A self evident truth?

The Acton Institute for the Study of Religion & Liberty presents a film about the relationship between the two: The Birth of Freedom. The contention that all men are equal isn't obvious since human beings are obviously so unequal in so many ways. The very idea of human equality, and of human rights, comes from somewhere else.

The American founders said that all men are created equal and are endowed with certain unalienable rights—that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They called this a self-evident truth. Eighty-seven years later, Abraham Lincoln reaffirmed this idea on the Civil War battlefield of Gettysburg. And in 1963 these same words echoed from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial as Martin Luther King, Jr. urged America to fulfill the promise of its founding. But humans are separated by enormous differences in talent and circumstance. Why would anyone believe that all men are created equal? That all should be free? That all deserve a voice in choosing their leaders? Why would any nation consider this a self-evident truth?

The film answers the question. Thanks to the Evangelical Outpost for the reference. The Birth of Freedom - A Documentary on the History of Freedom which asks: How is Freedom Born?

"Gotta serve somebody"

A DVD about Bob Dylan and Christianity is about to be released: Inside Bob Dylan's Jesus Years: Busy Being Born... Again! From the cover notes as quoted on the website:

In late 1978, Bob Dylan fell into the Arms of the Lord through the Vineyard Christian Fellowship Church. In his first-ever interview, Dylan's Bible class teacher, Pastor Bill Dwyer, details Bob Dylan's embrace of Jesus Christ and Christianity. Dylan then made three Gospel albums, winning a Grammy for Gotta Serve Somebody. However, Dylan's radical new direction alienated fans and enraged critics as he preached apocalyptic messages from the Book of Revelation.

Director Joel Gilbert weaves the intimate story Inside Bob Dylan's Jesus Years through revealing interviews, including legendary Slow Train Coming producer Jerry Wexler, background singer Regina McCrary, keyboardist Spooner Oldham, iconic San Francisco Chronicle rock reporter Joel Selvin, award-winning songwriter Al Kasha, Jews for Jesus pioneer Mitch Glaser, and Dylanologist AJ Weberman.

Included are rare photos and exclusive live concert footage from 1978-1981, while Bob Dylan himself explains the impact of Jesus on his art and soul in a recently unearthed TV news interview from 1981. ....

The trailer for the film:

Thanks to RightWingBob.com for the information. Home - Inside Bob Dylan's Jesus Years: Busy Being Born... Again!

Is Mormonism Christian?

Every issue of First Things presents interesting material. Some of it is made immediately available online, but to read all of each issue you need to subscribe. Ten issues online cost only $30. This month, the free article is an exchange between a Mormon and an Evangelical about "Is Mormonism Christian?"

Bruce Porter, the Mormon, concludes:

Are Mormons Christian? By self-definition and self-identity, unquestionably so. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints affirms that it is a Christian-faith denomination, a body of believers who worship Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and who witness that salvation is possible only by his atoning blood and grace. By the simple dictionary definition of a Christian as one who believes in or worships Jesus Christ, the case is compelling. To the title Christian a critic of Mormonism may add any modifiers he deems appropriate—unorthodox, heretical, non-Nicene, different—but blanket assertions that we are not Christian are a poor substitute for informed argument and dialogue.

Gerald McDermott ends his response:

In sum, then, Mormon beliefs diverge widely from historic Christian orthodoxy. The Book of Mormon, which is Mormonism’s principal source for its claim to new revelation and a new prophet, lacks credibility. And the Jesus proclaimed by Joseph Smith and his followers is different in significant ways from the Jesus of the New Testament: Smith’s Jesus is a God distinct from God the Father; he was once merely a man and not God; he is of the same species as human beings; and his being and acts are limited by coeternal matter and laws.

The intent of this essay is not to say that individual Mormons will be barred from sitting with Abraham and the saints at the marriage supper of the Lamb. We are saved by a merciful Trinity, not by our theology. But the distinguished scholar of Mormonism Jan Shipps was only partly right when she wrote that Mormonism is a departure from the existing Christian tradition as much as early Christianity was a departure from Judaism. For if Christianity is a shoot grafted onto the olive tree of Judaism, Mormonism as it stands cannot be successfully grafted onto either.

The whole article, well worth reading if you care about the issue, is here.

FIRST THINGS: A Journal of Religion, Culture, and Public Life

Dark was the night

Justin Taylor interviews Steve Nichols about his new book, Getting the Blues: What Blues Music Teaches Us about Suffering and Salvation. One of my former students encouraged me to listen to the Blues - I started and haven't stopped. I'm getting this book. A portion of the interview:

What motivated you to move from simply enjoying the blues to wanting to write a book about it?

As I mentioned, it didn’t take me long to see that there is a lot of theology here, but the kind of theology we don’t always dwell on. The blues is more about the “fellowship of his suffering,” than it is about the “power of the resurrection.” The blues reminds us of the curse, of our limitations and of our fallenness. The blues is also about the cross. The blues reminds us that while we celebrate Easter Sunday, we do well sometimes to pause over Good Friday. Our theology tends to be more triumphant, more major key. I liked the theology I was hearing in the blues because it was a theology we don’t always hear in our typical contemporary American evangelical contexts.

In the course of reading for the book, I didn’t spend all my time in research just listening, I came across the term theomusicology. That’s what I’m doing in this book, a theomusicology of the blues. Again, I think it’s a theology or a slant on theology that we, the “us” in the subtitle of the book, don’t always pay attention to but should.

For those unfamiliar with the music, where should they start?

At the end of the book I offer a discography of three or so CDs that complement each chapter in the book. I’ll pull a few out of there for you. You can’t go wrong with the standards: Son House (Delta Blues), Charley Patton (Primeval Blues, Rags, and Gospel Songs), Robert Johnson (Complete Recordings), and Muddy Waters (The Anthology). I’m also partial to the smooth vocals of Mississippi John Hurt (Avalon Blues: The Complete 1928 Okeh Recordings). For the more raspy vocals, it doesn’t get any better than Blind Willie Johnson (The Complete Blind Willie Johnson). His moaning version of “Dark Was the Night,” a song about Good Friday, was launched into space on the Voyager.

If you’ve not listened to the blues before, then I’d start with Hurt before moving on. If you were into the whole British rock scene, then you need to start with Eric Clapton’s “Me and Mr. Johnson,” his tribute to Robert Johnson. In fact, I think I’ll go have a listen myself. (more)

Between Two Worlds: An Interview with Steve Nichols on Getting the Blues

"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom"

In a post titled "The Therapeutic Gospel" David Powlison describes a gospel that is about using God to fix what I think is wrong in my life rather than one that is about bringing me into His Kingdom, one that has Him serving what I think are my needs rather than one that brings me to love Him and to serve Him and to want what He wants:

In this new gospel, the great evils to be redressed do not call for any fundamental change of direction in the human heart. Instead, my deepest problems are merely limited to what has happened to me. It's not something about me that has also gone woefully astray.

It's only about my sense of rejection because others have not loved me thoughtfully and well. It's my corrosive experience of life's vanity, because I haven't been able to have the impact I want, to be recognized as Somebody Who Matters. It's my nervous sense of self-condemnation and diffidence, because my self-esteem is wobbly. It's the imminent threat of boredom if my music is turned off. It's how so much of life is routine; I love the adrenaline rush, and I don't like it when a long, slow road lies ahead.

The gospel is enlisted to serve these particular cravings; Jesus and the church exist to make you feel loved, significant, validated, entertained and charged up. This gospel ameliorates distressing symptoms. It makes you feel better. The logic of this therapeutic gospel is a jesus-for-Me who meets individual desires and assuages psychic aches. ....

Such a gospel massages self-love. There is nothing in its inner logic to make you love God and love any other person besides yourself. This therapeutic gospel may often mention the word "Jesus," but He has morphed into the meeter-of-your-needs, not the Savior from your sins. It corrects Jesus' work. The therapeutic gospel unhinges the gospel.

The real gospel is the good news of the Word made flesh, the sin-bearing Savior, the resurrected Lord: "I am the living One, and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore" (Rev. 1:18). This Christ turns the world upside down. One prime effect of the Holy Spirit's inworking presence and power is the rewiring of our sense of felt needs.

Because the fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, we keenly feel a different set of needs when God comes into view and when we understand that we stand or fall in His gaze. My instinctual cravings are replaced (sometimes quickly, always gradually) by the growing awareness of true, life-and-death needs:

• I need mercy above all else: "Lord, have mercy on me." "For Your name's sake, pardon my iniquity for it is very great."
• I want to learn wisdom, and unlearn willful self-preoccupation: "Nothing you desire compares with her."
• I need to learn to love both God and neighbor: "The goal of our instruction is love that comes from a pure heart, a good conscience, and a sincere faith."
• I long for God's name to be honored, for his kingdom to come, for his will to be done on earth, for his whole church to be glorified together.
• I want Christ's glory and lovingkindness and goodness to be seen on earth, to fill the earth as obviously as water fills the ocean.
• I need God to be my refuge and deliverer, setting me free from enemies, sufferings, sorrows, death, temptations.
• I long for the Lord to wipe away all tears.
• I need God to change me from who I am by instinct, choice, and practice.
• I want him to deliver me from my obsessive self-righteousness, to slay my lust for self-vindication, so that I feel my need for the mercies of Christ, so that I learn to treat others gently.
• I need God's mighty and intimate help in order to will and to do those things that last unto eternal life, rather than squandering my life on vanities.
• I want to learn how to endure hardship and suffering in hope, having my faith simplified, deepened, and purified.
• I need to learn, to listen, to worship, to delight, to trust, to give thanks, to cry out, to take refuge, to obey, to serve, to hope.
• I want to attain the resurrection to eternal life: "We groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body."
• I need God himself: "Show me your glory." "Maranatha. Come, Lord Jesus." [more]

Thanks to Theocentric Preaching for the reference.

The Therapeutic Gospel: Part 1

The name of the Lord

For many years - before the advent of the NIV, and then the ESV - my favorite modern translation of the scriptures was The Jerusalem Bible, at least partly because J.R.R. Tolkien was involved in its English version, but also because it reads so well. One of its characteristics is the use of "Yahweh" for the name of God, for example, here:

Happy the man
who never follows the advice of the wicked,
or loiters in the way that sinners take,
or sits about with scoffers,
but finds his pleasure in the Law of Yahweh,
and murmurs his law day and night.
(Psalm 1:1-2)

The Jerusalem Bible is a Catholic version - but, according to Christianity Today, neither it nor the New Jerusalem Bible can be used without modification in Catholic worship any longer:

Observant Jews have traditionally not used the name Yahweh, refusing to pronounce the so-called proper name of God out of respect, or to be sure they do not misuse it. Now neither will Roman Catholics, at least in their worship services.

"In recent years the practice has crept in of pronouncing the God of Israel's proper name," said a June letter from the Vatican. "As an expression of the infinite greatness and majesty of God, it was held to be unpronounceable and hence was replaced during the reading of sacred Scripture by means of the use of an alternate name: Adonai, which means 'Lord.'" In August, U.S. bishops were directed to remove Yahweh from songs and prayers.

Protestants should be following their lead, said Carol Bechtel, professor of Old Testament at Western Theological Seminary in Holland, Michigan. "It's always left me baffled and perplexed and embarrassed that we sprinkle our hymns with that name," she said. "Whether or not there are Jewish brothers and sisters in earshot, the most obvious reason to avoid using the proper and more personal name of God in the Old Testament is simply respect for God." ....

Other evangelicals have been debating not only the word Yahweh but also Jehovah, said John Witvliet, director of the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship. ....

Both Yahweh and Jehovah have been removed from the Christian Reformed Church's Psalter Hymnal, turning "Guide Me, O Thou Great Jehovah" into "Guide Me, O Thou Great Redeemer." ....

Protestantism has long traditions of both using and avoiding the name Yahweh, according to Witvliet. "Some people said using Yahweh emphasized for them the transcendence of God, which you might say is precisely the goal of not saying the term."

Primarily because of friends who feel strongly about the question, I have become uncomfortable about using "Yahweh" in conversation and in worship, but until reading this, had never considered "Jehovah" the least bit controversial.

Barring Yahweh | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction

History online

Nick Kersten, Historian for the Seventh Day Baptist Historical Society has found that some of the most interesting books about Seventh Day Baptist history are becoming available online:

There is good news for Seventh Day Baptists regarding out-of-print SDB and SDB-related publications!

The Historical Society frequently receives requests for information which come from out of print volumes. These requests are sometimes accompanied by inquiries about where these out of print volumes can be found for purchase. Purchasing the books through used or rare books dealers is frequently very expensive, and so this alternative is less expensive. Through the Google Books project, many of these volumes are available online in .pdf format. ....

A list follows of some of the volumes which are available in this way:

Seventh Day Baptists in West Virginia, by Corliss F. Randolph

The German Sectarians of Pennsylvania, by Friedrich Sachse

It is important to note that not all of the volumes which are currently out of print are available in this way and not all books listed are available in a downloadable format, but searches of key topics like "Seventh Day Baptist" or authors names can be a tool used to determine what books may be available in your area of interest. ....

SDB Exec: September 2008

"It's not our evil deeds..."

Some guys are born where they want to be - Catholic, Jewish, Baptist, whatever. My life has been more like one of those Outward Bound programs where they drop you far from home and you have to make your way back with a piece of string and a matchbook.

Peter Robinson uses that quotation to begin a segment of his interview with Andrew Klavan:

Andrew Klavan gives a tour of his life in — and out of — faith. Early on, he was raised in the Jewish faith, but as he says “without faith”; then as a young man he rejected God and faith entirely; finally, in what he calls “the atmosphere of unknown,” he “made the decision to believe.”

The "belief" segment of the interview:

Two quotations - on forgiveness:

It's not our evil deeds that we are asking to be forgiven for. It's our humanity.

and on understanding:

Having made the decision to believe I feel that I understand reality far better.

Watch it here. The other parts of the interview can be found here.

Uncommon Knowledge on National Review Online

Not really about growth

USA TODAY notes that the "megachurch" growth rate has slowed and describes some of the reasons. In the process, the article also describes the more serious problem of the increasing number of those not attracted to or affected by any church at all. Much church growth is simply a matter of attracting people from other churches - not bringing the good news to those who are not Christians.

The unchurched remain untouched. While the number of people who say they attend at least once a week hovers around 30% year after year, the number who say they "never" go to church climbs.

The tally of "Nevers" varies from 16% in Gallup surveys to 22% in the General Social Survey, conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, to 32% in an Ellison Research survey this year. The new "Nevers" come from the pool of people who once attended monthly or a few times a year.

Many slide away from church to find other answers to their spiritual quest or another church where the preaching or music or family programs better suit their style.

"The megachurch story is not really about growth, it's about shifting allegiances. People want to feel good about who they already are," says Philip Goff, director of the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University in Indianapolis. "If church is too challenging or not entertaining, they'll move on."

Amid dwindling numbers, megachurches seek the 'seekers' - USATODAY.com

All law imposes someone's convictions

Archbishop Chaput comments on Biden's confused position on whether abortion ought to be legal. Biden, answering a question on Meet the Press yesterday, says that "I'm prepared as a matter of faith to accept that life begins at the moment of conception. But that is my judgment. For me to impose that judgment on everyone else who is equally and maybe even more devout than I am seems to me is inappropriate...." So Biden is perfectly willing to permit the killing of what he believes is a human life. The bishops of Biden's tradition understand both logic and the moral responsibility of public servants considerably better than he does. Chaput:

Asked when life begins, Sen. Biden said that, "it's a personal and private issue." But in reality, modern biology knows exactly when human life begins: at the moment of conception. Religion has nothing to do with it. People might argue when human "personhood" begins - though that leads public policy in very dangerous directions - but no one can any longer claim that the beginning of life is a matter of religious opinion.

.... Abortion is a foundational issue; it is not an issue like housing policy or the price of foreign oil. It always involves the intentional killing of an innocent life, and it is always, grievously wrong. If, as Sen. Biden said, "I'm prepared as a matter of faith [emphasis added] to accept that life begins at the moment of conception," then he is not merely wrong about the science of new life; he also fails to defend the innocent life he already knows is there. ....

In his Meet the Press interview, Sen. Biden used a morally exhausted argument that American Catholics have been hearing for 40 years: i.e., that Catholics can't "impose" their religiously based views on the rest of the country. But resistance to abortion is a matter of human rights, not religious opinion. And the senator knows very well as a lawmaker that all law involves the imposition of some people's convictions on everyone else. That is the nature of the law. .... Other people have imposed their "pro-choice" beliefs on American society without any remorse for decades.

Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog: Archbishop Chaput comments on Senator Biden's comments

Screwtape

Justin Taylor has found that John Cleese's reading of The Screwtape Letters, once available on cassette, but not yet on CD, can be downloaded from Audible.com for $10.49. That is a bargain - Cleese is the perfect reader for Screwtape's letters to his nephew, Junior Tempter Wormwood.

In the very first letter, Screwtape advises that Wormwood should emphasize jargon, not logic, as he attempts to prevent the conversion of his "patient" to Christianity:

...Jargon, not argument, is your best ally in keeping him from the Church. Don't waste time trying to make him think that materialism is true! Make him think it is strong, or stark, or courageous - that it is the philosophy of the future. That's the sort of thing he cares about.

The trouble about argument is that it moves the whole struggle onto the Enemy's own ground. He can argue too; whereas in really practical propaganda of the kind I am suggesting He has been shown for centuries to be greatly the inferior of Our Father Below. By the very act of arguing, you awake the patient's reason; and once it is awake, who can foresee the result? Even if a particular train of thought can be twisted so as to end in our favour, you will find that you have been strengthening in your patient the fatal habit of attending to universal issues and withdrawing his attention from the stream of immediate sense experiences. Your business is to fix his attention on the stream. Teach him to call it "real life" and don't let him ask what he means by "real".

If you've never read it, then listen to it in this great recording or read The Screwtape Letters the old fashioned way for about the same cost.

Between Two Worlds: John Cleese Reading Screwtape Letters

"Meeting together...and being accountable and real"

Julie R. Neidlinger explains "Why I Walked Out of Church", and, although she references certain stylistic things that she finds offensive, she isn't actually attacking styles but what she thinks they represent in a lot of churches. Trendiness, salesmanship and manipulation are some of her targets.

Today, I went to Bismarck Evangel Temple, sat through the worship and most of the sermon, and then...walked out before it was done.

I don't blame that church; it is my own inability to fit that literally forced me to leave. I don't really doubt their sincerity, and that many people love the programs and opportunities that church provides. I've even found, in the past, a few sermons to be interesting. But...

I believe what I believe - my Christian faith - not because of tradition or because I was raised that way. Not because I want fire insurance or hell-avoidance. Not because I want to find a group or place to belong. I believe it on my own, I believe it to be real, I believe it to be important and valid, and I believe the way we have made Christianity out to be is completely wrong. And that's why I have such a hard time going to church as it is now done. ....

I'm not going to be one of those starched-collar Christians who, based on personal preference, say that this is a sign we're going to hell in a handbasket and that all things are wrong unless they are done as they were with the Puritans. What I'm saying is that I can't stand the phoniness, or trendiness, or sameness - or whatever I'm trying to say here - that the church seems to catch onto at the tail end, not even aware of how lame it is. The fact that this is not only actually successful in appealing to people, but attracts them, also disgusts me.

It makes me want to throw up.

It's buying into some kind of lie or substitution of cool culture as being relevant when it isn't.

If I see another cool Bible college student or pastoral studies major wearing the hemp choker necklace, flip-flops, open-at-the-collar shirt that's untucked, and baggy jeans, saying words like "dude" and "sweet", I will kick their ass. It's like the Christian version of annoying hipsters, an overly-studied and homogenized "with-it" faux coolness. ....

I'm not looking for starched Baptist legalism, but Casual Friday Church is as equally fake and disgusting.

I miss my own, small church, from back home. It's filled with uncool, normal people who just want to help and talk and connect and be real and accountable to each other. It's filled with people who want to go to the Dairy Queen after service and maybe have an ice cream cone. People who help change a flat tire in the parking lot. The building isn't huge or fancy. The church doesn't have programs and any other accessories to attract sub groups, like teens or kids events or anything that smacks of entertainment; there's no program there to attract me to stay, but instead, it is the real relationships that have done the trick. We greet people not as a job or because we're the assigned greeter, but because we see they're new and we want to get to know them.

I feel more like part of the body than an attendee when I go there. I have a place, an integral part, just like all the rest of the people. As it is, the more I attend these larger churches and hear about programs and activities and see places to sign up for classes and possible facility expansion projects...the less I want anything to do with it. I feel like a barcode in the pew, and little else.

I'm having difficulty putting this into words.

I hate to church hop. I don't want to waste my time here going from one church to the next. I would like to find just a small group of people and meet and talk about our beliefs and struggles and study the Bible and connect on a real level, and let that be church. Because isn't that what the church is, meeting together with other believers and being accountable and real with each other in our walk?

Thanks to Mark Olson for the link to The Thinklings whence I was guided to this post - which I appreciate and would never have found otherwise. There are lots of comments following the article and most of them actually respond to what Julie Neidlinger says.

Why I Walked Out of Church

"Singing and making melody..."

John Piper on "The Importance of Corporate Singing":

Thirteen years ago we asked: What should be the defining sound of corporate worship at Bethlehem, besides the voice of biblical preaching?

We meant: Should it be piper organ, piano, guitar, drums, choir, worship team, orchestra, etc. The answer we gave was "The people of Bethlehem singing."

Some thought: That’s not much help in deciding which instruments should be used. Perhaps not. But it is massively helpful in clarifying the meaning of those moments.

If Bethlehem is not "singing and making melody to the Lord with [our] heart," (Ephesians 5:19), it’s all over. We close up shop. This is no small commitment.

The Importance of Corporate Singing :: Desiring God

"You knitted me together in my mother’s womb"

The argument against abortion can be made in purely secular terms - and in a secular political environment probably should be. But Speaker Pelosi's ignorance of the historic position of the tradition to which she belongs has inspired many responses reminding us that long before there was accurate scientific knowledge about the development of the unborn child, Christianity had a definite position on the issue. James Grant promotes some research by one of his commenters that provides evidence:

"You shall not kill the child by obtaining an abortion. Nor, again, shall you destroy him after he is born." (Barnabas, 70-80 AD, 1.148)

"You shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill one who has been born." (The Didache, 80-140 AD, 1.377)

"We say that those women who use drugs to bring on abortion commit murder. And we also say that we will have to give an account to God for the abortion." (Athenagoras, 175 AD, 2.147)"In our case, murder is once for all forbidden. Therefore, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier way to kill a human. It does not matter whether you take away a life that has been born or destroy one that is not yet born." (Tertullian, 197 AD, 3.26)

"Indeed, the Law of Moses punishes with appropriate penalties the person who causes abortion. For there already exists the beginning stages of a human being. And even at this stage, [the fetus] is already acknowledged with having the condition of life and death, since he is already susceptible to both." (Tertullian, 210 AD, 3.218)

"Are you to dissolve the conception by aid of drugs? I believe it is no more lawful to hurt a child in process of birth, than to hurt one who is already born." (Tertullian, 212 AD, 4.57)

"There are some women who, by drinking medical preparations, extinguish the source of the future man in their very bowels. So they commit murder before they bring forth." (Mark Minucius Felix, 200AD, 4.192)

"The womb of his wife was hit by a blow of his heel. And, in the miscarriage that soon followed, the offspring was brought forth, the fruit of a father’s murder." (Cyprian, 250AD, 5.326)

"The soul is not introduced into the body after birth, as some philosophers think. Rather, it is introduced immediately after conception, when the divine necessity has formed the offspring in the womb." (Lactantius, 304-313AD, 7.297)

"You shall not slay your child by causing abortion, nor kill the baby that is born." (Apostolic Constitutions, 390 AD, 7.466)

Thanks to Gene Edward Veith for the reference.

In Light of the Gospel » Blog Archive » Quotes on Abortion from the Early Church

As a servant

Dan Gilgoff at God-o-Meter interviews Kaylene Johnson, the author of a biography of Governor Sarah Palen. A few questions and answers from the interview:

How does her faith influence her worldview and politics?

It's really central to who she is and how she views the world and her job. One of the things I felt with talking with her is that, unlike with a lot of politicians who are running for office, there's not a sense of political ambition as much as there is a sense of service. I think that' s unique. She comes at her job as a servant. ....

.... Did she make her faith and values an issue in her campaign for governor?

Her faith didn't play a big role. It's a very big part of who she is but she's also very private. It's not something she uses as a campaign tool. I don't think she would hold it secret at all if asked about it directly. She would freely speak her mind about it. It would be interesting to see how she responds to that question because it's such an important part of her life.

Palin has become a darling of the nation's conservative evangelical leadership. Was she close to that community in Alaska? Did they play a big part in her election as governor?

No, not really. I would not say that I was sort of amused [by Palin's rollout as a family values candidate] because she is a family person and is not shy about saying so. But it's not something used in her campaign. Her campaign was really about her call for ethics in government. That's what clinched the deal.

God-o-Meter - A scientific measure of God-talk in the elections

Scared silly by science

P.J. O'Rourke on faith in God and faith in scientists:

Faith depends upon belief in things that cannot be proved, and I can prove that more people flunk physics than flunk Sunday School.

"But science can be proved," a scientist would say. "The whole point of science is experimental proof." Yet we non-scientists have to take that experimental proof on faith because we don't know what the scientists are talking about. This makes science a matter of faith in men while religion, of course, is a matter of faith in God, and if you've got to choose...

Personally, I don't think you do. Science and religion both assert the same thing: that the universe operates according to rules and that those rules can be discerned. Albeit this does make it easier to believe in God than, for instance, organic chemistry. Just the fact of rules implies a rule maker while just the fact of mixing nitro with glycerin and causing an explosion does not imply a Ph.D. ....

In one way, however, faith in science does come easier than faith in God - if fear is any gauge of how real we believe a thing is. To judge by human behavior, people are not trembling before the Almighty much. But many of those same people are scared silly by science. They are frightened by a climate stuck in the microwave of technological advances, frightened by genetic modifications that may - who knows? - cross cabbages with kings and produce a Prince Charles, and naturally they are frightened by the clouds of mushrooms being grown in the science cellars of Iran and North Korea.

One sympathizes with science's faithful. The apocalyptic power of God has existed forever, and He's been restrained about using it, despite provocation. The apocalyptic power of science has existed only since 1945, and the A-bomb has been tried twice already. .... (more)

Thanks to Arts & Letters Daily for the reference.

More than a dime's worth of difference

Christianity Today compares the platform positions of the two major parties on abortion, Africa, climate change, embryonic research, faith-based programs, global poverty, HIV/AIDS, human trafficking, Israel/Middle East, marriage and sexuality and religious liberty. The differences are significant, for instance on marriage:

Democrats: "We support the full inclusion of all families in the life of our nation, and support equal responsibility, benefits, and protections. We will enact a comprehensive bipartisan employment non-discrimination act. We oppose the Defense of Marriage Act and all attempts to use this issue to divide us."

Republicans: "Because our children's future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man and a woman, so that judges cannot make other arrangements equivalent to it. In the absence of a national amendment, we support the right of the people of the various states to affirm traditional marriage through state initiatives.

"Republicans have been at the forefront of protecting traditional marriage laws, both in the states and in Congress. A Republican Congress enacted the Defense of Marriage Act, affirming the right of states not to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states. To safeguard that victory, a Republican House of Representatives passed legislation withdrawing jurisdiction over DOMA from the federal courts. We urge renewed use of that Article III power to prevent activist federal judges from imposing upon the rest of the nation the judicial activism in Massachusetts and California.

"We lament that judges ... are undermining traditional marriage laws from coast to coast."

The Democrats have comparatively little to say about religious liberty, but the Republicans have a rather lengthy section:

"Our Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion and forbids any religious test for public office, and it likewise prohibits the establishment of a state-sponsored creed. The balance between those two ideals has been distorted by judicial rulings which attempt to drive faith out of the public arena.

"We affirm every citizen's right to apply religious values to public policy and the right of faith-based organizations to participate fully in public programs without renouncing their beliefs, removing religious objects or symbols, or becoming subject to government-imposed hiring practices. We support the First Amendment right of freedom of association on the part of the Boy Scouts of America and other service organizations whose values are under assault, and we call upon the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to reverse its policy of blacklisting religious groups which decline to arrange adoptions by same-sex couples. Respectful of our nation's diversity in faith, we urge reasonable accommodation of religious beliefs in the private workplace. We deplore the increasing incidence of attacks against religious symbols, as well as incidents of anti-Semitism on college campuses.

"Republican leadership has made religious liberty a central element of U.S. foreign policy. Asserting religious freedom should be a priority in all America's international dealings. We salute the work of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and urge special training in religious liberty issues for all U.S. diplomatic personnel."

"All who are engaged in the healing arts - doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and others - must be free to obey their conscience while performing their professional duties. This is especially true of the religious organizations which deliver a major portion of America's health care, a service rooted in the charity of faith communities.

"We ask all to join us in rejecting the forces of hatred and bigotry and in denouncing all who practice or promote racism, anti-Semitism, ethnic prejudice, or religious intolerance." [more]

Comparing the Platforms | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction

"If people really believe something..."

Archbishop Chaput agrees with Rick Warren about the absurdity of attempting to separate faith from politics:

In the name of being good citizens, a lot of Catholics have bought into a very mistaken idea of the "separation of Church and state." American Catholics have always supported the principle of keeping religious and civil authority distinct.

Nobody wants a theocracy, and much of the media hand-wringing about the specter of "Christian fundamentalism" is really just a particularly offensive scare tactic. The Church doesn’t presume to run the state. We also don’t want the state interfering with our religious beliefs and practices - which, candidly, is a much bigger problem today.

Separating Church and state does not mean separating faith and political issues. Real pluralism requires a healthy conflict of ideas. In fact, the best way to kill a democracy is for people to remove their religious and moral convictions from their political decision-making. If people really believe something, they’ll always act on it as a matter of conscience. Otherwise they’re just lying to themselves. So the idea of forcing religion out of public policy debates is not only unwise, it’s anti-democratic.

First Things » Blog Archive » Nobody wants a theocracy.

Too much combativeness?

I was extremely skeptical about the Obama/McCain appearnace at Saddleback, just as I remain skeptical about the "seeker-sensitive" approach taken by that church. But Warren did very well with the candidates, and, thinks Peter Wehner, he has a better appraoch to politics than many who have been identified as the "religious right":

...[B]ecause of the tone, grace, and sensibilities with which he approaches politics, Warren is replacing the "religious right" model with a new, better, and, I think, more Christ-based paradigm.

.... Warren’s effort to move evangelical Christians away from what he calls the "combativeness" of the religious right is welcome and long overdue. ....

At the same time, there is a tendency for the mainstream media to exaggerate how much the evangelical community is shifting in its attitudes on key political issues and its worldview. According to Warren, "A lot of people hear [about a broader agenda] and they think, 'Oh, evangelicals are giving up on believing that life begins at conception.' They’re not giving up on that at all. Not at all."

When asked about the assertion that the Democratic party is changing its abortion platform, Warren replies, "Window dressing. Too little, too late." And when asked about the opposite claim by the Rev. Jim Wallis, Warren is admirably honest and dismissive. "Jim Wallis is a spokesman for the Democratic party," according to Warren. "His book reads like the party platform."

.... After having attended a recent gathering at the Aspen Institute, for example, Warren commented that many secular liberals there thought "the answer to everything was a government program."

Warren begs to differ, and the remarkable work of Saddleback Church is the best evidence he can amass to prove his case. ....

A passionate commitment to issues has sometimes led Christians in the public square to demonize those with whom they disagree, which has badly harmed their witness. ....

Rick Warren, along with Tim Keller and some others, are helping evangelical Christians to again be associated with intellectual and moral seriousness and fidelity to their faith. That is very good for Christianity, and very good for America.

First Things » Blog Archive » Back to Saddleback

Sabbath Recorder September 2008

The September, 2008, Sabbath Recorder is available online here as a pdf.

This month's issue of The Sabbath Recorder reports on the Seventh Day Baptist General Conference sessions that took place at Carthage College in Kenosha, Wisconsin early in August.

There is also a fine article by SDB Historian, Nick Kersten, recounting the role of Seventh Day Baptists in the struggle for religious liberty - and particularly for the freedom to worship on the Sabbath.

The Sabbath Recorder is the magazine of the Seventh Day Baptist General Conference and has been regularly published in some form since 1844.