far from bringing me the lasting relationship I sought, only made marriage a more distant prospect.

And I am not alone. Count me among the dissatisfied daughters of the sexual revolution, a new counterculture of women who are realising that casual sex is a con and are choosing to remain chaste instead. [more]

Dawn Eden has a blog called Dawn Patrol.

Source: Casual sex is a con: women just aren't like men - Sunday Times - Times Online

Kevin Butler is right and I am wrong

In the materials sent to Seventh Day Baptist churches about SDB disaffiliation from the Baptist Joint Committee, one of the sections is written by Kevin Butler, editor of the Sabbath Recorder - and Seventh Day Baptist representative to the BJC. Kevin is a good friend, a person of absolute integrity, and a minister of the gospel. He and I disagree on this issue.

At one point in his argument appears this passage:

In one blog I read against the BJC, the author stated that the group Americans United for the Separation of Church and State began in 1947 and shared office space with the BJC "until the last few years." Well, in the scheme of eternity, I guess that nearly six decades ago could be viewed as "the last few years." AU vacated the BJC office in 1948. We need to be careful with "facts."

As readers of "One Eternal Day" know, this is the blog he is quoting. I know Kevin wouldn't say anything he didn't believe to be true. And I certainly agree that we should be careful with facts. I also agree that sixty years ago isn't recent. So I re-checked. I have been unable to find the evidence for my assertion. Kevin is correct. I regret the error.

I would note, however, the accuracy of the account of the origins of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. From a tribute delivered by Kent Walker, current executive of the BJC:

Finally, Dawson[Note: then the BJC executive] was instrumental in founding Protestants and Other Americans United for the Separation of Church and State in 1947. POAU now, of course, is Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Dawson counted his role in forming POAU and serving as its first secretary one of his most important contributions to the defense of religious liberty. [...] According to Dawson, "POAU had not a penny on which to operate" and thus began in a single room in the offices of the Joint Committee. [emphasis added]
Source: Baptist Joint Committee

In 1947, Joseph Dawson, executive secretary of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, founded Protestants and Other Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.
Source: Washington Times

The organizations remain very close ideologically and in terms of personnel - and that is certainly more important than physical proximity. Among the BJC personalities who serve or have recently served on Americans United's governing board are James Dunn, Stan Hastey, Brent Walker and K. Hollyn Holman. As the previous post indicated, the BJC and Americans United are frequent allies, and have been ever since the BJC founded Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.

BJC, politics and "faith-based" initiatives

The following was found after about thirty seconds of "Googling" "Baptist Joint Committee" and "Americans United." It is a pretty good indication of the types of alliances the BJC joins on Establishment clause issues [on "free exercise" issues, the list would less ideological, and more acceptable, at least to me]. The list includes most of those one would expect in an explicitly liberal political alliance in Washington. The story is from 2001, but the example isn't isolated - I would invite anyone to do a similar search. It has been suggested that calling attention to such alliances is "guilt by association." However, the association was voluntary and not invented by opponents of the BJC. Of course, agreement on one issue doesn't imply agreement on everything - but it does mean agreement on that issue, and, when it happens again and again, it is fair to draw an inference.

WASHINGTON - April 11 - A broad coalition of religious, education, labor, civil liberties and health advocacy groups today urged the U.S. House to reject a bill that directs tax aid to houses of worship to provide social services. Two dozen groups representing millions of Americans said the "charitable choice" provisions of the Watts-Hall "Community Solutions Act" (H.R. 7) must be rejected. The provisions, which reflect the Bush administration's "faith-based" initiative, allow religious groups to get government funds without the church-state safeguards that have been in effect in the past. In a letter to House members, the groups said, "'Charitable choice' is an unconstitutional and dangerous proposal that will harm religion, authorize government-funded discrimination, undermine the accountability of taxpayer dollars, foster litigation against state and local governments and violate the personal rights of Americans seeking help."

Among the groups signing the letter is Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the group spearheading opposition to the Bush initiative. "Opposition to Bush's faith-based fiasco is building steadily," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. "Until the plan is brought into line with the Constitution, Congress has a responsibility to reject it." In addition to American United, other groups signing the letter include: American Association of School Administrators, American Association of University Women, American Federation of Teachers, American Humanist Association, American Jewish Committee, Americans for Religious Liberty, Association of Federal, State, County and Municipal Employees, Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, Catholics for a Free Choice, Friends Committee on National Legislation (Quakers), Hadassah, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, National Association of Social Workers, National Council of Jewish Women, National Education Association, NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, OMB Watch, People for the American Way, Service Employees International Union, The Interfaith Alliance, Union of American Hebrew Congregations, Unitarian Universalist Association and Women of Reform Judaism. [emphasis added]

Source: Americans United for Separation of Church and State

The news release was posted on a "progressive" [read liberal] website by Americans United. The bill they were opposing back in those early days of the Bush administration, was co-sponsored by a Republican from Oklahoma and a Democrat from Ohio.

There are no lost battles (because there are no won battles)

World Magazine Blog comments below on some recent Federal Court Establishment clause cases. The first case, involving the Veterans Administration, was decided, I'm proud to say, here in Madison, Wisconsin, where, I'm sorry to say, the Freedom from Religion Foundation is located. The second case is about the Mt. Soledad Cross - part of a World War II memorial.

Believing that "faith plays an important role in a person's sense of health and wellness," the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) incorporates religion into its patient care when it is deemed important to the patient. Freedom From Religion Foundation challenged the constitutionality of this use of religion in federal court, but a Wisconsin-based federal district court has dismissed the case.

Specifically, the lawsuit challenged VA's practices of: (1) giving patients a "spiritual assessment" which asks such questions as how often they attend church and how important religion is to their lives; (2) its integration of chaplains into patient care; and (3) its employment of alcohol treatment programs that incorporate religion. U.S. District Judge John Shabaz concluded that the use of religion for the purpose of helping to heal the sick legitimately relates to the VA's responsibilities and that because all of the challenged programs are voluntary they do not violate the Constitution. Freedom From says it will appeal the decision.

Source: Federal judge okay's VA's use of religion

The 9th Circuit appeals court yesterday ruled that a U.S. district court must vacate its order for the City of San Diego to remove the cross that is part of a war memorial atop Mt. Soledad in La Jolla, California. (You can read the ruling here.)

On May 3, 2006, Judge Gordon Thompson, Jr., moved to enforce an order he initially made in 1991, telling the city that the cross violated the state constitution's ban on government aid and preference for religion, and to remove it or face a fine of $5,000 per day. In August, Congress passed a bill allowing the federal government to take control of the land. That rendered Judge Thompson's order moot, since the land no longer fell under the authority of the California constitution, triggering the 9th Circuit's decision.

But the battle over the cross isn't over yet. Two lawsuits challenging the land transfer are moving through federal court with a potential trial scheduled for July.

Source: 9th Circuit: Vacate order to remove Soledad cross

"The politics of long joy"

In a new column at Books & Culture, Alan Jacobs, author of a recent biography of C.S. Lewis, The Narnian, uses Paradise Lost as way into discussing why "winning trophies," or what Milton calls "short joy" is far less important than obedience.

Near the middle of Milton's Paradise Lost, the archangel Raphael describes for Adam — who has not yet fallen, not yet disobeyed — the War in Heaven between Satan's rebellious angels and those who have remained faithful to God. Throughout this portion of the poem a major figure is a loyal angel named Abdiel. It is his task, or privilege, to cast the first blow against Satan himself: his "noble stroke" causes Satan to stagger backwards and fall to one knee, which terrifies and enrages the great rebel's followers. This happens as Abdiel expected; he's not afraid of Satan, and knows that even the king of the rebels cannot match his strength, since rebellion has already sapped some of the greatness and power of the one once known as Lucifer.

But what if the combat hadn't gone as expected? What if Satan had been unhurt by Abdiel's blow, or had himself wounded the faithful angel? In that case, says one Milton scholar, John Rumrich, "God would by rights have some explaining to do." What right would God have to send Abdiel into a struggle where he could be wounded or destroyed? To Rumrich's claim that most eminent of Miltonists, Stanley Fish, replies: Every right. God's actions are not subject to our judgment, because he's God — a point which, Fish often reminds us, modern literary critics seem unable to grasp. (more)

Source: Rumors of Glory: The Politics of Long Joy - Books & Culture Magazine

Sectarian bigotry

S.M. Hutchens at Touchstone Magazine's Mere Comments, writes about the Roman Catholic/Protestant divide in the context of growing up in an Evangelical church in a community with many Catholics:

The few Catholic fanatics I encountered, including the Marian ones, looked very much like Protestant fanatics I knew - just with different objects for their fanaticism. A lot of the Catholic nuts clustered around Mary just like the Protestant nuts (in my church, anyway) clustered around end-times prophecy - but a nut is a nut, wherever you find him. The Catholics who hated Protestants suffered from the same personality flaws as their Protestant counterparts. As far as earning their salvation by good works was concerned, I knew no official Catholic doctrine, but did notice that Catholic legalists and bean counters, who really thought they could, were the kind of people who you would expect to: either obsessive types or people who relied on their baptisms for salvation because they preferred this to walking with God. They were a lot like the Baptists who thought their souls were eternally secure because at some time in their lives a preacher got them whupped up enough to get saved. Neither of them seemed to be trusting in the God of the Bible, who clearly was not the kind of salvation machine they took him for.

It does seem that, increasingly, orthodox believers in all Christian denominations recognize the importance of their commonalities in the face of the tenuous and uncertain doctrinal commitments of the theological liberals in their traditions.

Source: Touchstone Magazine - Mere Comments: The Touchstone Evangelical

The "Religious Left"

Seventh Day Baptists have long since withdrawn membership from the National Council of Churches. It's a good thing:

The National Council of Churches is becoming financially beholden to secular groups with liberal political leanings, according to a report by a religious watchdog organization.

The Institute on Religion and Democracy, a group formed by members of the NCC, says the group accepted the majority of its charitable donations last year from nonreligious organizations and has been pursuing an agenda that does not mesh with the majority of its church members, including support for abortion and homosexual "marriage."

"We found numerous common themes among the dozens of nonchurch entities from which the church council has recently sought or received funding," said John Lomperis, a research associate with IRD who co-wrote the group's report on the NCC.

"These groups have very little demonstrated interest in religion beyond recruiting faith communities to support their favored social and political causes."

Politically affiliated groups who donated to the NCC between 2004 and 2005 include the Sierra Club; the Ford Foundation, which advocated for "reproductive rights"; the United Nations Foundation, which is funded by billionaire media mogul and philanthropist Ted Turner; and the Connect US Network, which has ties to George Soros' Open Society Institute, Mr. Lomperis said.

Mr. Lomperis says the NCC also applied for a $100,000 grant from MoveOn.org, a liberal political-advocacy group that worked to defeat President Bush in the 2004 election, but has not yet received any grant money from the organization.

IRD Vice President Alan F.H. Wisdom says the problem lies not with the NCC accepting such money, but that the groups who are donating it do not reflect the views of the member churches. "The religious left simply does not have 45 million people in the pews on any given Sunday," he said. [links added]

At IRD - "Executive Summary of 'Strange Yokefellows"

At GetReligion - "Looking Beyond the Press Conference"

More at Get Religion 1/19 - Knight's Crusade

Source: How secular donors move church agenda - The Washington Times