Uncategorized

Today is the International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church. We should all set aside some time to pray for those brothers and sisters in Christ who don’t live in countries with the religious freedoms we enjoy here in the United States. I posted earlier about how we take our freedoms for granted and suffer a persecution complex and gave a couple of examples of real persecution. I want to add to that that the American Church (TM) is also lazy and comfortable. And our faith suffers for it.

Below is a controversial sermon brought to my attention a while back by another blog. If you don’t have the patience to watch the whole hour of it, I posted an interview of this brother (that’s right, I’m calling him ‘brother’) with Kirk Cameron that’s only ten minutes. And if YouTube isn’t your thing, check out his ministry.

And the interview that cuts right to the heart of it (check out Kirk Cameron’s reaction at the end!)

And if your faith isn’t challenged enough by all of that, check out what’s really going on overseas, where it’s not comfortable to be a Christian. Voice of the Martyrs catalogues persecution in the global church and HOPEworldwide gives inspirational stories of Christians serving where it’s least comfortable to do so.

Today is a day to challenge our comfort level, to challenge our faith. Pray not only for the Persecuted Church, but also for our own faith, and for God to provide the opportunity to be uncomfortable for the cause of Christ. That’s a hard prayer, and we might not like His answer, but that’s the only way for the American Church (TM) to grow, Christ to be preached, and God to be glorified.

“Everything is possible for him who believes.”

“I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!” (Mk 9:23-24)

Remember, remember the Fifth of November,
The Gunpowder Treason and Plot,
I can think of no reason
Why the Gunpowder Treason
Should ever be forgot.

Reaction to yesterday’s election are still being sorted out, and there will be countless analyses and debates over what worked and what didn’t and what role the infamous “value voter” played in the results. But there are two contradictory reactions to last night’s results. On the one hand, the passing of anti-gay measures in California, Arizona, Florida, and Arkansas signals continued intolerance by “Christian bigots, which is redundant” (quoted from a message board earlier today) towards the homosexual community. On the other hand, the divine providence expected by Governor Palin in her interview with Dr. James Dobson and again to reporters after she voted yesterday in Alaska didn’t come to pass, signaling to some the end of the influence of the Religious Right.

Which is it? Are we still teetering on the edge of a theocracy driven by intolerance and bigotry, or is this country literally going to Hell in a hand basket? This irony is highlighted in California where voters supported defining marriage as between a man and a woman for the second time while defeating a measure requiring parental consent for abortions, also for a second time.
If anything, it shows that no one can be pigeon-holed by a single issue. And whatever comes out of these results, hopefully the “value voter” will no longer be defined by a short list of wedge issues. I believe this is the dawn of not only post-partisan politics, as noted by President-elect Obama, but also post-partisan Christianity. That’s my prayer anyway.

So what does all this have to do with my invocation of Guy Fawkes above? That both sides of the culture war today feel slighted, disrespected, devalued, and defeated reflects the irony of the cultural versus historical Guy Fawkes.

If you’ve never heard of him (and I teased a friend on Halloween who was wearing a Guy Fawkes mask for no other reason than its use in V for Vandetta) these entries on wikipedia (Guy Fawkes, Gunpowder Plot ) are worth reading. The poem above, and the celebration of Guy Fawkes Night, are celebrated by anarchists, were used symbolically in V opposing fascism in Britain, and continue to inspire anti-government sentiment.

But the poem continues:

Guy Fawkes, Guy Fawkes, t’was his intent
To blow up the King and Parli’ment.
Three-score barrels of powder below
To prove old England’s overthrow;
By God’s providence he was catch’d
With a dark lantern and burning match.
Holloa boys, holloa boys, let the bells ring.
Holloa boys, holloa boys, God save the King!

You see, the poem wasn’t celebrating his treason, but was celebrating his getting caught. And it continues further:

A penny loaf to feed the Pope
A farthing o’ cheese to choke him.
A pint of beer to rinse it down.
A fagot of sticks to burn him.
Burn him in a tub of tar.
Burn him like a blazing star.
Burn his body from his head.
Then we’ll say ol‘ Pope is dead.
Hip hip hoorah!
Hip hip hoorah hoorah!

Why did he do it? His treason was in response to discrimination by the British Monarchy towards Catholics. That’s right, this treason was over religious freedom. Even more ironic was that the Monarchy was a borderline theocracy led by King James, the commissioner of that version of the Bible bearing his name.

As Christians of a different stripe, we should never hope for, pray for, or vote for a theocracy (despite what many Evangelical leaders may tell you). There’s too much opportunity for abuse, and too little opportunity to glorify God’s name.

As you burn your “guy” in effigy, launch a firecracker, or light a bonfire tonight to celebrate the new world order in American politics, remember that it was for religious freedom that this country was settled, for freedom from tyranny this country was founded, and opposition to theocracy that inspired the Gunpowder Plot. Remember, remember the 5th of November.

You shall have no other gods before me.” (Ex 20:2-3)

For fun, Google “Obama worship” or “Obama Messiah”. Over four million hits for the former, over three million for the latter. In fact, some of the Obama worship is downright scary (see the “Obama children” for example).

But this shouldn’t come as any surprise. The quarterback picked in the first round of the draft is usually hailed as the Messiah for their team. And America is full of false idols, from money and fame, to celebrities, to gadgets.

So I take “Obama worship” as more of a figure of speech. But is it? I’ve already said much about our over reliance on our politicians to fix everything that’s wrong with this country and how we expect legislation to define our morals. While we may not be worshipping our politics, we are putting our faith in them. We may not be praying to a political candidate, but I’d be willing to bet that there are many who have given more to campaigns than they’ve given to their church.

It’s the eve of the election, and there’s nothing I can post here to change anyone’s mind. But I will continue to warn against turning politics into an idol, be it the celebrity of a candidate as in the case of Obama, or the platform held as in the case of the Religious Right.

A couple of images to give you chills before you head out to vote.

After looking at these, ask yourself if you’ve put any other gods before the LORD. If you can honestly say that you have not, praise God! But look around, and pray for the many who have.

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor. (Romans 13:1-7)

It’s tempting to rely on our government to fix all of our social ills, be they education, poverty, health care, etc. And even moreso as Christians when considering issues such as abortion or gay-marriage. But is that really the government’s role?

The scripture above was written to Christians living in Rome. Not exactly a culture that allowed them to exercise their religious freedom. But here Paul is instructing persecuted Christians that even the worst rulers are put there by God. How can that be? Because the purpose of government is to enforce the rule of law, and as Christians we are to obey those laws.

We expect too much from our politicians. God warned Israel against being ruled by a king, and there are six books in the Old Testement that describe how well that went when Israel insisted upon one anyway. Their first king, Saul, was haughty and disregarded the commands of God. Their second, David, was a man after God’s own heart, but he committed aldultery and murdered one of his soldiers to cover it up. Their third, Solomon, was blessed with wisdom, but he was blinded by lust. And it was all down hill from there.

Ultimately God is sovereign. He uses rulers and authorities as he wills. Habakkuk asked God how long he would allow the wickedness in Jerusalem to continue. God replied that Habakkuk needn’t worry because the Babylonians would come and conquer them to work out God’s justice. That answer confused Habakkuk, and he called God on it. Again, God said not to worry because the Babylonians too, would eventually fall. (Hab 1:2,6,12-13, 2:4,8-9)

God uses kingdoms, governments, and authorities to carry out his justice, not to define morality. God’s Word does that. Yet we continually rely on our political leaders to fix everything, and pass bonds, initiatives and propositions to try and fix ourselves that where our politicians fail. This is wrong. You don’t need a loaded Supreme Court to bring an end to abortion, you only need to obey God’s Word and not commit sexual immorality or aldultery. You don’t need gun control, you only need to obey the Ten Commandments and not murder.

Easier said than done. Especially in a pluralistic culture where not everyone shares the same standards of morality. But keep in mind, the Christians Paul was writing to above were in the minority. Jews under Babylonian rule were in the minority. And their culture was most depraved when they ruled over themselves. Be careful what you wish for.

No matter how Tuesday’s election turns out, we need to keep things in perspective. One of the fear-mongering tactics frequently used to rally the “christian conservative” base is that liberals want to curtail our rights as Christians to practice our faith. Issues like limited prayer in schools, removal of displays of the Ten Commandments, and (gasp) even gay-marriage are used as evidence that we, as Christians, are on the verge of persecution not seen since Nero. Puh-lease. It’s often noted by political commentators and atheist antagonists that the Religious Right has a persecution complex, and I couldn’t agree more.

I don’t really think that if Sen Obama is elected president on Tuesday that I’ll have to start worshiping in secret for fear of being arrested or killed. To use such hyperbole disrespects Christians across the globe who do face such persecution.

For example, take the current situation in India. What situation, you ask? Exactly. While our media is focused on the political campaigns and the war in Iraq, there are other things going on in the world. And while our religious leaders are urging votes in one direction or another and topics such as gay-marriage and abortion take center stage, few talk about what’s going on in the real persecuted church. In fact, this poll from Voice of Martyrs shows how oblivious we are.

It’s similar to the crisis in Sudan, which didn’t really come to the western world’s attention until celebrities started to speak out about it. Nice that they noticed a couple years after the crisis began when the Muslim government from the north region started singling out and killing Christians in the south.

Of course Christian-aid workers are always at risk, recently making headline when a British aid worker was killed in Afghanistan.

So the next time you’re tempted to think that you’re being persecuted in this country that still holds to the First Amendment, think again. And say a prayer for the persecuted church.

We’re down to the home stretch. That’s why I’m on a posting marathon here and I’m not out of topics yet. But this headline caught my attention and I couldn’t let it slide. I guess file it in the “what the?” drawer.

The North Carolina Senate race is a tight one, and like most races this season no one wants to talk issues but everyone wants to sling mud. In this case it’s Liz Dole, who I just lost all respect for, putting out an ad against her opponent, Kay Hagan, accusing her of being “godless.” This article includes the videos and hers is definitely over the line. If I didn’t know better (and most voters don’t) I’d think the voice that says repeatedly “there is no God” was hers. But then I read the article and find out that she’s an elder in her church and teaches Sunday school. Hagan responds with an add of her own calling out Dole for “bearing false witness” and follows that up with a lawsuit against Dole.

Have we sunk so low that this is the substance of our political debates? Do you base your vote on who is most religious, has the most faith, is the most righteous? If so, you might as well stay home because we are all sinners and Jesus reminds us that “no one is good but God alone.” (Mk 10:18) That’s not all we need to be reminded of.

If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? But instead, one brother goes to law against another—and this in front of unbelievers!

The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers. (1 Cor 6:1-8)

“Endure hardship with us like a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs…” (2 Tim 2:3-4)

They say power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. In the same way political power corrupts politically and drives out whatever spirituality was there to begin with.

There are a few measures on state ballots regarding same-sex marriage and there’s still a desire by the Religious Right to pass a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage. This is a touchy subject that I’ve so far avoided. But in light of these initiatives, I want to offer some thoughts.

I’m not going to judge the morality of homosexuality here. I think citing Leviticus is a tenuous argument in light of the New Covenant and also that eating shellfish is also an “abomination.” There’s plenty in the New Testament however, that one can refer to if so inclined. Instead I want to focus on the marriage issue itself, and rely on history, the Bible and reason to make my case.

First, this is not a Civil Rights issue. I understand the “Separate But Not Equal” case being made relative to Civil Unions, but I disagree with that premise. There’s a difference between being afforded the same rights and responsibilities as marriage, but under a different name, and having separate bathrooms, restaurants, schools, and buses. The only “separation” is in name only. There is no physical separation as was the case in the Civil Rights Movement. And that physical separation resulted in a risk to welfare and safety, which is also not the case with this issue. There’s nothing stopping a City Hall from officiating a “civil union” and even calling it a marriage. Just as there’s nothing stopping churches from having “marriage ceremonies” for civil unions. Both of these have happened and will likely continue to happen. The only “separation” in this issue is being able to get a “marriage” license and to be able to check a box that says “married” on official forms. Where civil unions are present, that’s it. That’s what this fight is over. There is no Separate But Not Equal.

Second, even if you assume that homosexuality is ok according to the Bible (based on condemnations against homosexuality being motivated by pagan practices), allowing divine marriage calls into question the very nature of God. (Note, despite this being argued by the religious community, marriage is not a religious institution. It is a civil recognition of being able to share property, name, and responsibility. If this was all there is to it, I wouldn’t oppose gay marriage so long as churches were protected from having to recognize them.) Even if you don’t take Adam and Eve as literal, few argue the fundamental point from those passages that we’re created, man and woman, in God’s image. Marriage is then later defined as, “for this reason…they will become one flesh”. (Gen 2:24) Feminine qualities of God unite with the masculine qualities of God (refer to the books Captivating and Wild at Heart, respectively) to create a complete reflection of God’s character. “This is a profound mystery.” (Eph 5:32) This is impossible in same-sex marriage. Also, the metaphors of God and the nation of Israel and of Jesus and the Church break down if same-sex marriage can be “blessed” by God via a religious ceremony. In that case, you might as well throw out the whole book of Hosea.

Now, you could argue from that point that churches don’t have to recognize gay marriage. Fine, but my third point is a legal one. Many on the Religious Right like to point to the “slippery slope” allowing same-sex marriage could create. This is based on the motivation for gay marriage being able to marry who you want and that preventing two people in love from marrying is denying them fundamental rights protected by the Constitution. But where do you draw the line? The Mormon Church outlawed the practice of polygamy in order for Utah to be admitted to the Union over a hundred years ago. To this day, polygamy is still illegal despite offshoots of the Mormon Church openly practicing it. Such a blatant violation of the law opens up the possibility of legal action, as was the case in Texas and the trial and conviction or Warren Jeffs earlier this year. Aren’t their rights being infringed upon by not allowing them to marry who they choose? The legal argument however, is to protect the welfare of minors, but the age of consent varies state by state and the present definition of “adult” is relatively modern, coming about in the last century in response to child labor and the industrial revolution. The definition is also very inconsistent when you consider the ages of being able to drive, vote, enlist/be drafted into the military, smoke, work full time, drink alcohol, and even graduate college (the youngest person to earn a Ph.D. was 14). Isn’t preventing one from marrying a minor, even if older than the age of consent, infringing on these same rights? You can see where this is going.

Taking it even further, some commentators have even made the leap in logic to apply this to being able to marry animals, as if such hyperbole would strengthen their point. While this sounds ridiculous, it’s not too far off. Spain’s parliament granted the human rights of “life and freedom” to apes last June. Note the absence of “pursuit of happiness” as stated by the Declaration of Independence, but with this legal precedence, can that be too far behind? After all, apes can learn language, use tools, problem solve, and build so with legal rights, there’s nothing preventing them from positively contributing to society. And if they have the legal rights to life and liberty, can they be legally prevented from marrying? And if not, what would legally prevent cross-species marriages? Again, the argument for same-sex marriage is that being able to marry the person you love falls under the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The catch is you can’t marry an ape if you limit this to “persons”. But that legally requires you to define “person” and that then gets you back to the issue of minors but now also wades into the abortion debate. So where does it end?

Semantics. That’s what this is really over, the definition of a word. A word, not defined by religion, but by cultures over the course of thousands of years. I hate that we even have to consider this on the ballot, it is so stupid to me. I’m not opposed to civil unions despite being opposed to the lifestyle. I am opposed to what legally and culturally approving gay marriage could lead to. I am sickened that we live in a world where this is even an issue. And I’m angered by the foolish debate comparing this to Civil Rights Movement and calling opponents “homophobes” as if opposition is equal to racism or anti-Semitism. You can then guess which way I’m going to vote.

This is for the many who define their politics from forwarded emails. And I know you’re out there, because you send these emails to me!

One hot topic recently in the presidential race has been Barack Obama’s opposition to “Born Alive” legislation while in the Illinois legislature. I remember this issue coming up in the primaries but didn’t pay it much attention. Support or opposition of abortion legislation is a tricky thing to weigh considering all the fine print that usually is needed for such legislation to pass. This case is no different.

If you want to look at it in black and white, supporters of Sen McCain (not officially the McCain Campaign) put out this ad. As usual, there’s more to the story, so I checked out politifact.com and the had a very comprehensive article on this. The truth of course, is grey, with both sides misrepresenting the issue. This shouldn’t come as any surprise.

But what is interesting in this article is the bureaucratic red tape that’s necessary in abortion legislation. You usually hear about “health of the mother” clauses which are tricky because what is “health”? It is usually left undefined, opening up mental anguish or physical pain (the promise of painful labor from Genesis) as legal reasons to allow for abortions.

But this article introduced me to the “neutrality clause” where the legislation essentially promises that passage won’t change the legal status of a fetus. It’s like a disclaimer that preserves Roe v Wade. The reason these clauses are necessary is because the Pro Choice side insists that any restriction on abortion will lead to an outright ban. Not an unreasonable position, in fact this is the position the Gun Ownership side of the Right to Bear Arms debate take. Any restriction to gun ownership opens up the possibility to outright prohibit any ownership at all.

But these word games are silly. Do you think anyone really believes a baby born from a failed abortion would be refused medical care because they’re not supposed to be alive? Or that there’s really a “health” reason (to the mother) to abort a child 8 months into a pregnancy that wasn’t there in the first three months?

Regardless of how you feel about either of these issues, the truth is Roe v Wade won’t be overturned via legislation. There will never be the votes to make it happen, no matter who is president. Even hoping to load the Supreme Court in the hopes to overturn the ruling is a stretch with Justices serving life terms. So to me as a Christian, the only way to stop the disgusting act of abortion is to face the issues that lead to abortion in the first place: a casual view of sex, rampant single parenthood tied to poverty, and the cycle of teenage pregnancy that runs generation to generation. And these can only be addressed through supporting, not condemning, those in these plights, living our convictions, and applying the word of God.

I’m going to go a bit off topic and get personal here. Right now my wife is with one of our good friends about to welcome a new life into this world. From the world’s perspective, our friend is (about to be) a single mom, with no job, and health issues. A perfect candidate for an abortion right? To quote Lee Corso, “not so fast, my friend!” Or better yet, to quote Paul, “By no means!” (Rom 6:1) It wasn’t a “Christian value” issue for her, or even a question about convenience. She wants to be a mom, and I think she’ll do great at it. She didn’t let the fact that the father (this will be the last time I mention him) bailed on her dissuade her from valuing life over convenience. For that she should be commended.

At the same time, another friend’s niece just passed away at less than two weeks of age. She was born with heart problems and they did everything they could to save her. Again, life was more important than convenience.

I’m reminded of the flack John Kerry took for being pro-life, but voting pro-choice. Personally I understand it, but couldn’t understand why the Catholic Church would not serve him the Eucharist while I know there were multiple adulterers in the parish I grew up in. His wife, Teresa Heinz-Kerry related their own personal story of a baby doctors feared wasn’t going to make it, but she chose not to abort, trusting that God was in control. When she miscarried, she knew it was meant to be. Politically, she’s grateful she had the choice to make, even though she chose life.

Similarly, a couple from our church was having a baby ultrasounds showed would be born with deformities and tests showed would have serious issues. Doctors encouraged an abortion, but they too, chose to trust in God. And God knew what he was doing when the pregnancy ended in miscarriage.

These are painful experiences, to be sure. But I also know of other families who would give anything just to be able to get pregnant. The brother who officiated my wedding and his wife just welcomed twins into this world. They were trying to get pregnant for years. Finally, they chose to adopt embryos. What? That was my reaction too. But this is becoming increasingly popular. Just as First Century Christians rescued babies from infanticide in Rome, many Christians today are rescuing embryoes that would otherwise be discarded. Our friends adopted embryos, leftovers if you will, from a couple who did in-vitro fertilization. These are the same types of embryos at the center of the stem-cell debate.

Another family at my church returned a month ago from China after adopting their second child from there. In China, you’re limited in the number of children you can have. So if one is born with a defect, or God-forbid is a girl, the baby is usually discarded like an old pair of shoes. Their first child was born with a clubbed foot. This child, with a cleft palate. Both now can overcome these “hardships” with first-world medical care. And a family who couldn’t bear children are blessed with two beautiful girls.

Meanwhile yet another family at church has adopted two black children with family histories of drug abuse. Unfortunately, no one wants a black baby, especially one with that kind of history. They can’t wait until they have enough saved to adopt again.

And one of the biggest things that’s keeping me from supporting Obama is this clip where he states he doesn’t want his children “punished” with having a child if they make an irresponsible decision. Now, I get where he was going with this, but as a recovering addict I understand the difference between a punishment and a consequence. And as a Christian I understand the difference between justice and mercy. But those words from the likely future President of the United States burn me bad.

I write all of this because this is a very personal issue for me. I am the product of an unwed, teenage mother that probably got pregnant on spring break, based on my birthday. I’ll never know the circumstances because I was adopted at two weeks. But I remember debating abortion in my high school civics class when one girl said that men shouldn’t have any say in the abortion debate because it doesn’t effect them. I beg to differ as living proof of “choice”. In a different era, under different circumstances, would I have been aborted? Probably. And that thought sends chills down my spine and brings me to my knees to thank God for my very breath.

After seeing my own children develop in their mother’s womb and being there as they drew their first breaths, I could never, ever, support “choice” for the sake of convenience. Is that the only “political” issue important to me? Of course not, but no other is as personal.

With the general election only a couple of weeks away, I’m finally getting around to reading “God’s Politics” by Jim Wallis, requisite reading for the topics I cover on this blog. Reading it is like I wrote it myself, if only I was a better writer and could expand the depth of my thoughts enough to fill a book. I agree with much of what I’ve read so far; in fact, his motivation for writing that book is the same as my motivation for this blog. But I do disagree with him in some areas, most notably with regards to the war in Iraq and his faith in Christian values shaping our political system.

I was hoping to share more of my thoughts as I go through the book and relate to the current election. But not only have I run out of time, but that book is packed! With small font, margins that run nearly to the edge of the page, and pretty dense prose I’m only a dozen or so pages in after a week. At this rate, I might finish the book this year. So don’t hold your breath for any reviews.

In the meantime however, I do recommend you click over to his website, Sojourners (also linked over on the right). The God’s Politics Blog has a rotation of writers and consistently offers pretty strong insight. In the spirit of remaining “fair and balanced” I also suggest checking out Breakpoint, the ministry started by Chuck Colson. The articles there are more in-depth, so there aren’t as many and are updated less frequently. Regardless, these articles are very insightful. I feel that the two frame a strong Christian socio-political worldview.

We’re in the home stretch and there are too many topics to try and squeeze in before the election. But I’m going to try. I mentioned before that I don’t want to make this blog politics-only, but in this case the calendar takes precedent. I’m going to try and hit on some hot topics and continue to post regarding headlines as I see them. As we head towards the General Election remember what country you’re a citizen of and put your faith in its ruler. Referencing the “Faith Hall of Fame” in Hebrews 11, “If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.” (Heb 11:15-16)