From his office [Stephen] Meyer has ventured forth to debate at least nine prominent Darwinians on CNN, NPR, FOX, the BBC, and other venues. In it he has written numerous newspaper and magazine columns in defense of Intelligent Design (ID), as well as an academic article that became notorious five years ago when Richard Sternberg, a Smithsonian-affiliated scientist, agreed to publish it in the peer-reviewed Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. Darwinian higher-ups demoted Sternberg for allowing the other side to have its say. They interrogated him about religious and political beliefs.

via WORLD Magazine | Daniel of the Year | Marvin Olasky | Dec 19, 09.

A caller to the Bob McLain Show yesterday drew a link between the “anti-evolution fringe” and the ”climate change deniers.”  He’s absolutely right.  Global warming is the same sort of anti-scientific, outcome-based, dogmatic thinking that we’ve seen from the macroevolutionists for decades.  And when they can’t win in the marketplace of ideas, what do they do?  They go to court to shut down the opposition, they bolt the doors, and guard the castle of ignorance against any breach in the wall of orthodoxy.

Stephen Meyer is WORLD Magazine’s “Daniel of the Year.”  He is articulate, smart, quick on his feet, and bold!  God is using him to pull down the strongholds of evolutionary thinking.  Marvin Olasky reports that Meyer, “director of the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, fights to show that all lives have eternal value because they are the work of a Creator and not the product of chance.”

I heard Dr. Meyer on the radio this week and was very impressed with the way that he interacts with skeptics and supporters alike.

Read the story here.

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer

There can be only one. (H/T Evolution News)

Excerpt:

From his office Meyer has ventured forth to debate at least nine prominent Darwinians on CNN, NPR, FOX, the BBC, and other venues. In it he has written numerous newspaper and magazine columns in defense of Intelligent Design (ID), as well as an academic article that became notorious five years ago when Richard Sternberg, a Smithsonian-affiliated scientist, agreed to publish it in the peer-reviewed Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington.

[...]When Meyer completed his dissertation, “Of Clues and Causes: A Methodological Interpretation of Origin of Life Studies,” the University of Cambridge in 1991 awarded him its prestigious Ph.D. Meyer, having proceeded through questioning and discernment stages, had to decide whether to enter the courage stage. Everyone knows that microevolution—change within species—occurs, but the critical issue is whether the descendants of dinosaurs become birds through natural selection. Denying macroevolution leaves scientists unprotected even at some Christian colleges.

[...]Courage becomes a determinant once we count the cost and see that it’s great. Meyer’s first inkling came when “talking about my ideas to people at Cambridge High Table settings, and getting that sudden social pall.” But the cost was and is more than conversational ease: San Francisco State University in 1992 expelled a professor, Dean Kenyon, who espoused ID, and other job losses have come since.

I met Dr. Meyer for the first time at the Baylor University conference on intelligent design in 2000. He comes across as extremely genuine and approachable. At other conferences, he even remembered my name! I still hold out hope of one day going for a PhD (I even came up with a great idea this week) and it’s largely because of authentic Christian scholars like Dr. Meyer who inspire me with a vision of what is possible.

I just posted my first piece on the 9Marks blog, Church Matters.  Here’s the piece, albeit with a few tweaks.  I attempted to make some changes to the original but have had some challenges with Typepad.

The piece is on “God, Evangelicals, and Advertising” (here’s the original).

******************

Let me quickly say that it is an honor to post on this blog.  As a 9Marks blog rookie, I’m glad to be called off the bench (where I belong) to join the game.  For the record, I’m just here to pass into the post and keep the starters happy.  Thabiti, I see you down low.  Menikoff, show them the up and under.

Thanksgiving break afforded me the opportunity to do something I always enjoy: perusing evangelical magazines.  It’s always interesting to peruse certain periodicals to see what content they feature, what the cover story is, and so on.  I noticed recently how many advertisers, many of them seminaries and colleges, in said magazines promote themselves in formats similar to secular marketers.  The lingo used in many of these color-splashed ads might include something like this:

• “Distance learning you will benefit from”
• “That’s the essence of [College X]“
• “Take your knowledge to a higher level”
• “Discover how to use your God-given gifts”
• “The flexibility you need; the depth you crave”

And the list goes on.

Let me say that there is not necessarily anything heinous about these taglines.  Marketing is tough, and it helps to craft a catchy slogan that stands out from other products.  Furthermore, I don’t approach marketing assuming that Christian advertisers need to quote Scripture or have certain words in the pitch.  There’s room for all kinds of wording in our advertisements.

However, I did wonder in my reading whether there was not an element missing from many of the ads I saw: God.  Many ads made reference to me, or a theoretical me, but few of them made reference to God.  Fewer still put God front and center in the advertisement.  I was left with the suspicion that one could change the names and titles in many of the ads I saw–secularize them, so to speak–leaving many of them fit for any old magazine, Christian or not.

So what’s the big deal?  They’re just ads, right?  Well, I wondered whether these institutions weren’t missing out on a great opportunity to reach the Christian audience with a message that far exceeds “Tailor your learning to your needs.”  What if Christian organizations and schools advertised themselves like this:

• “God looms large over everything we do”
• “Come learn about the transcendent majesty of almighty God”
• “Begin a distance learning program that engages your love for Christ the King”
• “God. Is. Awesome.”
• “Experience the Exhilaration of the Gospel”

Some schools and organizations do run these kind of ads.  But many don’t.  Is there something missing here?  I think so.  Reading those kind of ads would, for me personally, grab my attention.

It’s no secret that today’s younger generation is captivated by God and “large-God” theology.  “Small-God” theology is out.  The grandeur of a holy King is in, thankfully and deservedly.  Would it behoove our marketers–and more importantly, our leaders–to see this?  Could we not better honor our God by such promotion and, at the same time, reach the Christian audience hungry for more of God more effectively?

I wonder here if the way we market our schools and organizations shows how we think about them, and about God more broadly.  We know from James 3:1-12 that the tongue plays a major role in leading us into error.  We might think that, if we wish to grow and change for God’s glory, we need to first tackle the heart and then bridle the tongue.  But the Bible seems to suggest that to grow in grace we need to tackle the heart, yes, but we also need to know that bridling the tongue will help us greatly in our fight against sin.  If we allow ourselves to speak unwisely, then we will live unwisely.  If we change the way we speak, however, holding our tongues captive for Christ (to use a mildly strange metaphor), then we will be surprised at how the way we think changes in the process.

So what’s the bigger point?  Well, noting that this is a major question not only for schools (which advertise in magazines) but, more significantly, for churches, I would ask what might happen if we evangelicals thought of marketing more as an opportunity to showcase God and less of an opportunity to cater to so-called felt needs, we might see interest increase in our products.  Perhaps if we allowed God and the glorification of Him to shape all our promotion, publicity and thinking about our churches and institutions, we might see renewal of vision, “success” in our efforts, and most importantly, increased glory for the Lord of our lives.

Church, school, parachurch involvement–when faithful, these are equipped not to meet our needs, burnish our resumes or increase our sense of personal fulfillment, but to bring us to a breathtaking awareness of the majesty of the Triune God.  That–to me at least–is compelling, invigorating.  That makes me want to get out of bed in the morning and serve the Lord in my calling.  I am guessing that the same is true for others.

To close, I would submit that advertising is not simply the slogan that a group of marketers think up in a large room with nice couches and stress balls.  Advertising, as with all that we communicate, shows not only how we think about our churches and schools, but how we think about God Himself.

According to an October blog posting here,

World Magazine, the publication that had originally stoked the fires of this controversy, did a cover story on the TNIV. That story was, in my view, an inaccurate and, at times, inflammatory account. I wrote a fairly brief letter to the editor. They published only a part of that letter. The end result was that I was made to look worse for my written effort. The result of this was to generate more mail, a great deal of it angry and accusatory….Most made assumptions and many called me names and expressed their horror at my departure from the faith. [bold emphasis added]

What you are about to read is disturbing and shocking, especially if you have children who attend a church youth group. Please be aware that what is detailed below is happening in many churches in America, and may be coming to yours very soon. Prepare to be outraged.

Those churches who rely on their slick marketing schemes to “draw a crowd” have sunk to new lows as of late. This is especially evident in the area of the foreign-to-Scripture concept of the church youth group led by the ever-so-popular (and equally absent from Scripture) youth pastors.

For those who have no idea what kind of shenanigans have been going on in the name of “youth ministry,” here are a few samplings that DefCon’s addressed in the past:

- Whos’ pastoring the youth pastors?

- The problem with youth ministry today.

- A story of injured clowns and evil chickens.

- Another church sanctuary turned into a stage for a worldly dance exhibition.

But these past examples are mild compared to what’s taking place now. Countless churches are going out of their way to pander to the youth culture by means of the basest of juvenile humor (the very humor formed, cultivated, and driven by the world).

Because these so-called churches are constantly chasing after the hem of the garment of their elusive mistress of cultural relevance, they must constantly come up with something new, something more radical, something more shocking, something more like the world in order to attract and keep their “customers.”

But as with all fads, what was hip, cool, and relevant yesterday loses it’s impact tomorrow, so something even more vile, shocking, and wicked (yes, wicked) must take the place of yesterday’s flavor of the month.

To see this spiral into depravity I submit two articles for your consideration. One was written by a Christian journalist for a Christian news source from August 2002, the other was written by a secular journalist for a secular news source in September 2009.

The following is the 2002 article from World Magazine’s Gene Edward Veith:

Stupid Church Tricks

by Gene Edward Veith

Four sets of parents are suing a church in Indiana for what happened at a New Year’s Eve lock-in. A youth leader chewed up a mixture of dog food, sardines, potted meat, sauerkraut, cottage cheese, and salsa, topped off with holiday eggnog. As if this spectacle were not disgusting enough (let the reader beware), he then spit out the mixture into a glass and encouraged the members of the youth group to drink it!

Some of those who did, of course, became sick, whereupon their parents sued the church. According to the Associated Press account, the youth pastor said that the “gross-out” game, called the Human Vegematic, was just for fun and that the church forced no one to participate. The lawsuit accused the adults in charge of pressuring the 13- and 14-year-olds into activities that caused them physical and mental harm.

Such “gross-out” games have become a fad in youth ministry. Since adolescents are amused by bodily functions, crude behavior, and tastelessness ­following the church-growth principle of giving people what they like as a way to entice them into the kingdom ­many evangelical youth leaders think this is a way to reach young people.

The Source for Youth Ministry, a popular and widely used resource center, posts scores of games on its website, many of which were contributed by youth group leaders in the field. There is Sanctuary Softball, which involves whacking a Nerf ball in church, with home plate being the area of the altar, and running through the pews, as the fielders then try to hit the batter with the ball to make an out. Another fun activity is Seafood Catch, which involves putting minnows in the baptistery, then catching them by hand. (“Extra points for eating them after it is done.”)

Then there are games designed to appeal to adolescents’ hormones. These include kissing games like “Kiss the Wench.” “Leg Line Up” has girls feel boys’ legs to identify who is who. Some of them have odd homosexual subtexts, like “Pull Apart,” in which guys cling to each other, while girls try to pull them apart. Another has girls putting make-up on guys, leading to a drag beauty show. Then there is the embarrassingly Freudian “Baby Bottle Burp,” in which girls put a diaper (a towel) on a boy, then feed him a bottle of soda, and cradle him until he burps!

These are presented as just ordinary games, good ways to break the ice at youth group. But there is another category of “Sick and Twisted Games.” Many of these involve eating and drinking gross things, like at the Indiana church. (“Toothbrush Buffet” has youth group leaders brushing their teeth and spitting into a cup. Each then passes it along to the next in line, who uses what is in the cup to brush his teeth. The last one drinks down everyone’s spit.) Others are scatological, and are too repellent to describe.

What do teenagers learn from these youth group activities? Nothing of the Bible. Nothing of theology. Nothing of the cost of discipleship. But they do learn some lessons that they can carry with them the rest of their lives.

*Lose your inhibitions. Young people usually have inhibitions against doing anything too embarrassing or shameful. These exercises are designed to free people from such hang-ups. For some reason, post-Freudian psychologists­ whose “sensitivity groups” are the model for these kinds of exercises­ maintain that such inhibitions are bad. Christians, though, have always insisted that we need to feel inhibited about indulging in things for which we should feel ashamed. This is part of what we mean by developing a conscience.

Though being “gross” may not be sinful in itself, overcoming natural revulsions can only train a child to become uninhibited about more important things.

*Give in to peer pressure. Defenders of these kinds of activities maintain that they help create group unity. The way they work, though, is to overcome a teenager’s inhibitions with the greater desire to go along with the group. In other words, these exercises teach the teenager to give in to peer pressure. Instead, youth groups need to teach Christian teenagers not to go along with the crowd and to stand up against what their friends want them to do.

*Christianity is stupid. Status-conscious teenagers know that those who are so desperate to be liked that they will do anything to curry favor are impossible to respect. Young people may come to off-the-wall youth group meetings, but when they grow up, they will likely associate the church with other immature, juvenile phases of their lives, and Christianity will be something they will grow out of.

Teenagers get enough entertainment, psychology, and hedonism from their culture. They don’t need it from their church. What they need­ and often yearn for ­is God’s Word, catechesis, and spiritual formation.

Reprinted from FCF World Ministries.

And since 2002, the pied pipers of pragmatism have taken yet one more steep step down the rung in their worldly, Christ-less social gatherings.

The Berean Wife alerted me to an article from Folio Weekly (in PDF format) detailing the atrocious behaviors of a “church” youth group. This unbelievable article is entitled Peanut Butter Salvation: Why a Southside MegaChurch Thinks That Goldfish Swallowing and Toe-Licking Will Lead the Next Generation to God.

Here are some quotes from this article along with my commentary interjected in red.

As the youth leader held his arms aloft, the teenagers gaped at the hair, furred into a strip matted by sweat and deodorant. They watched as Pastor Turner dug into a jar of peanut butter and smeared gobs of it onto the exposed underarms, then turned to the audience. Did anyone, he asked, have the guts to lick it clean and swallow it down without puking? He got two volunteers. As the audience roared with excitement and disgust, the two male teenagers approached the youth leader and began to lick his armpits, burrowing their faces in the peanut butter and eating it. Neither puked. Their only prize was bragging rights. [This one needs no comment.]

It may seem hard to believe, but the genesis of the “Fearless” program was a marketing impulse. [No, it's not really that hard to believe. It's what we've come to expect from those who think they can "do church" better than God.] Pastor Turner and his creative team say they wanted to do something that would shock and astound their teenage audience. [If you really want to "shock and astound" the teens, try preaching the Word!] They hoped to get students talking about Celebration Church and about the Wednesday night service. [Because talking about Jesus and His finished work on the cross just isn't as cool.] They wanted a buzz that would go viral, that teens would text and Twitter about. They wanted the kids to share their cell phone pictures and videos. Ultimately, they wanted hordes of kids to show up the following Wednesday to see what crazy things the youth ministry would think up next. [Makes the church leadership feel good seeing all those kids show up to see what crazy world-mimicking things the youth ministry would think up next. What about the novel idea that kids should be showing up to church to learn more about God and to fellowship with the brethren? Oh, and don't forget, what you attract them with is ultimately what you have to keep them with. And here's the paradox: Take away the contrived entertainment and you lose the kids, "They're not doing what attracted me, dude, so I'm outta here." Keep the same level and you lose the kids, "They're not cutting edge, they're like so 5 minutes ago, I'm outta here." So the only solution is to push the envelope more and more.]

The program isn’t confined to the church’s Deerfield Boulevard campus. [Why not just say church? What is so offensive to all these megachurches that they hide behind the name "campus?"] Across town, at the Orange Park campus, another youth minister was hosting his own “Fearless” event. . . . Instead of an armpit, [22 year-old Pastor Shawn] Kelley smeared peanut butter on a youth leader’s feet and challenged two teens to lick it off. It was pretty gross, the pastor assures. “This leader’s feet are pretty bad.” . . . Still, Kelley says he did not, as Folio Weekly heard from a concerned parent, spread the peanut butter on his own feet, or between the youth leader’s toes. “We didn’t want to put it in between his toes,” he says. “That would be pushing it.” [Oh, so now we're taking a lesson on morality and what is and is not "pushing it" from Mr. Kelley. We'd love to know by what standard you rely on to define what's "pushing it" and what's not.]

Pastor Turner wants to send kids home from church thinking, “I don’t believe what just happened here tonight.” [Not thinking about their utter sinfulness before a holy God and the only propitiation for their transgressions being the spotless Lamb of God nailed to a cross because without the shedding of blood their is no remission of sins.] That’s a fair approximation of what one area mother felt when her son came home from the Orange Park service with video footage of the toe-licking. . . . She was so upset that the next morning she contacted Pastor John Wyatt, the head youth pastor for all six Celebration locations. She was stunned when he didn’t agree that having a child lick anything off an adult’s feet was inappropriate. . . . [She may have been stunned, but we're not. In fact, just wait till you see the comments start pouring in on this post defending this foolishness.] The mother suggests that the act between a minor and an adult in a private home would seem not only inappropriate, but perverse — and possibly illegal. [Wow, she hit the nail on the head!] But she says Pastor Wyatt, 37, and other church leaders didn’t concede there was anything wrong with what they’d done. [And they never will.] The woman decided not to allow her son to attend the church again. . . . [Although I question why she let him attend in the first place, this decision is wise.] “When you send a kid to church, you aren’t expecting they are going to be exposed to something like that. It just does not really make sense how Bible study turns into fish eating and eating peanut butter off a grown man’s toes.” [We've been trying to make sense of this foolishness too, but in the end, it's just silly men who have never grown up, getting paid to play silly games with kids who will eventually be inoculated against true Biblical Christianity.]

“The idea is to get students here to meet our Savior. They are getting all this crazy stuff out there in the world all the time. We are trying to show them that God is cooler.” [1. No, no, no. The "church" was never meant to be the place for people to "meet our Savior." The church is for the Believers, not the unbelievers. If an unbeliever attends a church service and he "meets our Savior" then great, but this was not the purpose of the assembly of the brethren. Actually reading your Bible would clarify the confusion.

2. So you're essentially using the old "bait and switch" tactic to sucker teens into your church? I guess if you're offering a fuzzy, non-offensive, feel-good Jesus then you can get away with it.

3. You're "crazy stuff" is somehow better than the "crazy stuff" in the world, how? Because you've "Christianized" it?

4. God is not "cool." For crying out loud, if you can't comprehend or even remotely understand the nature of God you have no business being a pastor. Have you forgotten that "cool" is defined by the world? Your god is an idol formed in the imaginations of your "creative team." You can keep your god. I'll stick to the true God revealed in Scripture who is not hip, cool, or what's happening now, but who is holy, holy, holy.]

Asked whether there was a religious lesson behind the grotesquerie, Wyatt offers, “It’s all about what it means to be fearless and know God is with you.” Pastor Kelley describes the “Fearless” stunts as metaphors for the courage it takes to be young and openly Christian. “It’s about being fearless, by allowing them to do something that took boldness, that they might possibly get made fun of for doing,” he says. “Standing up for Christ in the world requires you to be fearless.” [So let me get this straight. Standing up for Jesus requires boldness and fearlessness, but instead of instilling that in the youth by having them actually stand up for Jesus, or even showing them by example, instead you have them perform sick, twisted, and erotic games and this will somehow help them stand up for Jesus? And if they need to perform these juvenile games to stand up for Jesus then does that not mean that you're suggesting to them that their source of strength comes not from God but from them and their willingness to act like fools? Here's a novel idea: Try having them become "fearless" by actually proclaiming Jesus Christ, and start with you by boldly preaching Jesus Christ. Then encourage the one's that are really sincere to take missions trips to countries where standing up for Jesus will get you imprisoned, tortured and/or killed. Somehow I don't think the countless martyrs throughout church history and today needed to lick peanut butter off someone's toes in order to stand up for Jesus.]

Wyatt also points out that it’s much easier for a kid to talk about church with other teens when the conversation is about chugging a Happy Meal or bobbing for chicken feet. “They experience God here on Wednesday nights,” says Pastor Wyatt, “and they can’t always articulate that to their friends. This gives them something to say. ‘Wow, you’ve got to come to church, you’ve got to check this out. This is amazing! ’” [Of course it's easier to talk about Happy Meal chugging or bobbing for chicken feet if you're unregenerated. Preach the pure, unadulterated, hard truth of the gospel then sit back an watch the kids talk to other kids. A word of caution though, if any of them do get truly converted, they'll probably be telling other kids about Jesus Christ and his sacrifice instead of your church, and they probably won't remain in your church for very long either.]

“Unfortunately, somebody was offended, and we apologized right away,” says Pastor Wyatt. “But the other side of that is, there was a whole bunch of kids who gave their life to Christ that night. Ultimately, our goal is to get people into church and into a relationship with Jesus.” [Ah, the old "someone gave their life to Christ" card. Always employed when someone questions the worldly, Chirst-less, and wholly unbiblical marketing tactics of today's cool, hip, and relevant social clubs. Somehow, we're told not to judge them, but they are quick to judge others, claiming to know the hearts of these kids and pronounce that they're saved. Here's an experiment I suggest trying. Take these kids who you claim to have "given their life to Jesus," separate them from the toe-licking and armpit licking shenanigans, and teach them the hard things. Teach them the whole counsel of God. Teach them doctrine. Teach them that they are expected to lay down their life daily, that they're to die to self, that they're to take up their crosses daily and follow Christ. Teach them that those who choose to live holy lives will be persecuted. Teach them that friendship with the world is enmity to God and that those who love the things of this world are enemies of God. Then we'll check back in with you in six months and see where those kids who "gave their life to Christ" are. If they were truly converted they will be right there desiring more of the meat of the Word. If they were false converts they'll have left for the other megachurch down the street who has bowling/pizza nights, whip cream fights, rock concerts, gross-out games, and the weekly "rededicate your life to Christ" alter call.]

This article also interviews Karen McKinney, a director of youth ministries and associate professor at Bethel University who opposes the foolishness of what you’ve just read above. But just when you think there’s a voice of reason, we read this:

McKinney finds programs copying “Fear Factor” and other puke-inducing events to be a contradiction to the church’s message of stewardship. “What did we just teach?” she wonders rhetorically when told about the youth program. “What value is it when we know there are kids starving? … There are ways to teaching young people to be bold without wasting food.” [McKinney is about to offer an example of how she taught teens valuable lessons by means of a much better technique . Brace yourselves.] As an example, McKinney remembers how she was invited to speak about sexual boundaries to a teen group at a church in downtown St. Paul. After brief introductions, she broke the 12 students into two groups and told them they were going to play strip Pictionary. For every round lost, the losing group would have to take off an item of clothing. Before they even started, she says she could hear a 13-year-old girl say under her breath, “This is wrong.” But she said the group went through three rounds before the 13-year-old stood up and said, “I thought the topic was boundaries. We should not be playing this game.”McKinney then asked the other students if they also thought the game was wrong and why they didn’t voice those concerns. “They got the message loud and clear what it means to stand up when it comes to crossing these kinds of boundaries,” she says. Licking peanut butter off somebody’s armpit, she observes, crosses those boundaries without drawing valuable lessons for the Celebration students. “It’s just totally inappropriate,” she says. [So it's all right to "cross boundaries" as long as a lesson is learned? And encouraging 13-year-olds to play strip Pictionary is an acceptable ends-justifies-the-means lesson? Good grief, the inmates are running the asylum!]

Welcome to the American Christianity where worldly wisdom reigns from the pulpit and rules the day. Those who lower Christianity to such base levels are showing that they do not believe that the Gospel is enough to save as the Apostle Paul believed it was when under inspiration of the Holy Spirit he penned Romans 1:16: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes . . .”

Faith comes by hearing the Gospel, not by quaint little stories about how to be bold like Daniel while having kids perform gross and even erotic acts before their peers.

The defense commonly used by proponents of this worldly behavior in church is usually that they’re trying to reach a certain group, and in order to do that, they say, “you must first relate to that group and become like that group.” But I have to ask: If you have to reach people where they’re at, tell me, how do you reach the abortionist? How do you reach the homosexual? How do you reach the intravenous drug user? How do you reach the pedophile? I’ll stop there as I do not want to give these youth leaders any new ideas for their next big thing.

In seven years we went from teen girls feeling teen boys’ legs in youth group, to teens licking peanut butter off an adult’s feet and playing strip Pictionary. I can only imagine what the next seven years will bring.

I conclude with a quote from Gene Edward Veith who summed up the whole problem in his article posted above:

Status-conscious teenagers know that those who are so desperate to be liked that they will do anything to curry favor are impossible to respect. Young people may come to off-the-wall youth group meetings, but when they grow up, they will likely associate the church with other immature, juvenile phases of their lives, and Christianity will be something they will grow out of.

]]> http://theworksofgod.com/2009/10/14/church-of-the-disabled-part-2/ Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:00:18 +0000 John Knight http://theworksofgod.com/2009/10/14/church-of-the-disabled-part-2/

Last Friday I posted on the World Magazine article that highlighted a church in Anoka specifically for people with developmental disabilities.  It generated more comments than usual, comments that were thought-provoking and passionate.  Rather than let those comments disappear into the past, and knowing there might be others who would like to enter into this discussion or who have other opinions, I’m going to post those comments again, each in their entirety.

Certainly there are areas of disagreement.  Disability and conflict typically go together in this culture.  And hopefully nobody is shocked that those of us dealing with disability directly will also experience disagreement at times, even though we frequently link arms in common cause.

The Bible is full of disagreements which demonstrate God’s sovereignty over all things.  Barnabas and Paul had a ’sharp disagreement’ over including John Mark in their next trip together (Acts 15:39).  The ESV Study Bible notes that out of this disagreement came a doubling of their labors.  It also notes that both of their assistants, Mark and Silas, went on to lead significant ministries as well.  I am sure, however, that at the time those disagreements were painful for all involved, and little good was expected.  It is another demonstration that God always knows what he is doing, and frequently does not let us in on it until afterwards.

So, I have not changed my mind about what I wrote last week.  But I have been humbled to consider that there could be something better.  In our disagreements, let us pray for wisdom, for humble authenticity, and for God himself to reveal what is best.  But let us never, ever be neutral or resigned about the current situation and press on, so that everyone of all abilities would know this God who is sovereign over all things.

And with that, four responses to last week’s post:

Steve Burchett is a dad of a child with a disability, a pastor and writes the blog, Christ Communicator.

Thanks for sharing about this. I eagerly anticipate and thoroughly enjoy your thoughts on these issues.

I agree with you that this whole issue is in fact a wake-up call to the church. Interestingly, I received an email this week from a father who was struggling through family worship with his family because their child with special needs is quite disruptive, causing the other children to lose their focus. I tried to encourage him to keep plugging away, and that his and his wife’s patience would preach powerfully to their children about the patience and grace and love of God in Christ. I also shared with him that, in a sense, his children are at a great advantage because, when his family gathers together for family worship, they regularly get to see a picture of what a local church should look like. In other words, the church is not just for the same types of people, but it is a diverse group of people with different looks, needs, levels of maturity, and abilities. Granted, the family gathered at home is not a local church, but I was just speaking of the picture.

Thanks again, brother. I hope this important conversation continues for a lifetime, and that God turns our ideas and desires into realities.

Warmly and for God’s Glory,
Steve

Jeff McNair is a professor of special education at California Baptist University and writes the blog, Disabled Christianity.

Steve,
I ran across you post on Twitter, “Church of the disabled good idea” and found your perspective interesting. Thanks for your thoughtful post.

I can’t tell you how long I have been waiting for people in the church to even want to have the dialogue you describe. I have been trying to awaken churches to the presence of persons with disabilities in the community for many years.

As a special educator, I am aware of the progress that has been made in the secular society in the integration of persons with various disabilities. The secular society has clearly led the way in this area, at least in the last 40 years or so. You must understand that the model proposed in these segregated churches is something that was abandoned by the secular world perhaps 30 years ago. Those in disability fields would not celebrate a segregated church. In reality they would shake their heads at its inappropriateness in modern times. It is not that I care necessarily what the secular world thinks, however, should we not be leading the way in loving and caring for people, not doing things that even the secular world would think uncaring? You need only visit your public school, or talk to public school teachers to understand that the secular society has moved to inclusive practices for persons with various disabilities (intellectual disabilities in this case), in spite of the fact that their programs are largely built around the delivery of knowlege.

Churches on the contrary, are supposedly built around notions of faith development, and perhaps one of the best ways to develop faith in people is to have people in need around those who have the potential to meet need but are either unaware at best or uncaring at worst relative to those needs. Those who would segregate people with disabilities do favors neither those with disabilities nor those without disabilities. Rather they remove responsibility for one’s neighbor from the rank and file church member, and they communicate that those with disabilities do not belong with the rest of us. They also imply that they have nothing to offer those without disabilitie which I find really offensive. Particularly in light of Bible passages like 1 Corinthians 12:22. This passage tells me that “those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensible.” So, I take those parts of the Body of Christ which are arguably indispensable, and remove them from the Body, and put them over there? Take them away from the rest of the body? Why would I think that that would be a good thing to do? It is unbiblical, and reveals more about who I am then it does about who those individuals with disabilities are.

So to me it is tragic that we celebrate people who are taking us in the absolute wrong direction from a Biblical perspective. I also think your choice between doing nothing and doing the wrong thing also does not help. Jesus was very clear in Mark 7 when he said, “You let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men” (v 8 ) and then “Thus you nullify the word of God by your traditions that you have handed down. And you do many things like that” (v 13). The reason that people feel they need segregated churches is that for people to be present in integrated churches would imply that we need to change our traditions. As Jesus said, we would prefer to keep our traditions and reject the word of God. Solutions which reject the word of God are not solutions for the Christian.

McNair

Sue Hume is involved with one of the largest disability ministries I have encountered, the Barnabas Ministry at Grace Church of Eden Prairie.  She is a mother of a child with a disability and writes the blog, Hope for Special Moms.

In the perfect world, children and adults with disabilities would be welcomed in every church. But sadly they are not.

I have attended one of Don Anderson’s weekly services and was moved by the joy and fellowship I saw in the people who attended. They worshipped freely according to their individual abilities in a manner that would not be tolerated in typical Sunday services. Most of them came with parents and caregivers who also heard the Word.

I strongly disagree with Dr. McNair. Don Anderson is bringing the Gospel to those who aren’t able to hear it any other way. As a mother of teenagers with intellectual disabilities, I hope there will be a “Don Anderson” in their lives when I’m no longer around.

Tammy A is a new contributor to the comments, and has introduced me to Handi*Vagelism Ministries International.

I am so interested in the discussion here. I am a person with a disability myself. Because my disability is only phyical Cerebral Palsy) and I can freely go in and out of most churches…the issue of where I worship is not affected.
However, for seven years now I have served with Handi*Vangelism Ministries Intl. and am now working daily with others who have various disabilities.
If I understand both perspectives of Jeff and Steve here I think that they are not necessarily saying that what Don is doing is wrong per se…just that it is not best and what the church should ultimatly look like. I so agree on this point! I personally would hate it if someone told me that because of my disability I had to go to this church or specifically in this room because this is the room for those with disabilities. I have been greatly blessed by my interation with others with disabilites and they have taught me much about the Body of Christ and my walk with Jesus, but I am also blessed by interation with those we call “normal”. and desire to interact with everyone in the Body for mutual strenghtening and encouragement.
Hopefully, Don’s church will attract more people without disabilities(as most say) such as Sue above… and then it will become a church were everyone worships God together.
And by the way, I am really wrestling recently with the idea of catagorizing people…those with disabilities are here. Those with mental health issues here…those who are divorced here…the list goes on and on. Are we all not people who have needs and weeknesses and struggles. Must we put people in a box according to what the have or what they experienced in their lives? What would Jesus do if He were here and saw all of our needs? Just some thoughts that I have not come to a conclusion on. I just want to learn to see everyone with the eyes of JESUS.

World Magazine last month ran an article on a church in Anoka which specifically serves those with disabilities.  The article describes the work of one man, Don Anderson, who decided to actively pursue ministry with and for those with developmental disabilities.  World Magazine summarizes it this way:

So instead of trying to integrate the disabled into the church of the able, Anderson, now 52, integrates the able into the church of the disabled. Now an ordained pastor, he holds a church service twice a week where the developmentally disabled sing in the choir and lead the music, take the offering, read Scripture when they can, offer prayer requests, and make as much joyful noise as they want to.

For his work, Don Anderson and his church, Christ for People, has been nominated for a Hope Award for Effective Compassion by World Magazine.

Not everyone wants him to win.

Jeff McNair, who writes the blog Disabled Christianity and who teaches at California Baptist University is concerned about what this says about segregating developmentally disabled people.

I don’t mean to be unkind but I honestly pray that group will not receive the award, because it sends the exact wrong message about what the church should be doing relative to persons with disabilities. The answer is not to separate them from those without disabilities but to fully integrate them so that their prophetic presence will change us to be what God intends us to be. Both World magazine and this group are actually impeding the prophetic presence, and by impeding their presence, they impede the prophetic will of God.

I believe Dr. McNair when he says he doesn’t mean to be unkind, and he takes great pains in his post to say he doesn’t question Don Anderson’s motives.  But he uses rather strong language:

Those who do these segregated churches are actually doing harm to the larger Body of Christ because they are removing the prophetic presence from the larger church that would cause it to change.

I do not agree with Dr. McNair.  It is preferable, and what we are pursuing at Bethlehem, to include people with disabilities in the life of the church. I agree with him on that point.

But when the choice is between a church that specifically addresses the needs of people with developmental disabilities, or no opportunity for church at all for those individuals with developmental disabilities, I choose the former.  People with developmental disabilities should not always have to wait until ‘normal’ people get how valuable they are.

I think Dr. McNair would agree with me that this is an indictment on and a huge loss for churches who do not actively seek to include people with developmental disabilities.  But that indictment should not fall on Don Anderson, who has actively sought to do something about this situation.  Dr. McNair is pointing his finger at the wrong problem.

So, Don Anderson, if you treasure Jesus like the article suggests, count me in the group that hopes you win.  And also count me as one who hopes that more God-centered churches wake up and actively pursue, welcome, include and enjoy the giftings of those with developmental disabilities.

What do you think?

The current issue of World Magazine has a helpful essay by Andree Seu entitled “Control That Tongue: It Isn’t Legalistic to Strive for Greater Obedience.” In an age when exhortations to godliness are often mistaken for legalism, Seu encourages us to put practical holiness in its proper place. Here’s a snatch:

I love to be reminded of God’s covenant which binds me to Him like a strong cable. But I find it just as invigorating–and not at all burdensome–to be spurred on to greater faithfulness. Covenant is covenant, after all; a pledge of faithfulness between parties; initiated by God, to be sure, but with my own treaty stipulations.

Read the whole thing here.

HT: Pastor Brooks.

Pain and suffering are the gifts that keep on giving | Marvin Olasky, writing in World Magazine:

In a World Magazine blog from last Friday, Marcia Segelstein comments about Episcopal church Reverend Katherine Ragsdale’s remarks on abortion from a speech a few years back.  Ragsdale said:

When a woman wants a child but can’t afford one, because she hasn’t the education necessary for a sustainable job, or access to health care, or day care, or adequate food, it is the abysmal priorities of our nation, the lack of social supports, the absence of justice that are the tragedies; the abortion is a blessing.

And when a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe affordable abortion, there is not a tragedy in sight; only blessing.

The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply blessing. These are the two things I want you, please, to remember – abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you say it. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done.

According to Ragsdale, Jesus’ poor, helpless, husband-less, jobless, teenage mother should have had an abortion.

I can understand a non-Christian saying, “I don’t give a rip what God thinks.”  Well and good for you, my friend.  But this is coming from a self-proclaimed “Christian”!  In order for us to know what God thinks, we need to actually read the Bible.  Here’s a sampling:

• For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb (Ps. 139:13).
• The king of Egypt said…”When you serve as midwife to the Hebrew women and see them on the birthstool, if it is a son, you shall kill him, but if it is a daughter, she shall live.”  But the midwives feared God and did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live (Ex. 1:15, 16-17).
• “For he [i.e. John the Baptizer] will be great before the Lord.  And he must not drink wine or strong drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb” (Lk. 1:15).
• And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb…she exclaimed with a loud cry…”For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy” (Lk. 1:41, 42, 44).

So what do you think?  Is abortion a blessing? (Non-Christians feel free to weigh in, too.  Everyone, please be gentle.)

World Magazine, one of the major critics of the TNIV Bible, released an article titled Refreshing reversal. In it they still show they can’t get facts straight. A few of the claims I think could be challenged.

Stated…

Moe Girkins, who early in 2008 became president and CEO of Zondervan Publishing Co., quickly developed a concern about the collapse over the last decade of Zondervan’s worldwide dominance in Bible sales.

I would like to see some evidence that Girkins had “developed a concern” over a collapse in Bible sales. I have never seen a public statement regarding anything hinting at this. I’m not saying it isn’t there, but an actual quote would make that claim more credible.

Stated…

…in close cooperation with the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) and the International Bible Society (IBS)—began replacing the traditional NIV with revisions…

It did? when? Alternate NIV’s were released, like the NIrV, the NIVI in the UK and later the TNIV worldwide, but the last version of the NIV, the ‘84 version was never replaced.

Stated…

By some accounts, the NIV, which had enjoyed as much as a 50 percent market share, may have slipped to not much more than half that figure.

“…may have slipped…?” There’s a lot of ambiguity in that claim. I would like to see some hard numbers. Considering the word “may” was used, it seems numbers weren’t consulted.

WORLD Magazine today posted a great article on the topic of Obama’s czars, particularly amidst the resignation of the communist Van Jones.  Read that article here.  Also, related to this, read Tony Perkins’s artcile from this past July (written on the FRC Blog), which I mentioned here.

Obama’s hand-picking of radical extremists and Statists has not been limited to Van Jones.

What about Obama’s picking of czars to begin with?  See a great clip of Judge Andrew Napolitano discussion of the constitutionality of same:

Once again…Mr. President, what about that “transparency” thing you promised?

I had posted about a number of problems with a piece on the World Magazine website titled Translators: TNIV was a mistake. The title itself is misleading and in the article they had ran with erroneous information from a website story from Christianity Today. They added an editors note after more bloggers started to contact them and write about it. Two of which are here (Scripture Zealot) and here (Just after sunrise).

In the editors note it stated, “…See WORLD’s coverage in next week’s magazine for a fuller report.” The scary part in this is, them trying to “juggle” facts. Hopefully none of the facts will be “glass”, but I expect a mess after they are done nevertheless.

I’ve concluded that World Magazine is like a tabloid. In a post titled Translators: TNIV was a mistake, is misleading. The reasons is the “Translators” as a whole, haven’t spoken. Nor is this title completely what staff from Biblica and Zondervan meant with their statements. Also, the TNIV would have an impossible time qualifying as a “true” gender-neutral translation.

From worldmag.com,

Translators of the controversial, gender-neutral Today’s New International Version are now saying they made a mistake, reports Christianity Today. Biblica CEO Keith Danby said,

“Some of the criticism was justified. We fell short of the trust that was placed in us and we made some important errors on the way. … We let down our partners.”

christianitytoday.com states,

An earlier version of this blog post said that Keith Danby’s remark that “some of the criticism was justified and we need to be brutally honest about the mistakes that were made” was in regard to the Today’s New International Version. He was discussing the earlier New International Version Inclusive Language Edition, released in the U.K. in 1996. I [Ted Olsen] sincerely apologize for the error.

The quote World mag. is quoting isn’t for the TNIV. Let’s see if World magazine corrects their post…

Representative Michele Bachmann

I normally never link to WND, because they are out on the fringe, but this story seems ok.(H/T Commenter MC)

Let’s learn a bit about Michele!

Excerpt:

She began her political career simply, as a Christian mom concerned about the content of school papers her children brought home in their backpacks, but today she has become one of the leading defenders of liberty and conservative principles on Capitol Hill.

[...]Bachmann, a federal tax litigation attorney before serving in elected office, told WND that she is “first and foremost a mother.” In the late 90s, the mother of five and foster mom to another 23 children through the years, grew concerned about what her foster kids were bringing home from the public school.

“Through the Goals 2000 program, the federal government was pushing knowledge, facts and information out of classroom study, substituting them with a study of attitudes, values and beliefs,” she said, “but not necessarily the values that moms and dads would like.”

[...]“I started my career in politics believing the federal government should not have a role in the classroom,” Bachmann told WND. “Going forward, we have to pare back dramatically the size, scope and reach of the federal government. It’s extending its hand over almost every area and aspect of people’s lives, and that needs to come back if we are to remain free and prosperous. We can’t be free and prosperous if we go in the direction we’re heading.”

[...]“I believe in equality of opportunity, not equality of result, and that’s the big dividing line between liberals and conservatives,” she said. “Conservatives believe that each individual is important and deserves protection of their inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

“These rights come from our creator,” she continued, “Government neither gives them nor does government have the power to take them away. … I believe my job as a member of Congress is to secure those inalienable rights.

“The heart and soul of who we are as a nation is in the Declaration of Independence; the Constitution is the framework for how we uphold those rights; and the Bill of Rights goes on to secure those rights to the individual, protecting individual rights from big government,” she said.

[...]“Over the weekend, I read a 1986 book – ‘Destroying Democracy’ by James T. Bennett and Thomas J. Dilorenzo – that talked about ACORN’s agenda, and it was as fresh as everything President Obama has been advancing since he took office,” she said. “Complete nationalization of health care, energy tax, government taking over the economy – now that we have ‘bailout nation,’ the U.S. government owns or controls 30 percent of the American economy. If Obama gets his way and effectively nationalizes 18 percent of the nation’s wealth in healthcare, that will put 48 percent of our economy controlled or owned by the federal [government]. That’s outlandish.

“Americans gave got to melt the phone lines of the Democrats on the health care bill,” she continued. “If the president gets his way with nationalized health care, it will be almost impossible to ever turn it back and restore to us our freedom.”

[...]Bachmann explained much of the ridicule she endures is because powerful women with conservative views don’t fit liberals’ desired image.

“I’m not afraid to be a social or fiscal conservative, and that doesn’t fit their template,” she told WND. “Democrats see women as yet one more dependency group, but I defy that. I don’t need government programs to succeed. I worked my way through college, my husband and I started our own business, and we didn’t need the government to be the answer.

“I also think they’re upset that I’m willing to go on radio and TV shows and call them out on their policies,” she continued. “They’ve thrown just about everything they can throw at me and they haven’t prevailed yet, and I think that infuriates them.”

And would she run for President?

“If I felt that’s what the Lord was calling me to do, I would do it,” she answered. “When I have sensed that the Lord is calling me to do something, I’ve said yes to it. But I will not seek a higher office if God is not calling me to do it. That’s really my standard.

“If I am called to serve in that realm I would serve,” she concluded, “but if I am not called, I wouldn’t do it.”

She is probably the politician who best reflects my views across the board. She understands what policies men want. And she loves Christian apologetics.

Now consider a little more about her revealed by the extremely left-wing Minneapolis Star-Tribune – (probably the worst newspaper on the planet behind the New York Times and Los Angeles Times).

Excerpt:

Michele Marie Amble was born in 1956 into a family of Norwegian Lutheran Democrats. When she was young, they moved from Iowa to Minnesota, where she was an A student and a cheerleader and had hair to her waist. She was named Miss Congeniality in the Miss Anoka competition.

In 1970, her parents divorced, and her father moved to California.

Her mother, Jean, got a job at the First National Bank in Anoka, earning $4,800 a year — not enough to keep up the payments on their home in Brooklyn Park. She sold the house and moved the family to a small apartment in Anoka.

So when sixth-grader Michele wanted contact lenses, she knew she had to tackle the expense herself.

She began babysitting at 50 cents an hour, stuffing dollar bills and quarters into a small bank in her room for two years until, in the summer before ninth grade, she’d earned enough.

Then, one afternoon as she bicycled along West River Road, a contact lens flew out of her eye.

She and her mother got down on their hands and knees, peering at every glint in the gravel, hoping that they wouldn’t have to start pawing through the brush that hemmed the highway. Finally, they rose, empty-handed, to a loss that felt enormous. Somehow, Jean found the money to buy a replacement, recalling that she could hardly let her daughter’s determination go unrewarded.

Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs interviewed her, and so did World Magazine.

She is accepting contributions for her Senate race here.

You can view some videos of her passionate, articulate speeches here if you need convincing.

One does not come across too many bona fide evangelical members of the cultural intelligentsia.  Eric Metaxas of New York City is one of the few.

I’ve come into contact with Metaxas’s writing and speaking through a variety of venues.  For those who are not familiar with him, here’s a snatch from his website bio:

“In a decidedly eclectic career, Eric Metaxas has written for VeggieTales, Chuck Colson, and the New York Times, three things not ordinarily in the same sentence. He is a best-selling author whose biographies, children’s books, and works of popular apologetics have been translated into Albanian, Portuguese, Spanish, Korean, and Macedonian. The Hartford Courant has declared figuring him out “like trying to stick a pushpin in a cyclone.”

World Magazine recently did a couple of stories on Metaxas and his unique work in the first city of America.  Here’s the teaser to a story about the program Socrates in the City, an initiative run by the writer:

“A meeting begins at the Union Club in Manhattan, one of those elegant places with a rotunda, columns, three-tiered crystal chandeliers, marble floors, oil paintings in gilt frames of distinguished-looking gentlemen, and gold and blue swag drapes. Two hundred guests sit on upholstered empire chairs as host Eric Metaxas admonishes them: “This is a traditional club with traditional rules. Also, I might add, no spitting.”

Metaxas says this about the Clapham Sect, the group Metaxas and others seem to have taken as their role model:

“Wilberforce is a role model for Metaxas because he was both deeply religious and delightfully witty—”ardently evangelistic, always thinking of ways to bring those he knew to think about the state of their souls . . . but he never came across as a dour moralist; all who met him thought him winsome and full of joy.”

Metaxas insists that Wilberforce and his friends “were not mere culture warriors, trying to climb over the ramparts to take control, but rather were already insiders who knew how to behave like insiders, and who would do their best to change things from within. They knew how to move in their high circles of influence; knew the unspoken language of those circles; and knew when to push and when not to push and whom to ask about this or that, and whom not to ask.”

World Magazine’s Marvin Olasky also just published an interview with Metaxas that covers the culture’s lack of familiarity with Christ and Christianity.

I’m personally encouraged by Metaxas’s unique ministry and the exciting work of the gospel that is currently unfolding in NYC, with groups like the Kairos Journal/BibleMesh, The King’s College, World Magazine, and Redeemer Presbyterian Church leading the way.  There seems to be something of a gospel groundswell in Gotham that reminds one of the efforts of Wilberforce and his friends.

Here’s hoping that the Lord will continue to bless the work of this man and his fellow modern-day Claphamites. And here’s hoping that younger evangelicals will investigate the unique program of Metaxas and find much in it to emulate in seeking to reach the lost “tribes” of our world with the gospel and to season our world with Christian “salt”.

I would encourage readers of this blog to purchase Metaxas’s books.  He has a weighty mass-market tome on Dietrich Bonhoeffer coming out soon that looks terrific.  He has already published several texts, each of which you can find here.

World magazine had chosen Michael O’Brien’s Island of the World as one of its Top 40 books of the past two years! Read more here!

Buy it on Amazon!

Buy it on B&N!

Plenty going on of late.  Enjoy.

Fighter verse song CD’s now available

The fighter verse song CD that my husband, Mr. TommyD, has been involved with producing and recording, are now available via Children Desiring God.  We got a copy early and I think I can sing almost every song (or verse) on there from memory, as can the kids.  It’s great.  Check it out.  

God’s Word is powerful (especially in the ESV).

Pixar’s Up Does Not Disappoint

We saw Up on Saturday, and I enjoyed it immensely.  How a kid’s film can poignantly, yet subtly, cover topics such as the beauty of marital life, the pain of infertility, the loneliness of the elderly, and the heartache of divorce, all while being good for kids and keeping it’s viewers feeling “up” and laughing is beyond me.  

It is a spark of genius.

An Ever-Present Teleprompter

NBC has some nerve making fun of President Obama’s use of the teleprompter.  Next thing we know, they’ll be asking him actual questions at those silly little press conferences.  Alright, alright, simmer down.  I’m just teasing a bit.  It’s not like his teleprompter has its own blog or anything.  Seriously though, watch this montage.  You’ll chuckle.

Buckle Up!

Wearing a seat belt has been the law in MN for quite some time, but until now, you couldn’t be pulled over for not wearing one.  Now, not wearing your seat belt is a primary offense in MN.  And an expensive one at that.  Get ready to shell out $105 buckeroos for this safety violation.  

As they say, click it or tick-et.

Must-read WORLD article by my Dad, Linked to by Challies!

I know I already told you about this, but hey, cut me some slack.  It’s my dad!  And it’s a great piece.  So if you haven’t read about life-loving doctors and their valiant stand against the culture of death, go do so.  And uber-blogger Tim Challies linked to it in his A La Carte section.

Reverend Katherine Ragsdale is a soon-t0-be president of the Episcopal Divinity School, near Harvard. In this she will become the first female president of this school, so this is ground-breaking in their circles.

Yet she made the news recently, and I picked up her incredibly shocking story in World Magazine–a well-respected and very successful magazine which I enjoy reading. This story was cramped into the back page, but it should have been headlines–of the New York Times.

In one of her recent messages, she taught her disciples in this way:

Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you say it: abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you!

I was floored by her declaration. It never occurred to me that there were people in this world that believed this. Hilary Clinton could not go out and say this, yet she is arguably one of the most liberal Americans in politics–she would get blitzkrieged by the media. Any pro-choice (call it by it’s name, pro-abortion) backer will tell you that abortion is a necessity, by their standards, and a way to help out women in tragedy. Ragsdale calls abortion an incredibly positive thing , something to be sought after:

When a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe, affordable abortion–there is not a tragedy in sight–only blessing! The ability to enjoy God’s gifts and call is simply blessing.”

Really? Her view of abortion is very much in a minority so-far, to journalists she still does not exist. But what if her ideas take off? She is opening the door to bring in the “blessing” of abortion. Ragsdale also goes on to share that those who work in the abortion clinics, and who help women make the “right choice” are holy. Holy!

Rev. Ragsdale not only is pro-abortion, she is anti-birth.

So where do her ideas come from? She didn’t just wake up one day and decide to believe that “Abortion is a blessing”.

In 2005 it started showing in her messages that she had very strong feminist feelings. In 2003 she came out and stated that she was a lesbian, and she defended it by saying that it was all about: “Me, me, me.”

None of these ideas that she holds belong in the church–they never have been and never should be. The Bible is the center of the Christian Faith, and her sexism is a form of racism, her lesbianism is answerable to the same sin that had Sodom and Gomorrah burnt to the ground, and her selfishness is the greatest of all sins–pride (the want to become God, to control ones life).

But this is not her worst crime against the Faith. Also in 2003, on Easter Sunday, she stated that the Resurrection may never have happened. Going even farther back, to Easter in 2002, she said this:

The suffering and death of Jesus, according to the theory of Atonement, pays for our sins and buys our salvation. It’s an interesting theory, but not one that I find compelling.

Rev. Ragsdale, you are not only terrible in your theology (Who did Christ have to pay for our salvation?), you have missed the boat completely. You are a blind woman leading the blind.

There is a good reason why every single one of the Epistles talk so adamantly against false teaching and false teachers–they exist, they always have and always will.

Rev. Ragsdale is teaching heresy. In defense of the Resurrection and the death of Christ, the Apostle Paul has this to say:

1Co 15:19  If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.

1Co 1:18  For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

and

Gal 6:14  But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.

To put it simply: the Salvation of the world rests upon the facts of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I am sorry Rev. Ragsdale, you cannot pick and choose the parts of the Bible that you enjoy; you either believe every single word of it to be true and inspired of God, or you believe none of it.

I have always viewed abortion as a money issue. Aborting children is a money-making venture. And obviously a very well-paying one (especially with government money pouring in)! Abortion clinics are not open to help women, they are open to provide a money-making service. What, you think volunteers work there?

Most people who are pro-abortion do not think abortion is a blessing, Rev. Ragsdale is a minuscule minority in this. Her views absolutely blew me away, because I have never heard such a declaration, and by a so called “Christian”. We are in big trouble with these kinds of people paving the way for the future of Christianity in America.

But what about 5 years from now, will she still be a minority?

I will leave you with a quote from John Piper towards President Barack Obama. It was in response to the Presidents address in the celebration of the 36th-year anniversary of Roe vs. Wade (when abortion was deemed legal in America):

“No, Mr. President, you are not “protecting women”, you are authorizing the destruction of five…hundred…thousand…little women every year.”

I could not agree more, Mr. Piper. Abortion is murder, science almost proves this and our conscience (unless we suppress it)  leaves us without a doubt.

To Rev. Ragsdale, I say this:

No, Reverend Ragsdale, abortion is not a blessing and those that actively endorse, willingly let it happen, and instruct others to believe as you do will be judged. Only God has control over life and death, and the murder of one-million children each year in this country shall not be overlooked by God.

Will not the judge of the whole earth do what is just? (As Abraham appealed to God when he heard of the incoming doom on Sodom and Gomorrah).

In America, we are blindly committing murder–or are we really blind?

Guts and grace

World Magazine WEB EXTRA May 21, 2009

BOOKS: WORLD’s Lynn Vincent teams up with Sarah Palin on a book that promises to set the record straight about the Alaska governor’s personal and political life | Mickey McLean

Photos by (from left) Sean Haffey and Ted S. Warren/AP

After last week’s announcement that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would pen a memoir to set the record straight about her personal and political life, HarperCollins revealed Thursday that WORLD Magazine Features Editor Lynn Vincent has been signed on as Palin’s collaborator.

The book, not yet titled, will be co-published by HarperCollins imprint Harper and HarperCollins-owned Zondervan and is scheduled for release in the spring of 2010.

During her 10 years as a senior writer and features editor for WORLD, Vincent has covered politics, culture, and hot-button social issues such as abortion for the biweekly news magazine. She has also specialized in narrative journalism.

“Lynn has been WORLD’s best writer of action stories ranging from shots fired in a Texas church to raging fires on California hillsides,” said WORLD Editor in Chief Marvin Olasky. “She combines guts and grace, as does Sarah Palin, so the book should be outstanding.”

Vincent, 46, has collaborated on four previous memoirs. Her most popular collaboration, Same Kind of Different As Me (Thomas Nelson, 2006), tells the remarkable story of Ron Hall, a wealthy white art dealer, and Denver Moore, an illiterate homeless black man, as their lives converge unexpectedly. The book has sold nearly half a million copies and has stayed on the New York Times best-seller list for more than 59 consecutive weeks, including 29 weeks at No. 15 or above. Through speaking engagements by Hall and Moore, the book has helped raise more than $30 million for homeless shelters nationwide.

“Having worked for more than a decade with Lynn Vincent in what is often a man’s world, I know she brings a rare kind of strong-mindedness and tender-heartedness to every assignment,” said WORLD Editor Mindy Belz. “Lynn is a tenacious reporter and an exacting writer—and I’m not sure when she sleeps.”

While Vincent works with Palin on her memoir, she will take a leave of absence from her writing for WORLD and its online counterparts, WORLDmag.com and WorldMagBlog.

http://www.worldmag.com/webextra/15432

Straight time ABORTION: A pro-life Oakland pastor chooses jail over a plea bargain—and leads prisoners to Christ | Lynn Vincent

For 19 days in March and April, Walter Hoye was locked in a cell with 29 other prisoners at the Santa Rita jail near Oakland, Calif. There were times when he wished he could have stayed longer.
When the metal door first clanged shut behind him on March 20, Hoye, 52, decided the space was really more of a cage than a cell. A metal grid penning in prisoners. Fifteen bunks lining two walls. Two toilets and a urinal for all 30 men, and a shower that inmates had gradually transformed into a pornographic shrine.
As Hoye made his way to an empty bunk, a few prisoners, mostly black and Latino, dogged his path. “You smuggle in any drugs, man?” one of them asked.
“No,” Hoye said quietly.

Then the veteran inmates left him alone, he told me, except for “one of the brothers who was kind enough to help me make up my bed.”
A few minutes later, another man walked over to Hoye’s bunk and jabbed his finger at a newspaper he was holding. “This you?” he said, eyeing Hoye skeptically.
Hoye peered at the Oakland Tribune headline: “Anti-abortion pastor chooses jail.”
“Yeah, that’s me,” he said.
In the next moment, the inmate was striding up and down the length of the cell, announcing, “Hey, he don’t have to be here! He turned down probation! He doing straight time for what he believed in!”
It was true: On Feb. 19, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Stuart Hing sentenced Walter Hoye, a Missionary Baptist minister, to 30 days in jail after Hoye refused a plea deal that included three years’ probation, a small fine, and an order that he stay at least 100 yards away from Family Planning Specialists, an Oakland abortion clinic.
Passionate about the sky-high abortion rate among African-Americans, Hoye began offering men and women assistance at the clinic in 2006. About one in three Oakland residents is black, compared with a statewide African-American population of 6 percent. And though blacks make up only 12 percent of the U.S. population, they account for one-third of all abortions performed in the United States. More than three in 10 black women abort their unborn children.
According to the 2006 census, deaths now exceed live births among African-Americans. “We’re no longer replacing ourselves,” Hoye said. “So we’re not using terms like holocaust and genocide just to elicit a response. It’s the truth.”
In response, once a week Hoye stood quietly outside Family Planning Specialists with a sign that said, “Jesus loves you and your baby. Let us help.” When people approached the clinic, Hoye would ask their permission to speak with them about abortion alternatives; he also offered them pamphlets describing available help.
In 2007, pro-abortion clinic “escorts” began to show up in groups, surrounding Hoye and impeding his movement. They blocked his sign with sheets of blank cardboard and shouted down his low-key offers of help. When that didn’t scare Hoye off, clinic managers lobbied the Oakland city council and in December 2007, the council instituted a “bubble-zone” ordinance applicable within a 100-foot radius of any Oakland abortion clinic. The law made it a crime to “approach within eight feet of any person seeking to enter” a “reproductive health care facility” in order to offer literature, display a sign, or engage in “oral protest, education, or counseling.”
“This law is horribly unconstitutional,” Hoye said. “It allows abortion clinics to decide which U.S. citizens are allowed to retain their constitutional right to free speech.”
Represented by Life Legal Defense Fund (LLDF), Hoye challenged the ordinance in court. The case is still pending, but in May 2008, Oakland public attorneys acting in cooperation with clinic managers charged Hoye with “unlawful approaches” to women, and “force, threat of force, or physical obstruction.”
What prosecutors did not know was that LLDF attorneys possessed four hours of uncut videotape documenting Hoye’s activities outside the clinic on the dates in question. At trial in January 2009, the tapes impeached the testimony of clinic director Jackie Barbic, who claimed that Hoye repeatedly broke the 8-foot rule and that she and a patient had to put up their hands to fend him off. Instead, the tapes showed Hoye standing still as Barbic approached him; then they showed Hoye walking away. No incident shown on the tape matched Barbic’s testimony, and even clinic escorts testified that Hoye was always cordial and never obstructed anyone’s path or used threats or force.
Inexplicably, the jury still found Hoye guilty. At sentencing, the prosecutor recommended the probation and the clinic stay-away order—or two years in jail. When Hoye refused the stay-away order, Judge Hing appeared “surprised,” Hoye said. “The judge was essentially asking me to stop trying to help men and women outside an abortion clinic, and I just would not voluntarily give up my First Amendment rights.”
In February, Hing levied a sentence of 30 days and Hoye reported to the Santa Rita jail a month later. After the newspaper-reading inmate touted the Tribune article to the other prisoners—many of them inner-city drug dealers whose highest aspiration was to stay out of prison, they clamored to know why a man would choose jail over freedom. From that moment on, Hoye found himself in constant demand.
“I would be holding court with about 30 guys, explaining why I did what I did,” he said. “I explained what an abortion actually does, that it takes an innocent human life. We held prayer vigils, we had Bible studies. I must have counseled and mentored guys all day and all night. It got to the point where we started talking seriously about Christ.”
Most of the men in the cage at first mouthed pro-choice slogans, Hoye said. “But when I forced them to complete the sentence, ‘I believe that a woman has a right to choose to kill an innocent life,’ they couldn’t do it.”
One morning at about 2:30 a.m., a good-looking young man named Terrell approached Hoye’s bunk and asked what actually goes on during an abortion. Using his fingers to simulate a woman’s legs spreading, Hoye showed Terrell how the abortionist inserts a vacuum aspirator and sucks out the developing child.
Terrell, 18, told Hoye he had gotten his girlfriend pregnant and that she had aborted. “She made the decision,” he said. “It was her choice.”
“Yes, I know that, but what did you do?” Hoye replied. “Did you offer to marry her?”
Terrell shook his head. “No, I didn’t.”
“Did you offer to help her raise the child?”
“No, I didn’t.”
“Did you tell her that you love her and that you were going to go the distance with her as a man should, even if she decided to give the child up for adoption?”
“No, no, I didn’t,” Terrell said, his eyes filling with tears. “I never knew. No one ever told me what an abortion is. No one ever made it plain.”
When Terrell understood that he had, “perhaps because of his own lack of participation, been complicit in the murder of his own child, it really broke him,” Hoye said.
Before Terrell went back to his own bunk that night, Hoye prayed with him. “I told him God could forgive him, that what he’d done wasn’t an unforgivable sin.”
But the conversation didn’t end then. Terrell continued to visit with Hoye. “He began to understand that men have a responsibility to women, and vowed that, for him, an abortion would never happen again. He came to me a young man in jail for dealing drugs, trying to make some money and live the large life. I began to see him grow up.”

Released from jail on April 7, Hoye rejoined his wife, Lori, in their Oakland home. Today, he is not sorry for his choice. “I’ve been a jail chaplain in jail before, and even had the privilege of being a guest preacher at San Quentin. Being an inmate is completely different. I was actually one of them and it gave me a different kind of credibility. I’m sure my adversary meant my incarceration for evil, but God used it for good.”

Copyright © 2009 WORLD Magazine
Articles cannot be reproduced without permission
May 09, 2009, Vol. 24, No. 9