I can't believe it was unanimous.

The law "does not elevate accommodation of religious observances over an institution's need to maintain order and safety," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said from the bench in announcing the decision.

Ginsburg said judges who handle inmate cases should give deference to prison administrators.

So what we have here is a vindication of the ability of prisoners to worship freely, provided that doing so does not undermine prison security. Hardly an outrageous proposition -- especially since we give such accommodations to the terrositst ad Gitmo.

Posted by: Greg at 02:59 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 96 words, total size 1 kb.

Pope Benedict XVI, on his first trip away from Rome, has spoken about his desire to work for reconciliation between Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

In his homily at a Mass that closed a national religious conference, Benedict referred to Bari as a "land of meeting and dialogue" with the Orthodox Church.

"I want to repeat my willingness to make it a fundamental commitment to work, with all my energy, toward reconstituting the full and visible unity of Christ's followers," he said to applause from the estimated 200,000 people at the Mass.

Benedict told worshippers words were not enough, and that even ordinary Catholics needed to make concrete gestures to reach out to Orthodox Christians.

"I also ask all of you to decisively take the path of spiritual ecumenism, which in prayer will open the door to the Holy Spirit who alone can create unity," he said.

There is much to work on for the split to heal, but there is significantly more in common between the two branches of Christianity than between the two ancient branches and Protestantism. May we see the breach healed in our lifetimes.

Posted by: Greg at 08:57 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 200 words, total size 1 kb.

In one of the most arrogant, anti-constitutional decisions made by a judge that I have ever encountered, an Indiana judge has forbidden a pair of Wiccan parents from teaching exposing their son to their religious faith as a condition of the child custody provision of their divorce decree.

A Wiccan activist and his ex-wife are challenging a court's order that they must protect their 9-year-old son from what it terms their "non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals."

Thomas E. Jones and Tammy Bristol of Indianapolis are fighting a Marion Superior Court stipulation that they shelter the boy from their religion. The Indiana Civil Liberties Union has taken on the case, appealing the December decree to the Indiana Court of Appeals.

Jones, a Wiccan activist who has coordinated Pagan Pride Day in Indianapolis for the past six years, said he and his ex-wife were stunned when they saw the language in the judge's dissolution decree on Feb. 13, 2004.

"We both had an instant resolve to challenge it. We could not accept it," Jones said.

Neither parent has taken their son to any Wiccan rituals since the decree was issued, he said.

"I'm afraid I'll lose my son if I let him around when I practice my religion," he said.

Now I disagree with Wicca. I have some very firm beliefs on what fate eternity holds for those who practice Wicca. But when you have two parents who both practice the religion, it is unreasonable and intolerable for a judge to tell them that they cannot pass their religious values on to their child. For that matter, I have a problem if a judge were to order that one parent not pass on any or all of their religious beliefs to their child. Short of an immediate demonstrable harm to the child's well-being, it just is not a matter for the court to be involved in. It is the fundamental right of parents to oversee the religious upbringing of their children.

What was the basis for the ruling?

A court commissioner wrote the unusual order into the couple's dissolution decree after a routine report by the court's Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau noted that both Jones and his ex-wife are pagans who send their son, Archer, to a Catholic elementary school.

"Ms. Jones and Mr. Jones display little insight into the confusion these divergent belief systems will have upon Archer as he ages," the report said.

The dissolution decree said "the parents are directed to take such steps as are needed to shelter Archer from involvement and observation of these non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals."

The splitting parents challenged that section of the decree, but Judge Cale Bradford, who reviewed the commissioner's work, let it stand.

Uh, I thought that "diversity" was a good thing. I guess not in the eyes of these people. If the issue was the "confusion" that would be created by having the parents teaching one thing and the school something else, why not order the child removed fromt he Catholic school? After all, the kid is not Catholic, and everyone at the school knows that -- and have known that since he enrolled. The decision of the court simply does not make sense.

Additional commentary from Dolphin & Watching the Watchers.

Posted by: Greg at 10:58 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 569 words, total size 4 kb.

I don't know if I should weep over this story, or whether I should engage in encourage massive rioting in the streets over the disrespect shown to my religious faith. In either event, I know I should be outraged over the rape of the First Amendment by both the school district and the judge in this case.

A public school prohibited a second grader from singing a religious song at a talent show, prompting a lawsuit Friday alleging violation of the girl's constitutional rights.

A federal judge declined an emergency request to compel Frenchtown Elementary School to allow 8-year-old Olivia Turton to sing "Awesome God" at the Friday night show, but allowed the lawsuit to go forward.

School officials in the western New Jersey community had said the performance would be inappropriate at a school event. A message seeking comment from a school board attorney about the judge's ruling was not immediately returned.

The decision by U.S. District Judge Stanley R. Chesler in Trenton to consider the case later came just hours before Olivia had hoped to sing the pop song by the late Rich Mullins.

One verse has these lyrics: "Our God is an awesome God/He reigns from heaven above/with wisdom, pow'r and love/Our God is an awesome God."

It is implicit in the nature of a talent show that the students, not the school, select their songs. Therefore there is no question of the school "imposing" or "endorsing" anything. There is nothing "inappropriate" in the song -- unless one accepts the warped notion that allowing someone to acknowledge their religious beliefs is inappropriate. However, such a position would put you directly in conflict with the Constitutional prohibition on "prohibitting the free exercise" of religion.

What makes me saddest is that I somehow doubt that the school would have stopped this little girl from getting up on stage and parading around dressed like a whore and singing "Bootylicious". And as the story points out, the school has no problem allowing in a witchcraft ceremony during the talent show, drawn from Macbeth, despite the fact that witchcraft is ALSO a religion.

Such situations sometimes stir in me a disturbing thought. Maybe the Islamists have it right -- maybe we Christians need to take to the streets and leave a path of death and destruction through the cities of this country in order to get the respect from government that our numbers merit and the First Amendment supposedly grants us. But I know that is Satan -- and my own sinful nature -- talking.

We Christians follow the Prince of Peace. He has commanded us to turn the other cheek. He has warned us that we will be reviled by those who reject him, and will be persecuted for the sake of his name. So while we will fight in the halls of governemnt for our rights, and pursue them in the courts, true Christians will not engage in the savage behavior we have seen of late from the intolerant practitioners of a certain false religion.

For Jesus Christ is our Lord.

And Our God IS An Awsome God!

Posted by: Greg at 04:36 AM | Comments (32) | Add Comment
Post contains 532 words, total size 3 kb.

And here I thought they claimed to be persecuted by all of us awful Christians.

"Still, it's a great time to be an atheist," said Fitzgerald, who was raised a Baptist in Fresno. "Five hundred years ago, we'd be burned for what we were thinking. Fifty years ago, we'd lose our jobs. But today, we're free to be atheists.

Posted by: Greg at 02:14 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 67 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, since there seems to be a consensus among the press that the riots over reported Koran desecration were understandable and the fault of the US, I think it is important that we apply the principle to the holy texts of all faiths when they are abused or disrespected as a matter of official government policy.

As such, I am starting the "Slay a Saudi for the Savior” campaign, and expect the support of every liberal and Muslim out there. This is simply a proportional response to this report.

Bibles found in the possession of visitors to Saudi Arabia are routinely confiscated by customs officials, and in some cases copies allegedly have been put through a paper shredder, according to religious rights campaigners.

Reports from the Islamic world of the abuse of Bibles and other items important to Christians emerge from time to time, but generally have little impact - in contrast to the wave of Muslim anger sparked by a Newsweek report, since retracted, of Koran desecration by the U.S. military.

"The Muslims respect the Koran far more than Christians respect the Bible," says Danny Nalliah, a Sri Lankan-born evangelical pastor now based in Australia.

During the 1990s, Nalliah spent two years in Saudi Arabia, where he was deeply involved with the underground church.

"It's a very well-known fact that if you have a Bible at customs when you enter the airport, and if they find the Bible, that the Bible is taken and put in the shredder," he said in an interview this week.

"If you have more than one Bible you will be taken into custody, and if you have a quantity of Bibles you will be given 70 lashes for sure - you could even be executed."

And since there are constant complaints about the abuse of Muslim women, how about this Saudi abuse of a nun?

A friend of his, a fellow Christian in Saudi Arabia, told him of witnessing a particularly unpleasant incident involving a Catholic nun.

The man had been in the transit lounge at the airport in Jeddah - the gateway to Mecca, used by millions of Hajj pilgrims each year - when a nun arrived at the customs desk.

"Some fool [travel agent] had put her on a transit flight in Jeddah. You don't do that to a Catholic nun, because she's going to be tormented."

"They opened her bag, went through her prayer book, put the prayer book through the shredder ... took the crucifix off her neck and smashed it, tormented her for many minutes."

Eventually another Muslim official objected to their conduct, came across and "rescued" her, pointing out to the customs officials that she was not entering the country but only in transit and would be leaving on the next plane.

I demand that the Muslim pigs involved suffer death by beheading for their abuse of this woman of God – right in the middle of Saint Peter’s Square.

I declare a Crusade against the infidels who would dare defile crucifix or shred a prayer book or Bible. We must avenge these insults to the Christian faith.

Death to the Islam!

Death to Mecca!

Death to Saudi Arabia!

***

Uh – anyway, now that I’ve recovered my sense of proportion, I hope folks realize that this is not my actual belief. The above is a satirical piece. Unfortunately, the outrages committed by the Saudis are not something I’ve made up out of whole cloth. They are real.

That is why I urge the State Department to impose serious sanctions against Saudi Arabia and any other Muslim country that violates the rights of Christians. After all – Christianity deserves at least as much respect as Islam.

And to the Islamist fifth-columnists working at CAIR – you’ll get my support for your resolution when you get Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Muslim world to apply the same standard to Christian practices and beliefs.

UPDATE -- 5/20/05: Just in case folks didn't like my sources, here is a piece from today's Wall Street journal on the same Saudi policy regarding the Bible -- including this anecdote.

The Bible in Saudi Arabia may get a person killed, arrested, or deported. In September 1993, Sadeq Mallallah, 23, was beheaded in Qateef on a charge of apostasy for owning a Bible.

I wonder what Ms. Azza Basarudin (from the post below) feels about such cases?

More at GOPBloggers.

UPDATE -- 5/23/05 -- More on Saudi Bible desecration here.

UPDATE -- 5/26/05 -- Don't look now, but it isn't just Bibles that the Islamist Horde wants to ban and destroy -- now they want to confiscate Webster's Dictionary for defining anti-Semitism in a way that they don't like.

The latest edition of the dictionary "Webster" identified "anti- Semitism" as opposing Zionism and sympathizing with Israel's enemies, which showed "the racial trend and scientific distortion," officials of the Office of the Arab Boycott of Israel (OABI) were quoted as saying.

Ignorant cretins!

Posted by: Greg at 01:47 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 834 words, total size 6 kb.

Well, since there seems to be a consensus among the press that the riots over reported Koran desecration were understandable and the fault of the US, I think it is important that we apply the principle to the holy texts of all faiths when they are abused or disrespected as a matter of official government policy.

As such, I am starting the "Slay a Saudi for the Savior" campaign, and expect the support of every liberal and Muslim out there. This is simply a proportional response to this report.

Bibles found in the possession of visitors to Saudi Arabia are routinely confiscated by customs officials, and in some cases copies allegedly have been put through a paper shredder, according to religious rights campaigners.

Reports from the Islamic world of the abuse of Bibles and other items important to Christians emerge from time to time, but generally have little impact - in contrast to the wave of Muslim anger sparked by a Newsweek report, since retracted, of Koran desecration by the U.S. military.

"The Muslims respect the Koran far more than Christians respect the Bible," says Danny Nalliah, a Sri Lankan-born evangelical pastor now based in Australia.

During the 1990s, Nalliah spent two years in Saudi Arabia, where he was deeply involved with the underground church.

"It's a very well-known fact that if you have a Bible at customs when you enter the airport, and if they find the Bible, that the Bible is taken and put in the shredder," he said in an interview this week.

"If you have more than one Bible you will be taken into custody, and if you have a quantity of Bibles you will be given 70 lashes for sure - you could even be executed."

And since there are constant complaints about the abuse of Muslim women, how about this Saudi abuse of a nun?

A friend of his, a fellow Christian in Saudi Arabia, told him of witnessing a particularly unpleasant incident involving a Catholic nun.

The man had been in the transit lounge at the airport in Jeddah - the gateway to Mecca, used by millions of Hajj pilgrims each year - when a nun arrived at the customs desk.

"Some fool [travel agent] had put her on a transit flight in Jeddah. You don't do that to a Catholic nun, because she's going to be tormented."

"They opened her bag, went through her prayer book, put the prayer book through the shredder ... took the crucifix off her neck and smashed it, tormented her for many minutes."

Eventually another Muslim official objected to their conduct, came across and "rescued" her, pointing out to the customs officials that she was not entering the country but only in transit and would be leaving on the next plane.

I demand that the Muslim pigs involved suffer death by beheading for their abuse of this woman of God – right in the middle of Saint Peter’s Square.

I declare a Crusade against the infidels who would dare defile crucifix or shred a prayer book or Bible. We must avenge these insults to the Christian faith.

Death to the Islam!

Death to Mecca!

Death to Saudi Arabia!

***

Uh -- anyway, now that I've recovered my sense of proportion, I hope folks realize that this is not my actual belief. The above is a satirical piece. Unfortunately, the outrages committed by the Saudis are not something I've made up out of whole cloth. They are real.

That is why I urge the State Department to impose serious sanctions against Saudi Arabia and any other Muslim country that violates the rights of Christians. After all -- Christianity deserves at least as much respect as Islam.

And to the Islamist fifth-columnists working at CAIR --you'll get my support for your resolution when you get Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Muslim world to apply the same standard to Christian practices and beliefs.

UPDATE -- 5/20/05: Just in case folks didn't like my sources, here is a piece from today's Wall Street journal on the same Saudi policy regarding the Bible -- including this anecdote.

The Bible in Saudi Arabia may get a person killed, arrested, or deported. In September 1993, Sadeq Mallallah, 23, was beheaded in Qateef on a charge of apostasy for owning a Bible.

I wonder what Ms. Azza Basarudin (from the post below) feels about such cases?

More at GOPBloggers.

UPDATE -- 5/23/05 -- More on Saudi Bible desecration here.

UPDATE -- 5/26/05 -- Don't look now, but it isn't just Bibles that the Islamist Horde wants to ban and destroy -- now they want to confiscate Webster's Dictionary for defining anti-Semitism in a way that they don't like.

The latest edition of the dictionary "Webster" identified "anti- Semitism" as opposing Zionism and sympathizing with Israel's enemies, which showed "the racial trend and scientific distortion," officials of the Office of the Arab Boycott of Israel (OABI) were quoted as saying.

Ignorant cretins!

Posted by: Greg at 01:47 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 840 words, total size 6 kb.

Well, since there seems to be a consensus among the press that the riots over reported Koran desecration were understandable and the fault of the US, I think it is important that we apply the principle to the holy texts of all faiths when they are abused or disrespected as a matter of official government policy.

As such, I am starting the "Slay a Saudi for the Savior" campaign, and expect the support of every liberal and Muslim out there. This is simply a proportional response to this report.

Bibles found in the possession of visitors to Saudi Arabia are routinely confiscated by customs officials, and in some cases copies allegedly have been put through a paper shredder, according to religious rights campaigners.

Reports from the Islamic world of the abuse of Bibles and other items important to Christians emerge from time to time, but generally have little impact - in contrast to the wave of Muslim anger sparked by a Newsweek report, since retracted, of Koran desecration by the U.S. military.

"The Muslims respect the Koran far more than Christians respect the Bible," says Danny Nalliah, a Sri Lankan-born evangelical pastor now based in Australia.

During the 1990s, Nalliah spent two years in Saudi Arabia, where he was deeply involved with the underground church.

"It's a very well-known fact that if you have a Bible at customs when you enter the airport, and if they find the Bible, that the Bible is taken and put in the shredder," he said in an interview this week.

"If you have more than one Bible you will be taken into custody, and if you have a quantity of Bibles you will be given 70 lashes for sure - you could even be executed."

And since there are constant complaints about the abuse of Muslim women, how about this Saudi abuse of a nun?

A friend of his, a fellow Christian in Saudi Arabia, told him of witnessing a particularly unpleasant incident involving a Catholic nun.

The man had been in the transit lounge at the airport in Jeddah - the gateway to Mecca, used by millions of Hajj pilgrims each year - when a nun arrived at the customs desk.

"Some fool [travel agent] had put her on a transit flight in Jeddah. You don't do that to a Catholic nun, because she's going to be tormented."

"They opened her bag, went through her prayer book, put the prayer book through the shredder ... took the crucifix off her neck and smashed it, tormented her for many minutes."

Eventually another Muslim official objected to their conduct, came across and "rescued" her, pointing out to the customs officials that she was not entering the country but only in transit and would be leaving on the next plane.

I demand that the Muslim pigs involved suffer death by beheading for their abuse of this woman of God – right in the middle of Saint Peter’s Square.

I declare a Crusade against the infidels who would dare defile crucifix or shred a prayer book or Bible. We must avenge these insults to the Christian faith.

Death to the Islam!

Death to Mecca!

Death to Saudi Arabia!

***

Uh -- anyway, now that I've recovered my sense of proportion, I hope folks realize that this is not my actual belief. The above is a satirical piece. Unfortunately, the outrages committed by the Saudis are not something I've made up out of whole cloth. They are real.

That is why I urge the State Department to impose serious sanctions against Saudi Arabia and any other Muslim country that violates the rights of Christians. After all -- Christianity deserves at least as much respect as Islam.

And to the Islamist fifth-columnists working at CAIR --you'll get my support for your resolution when you get Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Muslim world to apply the same standard to Christian practices and beliefs.

UPDATE -- 5/20/05: Just in case folks didn't like my sources, here is a piece from today's Wall Street journal on the same Saudi policy regarding the Bible -- including this anecdote.

The Bible in Saudi Arabia may get a person killed, arrested, or deported. In September 1993, Sadeq Mallallah, 23, was beheaded in Qateef on a charge of apostasy for owning a Bible.

I wonder what Ms. Azza Basarudin (from the post below) feels about such cases?

More at GOPBloggers.

UPDATE -- 5/23/05 -- More on Saudi Bible desecration here.

UPDATE -- 5/26/05 -- Don't look now, but it isn't just Bibles that the Islamist Horde wants to ban and destroy -- now they want to confiscate Webster's Dictionary for defining anti-Semitism in a way that they don't like.

The latest edition of the dictionary "Webster" identified "anti- Semitism" as opposing Zionism and sympathizing with Israel's enemies, which showed "the racial trend and scientific distortion," officials of the Office of the Arab Boycott of Israel (OABI) were quoted as saying.

Ignorant cretins!

Posted by: Greg at 01:47 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 840 words, total size 6 kb.

The liberty to worship and believe according to oneÂ’s conscience is a fundamental human right. When will India stop the violation of these rights by some of its provinces?

The police have arrested four persons who were distributing copies of the Bible and biblical literature to the people in Rajnagar Block, Orissa, May 13.

The police action comes in the wake of the alleged conversion of 300 Hindu families to Christianity in Rajnagar. An angry Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh has threatened to launch an agitation if the police fail to take action against “those responsible for violating the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act.”

“The area is already tense, and at such a time open distribution of the Bible could add fuel to the fire,” said Mr. Sistikantha Kanungo, officer in charge of the Rajnagar police station. “That is why we arrested the four young men and detained them,” he added.

The arrested are Ashok Namalpuri (2 of Chalakamba village in Nayagarh district, Gorachand Pal (22) of Gaeba village in Gajapati district, Siddheswar Nayak (29) and Bimal Wilson (22) from Koraput.

They had come to Rajnagar in January last and were allegedly involved in conversions by distributing leaflets and pamphlets about Jesus Christ and Christianity and trying to influence school children, the officer added. For the last five months they were also teaching at two primary schools without charging any remuneration.

Says Mr. Subhranshu Sutar, a social activist, “These young men were often seen distributing biblical literature and copies of the Bible in at least fifteen villages in Rajnagar Block alone.”

Meanwhile, Mr. Hemant Sharma, the district collector of Kendrapara, has ordered an inquiry into the conversion of 300 Hindu families. The superintendent of police and the Rajnagar tehsildar will investigate the charges and submit a report within a week.

“OFRA demands that a convert or a re-convert should inform and obtain permission from the district administration before converting to another religion. But nobody has taken any permission in this case. So once the report is filed and someone is found guilty, they would be booked. The law will take its course,” said Mr. Sharma.

No government has any place granting or denying permission to change oneÂ’s faith. No government has any place prohibiting the distribution of religious texts to willing recipients.

Posted by: Greg at 12:20 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 388 words, total size 3 kb.

Listen up, you Islamist pigs. Don't make the US come back and kick your Taliban-loving asses again.

A group of Afghan Muslim clerics threatened on Sunday to call for a holy war against the United States in three days unless it hands over military interrogators reported to have desecrated the Koran. The warning came after 16 Afghans were killed and more than 100 hurt last week in the worst anti-U.S. protests across the country since U.S. forces invaded in 2001 to oust the Taliban for sheltering Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network. The clerics in the northeastern province of Badakhshan said they wanted U.S. President George W. Bush to handle the matter honestly "and hand the culprits over to an Islamic country for punishment". "If that does not happen within three days, we will launch a jihad against America," said a statement issued by about 300 clerics, referring to Muslim holy war, after meeting in the main mosque in the provincial capital, Faizabad.

Even if the charges are true, -- which appears unlikely, based upon the way Newsweek is backpeddling from this story -- we will turn US military personnel over to some Muslim backwater tribunal to be tried under rules set by your false prophet Muhammad sometime about a millenium after Hell freezes over.

Oh, and before any Muslim comes here asking me to tone down the level of contempt -- please note that this IS the toned-down version

Posted by: Greg at 12:28 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 254 words, total size 2 kb.

Pope Benedict XVI has announced that he has waived the ordinary five year waiting period for the beginning of canonization proceedings for his predecessor, Pope John Paul the Great.

The pope made the announcement during a meeting with the Roman clergy at the Basilica of St. John Lateran, first telling the assembled priests, "and now I have a very joyous piece of news for you."

Immediately following Pope John Paul's death on April 2, there were calls from faithful for his sainthood. At his funeral Mass, pilgrims held up banners saying "Santo Subito" ("Immediate Sainthood").

The announcement came on the anniversary of an 1981 assassination attempt by a Turkish gunman against John Paul in St. Peter's Square (search).

The pope read a letter in Latin in which the Vatican official in charge of sainthood, Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, announced that Benedict himself had authorized the beginning of John Paul's path to sainthood. The announcement drew a standing ovation from the Roman priests.

Benedict, who had been seated, stood up to join the clergy in applauding the major tribute to his predecessor.

This is clearly a response to the calls of the faithful to begin the process now. At the funeral for the late pontiff, cries of “Santo Subito” were heard throughout the crowd. In my eyes, this is akin to the practice of the early church, where sainthood was often determined by the people themselves, and then recognized by the institutional Church. Perhaps the bestknown example is that of St. Thomas a Becket, whose tomb became a place of pilgrimage immediately after his death, and whose holiness and martyrdom led to his recognition as a saint within three years of his death in acknowledgement of the popular acclamation that he was a saint.

Soon, very soon, I expect that we will be hearing of his beatification and canonization.

Posted by: Greg at 11:55 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 318 words, total size 2 kb.

I've intentionally stayed out of the discussion of the pastor in North Carolina who effectively excommunicated members of the congregation for their voting behavior. I"ve stayed out for several reasons. First, i've not been at all clear on what exactly happened -- reports have left me with enough of a fog factor that I don't want to do anyone an injustice.

But beyond that, I've had a second reason for staying silent. While I think that the man's actions are counterproductive in the contemporary world, I do not believe that they are wrong as a matter of principle. Quite bluntly, I believe that a church does have an obligation to discipline members who have strayed from its teachings, even if the misconduct is in the realm of political activity -- and i believe a fair reading of the First Amendment forbids the government from interfering in or punishing a church for doing so.

Before folks start tearing their hair out, i ask that you read this excerpt from Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., the president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

During the 2004 presidential election, leaders of the Roman Catholic Church debated whether Catholic candidates who support abortion rights and same-sex marriage should be denied Communion. There was no corresponding debate among Evangelicals. The virtual disappearance of church discipline among Evangelicals--a symptom of a larger loss of biblical ecclesiology--left many Christians simply scratching their heads. Now, the controversy in Waynesville, North Carolina emerges as a flashpoint of confusion. What should we think of this?

In the first place, we should quickly assert the autonomy of the Church as the Body of Christ. Though missiologically located within the secular world, the Church knows only one Sovereign--the Lord Jesus Christ. Yet, the church is located within a political context--a context it cannot deny. For most of U.S. history, this has not been an issue of difficulty for the church. This is no longer the case. At first blush, the actions of the East Waynesville Baptist Church appear to be out of bounds. A political judgment of this apparently partisan nature does not seem to be justified by the political context--at least not yet.

Honesty compels me to state that I could foresee a political context in which such a decision, made in extremis, could well be both justifiable and necessary. The church has faced this before. In the context of Nazi Germany, it was an unavoidable issue. Writing to Christians in France, Karl Barth lamented the sin of the German Christians who allowed the Nazi Party to assume power (through democratic elections, we should be reminded). Looking back to the political passivity of the German church, Barth reflected: "At the time and in Germany it implied a retreat of Christianity from responsibility in ecclesiastical and political spheres to the inner sphere of a religious attitude which, in order to maintain itself, no longer concerned itself with, or at least was not willing to fight and suffer for, the right form of the Church, let alone that of the State."

The right form of the church requires a common commitment to certain shared convictions. These commitments are irreducibly theological, but come with inevitable political consequences. Until recently, our domestic political debates have failed to reach a point of crisis with regard to these consequences, but crisis cannot be rejected as a possibility. In such cases, the church must maintain its witness and convictional commitments. A church should exercise discipline against a member who, while claiming to be a Christian, would vote for Adolf Hitler--or David Duke.

Now Mohler, like me, doesn't see the actions alleged in North Carolina as appropriate in today's context. But at the same time, he recognizes that a proper understanding of the nature of the Church mandates that this sort of action be done in the proper situation. Mojhler talks about voting for Hitler or David Duke -- I think of the excommunication of opponents of school desegregation by the Archbishop of New Orleans in the 1960s after they used their political offices and courtroom litigation to attempt to achieve a political result (school segregation) contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church. The acceptance of limits on speech on matters of faith and morals that intersect with politics cannot be accepted by a true Christian -- or a true believer in any other faith. Gvernment is not God.

Now I will concede that America is not a theocracy. I've yet to meet a Christian who wants it to be, despite the hysterical claims of outraged liberals any time a conservative Christian dares to exercise his or her rights as a citizen. The Church, however, IS AND MUST BE a theocracy by its very nature, no matter how much or how loudly the lukewarm may object. We may be obliged to accept the separation of church and state, but we must never give in to demands for the separation of church and church.

Posted by: Greg at 04:52 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 831 words, total size 5 kb.

When one hears the word "evangelical", the term "fundamentalist" is not far behind, along with the phrases "right-wing" and "theocrat". Such stereotypes are wrong, for most evangelicals support values that would have to be conceded to be mainstream -- not surprising, given that they make up some 40% of the American public. The only question, at times, is the proposed method of implementing those values. Mark Hall's piece in the Oregonian does a pretty good job of pointing that out.

What do evangelicals believe, then?

First, contrary to many stereotypes, evangelicals are among the most tenacious defenders of religious liberty. We have been fiery opponents of government attempts to dictate religious belief or actions.

Look at the leading "right-wing Christian" legal organizations -- they don't just defend Christians, but also Jews, Muslims, and others. Where these groups differe with the radical secularists is that they believe that neutrality doesn't mean driving religion from the public square. In that, they are exactly in line with American practice from the time of the writing of the First Amendment itself.

Second, evangelicals are concerned about the poor and dispossessed. Flippant critics chastise us for dropping the ball -- including evangelicals such as Jim Wallis, "Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It," and Ron Sider, "The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience."

But the best historical and sociological studies show that evangelicals, along with other religious conservatives, are among the most generous Americans when it comes to donating our time and money.

Look at the statistics that are out there. It is generally those who identify themselves as religious who are the most generous with their giving. While many oppose government programs, it is because they believe that private charity is superior to those programs. And if one looks at the statistics, there is a point to that argument.

Third, evangelicals place a high value on family. We believe the right of parents to raise their children should be respected and supported by the state. Many evangelicals would extend this principle to enabling all parents to provide for their children an education that reflects their world views.

For all we hear the rabid secularists talk about programs "for the children," they tend to ignore the fact that those with the best interest of a child closest to their hearts are their parents. This is a big part of why evangelicals tend to support school vouchers -- because who is most concerned with the individualized needs of a student if not their parents? Granted, these vouchers still will not enable most kids to attend the private schools of the elite liberals, but it will allow them in many cases to do better than they do now, and will actually leave public schools with more dollars per child because no voucher plan proposed has ever taken all the dollars per student for a voucher.

Fourth, evangelicals believe innocent human life ought not to be taken without a very good reason. We overwhelmingly oppose abortion and euthanasia.

Notice the reason for the opposition -- respect for life. I once argued that Jefferson, in listing three inalienable rights, put them in order of importance. The violation of the right to lifeimplicitly violates the others, and so governemnt is obliged to protect us from the unjust taking of life -- including protecting us from ourselves if need be. This respect for life is why there is division on the death penalty among evangelicals, though most will accept it as legitimate, though not mandatory, on biblical grounds.

Strangely enough, it is not the evangelicals who are unwilling to dialogue on these mainstream values. It is their opponents who refuse to discuss, refuse to compromise, and dismiss any attempt by evangelicals to participate in the political process as "mixing church and state" or "attempting to impose a theocracy".

But how do we have a democratic republic if the beliefs of four out of every ten Americans are declared illegitmate and those Americans are excluded from the process? How is it that those values can be labeled extreme when they are shared by enough Americans to enable their supporters to control the executive and legislative branches? The short answer is that those who would exclude the evangelical voice from the political arena are attempting to gain through bigotry, fear, and discrimination that which they cannot gain legitimately at the ballot box because they are the ones outside the mainstream.

Posted by: Greg at 12:46 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 749 words, total size 5 kb.

I spent the morning running my darling wife around to doctors and x-rays after she took a nasty spill this morning. While we are still waiting for results, we're pretty confident that she will be quickly on the mend. Given her health issues, though, I cannot help but be concerned that one day she will seriously hurt. That is why this story touches me in a special way, and chills me to the bone.

Evelyn Roberts, the 88-year-old wife of evangelist Oral Roberts, injured her head in a fall and was comatose today at a California hospital.

Roberts, who lives with her husband in California, fell en route to a dental appointment Tuesday and struck her head on the ground, said Jeremy Burton, spokesman for Tulsa-based Oral Roberts University.

She briefly lost consciousness after the fall and was taken to a hospital where tests revealed internal bleeding, Burton said. She fell into a coma a short time later.

"The Roberts family is asking the public to pray for Evelyn and their family," Burton said.

I know some may argue about Oral Roberts' theology and his politics. My response is that all of that is simply irrelevant. At a time like this, all of those things need to be set aside out of love for fellow human beings who are scared and hurting.

May God's will be done.

UPDATE: Mrs. Roberts passed away Wednesday evening. May God be mercful to her as she enters his Kingdom, and may he shower the Roberts family with comfort at this time of loss.

Posted by: Greg at 09:11 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 267 words, total size 2 kb.