Here is and article from Joseph Farah written shortly after 9/11. I excerpted a small portion because they don't let you reproduce the whole article from that site. Please click on the title to read the rest.
The Bible and Self Defense
After my plea to Americans last week to buy firearms as a first step to fighting terrorism, a number of Christians wrote challenging my prescription as unbiblical, unscriptural and ungodly.
Wrong.
The Bible couldn't be clearer on the right – even the duty – we have as believers to self-defense.
------------
The rest of the article makes some interesting points. What would the outcome have been if there had been one or two concealed carry permit holders legally armed on the planes that were used for such destruction on 9/11? I don't expect we will ever know, because our society will never give up on the idea that making guns illegal in certain places will make those places safer.
---Katie
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Christianity and Self-Defense
Should Christians defend themselves against people who would do them harm? Here is the first of several articles on the subject that I found interesting.
Christianity and Self-Defense
Jesus is well known for His continued emphasis on love, forgiveness, and “turning the other cheek.” It is therefore surprising to find Jesus advising the disciples to buy a sword in Luke 22:36: “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” Did Jesus in this verse advocate the use of a sword for self-defense purposes?
This is an issue over which Christians have vehemently disagreed for many centuries.
“TURN THE OTHER CHEEK” ALWAYS? It is true that Jesus said to turn the other cheek in Matthew 5:38-42. However, many scholars do not believe pacifism (or nonresistance) is the essential point of His teaching in this passage. These scholars do not believe Jesus was teaching to “turn the other cheek” in virtually all circumstances. Even Christ did not literally turn the other cheek when smitten by a member of the Sanhedrin (see John 18:22-23).
The backdrop to this teaching is that the Jews considered it an insult to be hit in the face, much in the same way that we would interpret someone spitting in our face. Bible scholar R. C. Sproul comments: “What’s interesting in the expression is that Jesus specifically mentions the right side of the face [Matthew 5:39]….If I hit you on your right cheek, the most normal way would be if I did it with the back of my right hand….To the best of our knowledge of the Hebrew language, that expression is a Jewish idiom that describes an insult, similar to the way challenges to duels in the days of King Arthur were made by a backhand slap to the right cheek of your opponent.”
The principle taught in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5:38-42 would thus seem to be that Christians should not retaliate when insulted or slandered (see also Romans 12:17-21). Such insults do not threaten a Christian’s personal safety. The question of rendering insult for insult, however, is a far cry from defending oneself against a mugger or a rapist.
Click on the title to read the rest!
----Katie
Christianity and Self-Defense
Jesus is well known for His continued emphasis on love, forgiveness, and “turning the other cheek.” It is therefore surprising to find Jesus advising the disciples to buy a sword in Luke 22:36: “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” Did Jesus in this verse advocate the use of a sword for self-defense purposes?
This is an issue over which Christians have vehemently disagreed for many centuries.
“TURN THE OTHER CHEEK” ALWAYS? It is true that Jesus said to turn the other cheek in Matthew 5:38-42. However, many scholars do not believe pacifism (or nonresistance) is the essential point of His teaching in this passage. These scholars do not believe Jesus was teaching to “turn the other cheek” in virtually all circumstances. Even Christ did not literally turn the other cheek when smitten by a member of the Sanhedrin (see John 18:22-23).
The backdrop to this teaching is that the Jews considered it an insult to be hit in the face, much in the same way that we would interpret someone spitting in our face. Bible scholar R. C. Sproul comments: “What’s interesting in the expression is that Jesus specifically mentions the right side of the face [Matthew 5:39]….If I hit you on your right cheek, the most normal way would be if I did it with the back of my right hand….To the best of our knowledge of the Hebrew language, that expression is a Jewish idiom that describes an insult, similar to the way challenges to duels in the days of King Arthur were made by a backhand slap to the right cheek of your opponent.”
The principle taught in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5:38-42 would thus seem to be that Christians should not retaliate when insulted or slandered (see also Romans 12:17-21). Such insults do not threaten a Christian’s personal safety. The question of rendering insult for insult, however, is a far cry from defending oneself against a mugger or a rapist.
Click on the title to read the rest!
----Katie
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Yes, They Said It - Revealing Comments
Below is an article from Dr. Mohler's Blog. He is president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. I read his blog regularly and really appreciate his sympathy for the orthodox in mainline denominations.
-------------------
Those wondering what has made orthodox believers in mainline Protestant denominations so upset need look no further than two very revealing comments offered by leading figures in these denominational conflicts.
Exhibit A -- Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson
The 2003 election and consecration of Gene Robinson as the first openly-homosexual bishop of the Episcopal Church USA set the stage for the separation of orthodox believers from the denomination that is now reaching fever pitch. Robinson was elected Bishop of New Hampshire even as those investing him in office were aware that he had years earlier divorced his wife and was then (as now) cohabitating with another man.
Keep that in mind as you read this comment Bishop Robinson made in recent days as he was speaking to students at Nova Southeastern University in Florida. Here is how Religion News Service reported the comment:
"I always wanted to be a June bride." -- Openly gay Episcopal Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, telling students at Nova Southeastern University in Florida of his wedding plans. Robinson and his partner Mark Andrew plan to enter into a civil union in New Hampshire in June. Robinson was quoted by University of Miami News Service (Dec. 4).
Well, how will the leadership of the Episcopal Church USA respond to that? Undoubtedly with the same acceptance of the unacceptable that has marked the church's leadership for decades.
Exhibit B -- Lutheran Pastor Bradley Schmeling
Bradley Schmeling, pastor of St. John's Lutheran Church [ELCA] in Atlanta, was removed from the denomination's clergy roster earlier this year after a church court found him in violation of church policy for being found in a same-sex relationship. Schmeling has not been caught in the relationship; he had disclosed the relationship to church leaders.
Subsequent to that action the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America [ELCA] --the most liberal branch of American Lutheranism -- voted in Chicago to retain the current policy, but to encourage "restraint" from any punitive action if ministers were found to be in violation. The Atlanta church has refused to relieve Pastor Schmeling of his duties.
The December 11, 2007 edition of The Christian Century features an interview with Pastor Schmeling in which he makes this comment:
In my early preaching there was a lot of traditional Lutheran language. I saw every lectionary text as a means to preach about "justification by grace through faith, not by works of the law." Over time, I began to see that people weren't worried whether they were going to heaven or not; they were afraid that they would finish life and find that there hadn't been any heaven in it.
If the issue of the 20th century was the experience of existential dread, the issue for the 21st century seems to be community. People aren't coming to church to hear that their sins are forgiven; they are coming to experience connection to God, to the people sitting with them in the sanctuary and to people around the world. My theology has thus become more incarnational and relational.
Few statements are more revealing. Pastor Schmeling is convinced that people do not come to church because they are worried about heaven or the forgiveness of their sins. No, all they want is connection.
Thus, Pastor Schmeling -- Lutheran Pastor Schmeling -- has abandoned preaching about "justification by grace through faith, not by works of the law" -- the very heart of Lutheran theology. Indeed, the very heart of the Gospel itself. This pastor has exchanged the Gospel for a more "incarnational and relational" theology.
Martin Luther, we are reminded, was constantly concerned about heaven, hell, and sin. As the late historian Heiko Oberman explained, Luther always saw himself, and all sinners, as caught in a battle between God and the Devil. Heaven and Hell are always in the balance and the forgiveness of sins is our greatest need. Luther understood "justification by grace through faith (alone), not by works of the law" to be the only truth that secures our salvation.
Of course, we might surmise that a pastor unconcerned with the forgiveness of sin is likely to draw a congregation equally unconcerned about sin. No need for the forgiveness of sin . . . no need for justification, no need for the Gospel, no need for a Savior. In the end, this statement explains everything.
When you hear folks wondering why orthodox believers are so heartbroken and concerned about the travail of their churches, keep these revealing comments in mind. They reveal the problem in a tragic nutshell.
________________
Professor Heiko Oberman's biography of Martin Luther, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil, remains in print from Yale University Press. The interview with Pastor Bradley Schmeling is not available online, but can be found as "Ministry and Mission: An Interview with Bradley Schmeling," The Christian Century, December 11, 2007, pages 10-11.
--------------
Click on the title to visit Dr. Mohler's Blog.
---Katie
-------------------
Those wondering what has made orthodox believers in mainline Protestant denominations so upset need look no further than two very revealing comments offered by leading figures in these denominational conflicts.
Exhibit A -- Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson
The 2003 election and consecration of Gene Robinson as the first openly-homosexual bishop of the Episcopal Church USA set the stage for the separation of orthodox believers from the denomination that is now reaching fever pitch. Robinson was elected Bishop of New Hampshire even as those investing him in office were aware that he had years earlier divorced his wife and was then (as now) cohabitating with another man.
Keep that in mind as you read this comment Bishop Robinson made in recent days as he was speaking to students at Nova Southeastern University in Florida. Here is how Religion News Service reported the comment:
"I always wanted to be a June bride." -- Openly gay Episcopal Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, telling students at Nova Southeastern University in Florida of his wedding plans. Robinson and his partner Mark Andrew plan to enter into a civil union in New Hampshire in June. Robinson was quoted by University of Miami News Service (Dec. 4).
Well, how will the leadership of the Episcopal Church USA respond to that? Undoubtedly with the same acceptance of the unacceptable that has marked the church's leadership for decades.
Exhibit B -- Lutheran Pastor Bradley Schmeling
Bradley Schmeling, pastor of St. John's Lutheran Church [ELCA] in Atlanta, was removed from the denomination's clergy roster earlier this year after a church court found him in violation of church policy for being found in a same-sex relationship. Schmeling has not been caught in the relationship; he had disclosed the relationship to church leaders.
Subsequent to that action the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America [ELCA] --the most liberal branch of American Lutheranism -- voted in Chicago to retain the current policy, but to encourage "restraint" from any punitive action if ministers were found to be in violation. The Atlanta church has refused to relieve Pastor Schmeling of his duties.
The December 11, 2007 edition of The Christian Century features an interview with Pastor Schmeling in which he makes this comment:
In my early preaching there was a lot of traditional Lutheran language. I saw every lectionary text as a means to preach about "justification by grace through faith, not by works of the law." Over time, I began to see that people weren't worried whether they were going to heaven or not; they were afraid that they would finish life and find that there hadn't been any heaven in it.
If the issue of the 20th century was the experience of existential dread, the issue for the 21st century seems to be community. People aren't coming to church to hear that their sins are forgiven; they are coming to experience connection to God, to the people sitting with them in the sanctuary and to people around the world. My theology has thus become more incarnational and relational.
Few statements are more revealing. Pastor Schmeling is convinced that people do not come to church because they are worried about heaven or the forgiveness of their sins. No, all they want is connection.
Thus, Pastor Schmeling -- Lutheran Pastor Schmeling -- has abandoned preaching about "justification by grace through faith, not by works of the law" -- the very heart of Lutheran theology. Indeed, the very heart of the Gospel itself. This pastor has exchanged the Gospel for a more "incarnational and relational" theology.
Martin Luther, we are reminded, was constantly concerned about heaven, hell, and sin. As the late historian Heiko Oberman explained, Luther always saw himself, and all sinners, as caught in a battle between God and the Devil. Heaven and Hell are always in the balance and the forgiveness of sins is our greatest need. Luther understood "justification by grace through faith (alone), not by works of the law" to be the only truth that secures our salvation.
Of course, we might surmise that a pastor unconcerned with the forgiveness of sin is likely to draw a congregation equally unconcerned about sin. No need for the forgiveness of sin . . . no need for justification, no need for the Gospel, no need for a Savior. In the end, this statement explains everything.
When you hear folks wondering why orthodox believers are so heartbroken and concerned about the travail of their churches, keep these revealing comments in mind. They reveal the problem in a tragic nutshell.
________________
Professor Heiko Oberman's biography of Martin Luther, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil, remains in print from Yale University Press. The interview with Pastor Bradley Schmeling is not available online, but can be found as "Ministry and Mission: An Interview with Bradley Schmeling," The Christian Century, December 11, 2007, pages 10-11.
--------------
Click on the title to visit Dr. Mohler's Blog.
---Katie
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
A Hero Among Us
I think I will make a shameless plug for the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms:
A Hero Among Us
joani-f (FreeRepublic)
Since the tragic shootings yesterday at the two churches in Colorado I have been intrigued by the story of Jeanne Assam, the volunteer civilian security guard who took down the shooter at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs.
I watched an online interview with her – her first since the shootings – this afternoon, and came away with the knowledge that standing before me was a genuine modern American hero ... and a true soldier of God.
Many in the media will downplay her heroism, for reasons that are obvious to those of us who are school in their anti-liberty, anti-Second Amendment, anti-Christian bias. But be not mistaken: Jeanne Assam is indeed an American hero.
Assam, and the other dozen or so civilian security personnel at New Life Church, are all members of the New Life congregation, about half of whom are armed, and all of whom have undergone background checks, have successfully completed gun safety courses, and have CCW permits. They all volunteer because, as worshippers, they have a 'sense of ownership' at New Life. It is as if they are protecting their own home and family from intruders.
Senior Pastor at New Life, Brady Boyd, stated that Assam came to his office at 7:30 Sunday morning and informed him about the earlier shooting incident in Arvada. She strongly suggested additional security for the day's services at New Life. Pastor Boyd credits Assam for the heightened security, and for thus preventing significantly more bloodshed.
When twenty-three-year-old Matthew Murray began shooting in the parking lot of the New Life Church a few hours later, all chaos broke loose. Two sisters, Stephanie Works, 18, and Rachael Works, 16, were killed as they were getting into their van following the early service. Their father, David Works, 51, suffered two gunshot wounds -- one to the abdomen and one to the groin -- and is listed in fair condition at a local hospital.
Murray wore body armor, and was reportedly equipped with sufficient firepower (some accounts report that he was carrying as many as five hundred rounds) to bring down hundreds of people. For those who may believe that this estimate is inflated, consider the fact that reports indicate that approximately seven thousand people were tightly packed within and just outside the church at the time, and each round of Murray’s rifle ammo, if properly placed, might certainly have been capable of taking down several people. The potentiality of hundreds of victims was not at all out of the realm of possibility.
During her interview today, Jeanne Assam stated that she attends one of the morning services and then volunteers as a guard during a later service. She has had previous law enforcement experience, has had to draw her weapon countless times in tense situations related to her law enforcement experience, but has never shot anyone before.
I was deeply impressed by her humility, her quiet intelligence, and her Christian outlook. At the outset of her comments she stated, 'I want to extend my sympathy to the families of the victims, and of the gunman. And I mean that very sincerely.'
In describing yesterday’s sequence of events at New Life Church she reflected:
The shots were so loud that I thought he was inside. But he wasn’t even inside yet, he was just entering the church. There was chaos as the parishioners ran in all directions.
I just knew what I had to do. It seemed like it was me, the gunman, and God.
I saw him coming through the doors and I took cover. I came out of cover and identified myself, engaged him and took him down. I knew that I could not let this man harm any more people. I said, 'God, this is you.' I asked Him to be with me and He never left my side.
I want to do His will and not my will. Where I was weak, God made me strong. He filled me, He guided me, He protected me, and many other people.
Assam fired off about a dozen shots, three of which managed to circumvent Murray's body armor, and all of which were fired while he was moving in her direction.
When she was asked whether the previous day’s tragedy had prevented her from getting a good night’s sleep on Sunday night, she replied that she hadn’t slept a wink.
Assam is unmarried, and currently works for Messenger International, a Christian ministry organization. In connection with her affiliation there, she has found herself at a crossroads in her life and has been seeking to know God's will for her ... asking Him to provide direction and guidance. In an effort to clear her mind in that endeavor, she had been fasting for three days, with the support of other members of the ministry. Sunday was the third day of that fast, and she was in a somewhat weakened state as a result.
Toward the end of the interview, she was asked, 'What was in your mind when he went down?' and she responded:
'How awesome and powerful God is.'
She continued ... 'I've had some quiet time with God and have had a lot of people pray with me. I'm even more in awe of Him than I was before.'
It is people like Jeanne Assam -- armed, law-abiding citizens in all walks of life -- church members, teachers, students, pilots, factory workers, white-collar workers, etc. -- who will prevent such future shedding of innocent blood. Law enforcement generally arrives long after such tragedies occur – such as occurred in the recent shooting at the Omaha mall, where the killer accomplished his mission in less than five minutes, and the police didn't arrive until the mall was awash in innocent blood.
The Second Amendment proved its value this weekend when a legally armed, courageous, cool-headed American citizen saved the lives of many of her countrymen.
God preserve the Second Amendment. And God bless Jeanne Assam.
~ joanie
------------
I have read that an autopsy has determined that the actual kill-shot came from the killer's own gun. Even if that is the case, I expect he would not have killed himself at that moment if he had not been under fire from this woman. He had plenty of ammo and could have killed many more people.
---Katie
A Hero Among Us
joani-f (FreeRepublic)
Since the tragic shootings yesterday at the two churches in Colorado I have been intrigued by the story of Jeanne Assam, the volunteer civilian security guard who took down the shooter at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs.
I watched an online interview with her – her first since the shootings – this afternoon, and came away with the knowledge that standing before me was a genuine modern American hero ... and a true soldier of God.
Many in the media will downplay her heroism, for reasons that are obvious to those of us who are school in their anti-liberty, anti-Second Amendment, anti-Christian bias. But be not mistaken: Jeanne Assam is indeed an American hero.
Assam, and the other dozen or so civilian security personnel at New Life Church, are all members of the New Life congregation, about half of whom are armed, and all of whom have undergone background checks, have successfully completed gun safety courses, and have CCW permits. They all volunteer because, as worshippers, they have a 'sense of ownership' at New Life. It is as if they are protecting their own home and family from intruders.
Senior Pastor at New Life, Brady Boyd, stated that Assam came to his office at 7:30 Sunday morning and informed him about the earlier shooting incident in Arvada. She strongly suggested additional security for the day's services at New Life. Pastor Boyd credits Assam for the heightened security, and for thus preventing significantly more bloodshed.
When twenty-three-year-old Matthew Murray began shooting in the parking lot of the New Life Church a few hours later, all chaos broke loose. Two sisters, Stephanie Works, 18, and Rachael Works, 16, were killed as they were getting into their van following the early service. Their father, David Works, 51, suffered two gunshot wounds -- one to the abdomen and one to the groin -- and is listed in fair condition at a local hospital.
Murray wore body armor, and was reportedly equipped with sufficient firepower (some accounts report that he was carrying as many as five hundred rounds) to bring down hundreds of people. For those who may believe that this estimate is inflated, consider the fact that reports indicate that approximately seven thousand people were tightly packed within and just outside the church at the time, and each round of Murray’s rifle ammo, if properly placed, might certainly have been capable of taking down several people. The potentiality of hundreds of victims was not at all out of the realm of possibility.
During her interview today, Jeanne Assam stated that she attends one of the morning services and then volunteers as a guard during a later service. She has had previous law enforcement experience, has had to draw her weapon countless times in tense situations related to her law enforcement experience, but has never shot anyone before.
I was deeply impressed by her humility, her quiet intelligence, and her Christian outlook. At the outset of her comments she stated, 'I want to extend my sympathy to the families of the victims, and of the gunman. And I mean that very sincerely.'
In describing yesterday’s sequence of events at New Life Church she reflected:
The shots were so loud that I thought he was inside. But he wasn’t even inside yet, he was just entering the church. There was chaos as the parishioners ran in all directions.
I just knew what I had to do. It seemed like it was me, the gunman, and God.
I saw him coming through the doors and I took cover. I came out of cover and identified myself, engaged him and took him down. I knew that I could not let this man harm any more people. I said, 'God, this is you.' I asked Him to be with me and He never left my side.
I want to do His will and not my will. Where I was weak, God made me strong. He filled me, He guided me, He protected me, and many other people.
Assam fired off about a dozen shots, three of which managed to circumvent Murray's body armor, and all of which were fired while he was moving in her direction.
When she was asked whether the previous day’s tragedy had prevented her from getting a good night’s sleep on Sunday night, she replied that she hadn’t slept a wink.
Assam is unmarried, and currently works for Messenger International, a Christian ministry organization. In connection with her affiliation there, she has found herself at a crossroads in her life and has been seeking to know God's will for her ... asking Him to provide direction and guidance. In an effort to clear her mind in that endeavor, she had been fasting for three days, with the support of other members of the ministry. Sunday was the third day of that fast, and she was in a somewhat weakened state as a result.
Toward the end of the interview, she was asked, 'What was in your mind when he went down?' and she responded:
'How awesome and powerful God is.'
She continued ... 'I've had some quiet time with God and have had a lot of people pray with me. I'm even more in awe of Him than I was before.'
It is people like Jeanne Assam -- armed, law-abiding citizens in all walks of life -- church members, teachers, students, pilots, factory workers, white-collar workers, etc. -- who will prevent such future shedding of innocent blood. Law enforcement generally arrives long after such tragedies occur – such as occurred in the recent shooting at the Omaha mall, where the killer accomplished his mission in less than five minutes, and the police didn't arrive until the mall was awash in innocent blood.
The Second Amendment proved its value this weekend when a legally armed, courageous, cool-headed American citizen saved the lives of many of her countrymen.
God preserve the Second Amendment. And God bless Jeanne Assam.
~ joanie
------------
I have read that an autopsy has determined that the actual kill-shot came from the killer's own gun. Even if that is the case, I expect he would not have killed himself at that moment if he had not been under fire from this woman. He had plenty of ammo and could have killed many more people.
---Katie
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
What is Christianity?
If you want to do some studying online, here is a great opportunity. Click on the title to reach a blog study of Luther's Small Catechism.
----Katie
----Katie
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Don't think this isn't where we are headed, folks....
The ELCA is in full communion with the ECUSA (the Episcopal Church). I have heard it said that when the Episcopal Church sneezes, the ELCA gets a cold. What is happening over there is very much the path of the ELCA.
Here is what The Rev. Johnathan Millard said to the annual convention of the Diocese of Pittsburgh about the direction of their national church, making the case for the Diocese of Pittsburgh leaving the ECUSA.
1. There is confusion concerning who God is:
Over the past 40 years there has been a drift away from orthodox ways of speaking about God. In some places in TEC instead of God being referred to as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, He is addressed only by function as creator, redeemer and sustainer, and not in personal ways. The problem with this approach is that it makes God more remote and the fact is God has revealed himself to us through the Scriptures not just by function, but in personal terms as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Another example is when the name LORD is replaced with "God." So instead of the Liturgical greeting:
"The Lord be with you" you may encounter in some parts of TEC "God be with you" or even "God is in you" with the response: "and also in you." The word LORD apparently is perceived as too male, and too authoritarian. The earliest creedal statement was simply "Jesus is Lord." And yes, it was meant to be authoritarian. I was very sad when I attended the Interfaith service at Calvary last week, to see precisely such a change had been made to the liturgy. When it came to share the Peace, the wording was not: "The peace of the Lord", but rather "The Peace of God."
2. There is a lack of clear teaching about the divinity of Christ:
In answer to a question referencing the divinity of Jesus, in an article published earlier this year, the Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Shori, said this: "If you begin to explore the literary context of the first century and the couple of hundred years on either side, the way that someone told a story about a great figure was to say 'this one was born of the gods.' That is what we're saying. This carpenter from Nazareth or Bethlehem - and there are different stories about where he came from - shows us what a godly human being looks like, shows us God coming among us."
At best that is ambiguous or confusing, and at worst it is false teaching. Jesus was much more than someone who "shows us what a godly human being looks like." And the Church does not say that he was "born of the gods." The biblical witness and the faith of the church is that Jesus is the Son of God: fully God and fully man. The Word became flesh (John 1). We proclaim this truth weekly in the Nicene Creed.
3. There is a lack of clear teaching about Salvation and Sin:
Questioned about selfishness and falleness, the Presiding Bishop said this:·"The human journey is about encouraging our own selves to move up into higher consciousness, into being able to be present in a violent situation without responding with violence ... " and in the same interview she went on to say: "The question is always how can we get beyond our own narrow self-interest and see that our salvation lies in attending to the needs of other people."
This is not the Gospel story of sin and redemption. The Scriptures teach that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (Rom. 3:23). The Scriptures teach that salvation is not through our works, or our efforts to move up to a higher consciousness, or even through attending to the needs of others. Our salvation lies in Jesus, "who while we were still sinners, died for us." (Rom. 5:8); and all who believe in the LORD and call upon his name will be saved. (Rom. 10:13)
4. There is a drift towards universalism:
The Presiding Bishop says of Jesus: "we who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box" (Time Magazine: July 17,2006). Jesus said: I am the way the truth and the life no one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6).
When, some years ago, I first heard Bishop Duncan speak of us living in a time of Reformation of the Church throughout the world, I confess I wondered if that was a little grandiose. I now believe, without a doubt, that he was right. This was illustrated for me, once again, just last week. I was deeply saddened to hear Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu deny the particularity of the Christian Faith, mocking the idea that Jesus could possibly be the only way to God, and declaring that all religions are worshipping the same God, just by different names. The archbishop is a great man who has done wonderful work for reconciliation and peace. I salute him for all the good he has done, but I am sad and troubled that he would be so dismissive of the supreme work of love and salvation that our Lord Jesus Christ did for us on the cross.
5. There is a loss of confidence in the Gospel as Good News for all:
The official teaching of the Anglican Church on the issue of human sexuality is that which has been set out by the Lambeth Conference in 1998 (Resolution 1:10). But here's the key point concerning the Gospel that I want to make:
[The Conference] "recognises that there are among us persons who experience themselves as having a homosexual orientation. Many of these are members of the Church and are seeking the pastoral care, moral direction of the Church, and God's transforming power for the living of their lives and the ordering of relationships." [emphasis added]. It is that confidence in the transforming power of God that the actions of TEC now challenge. So instead of welcoming and loving all into the church so that they might experience
transformation, TEC simply welcomes and affirms people just as they are - denying them the healing and hope and transforming power of God.
6. There is erroneous teaching and practice regarding human sexuality
Over the past couple of decades there has been a serious rejection of the clear teaching of the Bible and the Church on human sexuality and marriage. The clear teaching of Scripture and tradition and of the one, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic church is that sex is for marriage. The only sexually intimate relationships that are good and holy according to Scripture and tradition are those between a man and a woman, within an intended life long, faithful covenant of marriage. That means that pre-marital sex, extra-marital sex, gay sex, any sex outside of marriage is all contrary to God's will. This is the clear teaching of the Bible and of Jesus.
7. There is a seemingly 'social justice only' view of the mission of the church
I have struggled to find any clear statements from the Presiding Bishop about the basics of the faith. From her inaugural sermon through to all kinds of talks and sermons and interviews that I've seen or heard extracts from she seems to be concerned primarily with a political and social gospel. She seems to be concerned principally about the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals. There is much to be commended about these goals and much to challenge us - but they are by no means the same thing as the message of salvation for those who are perishing. (John 3: 16). If the Millennium Goals are our gospel message it falls seriously short of the message of proclaiming "Christ and him crucified." (1 Corinthians 2:1-5).
8. There is contempt for the Authority of the Bible
Bishop Bennison has said: "The church wrote the Bible, and the church can rewrite the Bible." No, that is a serious error.
9. There is failure by Bishops to defend the faith
The role of a bishop in the words of the 1662 ordinal is: ''to banish and drive away from the church all erroneous and strange doctrine contrary to the Word of God." - Here in the States, the very opposite is true. Rather than drive away false teaching many of the bishops of TEC embrace it, celebrate it and declare to be good and holy that which God declares to wrong. To ordain an openly gay, non-celibate man - when the rest of the world urged TEC not to do this - is not only contrary to Scripture but is also an arrogant display of American intransigence.
10. There is a lack of respect for truth or unity
There seems to be a cavalier spirit among many in TEC that disregards the mandate for unity with the one holy, catholic and apostolic church. Claims are made by 'progressives' that they are putting truth ahead of unity. However the 'truth' they claim is that it's a matter of social justice and Christian virtue to bless same sex unions and permit practicing gay and lesbian people to hold any office within the church. This is, of course, is contrary to the truth as revealed in Holy Scripture. And the only unity they secure is among a tiny minority of the church worldwide.
----
I have heard much of what is written above from ELCA pastors in Chicago and in Central Florida. This is not a good thing! If you are in the ELCA you should be concerned about what is being passed off as Christianity by your national church.
Click on the title to visit Stand Firm, a reform website for Episcopalians.
---Katie
(Hat tip to shrimp over at the Shellfish blog.)
Here is what The Rev. Johnathan Millard said to the annual convention of the Diocese of Pittsburgh about the direction of their national church, making the case for the Diocese of Pittsburgh leaving the ECUSA.
1. There is confusion concerning who God is:
Over the past 40 years there has been a drift away from orthodox ways of speaking about God. In some places in TEC instead of God being referred to as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, He is addressed only by function as creator, redeemer and sustainer, and not in personal ways. The problem with this approach is that it makes God more remote and the fact is God has revealed himself to us through the Scriptures not just by function, but in personal terms as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Another example is when the name LORD is replaced with "God." So instead of the Liturgical greeting:
"The Lord be with you" you may encounter in some parts of TEC "God be with you" or even "God is in you" with the response: "and also in you." The word LORD apparently is perceived as too male, and too authoritarian. The earliest creedal statement was simply "Jesus is Lord." And yes, it was meant to be authoritarian. I was very sad when I attended the Interfaith service at Calvary last week, to see precisely such a change had been made to the liturgy. When it came to share the Peace, the wording was not: "The peace of the Lord", but rather "The Peace of God."
2. There is a lack of clear teaching about the divinity of Christ:
In answer to a question referencing the divinity of Jesus, in an article published earlier this year, the Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Shori, said this: "If you begin to explore the literary context of the first century and the couple of hundred years on either side, the way that someone told a story about a great figure was to say 'this one was born of the gods.' That is what we're saying. This carpenter from Nazareth or Bethlehem - and there are different stories about where he came from - shows us what a godly human being looks like, shows us God coming among us."
At best that is ambiguous or confusing, and at worst it is false teaching. Jesus was much more than someone who "shows us what a godly human being looks like." And the Church does not say that he was "born of the gods." The biblical witness and the faith of the church is that Jesus is the Son of God: fully God and fully man. The Word became flesh (John 1). We proclaim this truth weekly in the Nicene Creed.
3. There is a lack of clear teaching about Salvation and Sin:
Questioned about selfishness and falleness, the Presiding Bishop said this:·"The human journey is about encouraging our own selves to move up into higher consciousness, into being able to be present in a violent situation without responding with violence ... " and in the same interview she went on to say: "The question is always how can we get beyond our own narrow self-interest and see that our salvation lies in attending to the needs of other people."
This is not the Gospel story of sin and redemption. The Scriptures teach that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (Rom. 3:23). The Scriptures teach that salvation is not through our works, or our efforts to move up to a higher consciousness, or even through attending to the needs of others. Our salvation lies in Jesus, "who while we were still sinners, died for us." (Rom. 5:8); and all who believe in the LORD and call upon his name will be saved. (Rom. 10:13)
4. There is a drift towards universalism:
The Presiding Bishop says of Jesus: "we who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box" (Time Magazine: July 17,2006). Jesus said: I am the way the truth and the life no one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6).
When, some years ago, I first heard Bishop Duncan speak of us living in a time of Reformation of the Church throughout the world, I confess I wondered if that was a little grandiose. I now believe, without a doubt, that he was right. This was illustrated for me, once again, just last week. I was deeply saddened to hear Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu deny the particularity of the Christian Faith, mocking the idea that Jesus could possibly be the only way to God, and declaring that all religions are worshipping the same God, just by different names. The archbishop is a great man who has done wonderful work for reconciliation and peace. I salute him for all the good he has done, but I am sad and troubled that he would be so dismissive of the supreme work of love and salvation that our Lord Jesus Christ did for us on the cross.
5. There is a loss of confidence in the Gospel as Good News for all:
The official teaching of the Anglican Church on the issue of human sexuality is that which has been set out by the Lambeth Conference in 1998 (Resolution 1:10). But here's the key point concerning the Gospel that I want to make:
[The Conference] "recognises that there are among us persons who experience themselves as having a homosexual orientation. Many of these are members of the Church and are seeking the pastoral care, moral direction of the Church, and God's transforming power for the living of their lives and the ordering of relationships." [emphasis added]. It is that confidence in the transforming power of God that the actions of TEC now challenge. So instead of welcoming and loving all into the church so that they might experience
transformation, TEC simply welcomes and affirms people just as they are - denying them the healing and hope and transforming power of God.
6. There is erroneous teaching and practice regarding human sexuality
Over the past couple of decades there has been a serious rejection of the clear teaching of the Bible and the Church on human sexuality and marriage. The clear teaching of Scripture and tradition and of the one, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic church is that sex is for marriage. The only sexually intimate relationships that are good and holy according to Scripture and tradition are those between a man and a woman, within an intended life long, faithful covenant of marriage. That means that pre-marital sex, extra-marital sex, gay sex, any sex outside of marriage is all contrary to God's will. This is the clear teaching of the Bible and of Jesus.
7. There is a seemingly 'social justice only' view of the mission of the church
I have struggled to find any clear statements from the Presiding Bishop about the basics of the faith. From her inaugural sermon through to all kinds of talks and sermons and interviews that I've seen or heard extracts from she seems to be concerned primarily with a political and social gospel. She seems to be concerned principally about the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals. There is much to be commended about these goals and much to challenge us - but they are by no means the same thing as the message of salvation for those who are perishing. (John 3: 16). If the Millennium Goals are our gospel message it falls seriously short of the message of proclaiming "Christ and him crucified." (1 Corinthians 2:1-5).
8. There is contempt for the Authority of the Bible
Bishop Bennison has said: "The church wrote the Bible, and the church can rewrite the Bible." No, that is a serious error.
9. There is failure by Bishops to defend the faith
The role of a bishop in the words of the 1662 ordinal is: ''to banish and drive away from the church all erroneous and strange doctrine contrary to the Word of God." - Here in the States, the very opposite is true. Rather than drive away false teaching many of the bishops of TEC embrace it, celebrate it and declare to be good and holy that which God declares to wrong. To ordain an openly gay, non-celibate man - when the rest of the world urged TEC not to do this - is not only contrary to Scripture but is also an arrogant display of American intransigence.
10. There is a lack of respect for truth or unity
There seems to be a cavalier spirit among many in TEC that disregards the mandate for unity with the one holy, catholic and apostolic church. Claims are made by 'progressives' that they are putting truth ahead of unity. However the 'truth' they claim is that it's a matter of social justice and Christian virtue to bless same sex unions and permit practicing gay and lesbian people to hold any office within the church. This is, of course, is contrary to the truth as revealed in Holy Scripture. And the only unity they secure is among a tiny minority of the church worldwide.
----
I have heard much of what is written above from ELCA pastors in Chicago and in Central Florida. This is not a good thing! If you are in the ELCA you should be concerned about what is being passed off as Christianity by your national church.
Click on the title to visit Stand Firm, a reform website for Episcopalians.
---Katie
(Hat tip to shrimp over at the Shellfish blog.)
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
The Politics of Planting
Click on the title to watch a clever You Tube clip of the CNN debate that was supposed to have an audience made up of undecided voters. Watch it and decide for yourself if CNN actually went out and found a bunch of undecided, uninvolved average Joes and Janes for the audience for this debate, or if they....did something else. It's rather humorous.
---Katie
---Katie
Monday, November 26, 2007
More ELCA silliness
Take a look at this article over on Shellfish. Clam has information on an event that was held at Ebenezer/herchurch.org that makes me glad that I am leaving the ELCA. What is really interesting are the comments from a participant in that event, so make sure that you take a look at the comments. What stunned me was her claim that women staffers from churchwide took part. Wow.
Here is a sample:
Wisdom’s Urgent Cry
A Faith and Feminism
Womanist/Mujerista Conference
hosted by Ebenezer/herchurch Lutheran
and co-sponsored by San Francisco ELCA Conference
A gathering for feminist (men and women) faith seekers, church leaders, Interfaith leaders to experience and discuss the urgent implications of God/dess imagery and gender issues which transform the church, the world and our daily lives so that together we seek and speak justice.
And some of the presenters:
Mara Lynn Keller, ritualist of the Eleusinian Mysteries of Demeter and Persephone
Judith Lavender Dancer, dancer, healer and movement educator. Her work incorporates teachings from both Western and Eastern modalities, including Feldenkrais, Chi Qong, clowning, Bioenergetics, belly dancing, improvisation, meditation, and stilt dancing.
Arisika Razak, educator in the field of Women's Studies/Women's Spirituality. Arisika's work integrates the disciplines of Women's Studies/ Women's Spirituality, and Women's Health and Spiritual Dance, through the incorporation of the teachings of earth based spiritual traditions, women's spirituality, and women's health into the language of movement and dance.
I guess I am just inflexible or old fashioned or something, but you just cannot tell me these folks have not abandoned the faith passed down to us from the apostles.
---Katie
Here is a sample:
Wisdom’s Urgent Cry
A Faith and Feminism
Womanist/Mujerista Conference
hosted by Ebenezer/herchurch Lutheran
and co-sponsored by San Francisco ELCA Conference
A gathering for feminist (men and women) faith seekers, church leaders, Interfaith leaders to experience and discuss the urgent implications of God/dess imagery and gender issues which transform the church, the world and our daily lives so that together we seek and speak justice.
And some of the presenters:
Mara Lynn Keller, ritualist of the Eleusinian Mysteries of Demeter and Persephone
Judith Lavender Dancer, dancer, healer and movement educator. Her work incorporates teachings from both Western and Eastern modalities, including Feldenkrais, Chi Qong, clowning, Bioenergetics, belly dancing, improvisation, meditation, and stilt dancing.
Arisika Razak, educator in the field of Women's Studies/Women's Spirituality. Arisika's work integrates the disciplines of Women's Studies/ Women's Spirituality, and Women's Health and Spiritual Dance, through the incorporation of the teachings of earth based spiritual traditions, women's spirituality, and women's health into the language of movement and dance.
I guess I am just inflexible or old fashioned or something, but you just cannot tell me these folks have not abandoned the faith passed down to us from the apostles.
---Katie
Friday, November 23, 2007
Thomas Jefferson Would Prefer Bloggers over Mainstream Media
Mainstream reporters and writers are quick to point out the importance of media and freedom of the press, after all, Thomas Jefferson said “were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” But today's media might not be exactly what TJ had in mind...he might actually have been thinking of something a lot like modern day blogging.
Check out this article on Pajamas Media:
Thomas Jefferson Wouldn't Think Much of Modern Journalism. Blogging - That's Another Story...
November 21, 2007 1:00 AM
Would he read the NY Times?
Though journalism as we know it didn’t exist when the First Amendment was written, today’s reporters don’t hesitate to make the case for their importance by citing a famous Thomas Jefferson quote. Steve Boriss contends that mainstream news is the opposite of what the third president thought it should be.
By Steve Boriss
Many journalists are fond of telling us how central they are to our democracy. Some cite Thomas Jefferson’s quote, “were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” These self-important boasts by journalists deserve to be challenged. Modern journalism is not only different from what Jefferson intended, it is almost completely the opposite in three fundamental ways: the role of the press, the voices that matter, and the importance of opinions.
1. The role of the press — Jefferson’s vision for the role of the press was completely integrated with his vision for the country. He believed that each of us is born with God-given rights that must not be taken away — life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The potential thief he had in mind was government. Accordingly, he thought that the single most important role for newspapers was to serve as a “fence” to prevent government from encroaching on individual rights.
But modern journalism has hopped this fence by tending to side with the government establishment, often protecting it from people and corporations. Jon Ham notes that newspapers typically feature government as an enlightened class and make use of a “standard journalism template that the private sector has questionable motives, i.e., profit, whereas the public sector’s motives are pure, i.e., altruistic.” PBS’ Bill Moyers now tours the country lashing out against the dangers of too much corporate control over the news media, while singing the virtues of government-controlled NPR and PBS. This anti-corporate attitude has its roots in Marxist, not Jeffersonian thought. As ABC’s John Stossel points out, corporations do not have nearly the same power as government entities, which are “coercive monopolies that spend other people’s money taken by force.”
Click on the title for the rest. It is quite good!
---Katie
Check out this article on Pajamas Media:
Thomas Jefferson Wouldn't Think Much of Modern Journalism. Blogging - That's Another Story...
November 21, 2007 1:00 AM
Would he read the NY Times?
Though journalism as we know it didn’t exist when the First Amendment was written, today’s reporters don’t hesitate to make the case for their importance by citing a famous Thomas Jefferson quote. Steve Boriss contends that mainstream news is the opposite of what the third president thought it should be.
By Steve Boriss
Many journalists are fond of telling us how central they are to our democracy. Some cite Thomas Jefferson’s quote, “were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” These self-important boasts by journalists deserve to be challenged. Modern journalism is not only different from what Jefferson intended, it is almost completely the opposite in three fundamental ways: the role of the press, the voices that matter, and the importance of opinions.
1. The role of the press — Jefferson’s vision for the role of the press was completely integrated with his vision for the country. He believed that each of us is born with God-given rights that must not be taken away — life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The potential thief he had in mind was government. Accordingly, he thought that the single most important role for newspapers was to serve as a “fence” to prevent government from encroaching on individual rights.
But modern journalism has hopped this fence by tending to side with the government establishment, often protecting it from people and corporations. Jon Ham notes that newspapers typically feature government as an enlightened class and make use of a “standard journalism template that the private sector has questionable motives, i.e., profit, whereas the public sector’s motives are pure, i.e., altruistic.” PBS’ Bill Moyers now tours the country lashing out against the dangers of too much corporate control over the news media, while singing the virtues of government-controlled NPR and PBS. This anti-corporate attitude has its roots in Marxist, not Jeffersonian thought. As ABC’s John Stossel points out, corporations do not have nearly the same power as government entities, which are “coercive monopolies that spend other people’s money taken by force.”
Click on the title for the rest. It is quite good!
---Katie
Thursday, November 22, 2007
When the Pilgrims Rejected Communism, Prosperity Followed
From the Las Vegas Review-Journal:
When the Pilgrims rejected communism, prosperity followed.
As our modern gladiators chase a pigskin down the field in Dallas, Detroit and Atlanta, we settle into our living rooms, loosen our belts and remind the little ones this is the day we echo the thanks of the Pilgrims, who gathered in the autumn of 1621 to celebrate the first bountiful harvest in a new land.
The Pilgrims' first winter in the New World had been a harsh one. The wheat the Pilgrims had brought with them to plant would not grow in the rocky New England soil. Nearly half the colonists died.
But the survivors were hard-working and tenacious, and -- with the help of an English-speaking Wampanoag named Tisquantum (starting a long tradition of refusing to learn three-syllable words, the Pilgrims dubbed him "Squanto") -- they learned how to cultivate corn by using fish for fertilizer, how to dig and cook clams, how to tap the maples for sap. And so they were able to thank the Creator for an abundant harvest that second autumn in a new land.
The only problem with the tale, unfortunately, is that it's not true.
Yes, the Indians did graciously show the new settlers how to raise beans and corn. But in a November 1985 article in The Free Market, a monthly publication of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, author and historian Richard J. Marbury pointed out: "This official story is ... a fairy tale, a whitewashed and sanitized collection of half-truths which divert attention away from Thanksgiving's real meaning."
In his "History of Plymouth Plantation," the governor of the colony, William Bradford, reported that the colonists went hungry for years because they refused to work in the fields, preferring to steal. Gov. Bradford recalled for posterity that the colony was riddled with "corruption and discontent." The crops were small because "much was stolen both by night and day, before it became scarce eatable."
Although in the harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622 "all had their hungry bellies filled," that relief was short-lived, and deaths from illness because of malnutrition continued.
Then, Mr. Marbury points out, "something changed." By harvest time, 1623, Gov. Bradford was reporting that, "Instead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God." Why, by 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists actually began exporting corn.
What on earth had transpired?
In 1623 Gov. Bradford simply "gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit."
Previously, the Mayflower Compact had required that "all profits and benefits that are got by trade, working, fishing, or any other means" were to be placed in the common stock of the colony, and that, "all such persons as are of this colony, are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock."
A person was to put into the common stock all he could, and take out only what he needed -- a concept so attractive on its surface that it would be adopted as the equally disastrous ruling philosophy for all of Eastern Europe some 300 years later.
"A form of communism was practiced at Plymouth in 1621 and 1622," agrees Tom Bethell of the Hoover Institution in his book "The Noblest Triumph: Property and Prosperity through the Ages."
"Under the arrangement of communal property one might reasonably suspect that any additional effort might merely substitute for the lack of industry of others," Mr. Bethell notes. But once private ownership was substituted, "Knowing that the fruits of his labor would benefit his own family and dependents, the head of each household was given an incentive to work harder."
They say those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Yes, America is a bounteous land, but the source of that bounty lies not primarily in the fertility of our soil or the frequency of the rains. There is hardly a more fertile breadbasket on the face of the earth than the Ukraine, where for decades crops rotted in the fields under a Soviet administration that allowed no farmer a private profit incentive to hire enough help to get the turnips picked.
No, the source of our bounty is the discovery made by the Pilgrims in 1623, that when individuals are allowed to hold their own land as private property, to eat what they raise and keep the profits from any surplus they sell, hard work is rewarded and thus encouraged, and the entire community enjoys prosperity and plenty.
And so it is that on this Thanksgiving Day we ask God's continued blessing on America -- a land blessed most of all by our inherited concept of private property rights, the system that allows each to keep the profit of his sweat and toil -- and for this reason the land of peace and plenty, the envy of mankind, the land of the free.
A version of this editorial first appeared on this page in 1999.
When the Pilgrims rejected communism, prosperity followed.
As our modern gladiators chase a pigskin down the field in Dallas, Detroit and Atlanta, we settle into our living rooms, loosen our belts and remind the little ones this is the day we echo the thanks of the Pilgrims, who gathered in the autumn of 1621 to celebrate the first bountiful harvest in a new land.
The Pilgrims' first winter in the New World had been a harsh one. The wheat the Pilgrims had brought with them to plant would not grow in the rocky New England soil. Nearly half the colonists died.
But the survivors were hard-working and tenacious, and -- with the help of an English-speaking Wampanoag named Tisquantum (starting a long tradition of refusing to learn three-syllable words, the Pilgrims dubbed him "Squanto") -- they learned how to cultivate corn by using fish for fertilizer, how to dig and cook clams, how to tap the maples for sap. And so they were able to thank the Creator for an abundant harvest that second autumn in a new land.
The only problem with the tale, unfortunately, is that it's not true.
Yes, the Indians did graciously show the new settlers how to raise beans and corn. But in a November 1985 article in The Free Market, a monthly publication of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, author and historian Richard J. Marbury pointed out: "This official story is ... a fairy tale, a whitewashed and sanitized collection of half-truths which divert attention away from Thanksgiving's real meaning."
In his "History of Plymouth Plantation," the governor of the colony, William Bradford, reported that the colonists went hungry for years because they refused to work in the fields, preferring to steal. Gov. Bradford recalled for posterity that the colony was riddled with "corruption and discontent." The crops were small because "much was stolen both by night and day, before it became scarce eatable."
Although in the harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622 "all had their hungry bellies filled," that relief was short-lived, and deaths from illness because of malnutrition continued.
Then, Mr. Marbury points out, "something changed." By harvest time, 1623, Gov. Bradford was reporting that, "Instead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God." Why, by 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists actually began exporting corn.
What on earth had transpired?
In 1623 Gov. Bradford simply "gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit."
Previously, the Mayflower Compact had required that "all profits and benefits that are got by trade, working, fishing, or any other means" were to be placed in the common stock of the colony, and that, "all such persons as are of this colony, are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock."
A person was to put into the common stock all he could, and take out only what he needed -- a concept so attractive on its surface that it would be adopted as the equally disastrous ruling philosophy for all of Eastern Europe some 300 years later.
"A form of communism was practiced at Plymouth in 1621 and 1622," agrees Tom Bethell of the Hoover Institution in his book "The Noblest Triumph: Property and Prosperity through the Ages."
"Under the arrangement of communal property one might reasonably suspect that any additional effort might merely substitute for the lack of industry of others," Mr. Bethell notes. But once private ownership was substituted, "Knowing that the fruits of his labor would benefit his own family and dependents, the head of each household was given an incentive to work harder."
They say those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Yes, America is a bounteous land, but the source of that bounty lies not primarily in the fertility of our soil or the frequency of the rains. There is hardly a more fertile breadbasket on the face of the earth than the Ukraine, where for decades crops rotted in the fields under a Soviet administration that allowed no farmer a private profit incentive to hire enough help to get the turnips picked.
No, the source of our bounty is the discovery made by the Pilgrims in 1623, that when individuals are allowed to hold their own land as private property, to eat what they raise and keep the profits from any surplus they sell, hard work is rewarded and thus encouraged, and the entire community enjoys prosperity and plenty.
And so it is that on this Thanksgiving Day we ask God's continued blessing on America -- a land blessed most of all by our inherited concept of private property rights, the system that allows each to keep the profit of his sweat and toil -- and for this reason the land of peace and plenty, the envy of mankind, the land of the free.
A version of this editorial first appeared on this page in 1999.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Does God Exist?
Of course, I know you know how I would answer that question, but it remains a topic of debate amongst philosophers and intellectual elites. Atheism is very in these days with a number of books being written and prominent atheists being hailed for their wisdom and their boldness in rejecting theism. Of course you don't hear much about Anthony Flew, once the darling of those promoting the "truth" of atheism:
Now, in his early eighties, Flew has rejected atheism and said he believes that God exists. He does not espouse the Christian God, but calls himself a Deist. He says he has a lifelong commitment to following the evidence where it leads, and that new advances in the sciences have shown him that materialism and Darwinism simply cannot account for the world as it is and life as it is. Examining the fine-tuning of the universe and the mind-boggling complexity of the cell (a complexity that evolution presumes but cannot explain), Flew now believes that the design of the universe requires a designer. He gives his reasons in a new book There Is a God which is co-authored with Roy Abraham Varghese.
----
Click on the title. It's pretty interesting.
---Katie
Now, in his early eighties, Flew has rejected atheism and said he believes that God exists. He does not espouse the Christian God, but calls himself a Deist. He says he has a lifelong commitment to following the evidence where it leads, and that new advances in the sciences have shown him that materialism and Darwinism simply cannot account for the world as it is and life as it is. Examining the fine-tuning of the universe and the mind-boggling complexity of the cell (a complexity that evolution presumes but cannot explain), Flew now believes that the design of the universe requires a designer. He gives his reasons in a new book There Is a God which is co-authored with Roy Abraham Varghese.
----
Click on the title. It's pretty interesting.
---Katie
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
SJWPFriends
If you are a member or former member of my church, check out the bottom of the side bar. I have started a yahoo group to help people keep up with each other, whether they have changed churches in the area or moved away. Want to hear what your old friends and/or acquaintances are up to? Click and join! (I do have to approve your membership.)
---Katie
---Katie
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Does the Gospel Excuse Sin?
From Pastor Paul McCain's blog:
As readers of this blog site know, a topic that has had my attention for quite some time is the problem of an aversion to sanctification that has taken hold in certain quarters in Confessional Lutheranism. It is a subset of Gospel reductionism, and a sad legacy of those years in our Synod when there was active and open denial of the third use of the law. Under that influence there developed unfortunate views of Christian sanctification. Also there are those who appear to think that the best antidote to legalism is a certain kind of antinomianism. I've noticed for many years that there are those who go so far as to think that since Pietism is a problem, a demonstration of impiety is the solution: coarse language, crude humor, making fun of people, drinking to excess, etc.
Click on the title to read the rest of this excellent article.
---Katie
As readers of this blog site know, a topic that has had my attention for quite some time is the problem of an aversion to sanctification that has taken hold in certain quarters in Confessional Lutheranism. It is a subset of Gospel reductionism, and a sad legacy of those years in our Synod when there was active and open denial of the third use of the law. Under that influence there developed unfortunate views of Christian sanctification. Also there are those who appear to think that the best antidote to legalism is a certain kind of antinomianism. I've noticed for many years that there are those who go so far as to think that since Pietism is a problem, a demonstration of impiety is the solution: coarse language, crude humor, making fun of people, drinking to excess, etc.
Click on the title to read the rest of this excellent article.
---Katie
Sunday, November 04, 2007
Thank God for Faithful Pastors!
Found this over at Shrimp's blog. Click on the title.
Earlier this week, the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church sent the following message to the Bishop of Pittsburgh, who is (in the words of the Episcopal News Service) "actively seeking to withdraw his diocese from the Episcopal Church":
The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan
Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA
Dear Bob,
There have been numerous public references in recent weeks regarding resolutions to be introduced at your forthcoming diocesan convention. Those resolutions, if adopted, would amend several of your diocesan canons and begin the process of amending one or more provisions of your diocesan Constitution. I have reviewed a number of these proposed resolutions, and it is evident to me that they would violate the Constitutional requirement that the Diocese conform to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church. It is apparent from your pre-convention report that you endorse these proposed changes. I am also aware of other of your statements and actions in recent months that demonstrate an intention to lead your diocese into a position that would purportedly permit it to depart from The Episcopal Church. All these efforts, in my view, display a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between The Episcopal Church and its dioceses. Our Constitution explicitly provides that a diocese must accede to the Constitution and Canons of the Church.
I call upon you to recede from this direction and to lead your diocese on a new course that recognizes the interdependent and hierarchical relationship between the national Church and its dioceses and parishes. That relationship is at the heart of our mission, as expressed in our polity. Specifically, I sincerely hope that you will change your position and urge your diocese at its forthcoming convention not to adopt the resolutions that you have until now supported.
If your course does not change, I shall regrettably be compelled to see that appropriate canonical steps are promptly taken to consider whether you have abandoned the Communion of this Church -- by actions and substantive statements, however they may be phrased -- and whether you have committed canonical offences that warrant disciplinary action.
It grieves me that any bishop of this Church would seek to lead any of its members out of it. I would remind you of my open offer of an Episcopal Visitor if you wish to receive pastoral care from another bishop. I continue to pray for reconciliation of this situation, and I remain
Your servant in Christ,
Katharine Jefferts Schori
Bishop Duncan's reply is most elegant:
1st November, A.D. 2007
The Feast of All Saints
The Most Revd Katharine Jefferts Schori
Episcopal Church Center
New York, New York
Dear Katharine,
Here I stand. I can do no other. I will neither compromise the Faith once delivered to the saints, nor will I abandon the sheep who elected me to protect them.
Pax et bonum in Christ Jesus our Lord,
+Bob Pittsburgh
It looks even better on the Diocese's website.
----
Click on the title to read Shrimp's comparison with General Anthony Clement McAuliffe's "nuts" response to the Germans.
Good stuff. I'm glad to see people willing to stand up to bullies. Wish we had a few more of those in my church (as in local church - there are several I can think of in the greater church.)
---Katie
Earlier this week, the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church sent the following message to the Bishop of Pittsburgh, who is (in the words of the Episcopal News Service) "actively seeking to withdraw his diocese from the Episcopal Church":
The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan
Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA
Dear Bob,
There have been numerous public references in recent weeks regarding resolutions to be introduced at your forthcoming diocesan convention. Those resolutions, if adopted, would amend several of your diocesan canons and begin the process of amending one or more provisions of your diocesan Constitution. I have reviewed a number of these proposed resolutions, and it is evident to me that they would violate the Constitutional requirement that the Diocese conform to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church. It is apparent from your pre-convention report that you endorse these proposed changes. I am also aware of other of your statements and actions in recent months that demonstrate an intention to lead your diocese into a position that would purportedly permit it to depart from The Episcopal Church. All these efforts, in my view, display a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between The Episcopal Church and its dioceses. Our Constitution explicitly provides that a diocese must accede to the Constitution and Canons of the Church.
I call upon you to recede from this direction and to lead your diocese on a new course that recognizes the interdependent and hierarchical relationship between the national Church and its dioceses and parishes. That relationship is at the heart of our mission, as expressed in our polity. Specifically, I sincerely hope that you will change your position and urge your diocese at its forthcoming convention not to adopt the resolutions that you have until now supported.
If your course does not change, I shall regrettably be compelled to see that appropriate canonical steps are promptly taken to consider whether you have abandoned the Communion of this Church -- by actions and substantive statements, however they may be phrased -- and whether you have committed canonical offences that warrant disciplinary action.
It grieves me that any bishop of this Church would seek to lead any of its members out of it. I would remind you of my open offer of an Episcopal Visitor if you wish to receive pastoral care from another bishop. I continue to pray for reconciliation of this situation, and I remain
Your servant in Christ,
Katharine Jefferts Schori
Bishop Duncan's reply is most elegant:
1st November, A.D. 2007
The Feast of All Saints
The Most Revd Katharine Jefferts Schori
Episcopal Church Center
New York, New York
Dear Katharine,
Here I stand. I can do no other. I will neither compromise the Faith once delivered to the saints, nor will I abandon the sheep who elected me to protect them.
Pax et bonum in Christ Jesus our Lord,
+Bob Pittsburgh
It looks even better on the Diocese's website.
----
Click on the title to read Shrimp's comparison with General Anthony Clement McAuliffe's "nuts" response to the Germans.
Good stuff. I'm glad to see people willing to stand up to bullies. Wish we had a few more of those in my church (as in local church - there are several I can think of in the greater church.)
---Katie
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Why does this make my skin crawl?
Click on the title to see information about a rather strange combination of speakers for a "Rethink Conference" to be held in January. I just can't envision this particular mix of beliefs and talents....
---Katie
---Katie
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Fascinating Website
I like old buildings. One of my most interesting experiences when I was a bit younger (ahem!) was looking through abandoned houses in middle South Carolina when I was in college. It was all legal; the family of one of my classmates owned the property.
I just discovered this website (click on the title!) that indulges my love for exploring old, abandoned buildings. It is a little creepy because the photographer likes old mental hospitals and such things. There are other things as well, like a luxury hotel and an old mine.
I just thought I'd share it with you - it's very cool!
---Katie
I just discovered this website (click on the title!) that indulges my love for exploring old, abandoned buildings. It is a little creepy because the photographer likes old mental hospitals and such things. There are other things as well, like a luxury hotel and an old mine.
I just thought I'd share it with you - it's very cool!
---Katie
Thursday, October 25, 2007
ELCA Sexuality Study Deadline Nov. 1!!!
If you are planning to participate in the third part of the ELCA Sexuality Study, time is running out! Click on the title for the link.
I am having a hard time bringing myself to do it because of the way I thought Galatians was abused during the Churchwide Assembly, but I am going to try. Our input does have an effect, even if it doesn't as much as we wish it did.
---Katie
I am having a hard time bringing myself to do it because of the way I thought Galatians was abused during the Churchwide Assembly, but I am going to try. Our input does have an effect, even if it doesn't as much as we wish it did.
---Katie
Friday, October 19, 2007
Lutheran Terminology
This is from an old post on Rev. Paul McCain's blog, Cyberbretheren. Some of it scarily sounds like what is being taught in the ELCA. Some of the rest of it I wish were being taught in the ELCA.
A Brief Lexicon of Lutheran Terminology for the Unlearned
Predestination: What do you think I am, some kind of Calvinist?
Law: Everything that I don't have to do because I'm baptized.
Gospel: The unconditional pronouncement of the forgiveness of sins.
Repent: That thing I never have to do because of the Gospel.
Believe: That other thing I never have to do because of my baptism.
Baptism: A sacrament for only babies that guarantees their salvation after they grow up and quit attending church.
Conversion: When a baby gets baptized. Adults are never converted.
Evangelism: My pastor's job. That's why adults are never converted.
Catechism: Doctrines that I don't know, but my pastor is supposed to teach my kids.
Confirmation: The wonderful day on which a 13-year-old is allowed to receive the Lord's Supper for the first and last time.
Book of Concord: The comprehensive book of everything my pastor believes.
Liturgy: The order of service, which my children are supposed to miraculously learn by playing with toys during the worship hour.
Pietism: The belief that Christians ought to care about obeying God.
Pietist: Anyone more scrupulous about obeying God than me.
Good Works: What makes the Pietists stand out from the real Lutherans. Only done for the purpose of earning one's salvation.
Legalism: Making me feel guilty or obligated to exercise moral discipline.
Papist: Anyone who foolishly believes that the pope speaks with God's infallible voice.
Martin Luther: 16th-century Reformer who spoke with God's infallible voice.
The Bible: A collection of holy books consisting of Genesis 1 and 2, the Ten
Commandments, the four Gospels, and the book of Galatians.
Old Testament: A collection of books that Jews and Calvinists teach their children.
"The Bible is a book for heretics": Common erroneous saying of 16th-century papists.
Revelation: A book for heretics.
Church Discipline: Not a mark of the Church, therefore not required for or practiced by Lutheran churches. We hear that the Pietists are all into it, though.
Pastor: The guy who is responsible for teaching the faith to my children, preaching the Gospel to my neighbor, making our church grow, and making me feel good about myself.
Adiophora: Anything that is left free by Scripture, such as church government.
Episcopal polity: A forbidden form of church government, since Catholics do it.
Presbyterian polity: Another forbidden form of government, since Calvinists do it.
Congregational polity: The only acceptable form of government, since Walther instituted it.
Faith: The belief that what I do is irrelevant to my salvation.
Justification: A legal status of righteousness before God that is achieved by continually reminding one's self that God doesn't care what you do.
---Katie
A Brief Lexicon of Lutheran Terminology for the Unlearned
Predestination: What do you think I am, some kind of Calvinist?
Law: Everything that I don't have to do because I'm baptized.
Gospel: The unconditional pronouncement of the forgiveness of sins.
Repent: That thing I never have to do because of the Gospel.
Believe: That other thing I never have to do because of my baptism.
Baptism: A sacrament for only babies that guarantees their salvation after they grow up and quit attending church.
Conversion: When a baby gets baptized. Adults are never converted.
Evangelism: My pastor's job. That's why adults are never converted.
Catechism: Doctrines that I don't know, but my pastor is supposed to teach my kids.
Confirmation: The wonderful day on which a 13-year-old is allowed to receive the Lord's Supper for the first and last time.
Book of Concord: The comprehensive book of everything my pastor believes.
Liturgy: The order of service, which my children are supposed to miraculously learn by playing with toys during the worship hour.
Pietism: The belief that Christians ought to care about obeying God.
Pietist: Anyone more scrupulous about obeying God than me.
Good Works: What makes the Pietists stand out from the real Lutherans. Only done for the purpose of earning one's salvation.
Legalism: Making me feel guilty or obligated to exercise moral discipline.
Papist: Anyone who foolishly believes that the pope speaks with God's infallible voice.
Martin Luther: 16th-century Reformer who spoke with God's infallible voice.
The Bible: A collection of holy books consisting of Genesis 1 and 2, the Ten
Commandments, the four Gospels, and the book of Galatians.
Old Testament: A collection of books that Jews and Calvinists teach their children.
"The Bible is a book for heretics": Common erroneous saying of 16th-century papists.
Revelation: A book for heretics.
Church Discipline: Not a mark of the Church, therefore not required for or practiced by Lutheran churches. We hear that the Pietists are all into it, though.
Pastor: The guy who is responsible for teaching the faith to my children, preaching the Gospel to my neighbor, making our church grow, and making me feel good about myself.
Adiophora: Anything that is left free by Scripture, such as church government.
Episcopal polity: A forbidden form of church government, since Catholics do it.
Presbyterian polity: Another forbidden form of government, since Calvinists do it.
Congregational polity: The only acceptable form of government, since Walther instituted it.
Faith: The belief that what I do is irrelevant to my salvation.
Justification: A legal status of righteousness before God that is achieved by continually reminding one's self that God doesn't care what you do.
---Katie
Tony Snow is amazing.
What an amazing Christian man!
Click on the title to read the entire article on the Christianity Today site.
Cancer's Unexpected Blessings
When you enter the Valley of the Shadow of Death, things change.
Tony Snow
July 20, 2007
Commentator and broadcaster Tony Snow announced that he had colon cancer in 2005. Following surgery and chemo-therapy, Snow joined the Bush administration in April 2006 as press secretary. Unfortunately, on March 23 Snow, 51, a husband and father of three, announced that the cancer had recurred, with tumors found in his abdomen—leading to surgery in April, followed by more chemotherapy. Snow went back to work in the White House Briefing Room on May 30, but resigned August 31. CT asked Snow what spiritual lessons he has been learning through the ordeal.
Blessings arrive in unexpected packages—in my case, cancer.
Those of us with potentially fatal diseases—and there are millions in America today—find ourselves in the odd position of coping with our mortality while trying to fathom God's will. Although it would be the height of presumption to declare with confidence What It All Means, Scripture provides powerful hints and consolations.
The first is that we shouldn't spend too much time trying to answer the why questions: Why me? Why must people suffer? Why can't someone else get sick? We can't answer such things, and the questions themselves often are designed more to express our anguish than to solicit an answer.
I don't know why I have cancer, and I don't much care. It is what it is—a plain and indisputable fact. Yet even while staring into a mirror darkly, great and stunning truths begin to take shape. Our maladies define a central feature of our existence: We are fallen. We are imperfect. Our bodies give out.
Be sure to read the rest. It's worth it.
---Katie
Click on the title to read the entire article on the Christianity Today site.
Cancer's Unexpected Blessings
When you enter the Valley of the Shadow of Death, things change.
Tony Snow
July 20, 2007
Commentator and broadcaster Tony Snow announced that he had colon cancer in 2005. Following surgery and chemo-therapy, Snow joined the Bush administration in April 2006 as press secretary. Unfortunately, on March 23 Snow, 51, a husband and father of three, announced that the cancer had recurred, with tumors found in his abdomen—leading to surgery in April, followed by more chemotherapy. Snow went back to work in the White House Briefing Room on May 30, but resigned August 31. CT asked Snow what spiritual lessons he has been learning through the ordeal.
Blessings arrive in unexpected packages—in my case, cancer.
Those of us with potentially fatal diseases—and there are millions in America today—find ourselves in the odd position of coping with our mortality while trying to fathom God's will. Although it would be the height of presumption to declare with confidence What It All Means, Scripture provides powerful hints and consolations.
The first is that we shouldn't spend too much time trying to answer the why questions: Why me? Why must people suffer? Why can't someone else get sick? We can't answer such things, and the questions themselves often are designed more to express our anguish than to solicit an answer.
I don't know why I have cancer, and I don't much care. It is what it is—a plain and indisputable fact. Yet even while staring into a mirror darkly, great and stunning truths begin to take shape. Our maladies define a central feature of our existence: We are fallen. We are imperfect. Our bodies give out.
Be sure to read the rest. It's worth it.
---Katie
Do you believe in defending yourself? You must be nuts.
This is very troubling.
College Admins: If You Favor Second Amendment Rights, You Must Be Crazy
By Jon Sanders
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
A Minnesota college student was suspended and ordered to undergo "mental health evaluation" for his response to campuswide e-mails from school officials concerning the Virginia Tech massacre.
The college, Hamline University, a private, liberal-arts institution affiliated with the Methodist Church, has a policy on "Freedom of Expression and Inquiry" that guarantees that Hamline students will be "free to examine and discuss all questions of interest to them and to express opinions publicly or privately."
With such a strong guarantee on students' "freedom from censorship and control" by the university, student Troy Scheffler's e-mail must have been horrifically bad to warrant such a crackdown. Right?
Wrong. What Scheffler did was make a gun-rights case for concealed-carry permits on campus to help ward off potential Cho Seung-Huis before they strike Hamline. This was no monstrous act; in fact, it was in line with public debate across the nation following Cho's rampage, not to mention an issue of perennial debate in America. Many researchers, most notably John R. Lott Jr., have shown conclusively that gun ownership itself wards off crime while laws banning guns lead to increases in crimes. Criminals are less likely to strike if they have reason to believe their prospective victims could be armed.
Scheffler had written in his April 17 e-mail reply to David Stern, Hamline vice president of student affairs, that "Considering this university also pushes 'diversity' initiatives like VA Tech, maybe its 'leadership' will reconsider [Hamline's] ban on conceal carry law abiding gun owners... Ironically, according to a few VA Tech forums, there are plenty of students complaining that this wouldn't have happened if the school wouldn't have banned their permits a few months ago."
He added, "I just don't understand why leftists don't understand that criminals don't care about laws; that is why they’re criminals... Maybe this school will reconsider its repression of law abiding citizens rights."
Two days later, Hamline President Linda Hanson e-mailed the campus about Virginia Tech. Scheffler replied to that e-mail also, expanding upon his comments to Stern.
In both messages, Scheffler made it clear to all but the most hysterically inclined person that his advocacy of concealed-carry permits was to protect the students from criminals. Scheffler recognized that this protection would be afforded primarily by predators' foreknowledge that any one of the students at Hamline could shoot back, but also – given that the administrators had both brought up the VT massacre – by students being able to stop a killing rampage before it got started.
In short, what Scheffler wrote was no preamble to a blood-lusty explosion of violence. At worst it was crude criticism of the university administration combined with a stark assessment of the true risk of a concealed-carry society like Virginia Tech's: total defenselessness against a Columbine-inspired mass murderer. Regardless, it should have been protected by the university's stated policy guaranteeing free expression.
Nevertheless, on April 23 Scheffler received a hand-delivered letter from Dean of Students Alan Sickbert that informed him his e-mails were "deemed to be threatening and thus an alleged violation of the Hamline University Judicial Code" and that he was placed on "interim suspension" to be lifted only after he agreed to a psychological evaluation by a licensed mental health professional.
Click on the title to read the rest.
------------------------
I know that a lot of people are afraid of guns and would never want to have one on their person or in their homes. I also know people who support gun rights but for various personal reasons cannot or will not have a gun. Yet those of us who are willing to train, practice and apply for a concealed carry permit should not be denied that right. Statistics show that the very fact that we do so provides some protection for our fellow citizens. The fact that some percentage of the population could be armed does deter some crime. As I have said before, if one of the professors or students at VA Tech had been legally armed, some, if not most, of the lives could have been saved. We will never know in that particular instance. We may never know in future instances if our institutions of higher learning continue to insist that an unarmed campus is a safe campus. Why do you think criminals choose campuses to shoot up? They can be reasonably certain they will not face armed opposition.
As an aside, I think this might be a big thing in the Methodist Church. Several years ago I attended a conflict resolution training event in a Methodist church. One of the people I trained with was also a CCW permit holder and we were both surprised that we were prohibited from carrying on the church property. (I used to work in a church - considering some of the people who show up there looking for "help" being armed is not such a bad idea.) More recently, we vacationed at Lake Junaluska, a Methodist assembly in NC. We stayed in the old Lambuth Inn. It was lovely. However, they prominently display a sign on the front door prohibiting concealed carry. Now, I did not feel unsafe there as I normally do in a hotel. It did not seem to me to be a place a criminal would be drawn to. However, I did wonder how they proposed to protect me if someone did decide to take advantage of this group of disarmed victims. After all, they did not want me to be capable of defending myself! As much as I liked the environment, we will probably choose another facility on our next trip to the mountains, one that will not deny us our lawful rights.
---Katie
College Admins: If You Favor Second Amendment Rights, You Must Be Crazy
By Jon Sanders
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
A Minnesota college student was suspended and ordered to undergo "mental health evaluation" for his response to campuswide e-mails from school officials concerning the Virginia Tech massacre.
The college, Hamline University, a private, liberal-arts institution affiliated with the Methodist Church, has a policy on "Freedom of Expression and Inquiry" that guarantees that Hamline students will be "free to examine and discuss all questions of interest to them and to express opinions publicly or privately."
With such a strong guarantee on students' "freedom from censorship and control" by the university, student Troy Scheffler's e-mail must have been horrifically bad to warrant such a crackdown. Right?
Wrong. What Scheffler did was make a gun-rights case for concealed-carry permits on campus to help ward off potential Cho Seung-Huis before they strike Hamline. This was no monstrous act; in fact, it was in line with public debate across the nation following Cho's rampage, not to mention an issue of perennial debate in America. Many researchers, most notably John R. Lott Jr., have shown conclusively that gun ownership itself wards off crime while laws banning guns lead to increases in crimes. Criminals are less likely to strike if they have reason to believe their prospective victims could be armed.
Scheffler had written in his April 17 e-mail reply to David Stern, Hamline vice president of student affairs, that "Considering this university also pushes 'diversity' initiatives like VA Tech, maybe its 'leadership' will reconsider [Hamline's] ban on conceal carry law abiding gun owners... Ironically, according to a few VA Tech forums, there are plenty of students complaining that this wouldn't have happened if the school wouldn't have banned their permits a few months ago."
He added, "I just don't understand why leftists don't understand that criminals don't care about laws; that is why they’re criminals... Maybe this school will reconsider its repression of law abiding citizens rights."
Two days later, Hamline President Linda Hanson e-mailed the campus about Virginia Tech. Scheffler replied to that e-mail also, expanding upon his comments to Stern.
In both messages, Scheffler made it clear to all but the most hysterically inclined person that his advocacy of concealed-carry permits was to protect the students from criminals. Scheffler recognized that this protection would be afforded primarily by predators' foreknowledge that any one of the students at Hamline could shoot back, but also – given that the administrators had both brought up the VT massacre – by students being able to stop a killing rampage before it got started.
In short, what Scheffler wrote was no preamble to a blood-lusty explosion of violence. At worst it was crude criticism of the university administration combined with a stark assessment of the true risk of a concealed-carry society like Virginia Tech's: total defenselessness against a Columbine-inspired mass murderer. Regardless, it should have been protected by the university's stated policy guaranteeing free expression.
Nevertheless, on April 23 Scheffler received a hand-delivered letter from Dean of Students Alan Sickbert that informed him his e-mails were "deemed to be threatening and thus an alleged violation of the Hamline University Judicial Code" and that he was placed on "interim suspension" to be lifted only after he agreed to a psychological evaluation by a licensed mental health professional.
Click on the title to read the rest.
------------------------
I know that a lot of people are afraid of guns and would never want to have one on their person or in their homes. I also know people who support gun rights but for various personal reasons cannot or will not have a gun. Yet those of us who are willing to train, practice and apply for a concealed carry permit should not be denied that right. Statistics show that the very fact that we do so provides some protection for our fellow citizens. The fact that some percentage of the population could be armed does deter some crime. As I have said before, if one of the professors or students at VA Tech had been legally armed, some, if not most, of the lives could have been saved. We will never know in that particular instance. We may never know in future instances if our institutions of higher learning continue to insist that an unarmed campus is a safe campus. Why do you think criminals choose campuses to shoot up? They can be reasonably certain they will not face armed opposition.
As an aside, I think this might be a big thing in the Methodist Church. Several years ago I attended a conflict resolution training event in a Methodist church. One of the people I trained with was also a CCW permit holder and we were both surprised that we were prohibited from carrying on the church property. (I used to work in a church - considering some of the people who show up there looking for "help" being armed is not such a bad idea.) More recently, we vacationed at Lake Junaluska, a Methodist assembly in NC. We stayed in the old Lambuth Inn. It was lovely. However, they prominently display a sign on the front door prohibiting concealed carry. Now, I did not feel unsafe there as I normally do in a hotel. It did not seem to me to be a place a criminal would be drawn to. However, I did wonder how they proposed to protect me if someone did decide to take advantage of this group of disarmed victims. After all, they did not want me to be capable of defending myself! As much as I liked the environment, we will probably choose another facility on our next trip to the mountains, one that will not deny us our lawful rights.
---Katie
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Education is too important to be left to the government.
The real reason homeschooling and all other school choice options should be expanded.
From Jeff Jacoby's column:
Big Brother at school
By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist | October 17, 2007
"FREEDOM of education, being an essential of civil and religious liberty . . . must not be interfered with under any pretext whatever," the party's national platform declared. "We are opposed to state interference with parental rights and rights of conscience in the education of children as an infringement of the fundamental . . . doctrine that the largest individual liberty consistent with the rights of others insures the highest type of American citizenship and the best government."
That ringing endorsement of parental supremacy in education was adopted by the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1892, which just goes to show what was possible before the Democratic Party was taken hostage by the teachers unions. (Wondrous to relate, the platform also warned that "the tendency to centralize all power at the federal capital has become a menace," blasted barriers to free trade as "robbery of the great majority of the American people for the benefit of the few," and pledged "relentless opposition to the Republican policy of profligate expenditure.")
Today, on education as on so much else, the Democrats sing from a different hymnal. When the party's presidential candidates debated at Dartmouth College recently, they were asked about a controversial incident in Lexington, Mass., where a second-grade teacher, to the dismay of several parents, had read her young students a story celebrating same-sex marriage. Were the candidates "comfortable" with that?
"Yes, absolutely," former senator John Edwards promptly replied. "I want my children . . . to be exposed to all the information . . . even in second grade . . . because I don't want to impose my view. Nobody made me God. I don't get to decide on behalf of my family or my children. . . . I don't get to impose on them what it is that I believe is right." None of the other candidates disagreed, even though most of them say they oppose same-sex marriage.
Thus in a little over 100 years, the Democratic Party - and much of the Republican Party - has been transformed from a champion of "parental rights and rights of conscience in the education of children" to a party whose leaders believe that parents "don't get to impose" their views and values on what their kids are taught in school. Do American parents see anything wrong with that? Apparently not: The majority of them dutifully enroll their children in government-operated schools, where the only views and values permitted are the ones prescribed by the state.
--------------------
Click on the title to read the rest.
As a youth pastor once said to me, "You had better indoctrinate your kids or someone else will!" I find it appalling the number of parents who don't think it is their right and responsibility to teach their kids right from wrong and how to live constructively in society. Frankly, I don't think it is "progressive" or "open-minded." I think it is pure laziness.
---Katie
From Jeff Jacoby's column:
Big Brother at school
By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist | October 17, 2007
"FREEDOM of education, being an essential of civil and religious liberty . . . must not be interfered with under any pretext whatever," the party's national platform declared. "We are opposed to state interference with parental rights and rights of conscience in the education of children as an infringement of the fundamental . . . doctrine that the largest individual liberty consistent with the rights of others insures the highest type of American citizenship and the best government."
That ringing endorsement of parental supremacy in education was adopted by the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1892, which just goes to show what was possible before the Democratic Party was taken hostage by the teachers unions. (Wondrous to relate, the platform also warned that "the tendency to centralize all power at the federal capital has become a menace," blasted barriers to free trade as "robbery of the great majority of the American people for the benefit of the few," and pledged "relentless opposition to the Republican policy of profligate expenditure.")
Today, on education as on so much else, the Democrats sing from a different hymnal. When the party's presidential candidates debated at Dartmouth College recently, they were asked about a controversial incident in Lexington, Mass., where a second-grade teacher, to the dismay of several parents, had read her young students a story celebrating same-sex marriage. Were the candidates "comfortable" with that?
"Yes, absolutely," former senator John Edwards promptly replied. "I want my children . . . to be exposed to all the information . . . even in second grade . . . because I don't want to impose my view. Nobody made me God. I don't get to decide on behalf of my family or my children. . . . I don't get to impose on them what it is that I believe is right." None of the other candidates disagreed, even though most of them say they oppose same-sex marriage.
Thus in a little over 100 years, the Democratic Party - and much of the Republican Party - has been transformed from a champion of "parental rights and rights of conscience in the education of children" to a party whose leaders believe that parents "don't get to impose" their views and values on what their kids are taught in school. Do American parents see anything wrong with that? Apparently not: The majority of them dutifully enroll their children in government-operated schools, where the only views and values permitted are the ones prescribed by the state.
--------------------
Click on the title to read the rest.
As a youth pastor once said to me, "You had better indoctrinate your kids or someone else will!" I find it appalling the number of parents who don't think it is their right and responsibility to teach their kids right from wrong and how to live constructively in society. Frankly, I don't think it is "progressive" or "open-minded." I think it is pure laziness.
---Katie
Monday, October 15, 2007
Al Gore is not a climatologist....
or a meteorologist, or a scientist of any kind. People do realize that, don't they?
Now this man has the credentials to talk about our changing climate:
ONE of the world's foremost meteorologists has called the theory that helped Al Gore share the Nobel Peace Prize "ridiculous" and the product of "people who don't understand how the atmosphere works".
Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, told a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina that humans were not responsible for the warming of the earth.
His comments came on the same day that the Nobel committee honoured Mr Gore for his work in support of the link between humans and global warming.
"We're brainwashing our children," said Dr Gray, 78, a long-time professor at Colorado State University. "They're going to the Gore movie [An Inconvenient Truth] and being fed all this. It's ridiculous."
----
Click on the title for the rest of the article!
Now, I guess the next question would be, "Why are people so eager to believe this foolishness?" Hmmm.
---Katie
Now this man has the credentials to talk about our changing climate:
ONE of the world's foremost meteorologists has called the theory that helped Al Gore share the Nobel Peace Prize "ridiculous" and the product of "people who don't understand how the atmosphere works".
Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, told a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina that humans were not responsible for the warming of the earth.
His comments came on the same day that the Nobel committee honoured Mr Gore for his work in support of the link between humans and global warming.
"We're brainwashing our children," said Dr Gray, 78, a long-time professor at Colorado State University. "They're going to the Gore movie [An Inconvenient Truth] and being fed all this. It's ridiculous."
----
Click on the title for the rest of the article!
Now, I guess the next question would be, "Why are people so eager to believe this foolishness?" Hmmm.
---Katie
Saturday, October 13, 2007
How Important is Biology?
I watched a drama on vacation that included a story line about two couples whose babies were switched in the hospital. (The dad whose baby was chronically ill had switched his daughter for another baby without anyone's knowledge and the switch was discovered months later.) I wondered then what the best thing to do would be in that situation. Would it be better to swap back and have the baby that is yours biologically or should the parents stick with the baby they have bonded with, or more importantly, the baby who has bonded to them? I can't imagine how difficult that situation would be.
In Australia, two sets of parents have decided they cannot part with the babies they brought home from the hospital even though they were switched before they came home. Click on the title for the story.
Wow. Unimaginable.
---Katie
In Australia, two sets of parents have decided they cannot part with the babies they brought home from the hospital even though they were switched before they came home. Click on the title for the story.
Wow. Unimaginable.
---Katie
Friday, October 12, 2007
Happy Indigenous Resistance Day!
You gotta see this over on GOPublius! Click on the title.
Oh, and how DARE you celebrate Columbus Day!
---Katie
Oh, and how DARE you celebrate Columbus Day!
---Katie
Renewing Old Aquaintances
We just had a marvelous week. We actually got out of town for an entire week! The best part of our trip was a reunion of the Lutheran Student Movement members from the last 40 or more years at our alma mater, Clemson University. My hubby's roommate from college was there as was one of my bridesmaids and the pastor who did our wedding - he was also the pastor who was in charge of the LSM group we attended. Many other folks from "our generation" were there. At one point I said to my daughter, "Look, all the people sitting at these two tables were at our wedding!" It was very cool. And except for how we look (!) no one had changed too much! It was like coming home. I went off to college knowing no one there and LSM was my family there. And that is where I met hubby as well!
We had a barbecue on Friday, went to the pastor's open house, tailgated and attended the game (the only disappointment) on Saturday, and attended church at University Lutheran (where we got married almost 29 years ago) on Sunday. After lunch with my in-laws, we headed for the mountains for a few days and I'll post later about that!
---Katie
We had a barbecue on Friday, went to the pastor's open house, tailgated and attended the game (the only disappointment) on Saturday, and attended church at University Lutheran (where we got married almost 29 years ago) on Sunday. After lunch with my in-laws, we headed for the mountains for a few days and I'll post later about that!
---Katie
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
I used to like Sally Field....
...but when these people start talking politics, they really sound like morons.
From the Blogger News Network:
Just Shut Up, And Thank All The Little People
September 18th, 2007 by The Stiletto
It was bad enough watching Sally Field have a senior moment and lose her train of thought (video link) midway through her speech accepting an Emmy for lead actress in a drama series (”Brothers and Sisters”), but when she finally remembered what she wanted to say - “And, let’s face it, if the mothers ruled the war, there would be no (bleeped expletive) wars in the first place” – The Stiletto couldn’t have been alone in wondering whether she has Alzheimer’s.
In the 60-year old actress’ own lifetime there have been three female heads of state – all mothers - who did not hesitate to wage war to defend, or advance the interests of, their respective nations:
† Golda Meir, a founder of the state of Israel and its Prime Minister from 1969 to 1974, was the mother of two children, Sarah and Menachem. The original “Iron Lady,” Meir was at the helm during the 1973 Yom Kippur War between Israel and a coalition of Arab countries led by Egypt and Syria determined to take back the Sinai and Golan Heights, which had been captured by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War. Israel prevailed, and the war paved the way to the Camp David Accords, which led to normalized relations between Egypt and Israel.
† Prime Minister of India for three consecutive terms (1966 to 1977) and for a fourth term from 1980 until she was assassinated in 1984, Indira Gandhi was the mother of two sons, Sanjay and Rajiv. In the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, Gandhi backed East Pakistan against West Pakistan, which led to the creation of Bangladesh. Three years later, India developed a nuclear arsenal to counter the threat from Communist China. During Gandhi’s watch, India became the dominant power in the region.
† The sobriquet “Iron Lady” was reprised for Margaret Thatcher, who served as British Prime Minister from 1979 to 1990 and is mother to twins Mark and Carol. In 1982 when Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands, Thatcher dispatched the navy and recaptured the British territory in a decisive victory.
Forget osteoporosis. Fields’ agent should immediately phone the Aricept people to set up an audition.
Note: The Stiletto writes about politics and other stuff at The Stiletto Blog.
---Katie
And really, those of you have worked in a number of places and have worked on boards and such for volunteer organizations - who, in general, would you rather work for, a woman or a man? Many of my women friends have told me that they would much rather work for a man - women in leadership positions can be, and I mean CAN BE, just plain vicious...I know several exceptions, but this is a generalization. ;-)
Women can go to war just as easily as men. If Hillary gets to be president, just wait and see.
From the Blogger News Network:
Just Shut Up, And Thank All The Little People
September 18th, 2007 by The Stiletto
It was bad enough watching Sally Field have a senior moment and lose her train of thought (video link) midway through her speech accepting an Emmy for lead actress in a drama series (”Brothers and Sisters”), but when she finally remembered what she wanted to say - “And, let’s face it, if the mothers ruled the war, there would be no (bleeped expletive) wars in the first place” – The Stiletto couldn’t have been alone in wondering whether she has Alzheimer’s.
In the 60-year old actress’ own lifetime there have been three female heads of state – all mothers - who did not hesitate to wage war to defend, or advance the interests of, their respective nations:
† Golda Meir, a founder of the state of Israel and its Prime Minister from 1969 to 1974, was the mother of two children, Sarah and Menachem. The original “Iron Lady,” Meir was at the helm during the 1973 Yom Kippur War between Israel and a coalition of Arab countries led by Egypt and Syria determined to take back the Sinai and Golan Heights, which had been captured by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War. Israel prevailed, and the war paved the way to the Camp David Accords, which led to normalized relations between Egypt and Israel.
† Prime Minister of India for three consecutive terms (1966 to 1977) and for a fourth term from 1980 until she was assassinated in 1984, Indira Gandhi was the mother of two sons, Sanjay and Rajiv. In the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, Gandhi backed East Pakistan against West Pakistan, which led to the creation of Bangladesh. Three years later, India developed a nuclear arsenal to counter the threat from Communist China. During Gandhi’s watch, India became the dominant power in the region.
† The sobriquet “Iron Lady” was reprised for Margaret Thatcher, who served as British Prime Minister from 1979 to 1990 and is mother to twins Mark and Carol. In 1982 when Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands, Thatcher dispatched the navy and recaptured the British territory in a decisive victory.
Forget osteoporosis. Fields’ agent should immediately phone the Aricept people to set up an audition.
Note: The Stiletto writes about politics and other stuff at The Stiletto Blog.
---Katie
And really, those of you have worked in a number of places and have worked on boards and such for volunteer organizations - who, in general, would you rather work for, a woman or a man? Many of my women friends have told me that they would much rather work for a man - women in leadership positions can be, and I mean CAN BE, just plain vicious...I know several exceptions, but this is a generalization. ;-)
Women can go to war just as easily as men. If Hillary gets to be president, just wait and see.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Homeschooling Comes of Age
OK, I have to say I really like this article...and it is from one of my favorite organizations, Th Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Homeschooling Comes of Age
By Isabel Lyman
Posted on 9/10/2007
[Subscribe or Tell Others]
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the modern home education movement was in its infancy. At that time, most Americans viewed home-styled education as a quaint tourist attraction or the lifestyle choice of those willing to endure more hardship than necessary.
What a difference a few decades makes.
Homeschooling has undergone an extreme makeover. From maverick to mainstream, the movement has acquired a glamorous, populist sheen.
Flip through a few issues of Sports Illustrated, circa 2007, and there's no shortage of news about photogenic homeschoolers who make the athletic cut. Like Jessica Long who was born in Russia, resides in Baltimore, and is an accomplished swimmer. At 15, Jessica became the first paralympian to win the prestigious Sullivan Award, which honors the country's top amateur athlete. Then there's the dashing Joey Logano who, at 17, has already won a NASCAR race.
Even presidential hopefuls and their spouses have jumped on the school-thine-own bandwagon. Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) has offered enthusiastic support for homeschooling families, and Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Senator John Edwards (D-North Carolina) told the Wall Street Journal that this fall she plans to home educate the couple's two youngest children "with the help of a tutor."
As for scholastic achievements, this national competition season was remarkable, seeing home scholars crowned as champs in three major events. A twelve-year-old New Mexican named Matthew Evans won the National Word Power competition, sponsored by Reader's Digest. Thirteen-year-old Evan O'Dorney of California won the Scripps National Spelling Bee, and fourteen-year-old Caitlin Snaring of Washington was christened the National Geographic Bee champ.
Then there's Micah Stanley of Minnesota who has yet to receive any lessons in a brick-and-mortar classroom building. For the past few years, he's been enrolled in the Oak Brook College of Law, a distance learning law school headquartered in Sacramento. This past February, he took the grueling, three-day California general bar examination (California allows correspondence law students to sit for the bar), and he can now add "attorney" to his resume. In his spare time, he's finishing up a book titled, How to Escape the Holding Tank: A Guide to Help You Get What You Want.
Micah is 19.
A teenage lawyer/budding author, however, wouldn't surprise John Taylor Gatto, an outspoken critic of compulsory education laws and a former New York State Teacher of the Year. Writing in Harper's Magazine, Gatto forthrightly argued that "genius is as common as dirt."
Perhaps. But it's also understandable that when everyday folks hear about the homeschooled Joeys and Caitlins and Micahs, they become a tad intimidated — as if this educational choice were the exclusive domain of obsessive-compulsive moms and dads with money to burn, time to spare, and a brood of driven, Type-A offspring.
Although it's commendable when the young achieve Herculean goals, homeschooling has always been more about freedom and personal responsibility than winning an Ivy League scholarship or playing at Wimbledon. In general, it has attracted working-class families of all ethnicities and faiths, who have been eager to provide a nurturing, stimulating learning experience.
Of course, the unabashedly adventuresome are always an endearing staple of the movement. The Burns family, of Alaska, set out on a 36-foot sailboat this summer to travel the world for three years. Chris Burns (the dad) told the Juneau Empire he hopes "to connect with Juneau classrooms and host question-and-answer sessions while at sea," as well as homeschool the two Burns children.
In a legal sense, homeschools serve as a glaring reminder of a complex issue that has become the stuff of landmark Supreme Court cases: does the state have the authority to coerce a youngster to attend school and sit at a desk for 12 years? Whether said child has the aptitude and maturity for such a long-term contract (or is it involuntary servitude?) remains an uncomfortable topic because, in the acceptable mantra of the day, "education is a right."
Such a national conversation is long overdue, as there are plenty of signs — costly remedial education and rising dropout rates, to name two — to indicate that the status quo public school model isn't kid-friendly.
Homeschooling, after all, began to catch on with the masses because a former US Department of Education employee argued that children, like delicate hothouse plants, required a certain type of environment to grow shoots and blossoms, and that loving parents, not institutions, could best create the greenhouses.
It was 1969 when the late Dr. Raymond Moore initiated an inquiry into previously neglected areas of educational research. Two of the questions that Moore and a team of like-minded colleagues set out to answer were (1) Is institutionalizing young children a sound, educational trend? and (2) What is the best timing for school entrance?
In the process of analyzing thousands of studies, twenty of which compared early school entrants with late starters, Moore concluded that developmental problems, such as hyperactivity, nearsightedness, and dyslexia, are often the result of prematurely taxing a child's nervous system and mind with continuous academic tasks, like reading and writing.
The bulk of the research convinced Moore that formal schooling should be delayed until at least age 8 or 10, or even as late as 12. As he explained, "These findings sparked our concern and convinced us to focus our investigation on two primary areas: formal learning and socializing. Eventually, this work led to an unexpected interest in homeschools."
$6
"Above all, the merit of homeschooling is that it allows for experimentation, flexibility, and trial & error."
Moore went on to write Home Grown Kids and Home-Spun Schools. The rest, as they say, is history. The books, published in the 1980s, have sold hundreds of thousands of copies and offer practical advice to potential parent educators.
Nowadays, there's a sea of such self-help material, scores of commercial products, and online opportunities solely dedicated to encouraging families to learn together in the convenience of their homes. Homeschooling has graduated into a time-tested choice that allows children to thrive, learn at their own pace, and which frequently inspires other success stories. As our nation is famous for encouraging immigrants to reinvent themselves and achieve the American Dream, so home education does for youngsters whether they are late bloomers or are candidates for Mensa.
Above all, the merit of homeschooling is that it allows for experimentation, flexibility, and trial and error. Here is the great contrast with state-provided education. As with all systems hammered out by bureaucracies, public schools get stuck in a rut, perpetuate failures, respond slowly to changing times, and resist all reforms. Errors are not localized and contained, but all consuming and system wide. It's bad enough when such a system is used to govern labor contracts or postal service; it is a tragic loss when it is used to manage kids' minds.
Isabel Lyman, Ph.D., is the author of The Homeschooling Revolution, a paperback about the modern home education movement. Her articles and op-eds have appeared in the Miami Herald, Wall Street Journal, Dallas Morning News, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Investor's Business Daily, Boston Herald, Los Angeles Daily Journal, National Review, Chronicles, Daily Oklahoman, and other publications. See her website. Send her mail. Comment on the blog.
Sources:
John Taylor Gatto, "Against School — How public education cripples our kids, and why." Harper's Magazine, September 2003.
Ken Lewis, "Juneau man to set sail on world voyage." Juneau Empire, April 16, 2007.
Raymond Moore, "Homegrown and Homeschooled." Mothering, Summer 1990, p. 79.
Email interview with Micah Stanley, July 2, 2007.
Click on the title to visit the site!
---Katie
Homeschooling Comes of Age
By Isabel Lyman
Posted on 9/10/2007
[Subscribe or Tell Others]
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the modern home education movement was in its infancy. At that time, most Americans viewed home-styled education as a quaint tourist attraction or the lifestyle choice of those willing to endure more hardship than necessary.
What a difference a few decades makes.
Homeschooling has undergone an extreme makeover. From maverick to mainstream, the movement has acquired a glamorous, populist sheen.
Flip through a few issues of Sports Illustrated, circa 2007, and there's no shortage of news about photogenic homeschoolers who make the athletic cut. Like Jessica Long who was born in Russia, resides in Baltimore, and is an accomplished swimmer. At 15, Jessica became the first paralympian to win the prestigious Sullivan Award, which honors the country's top amateur athlete. Then there's the dashing Joey Logano who, at 17, has already won a NASCAR race.
Even presidential hopefuls and their spouses have jumped on the school-thine-own bandwagon. Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) has offered enthusiastic support for homeschooling families, and Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Senator John Edwards (D-North Carolina) told the Wall Street Journal that this fall she plans to home educate the couple's two youngest children "with the help of a tutor."
As for scholastic achievements, this national competition season was remarkable, seeing home scholars crowned as champs in three major events. A twelve-year-old New Mexican named Matthew Evans won the National Word Power competition, sponsored by Reader's Digest. Thirteen-year-old Evan O'Dorney of California won the Scripps National Spelling Bee, and fourteen-year-old Caitlin Snaring of Washington was christened the National Geographic Bee champ.
Then there's Micah Stanley of Minnesota who has yet to receive any lessons in a brick-and-mortar classroom building. For the past few years, he's been enrolled in the Oak Brook College of Law, a distance learning law school headquartered in Sacramento. This past February, he took the grueling, three-day California general bar examination (California allows correspondence law students to sit for the bar), and he can now add "attorney" to his resume. In his spare time, he's finishing up a book titled, How to Escape the Holding Tank: A Guide to Help You Get What You Want.
Micah is 19.
A teenage lawyer/budding author, however, wouldn't surprise John Taylor Gatto, an outspoken critic of compulsory education laws and a former New York State Teacher of the Year. Writing in Harper's Magazine, Gatto forthrightly argued that "genius is as common as dirt."
Perhaps. But it's also understandable that when everyday folks hear about the homeschooled Joeys and Caitlins and Micahs, they become a tad intimidated — as if this educational choice were the exclusive domain of obsessive-compulsive moms and dads with money to burn, time to spare, and a brood of driven, Type-A offspring.
Although it's commendable when the young achieve Herculean goals, homeschooling has always been more about freedom and personal responsibility than winning an Ivy League scholarship or playing at Wimbledon. In general, it has attracted working-class families of all ethnicities and faiths, who have been eager to provide a nurturing, stimulating learning experience.
Of course, the unabashedly adventuresome are always an endearing staple of the movement. The Burns family, of Alaska, set out on a 36-foot sailboat this summer to travel the world for three years. Chris Burns (the dad) told the Juneau Empire he hopes "to connect with Juneau classrooms and host question-and-answer sessions while at sea," as well as homeschool the two Burns children.
In a legal sense, homeschools serve as a glaring reminder of a complex issue that has become the stuff of landmark Supreme Court cases: does the state have the authority to coerce a youngster to attend school and sit at a desk for 12 years? Whether said child has the aptitude and maturity for such a long-term contract (or is it involuntary servitude?) remains an uncomfortable topic because, in the acceptable mantra of the day, "education is a right."
Such a national conversation is long overdue, as there are plenty of signs — costly remedial education and rising dropout rates, to name two — to indicate that the status quo public school model isn't kid-friendly.
Homeschooling, after all, began to catch on with the masses because a former US Department of Education employee argued that children, like delicate hothouse plants, required a certain type of environment to grow shoots and blossoms, and that loving parents, not institutions, could best create the greenhouses.
It was 1969 when the late Dr. Raymond Moore initiated an inquiry into previously neglected areas of educational research. Two of the questions that Moore and a team of like-minded colleagues set out to answer were (1) Is institutionalizing young children a sound, educational trend? and (2) What is the best timing for school entrance?
In the process of analyzing thousands of studies, twenty of which compared early school entrants with late starters, Moore concluded that developmental problems, such as hyperactivity, nearsightedness, and dyslexia, are often the result of prematurely taxing a child's nervous system and mind with continuous academic tasks, like reading and writing.
The bulk of the research convinced Moore that formal schooling should be delayed until at least age 8 or 10, or even as late as 12. As he explained, "These findings sparked our concern and convinced us to focus our investigation on two primary areas: formal learning and socializing. Eventually, this work led to an unexpected interest in homeschools."
$6
"Above all, the merit of homeschooling is that it allows for experimentation, flexibility, and trial & error."
Moore went on to write Home Grown Kids and Home-Spun Schools. The rest, as they say, is history. The books, published in the 1980s, have sold hundreds of thousands of copies and offer practical advice to potential parent educators.
Nowadays, there's a sea of such self-help material, scores of commercial products, and online opportunities solely dedicated to encouraging families to learn together in the convenience of their homes. Homeschooling has graduated into a time-tested choice that allows children to thrive, learn at their own pace, and which frequently inspires other success stories. As our nation is famous for encouraging immigrants to reinvent themselves and achieve the American Dream, so home education does for youngsters whether they are late bloomers or are candidates for Mensa.
Above all, the merit of homeschooling is that it allows for experimentation, flexibility, and trial and error. Here is the great contrast with state-provided education. As with all systems hammered out by bureaucracies, public schools get stuck in a rut, perpetuate failures, respond slowly to changing times, and resist all reforms. Errors are not localized and contained, but all consuming and system wide. It's bad enough when such a system is used to govern labor contracts or postal service; it is a tragic loss when it is used to manage kids' minds.
Isabel Lyman, Ph.D., is the author of The Homeschooling Revolution, a paperback about the modern home education movement. Her articles and op-eds have appeared in the Miami Herald, Wall Street Journal, Dallas Morning News, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Investor's Business Daily, Boston Herald, Los Angeles Daily Journal, National Review, Chronicles, Daily Oklahoman, and other publications. See her website. Send her mail. Comment on the blog.
Sources:
John Taylor Gatto, "Against School — How public education cripples our kids, and why." Harper's Magazine, September 2003.
Ken Lewis, "Juneau man to set sail on world voyage." Juneau Empire, April 16, 2007.
Raymond Moore, "Homegrown and Homeschooled." Mothering, Summer 1990, p. 79.
Email interview with Micah Stanley, July 2, 2007.
Click on the title to visit the site!
---Katie
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Don't Call Me Pastor!
I found this article oddly comforting amidst all the chaos at our church, chaos caused, according to some, by the fact that our pastor is not a shepherd. (I am quoting others, not making my own statement.)
Here is the excerpt that applied some salve to my bruised heart:
Granted, the metaphor of the people of God as a flock of sheep living under the watchful eye of a good shepherd runs deep in the Bible. And there is some support for referring to those in leadership roles as shepherds or pastors for God’s people. In John 21:16, Jesus’ second charge to Simon Peter is to “tend (shepherd, pastor) my sheep.” In the same way, I Peter 5:4 urges the elder within the church to “tend (shepherd, pastor) the flock of God that is your charge.” Ephesians 4:11 speaks of how it is a gift that some are appointed “apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers.”
However, it must be noted that positive references to church leaders as shepherds are few and far between. In fact, when the Bible speaks of the human shepherds and pastors of God’s people, it is most often with the language of condemnation and woe. Over and over again, the leadership of the faithful fail to be decent shepherds. David, the shepherd king, ends up as a sheep thief (II Samuel 11 and 12). Jesus speaks of how he—and he alone—is the Good Shepherd, and all others are either “thieves and robbers” or “hirelings who care nothing for the sheep” (John 10). “Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!” says the LORD—thus begins Jeremiah’s shepherd-sheep metaphor (23:1), and with it he tears at kings, priests, prophets, and all the other human shepherds of Israel as bullies and thieves. Ezekiel 34 is equally vicious in its condemnation of any who has claimed to be shepherd or pastor to God’s people. Even the little epistle of Jude takes a shot at would-be shepherds as it criticizes those who are “blemishes on your love feasts, as they boldly carouse together, looking after (=shepherding) themselves” (v. 12).
The good news within all the hard words against those who claim to be shepherds and pastors is the ongoing proclamation that, even though so many have failed, there is one who remains a good shepherd. As the familiar words of Psalm 23 say, “The LORD is my shepherd.” Jesus’ words in John 10, “I am the Good Shepherd,” are not an isolated instance. Jeremiah and Ezekiel’s rejection of human shepherds and pastors is grounded in the promise of God’s intention to be what humanity can not be. “I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep, and I will make them lie down,” says the LORD God. “I will seek the lost and I will bring back the strayed, and I will bind up the crippled, and I will strengthen the weak, and the fat and the strong I will watch over; I will feed them in justice” (Ezekiel 34:15-16).
Click on the title to read the whole article.
Like I said, I am not making a statement about anyone, but it does make us think - can we really expect pastors to be good shepherds? Always? Even though they are sinners just like us? Perhaps we should just be thankful when we have that experience with a pastor and realize we won't find it everywhere. And remember who the Good Shepherd really is and who we need to turn to when our hearts are sore.
---Katie
Here is the excerpt that applied some salve to my bruised heart:
Granted, the metaphor of the people of God as a flock of sheep living under the watchful eye of a good shepherd runs deep in the Bible. And there is some support for referring to those in leadership roles as shepherds or pastors for God’s people. In John 21:16, Jesus’ second charge to Simon Peter is to “tend (shepherd, pastor) my sheep.” In the same way, I Peter 5:4 urges the elder within the church to “tend (shepherd, pastor) the flock of God that is your charge.” Ephesians 4:11 speaks of how it is a gift that some are appointed “apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers.”
However, it must be noted that positive references to church leaders as shepherds are few and far between. In fact, when the Bible speaks of the human shepherds and pastors of God’s people, it is most often with the language of condemnation and woe. Over and over again, the leadership of the faithful fail to be decent shepherds. David, the shepherd king, ends up as a sheep thief (II Samuel 11 and 12). Jesus speaks of how he—and he alone—is the Good Shepherd, and all others are either “thieves and robbers” or “hirelings who care nothing for the sheep” (John 10). “Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!” says the LORD—thus begins Jeremiah’s shepherd-sheep metaphor (23:1), and with it he tears at kings, priests, prophets, and all the other human shepherds of Israel as bullies and thieves. Ezekiel 34 is equally vicious in its condemnation of any who has claimed to be shepherd or pastor to God’s people. Even the little epistle of Jude takes a shot at would-be shepherds as it criticizes those who are “blemishes on your love feasts, as they boldly carouse together, looking after (=shepherding) themselves” (v. 12).
The good news within all the hard words against those who claim to be shepherds and pastors is the ongoing proclamation that, even though so many have failed, there is one who remains a good shepherd. As the familiar words of Psalm 23 say, “The LORD is my shepherd.” Jesus’ words in John 10, “I am the Good Shepherd,” are not an isolated instance. Jeremiah and Ezekiel’s rejection of human shepherds and pastors is grounded in the promise of God’s intention to be what humanity can not be. “I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep, and I will make them lie down,” says the LORD God. “I will seek the lost and I will bring back the strayed, and I will bind up the crippled, and I will strengthen the weak, and the fat and the strong I will watch over; I will feed them in justice” (Ezekiel 34:15-16).
Click on the title to read the whole article.
Like I said, I am not making a statement about anyone, but it does make us think - can we really expect pastors to be good shepherds? Always? Even though they are sinners just like us? Perhaps we should just be thankful when we have that experience with a pastor and realize we won't find it everywhere. And remember who the Good Shepherd really is and who we need to turn to when our hearts are sore.
---Katie
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
As Sweden Islamifies, Crime Surges
From The Brussels Journal, the essential european blog:
"...Almost 90% of all robberies reported to the police were committed by gangs, not individuals. “When we are in the city and robbing we are waging a war, waging a war against the Swedes.” This argument was repeated several times. “Power for me means that the Swedes shall look at me, lie down on the ground and kiss my feet.” The boys explain, laughingly, that “there is a thrilling sensation in your body when you’re robbing, you feel satisfied and happy, it feels as if you’ve succeeded, it simply feels good.” “It’s so easy to rob Swedes, so easy.” “We rob every single day, as often as we want to, whenever we want to.” The immigrant youth regard the Swedes as stupid and cowardly: “The Swedes don’t do anything, they just give us the stuff. They’re so wimpy.” The young robbers do not plan their crimes: “No, we just see some Swedes that look rich or have nice mobile phones and then we rob them...”
-snip- "The number of rape charges in Sweden has quadrupled in just above twenty years. Rape cases involving children under the age of 15 are six times as common today as they were a generation ago. Most other kinds of violent crime have rapidly increased, too. Instability is spreading to most urban and suburban areas. Resident aliens from Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia dominate the group of rape suspects. "
Feeling like a frog in a pot yet, getting warmer little by little? It can't happen here, huh? Better hope when Hillary gets elected she lets us keep our guns so we can defend ourselves....
Yeah, I know...I'm a racist. Not!
---Katie
"...Almost 90% of all robberies reported to the police were committed by gangs, not individuals. “When we are in the city and robbing we are waging a war, waging a war against the Swedes.” This argument was repeated several times. “Power for me means that the Swedes shall look at me, lie down on the ground and kiss my feet.” The boys explain, laughingly, that “there is a thrilling sensation in your body when you’re robbing, you feel satisfied and happy, it feels as if you’ve succeeded, it simply feels good.” “It’s so easy to rob Swedes, so easy.” “We rob every single day, as often as we want to, whenever we want to.” The immigrant youth regard the Swedes as stupid and cowardly: “The Swedes don’t do anything, they just give us the stuff. They’re so wimpy.” The young robbers do not plan their crimes: “No, we just see some Swedes that look rich or have nice mobile phones and then we rob them...”
-snip- "The number of rape charges in Sweden has quadrupled in just above twenty years. Rape cases involving children under the age of 15 are six times as common today as they were a generation ago. Most other kinds of violent crime have rapidly increased, too. Instability is spreading to most urban and suburban areas. Resident aliens from Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia dominate the group of rape suspects. "
Feeling like a frog in a pot yet, getting warmer little by little? It can't happen here, huh? Better hope when Hillary gets elected she lets us keep our guns so we can defend ourselves....
Yeah, I know...I'm a racist. Not!
---Katie
Terrorist Test Run in Orlando?
I am not sure if this site is alarmist, or if their analysis is accurate, but I am aware that there have been many reports over the last few years of "test runs" for attacks on the US. I heard this one discussed on a local talk show, but did not find all the details anywhere until today. This is chilling. Click on the title for the whole article, but I don't know how long it will be there.
The Untold Story of Delta Flight 1824
By Douglas J. Hagmann
Sunday, September 9, 2007
9 September 2007: The passengers aboard Delta Airlines Flight 1824 flying out of Orlando International Airport last Thursday at 7:15 a.m. heard the following statement over the intercom as they were preparing to taxi onto the runway on their way to Atlanta, Georgia:
Ladies and gentlemen, we have been informed that there is "a credible security risk with this aircraft" and we are returning to the terminal.
snip
During a routine test of the baggage, Transportation Security Administration authorities ran the luggage through x-ray detection and then conducted an explosive trace detection of the bags belonging to the 9 Middle Eastern passengers. The x-ray of the bags found questionable items inside the luggage, and the explosive trace detection tests resulted in a "positive hit" for explosives -- specifically, SEMTEX, an explosive commonly used by Islamic terrorists. To be certain, however, the luggage was test no less than 4 times by four different machines and operators. Each time, a "positive hit" for explosives was registered. "The presence of explosive traces was 'no mistake,'" stated one federal source talking to this agency on condition of anonymity.
snip
Even more disconcerting, TSA and security officials observed that two of the Middle Eastern men intended for the flight had smeared Vaseline on their arms and neck areas -- a common tactic among hand-to-hand fighters who want the advantage in the event someone tries to grab them or put them in a headlock. Covered by the greasy agent, they are better able to extricate themselves during close-quarters, hand-to-hand fighting.
Like I said, click on the title....
What is more disconcerting to me is that the FBI labeled this incident benign.
---Katie
The Untold Story of Delta Flight 1824
By Douglas J. Hagmann
Sunday, September 9, 2007
9 September 2007: The passengers aboard Delta Airlines Flight 1824 flying out of Orlando International Airport last Thursday at 7:15 a.m. heard the following statement over the intercom as they were preparing to taxi onto the runway on their way to Atlanta, Georgia:
Ladies and gentlemen, we have been informed that there is "a credible security risk with this aircraft" and we are returning to the terminal.
snip
During a routine test of the baggage, Transportation Security Administration authorities ran the luggage through x-ray detection and then conducted an explosive trace detection of the bags belonging to the 9 Middle Eastern passengers. The x-ray of the bags found questionable items inside the luggage, and the explosive trace detection tests resulted in a "positive hit" for explosives -- specifically, SEMTEX, an explosive commonly used by Islamic terrorists. To be certain, however, the luggage was test no less than 4 times by four different machines and operators. Each time, a "positive hit" for explosives was registered. "The presence of explosive traces was 'no mistake,'" stated one federal source talking to this agency on condition of anonymity.
snip
Even more disconcerting, TSA and security officials observed that two of the Middle Eastern men intended for the flight had smeared Vaseline on their arms and neck areas -- a common tactic among hand-to-hand fighters who want the advantage in the event someone tries to grab them or put them in a headlock. Covered by the greasy agent, they are better able to extricate themselves during close-quarters, hand-to-hand fighting.
Like I said, click on the title....
What is more disconcerting to me is that the FBI labeled this incident benign.
---Katie
Monday, September 10, 2007
ELW
Here is an interesting opinion of the ELW, our new hymnal:
The creation of Evangelical Lutheran Worship (ELW) by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, as I understand it, was generated by the convergence of two factors. One was the fervent desire on the part of a relative minority in the church to end the use of masculine pronouns (“he,” “him,” “his”) to refer to God. The other was the increasingly serious financial situation of the church’s publishing house, Augsburg Fortress. A new worship book would make congregations pray and talk about God in ways that the influential minority considered essential and would at the same time be a big seller to bail out the publisher. And so it has happened.
Click on the title to read more at Lutheran Forum.
You know, those two items above have been my opinion for awhile - it's interesting that others think the same thing.
---Katie
The creation of Evangelical Lutheran Worship (ELW) by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, as I understand it, was generated by the convergence of two factors. One was the fervent desire on the part of a relative minority in the church to end the use of masculine pronouns (“he,” “him,” “his”) to refer to God. The other was the increasingly serious financial situation of the church’s publishing house, Augsburg Fortress. A new worship book would make congregations pray and talk about God in ways that the influential minority considered essential and would at the same time be a big seller to bail out the publisher. And so it has happened.
Click on the title to read more at Lutheran Forum.
You know, those two items above have been my opinion for awhile - it's interesting that others think the same thing.
---Katie
Are we in denial?
Here is an article from a non-mainstream source that is really scary. Do you think our schools are at risk? Or do you think terrorists realize that a Beslan-type attack on American schools could release a fury that would threaten every Muslim in the USA?
Here's an excerpt:
Probably the last place you want to think of terrorists striking is your kids' school. But according to two trainers at an anti-terrorism conference on the East Coast, preparations for attacks on American schools that will bring rivers of blood and staggering body counts are well underway in Islamic terrorist camps.
* The intended attackers have bluntly warned us they're going to do it.
* They're already begun testing school-related targets here.They've given us a catastrophic model to train against, which we've largely ignored and they've learned more deadly tactics from.
"We don't know for sure what they will do. No one knows the future. But by definition, a successful attack is one we are not ready for," declared one of the instructors, Lt. Col. Dave Grossman. Our schools fit that description to a "T"-as in Terrorism and Threat.
Click on the title to read the entire article.
This is an interesting web site focused on the effects of violence as well as the need to protect ourselves from violence.
---Katie
Here's an excerpt:
Probably the last place you want to think of terrorists striking is your kids' school. But according to two trainers at an anti-terrorism conference on the East Coast, preparations for attacks on American schools that will bring rivers of blood and staggering body counts are well underway in Islamic terrorist camps.
* The intended attackers have bluntly warned us they're going to do it.
* They're already begun testing school-related targets here.They've given us a catastrophic model to train against, which we've largely ignored and they've learned more deadly tactics from.
"We don't know for sure what they will do. No one knows the future. But by definition, a successful attack is one we are not ready for," declared one of the instructors, Lt. Col. Dave Grossman. Our schools fit that description to a "T"-as in Terrorism and Threat.
Click on the title to read the entire article.
This is an interesting web site focused on the effects of violence as well as the need to protect ourselves from violence.
---Katie
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
More thoughts on Churchwide Assembly
I have to say that my week at the Churchwide Assembly troubled me to some degree in my understanding of how we are to live as Christians. The theme for the Assembly was “Living in God’s Amazing Grace: Thanks Be to God!” The theme and all of our Bible study were from Galatians. Speakers and leaders emphasized over and over how we are no longer bound by the law. One Bible study leader asked, “What are you going to do now that you don’t have to do anything?” I have to say I struggled with this because I always have seen the Bible as having something to say about how I am to live. Am I to ignore all that the scriptures say about how we are to live because I am free from the law? Am I holding my brothers and sisters to a law to which we are no longer accountable by believing we should refrain from what the Bible defines as sexual sin?
I have been immersing myself in Jesus’ teachings since I have been home, particularly in the book of Matthew. I also have been reading Martin Luther’s “Freedom of a Christian.” Luther writes:
"Now Adam was righteous and created by God without sin, so he had no need to become righteous and justified through work and caretaking. However, so that he not be idle, God put him to work planting paradise, building and conserving it. These were free works, done only to please God alone, and not to attain righteousness, which he already possessed and which would have already been naturally inborn in all of us as well.
It is the same with the work of the believer, who through faith is once again put in paradise and created anew. Such a person does not need work to become righteous but, simply to please God, but is commanded to do such free works so as not to stand around idle but to give the body work to do that sustains it."
So, do we live our lives to please ourselves or to please God? And if we live to please God, how do we know what pleases God? Perhaps we look to the scriptures where we see not only the commands that God gives us, but a loving father who overlooks our mistakes and loves us in spite of our inability to keep the law perfectly. We don’t have to because Jesus already did it, yet we love him by doing what we can to obey him.
Hmmm. I seem to remember Jesus saying something about obeying him if we love him…
---Katie
I have been immersing myself in Jesus’ teachings since I have been home, particularly in the book of Matthew. I also have been reading Martin Luther’s “Freedom of a Christian.” Luther writes:
"Now Adam was righteous and created by God without sin, so he had no need to become righteous and justified through work and caretaking. However, so that he not be idle, God put him to work planting paradise, building and conserving it. These were free works, done only to please God alone, and not to attain righteousness, which he already possessed and which would have already been naturally inborn in all of us as well.
It is the same with the work of the believer, who through faith is once again put in paradise and created anew. Such a person does not need work to become righteous but, simply to please God, but is commanded to do such free works so as not to stand around idle but to give the body work to do that sustains it."
So, do we live our lives to please ourselves or to please God? And if we live to please God, how do we know what pleases God? Perhaps we look to the scriptures where we see not only the commands that God gives us, but a loving father who overlooks our mistakes and loves us in spite of our inability to keep the law perfectly. We don’t have to because Jesus already did it, yet we love him by doing what we can to obey him.
Hmmm. I seem to remember Jesus saying something about obeying him if we love him…
---Katie
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
My Report on Churchwide Assembly
I was told that a report was expected following my service as a voting member at Churchwide Assembly. Here is what I submitted to my church council.
Report from ELCA Churchwide Assembly 2007
The ELCA Churchwide Assembly was held in Chicago from Monday, August 6, through Thursday, August 11. The theme was “Living in God’s Amazing Grace: Thanks Be to God!” Plenary sessions and worship were held at the Navy Pier. Voting members and other participants stayed at the Hyatt Regency Chicago, which hosted some of our meals, special topic hearings and the ELCA 20th Anniversary Banquet. I served as a voting member from the Florida-Bahamas Synod.
Opening worship on Monday afternoon was quite a celebration, featuring wonderful music, banners, streamers and Holy Communion. Bishop Mark Hanson preached, outlining the differences between a settled church and a sent church. We had Holy Communion everyday, with each service featuring different liturgies and hymns from Evangelical Lutheran Worship.
The assembly opened Monday evening in the first plenary session with the lighting of a candle and the ringing of bells. We all stood and sang “A Mighty Fortress is Our God,” which was quite stirring with the large number of participants in that large room. I have to say one of my favorite parts of the assembly was the singing. It was part of every plenary session. The first plenary session consisted mainly of agreeing upon the rules of the assembly and figuring out what we were supposed to do.
The rest of the plenary sessions consisted of special guest speakers, reports from churchwide units, considering memorials from synods, elections, and Bible study focusing on Galatians. Speakers included keynote speaker Dr. Musimbi Kanyoro, a Kenyan native now at work with the international YWCA, Bishop Hanson in his report to the Assembly, Rev. Lowell Almen in his secretary’s report to the Assembly, Christina Jackson-Skelton, ELCA treasurer and Mission Investment Fund president, Rev. Kathryn I. Love from Evangelical Outreach and Congregational Mission Unit, and Vice President Carlos E. Pena in his report on behalf of the Church Council.
The Assembly received greetings from Metropolitan Chicago Synod Bishop Paul Landahl, Rev. Munib A. Younan, bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Jordan and the Holy Land, Ralston H. Deffenbaugh, Jr., president of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, LCMS President Gerald B. Kieschnick, Dr. Ishmael Noko, general secretary of the Lutheran World Federation, Rev. Deborah DeWinter, program executive for the United States for the World Council of Churches, Clare Chapmann, deputy general secretary for administration and finance for the national Council of Churches U.S.A., and Chaplain Peter K. Mushcinske on behalf of federal chaplaincy ministries.
The Assembly voted to develop a churchwide strategy for addressing the HIV/AIDS pandemic, to affirm Evangelical Lutheran Worship as the church’s primary worship resource, to encourage congregations and other Lutheran agencies to provide a welcoming and supporting environment for returning military veterans, to call for the development of a social statement on criminal justice for presentation for adoption in 2013, to recommit to this church’s strategy (Peace not Walls) for engagement in Israel and Palestine, to declare opposition to escalation of the war in Iraq, to call for moral deliberation about the situation in Iraq, to study the situation in Darfur and lobby U.S. officials to seek an end to the killing that many call a genocide in the African region, to increase giving to the ELCA World Hunger Appeal beyond the stated goal of $25 million annually, to extend the ELCA’s full communion partnership with the Moravian Church in America to the East Western Indies and the Alaska Provinces of the Moravian Church in America, to approve budget proposals for 2008 and 2009, to adopt the Social Statement on Education, and to endorse “Book of Faith: Lutherans Read the Bible,” a five year initiative to promote study of the Bible.
One bittersweet aspect of this Assembly was the retirement of Rev. Lowell Almen, secretary of the ELCA. Secretary Almen’s report consisted of a very well-done video overview of his twenty years of experiences as the church body’s first secretary. The Assembly elected David D. Swartling, a layperson and the Assembly’s parliamentarian, as the ELCA’s new secretary. On Friday, Lowell Almen received the Servus Dei medal in recognition of his twenty years of service as ELCA secretary.
Bishop Mark Hansen was re-elected for another six years with 86 % of the vote on the second ballot. He missed re-election on the first ballot by just two votes. He received a standing ovation from the Assembly.
I was very pleased to participate in the discussion and the voting for the Book of Faith: Lutherans Read the Bible initiative. For more information and to “join the conversation,” visit the web site, http://www.elca.org/bookoffaith/. The Assembly passed two resolutions supporting this initiative. One recommendation stressed the importance of Scripture for believers “throughout the ages” and thanked the North Carolina Synod for proposing the initiative. The second recommendation gave specific suggestions for ways to “invite and encourage all members, expressions, institutions and partners of this church to commit themselves regularly and increasingly to hearing, reading, studying, sharing and being formed by God’s Word.” Lutheran Coalition for Reform proposed an amendment that read “to develop a more profound appreciation of the distinctive Lutheran focus on God’s use of scripture to bring sinners to repentance and salvation in Christ.” This amendment was soundly defeated, even after substituting the word “all” for “sinners,” and substituting “faith” for “repentance.” Speakers objected to the negativity of the words sinners and repentance and had trouble with the idea of claiming that there is a distinctive Lutheran focus on the study of scripture. I found the whole discussion rather disturbing. Yet, I am excited and hopeful about the possibility of getting more Lutherans seriously studying scripture!
Once again sexuality issues created a great deal of discussion during the Assembly. Twenty-one of our sixty-five synods presented memorials asking the Assembly to direct the Church Council to modify ELCA standards regarding rostered/ordained people in partnered homosexual relationships. There were also memorials regarding same sex blessings, refraining from disciplining those in violation of standards, directing bishops to uphold/enforce the standards as they are, and one condemning reparative therapy for people with homosexual orientation. The Memorials Committee recommended that the Assembly refer all sexuality memorials to the Sexuality Task Force for inclusion in their deliberations as they develop a Social Statement on Sexuality to present for adoption at the 2009 Churchwide Assembly. The Assembly voted to do just that on all but one of the memorials. They voted to recommend that bishops demonstrate restraint in disciplining people and congregations that call ministers in mutual, chaste and faithful, committed, same-gender relationships, and called for restraint in disciplining professional leaders. So we still have the same standards, we just are not obligated to enforce them. So those synods who have not been enforcing the standards will continue as they have been and those who have been more inclined to enforce the standards will be discouraged from doing so, at least until the Social Statement on Sexuality is adopted. Anyone who would like to have input on this study should go to http://www.elca.org/faithfuljourney/ to download Journey Together Faithfully, Part Three, Free in Christ to Serve the Neighbor: Lutherans Talk about Sexuality. The response forms are due November 1, 2007. The first draft of the social statement will be released for discussion throughout the ELCA and response to the task force in March, 2008.
As stated earlier, our Bible Study times focused on Galatians and the freedom of the Christian. Repeatedly we were reminded of Paul’s condemnation of the Galatians for turning back to the keeping of the law as a requirement of being a Christian. On Friday, the Rev. Timothy J. Wengert from LTSP began his study by quoting Paul, “In Christ you are free! Free from sin, free from law, free from death, free from the devil and evil, free from guilt and shame, free from doubt and despair.” Then he asked, “So, now that you are free from doing anything, what are you going to do?” I think that is a very good question for all of us, individuals, churches and the church at large. It also raises a very Lutheran question for me, “What does this mean?” If I were to take all the Bible studies, sermons and speeches I heard at Churchwide Assembly at face value, I would have to say that we have no obligation to follow any law in the Bible, as long as we are loving, accepting and tolerant, and as long as we pursue justice in the world.
Friday evening we celebrated the Twentieth Anniversary of the ELCA at a banquet held at the Hyatt Regency. The food was wonderful and the entertainment hysterically funny! The Bottle Band from St. Luke’s Lutheran Church in Park Ridge, Illinois, used bottles to play everything from Bach to the blues and kept the attendees in stitches for the entire performance. Think of our clowns playing music….quite well….with bottles.
The closing worship on Saturday was another celebratory experience with dancers from the Thai Community Church of Chicago and singers and musicians from the Assembly voting members and congregations of the Metropolitan Chicago Synod. An installation ceremony for newly elected officers was part of the closing worship.
I would be happy to discuss the assembly or answer any questions that I can. Minutes, photos, videos and summaries are available at http://www.elca.org/assembly/, for those who are interested in more details.
Respectfully submitted,
---Katie
Report from ELCA Churchwide Assembly 2007
The ELCA Churchwide Assembly was held in Chicago from Monday, August 6, through Thursday, August 11. The theme was “Living in God’s Amazing Grace: Thanks Be to God!” Plenary sessions and worship were held at the Navy Pier. Voting members and other participants stayed at the Hyatt Regency Chicago, which hosted some of our meals, special topic hearings and the ELCA 20th Anniversary Banquet. I served as a voting member from the Florida-Bahamas Synod.
Opening worship on Monday afternoon was quite a celebration, featuring wonderful music, banners, streamers and Holy Communion. Bishop Mark Hanson preached, outlining the differences between a settled church and a sent church. We had Holy Communion everyday, with each service featuring different liturgies and hymns from Evangelical Lutheran Worship.
The assembly opened Monday evening in the first plenary session with the lighting of a candle and the ringing of bells. We all stood and sang “A Mighty Fortress is Our God,” which was quite stirring with the large number of participants in that large room. I have to say one of my favorite parts of the assembly was the singing. It was part of every plenary session. The first plenary session consisted mainly of agreeing upon the rules of the assembly and figuring out what we were supposed to do.
The rest of the plenary sessions consisted of special guest speakers, reports from churchwide units, considering memorials from synods, elections, and Bible study focusing on Galatians. Speakers included keynote speaker Dr. Musimbi Kanyoro, a Kenyan native now at work with the international YWCA, Bishop Hanson in his report to the Assembly, Rev. Lowell Almen in his secretary’s report to the Assembly, Christina Jackson-Skelton, ELCA treasurer and Mission Investment Fund president, Rev. Kathryn I. Love from Evangelical Outreach and Congregational Mission Unit, and Vice President Carlos E. Pena in his report on behalf of the Church Council.
The Assembly received greetings from Metropolitan Chicago Synod Bishop Paul Landahl, Rev. Munib A. Younan, bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Jordan and the Holy Land, Ralston H. Deffenbaugh, Jr., president of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, LCMS President Gerald B. Kieschnick, Dr. Ishmael Noko, general secretary of the Lutheran World Federation, Rev. Deborah DeWinter, program executive for the United States for the World Council of Churches, Clare Chapmann, deputy general secretary for administration and finance for the national Council of Churches U.S.A., and Chaplain Peter K. Mushcinske on behalf of federal chaplaincy ministries.
The Assembly voted to develop a churchwide strategy for addressing the HIV/AIDS pandemic, to affirm Evangelical Lutheran Worship as the church’s primary worship resource, to encourage congregations and other Lutheran agencies to provide a welcoming and supporting environment for returning military veterans, to call for the development of a social statement on criminal justice for presentation for adoption in 2013, to recommit to this church’s strategy (Peace not Walls) for engagement in Israel and Palestine, to declare opposition to escalation of the war in Iraq, to call for moral deliberation about the situation in Iraq, to study the situation in Darfur and lobby U.S. officials to seek an end to the killing that many call a genocide in the African region, to increase giving to the ELCA World Hunger Appeal beyond the stated goal of $25 million annually, to extend the ELCA’s full communion partnership with the Moravian Church in America to the East Western Indies and the Alaska Provinces of the Moravian Church in America, to approve budget proposals for 2008 and 2009, to adopt the Social Statement on Education, and to endorse “Book of Faith: Lutherans Read the Bible,” a five year initiative to promote study of the Bible.
One bittersweet aspect of this Assembly was the retirement of Rev. Lowell Almen, secretary of the ELCA. Secretary Almen’s report consisted of a very well-done video overview of his twenty years of experiences as the church body’s first secretary. The Assembly elected David D. Swartling, a layperson and the Assembly’s parliamentarian, as the ELCA’s new secretary. On Friday, Lowell Almen received the Servus Dei medal in recognition of his twenty years of service as ELCA secretary.
Bishop Mark Hansen was re-elected for another six years with 86 % of the vote on the second ballot. He missed re-election on the first ballot by just two votes. He received a standing ovation from the Assembly.
I was very pleased to participate in the discussion and the voting for the Book of Faith: Lutherans Read the Bible initiative. For more information and to “join the conversation,” visit the web site, http://www.elca.org/bookoffaith/. The Assembly passed two resolutions supporting this initiative. One recommendation stressed the importance of Scripture for believers “throughout the ages” and thanked the North Carolina Synod for proposing the initiative. The second recommendation gave specific suggestions for ways to “invite and encourage all members, expressions, institutions and partners of this church to commit themselves regularly and increasingly to hearing, reading, studying, sharing and being formed by God’s Word.” Lutheran Coalition for Reform proposed an amendment that read “to develop a more profound appreciation of the distinctive Lutheran focus on God’s use of scripture to bring sinners to repentance and salvation in Christ.” This amendment was soundly defeated, even after substituting the word “all” for “sinners,” and substituting “faith” for “repentance.” Speakers objected to the negativity of the words sinners and repentance and had trouble with the idea of claiming that there is a distinctive Lutheran focus on the study of scripture. I found the whole discussion rather disturbing. Yet, I am excited and hopeful about the possibility of getting more Lutherans seriously studying scripture!
Once again sexuality issues created a great deal of discussion during the Assembly. Twenty-one of our sixty-five synods presented memorials asking the Assembly to direct the Church Council to modify ELCA standards regarding rostered/ordained people in partnered homosexual relationships. There were also memorials regarding same sex blessings, refraining from disciplining those in violation of standards, directing bishops to uphold/enforce the standards as they are, and one condemning reparative therapy for people with homosexual orientation. The Memorials Committee recommended that the Assembly refer all sexuality memorials to the Sexuality Task Force for inclusion in their deliberations as they develop a Social Statement on Sexuality to present for adoption at the 2009 Churchwide Assembly. The Assembly voted to do just that on all but one of the memorials. They voted to recommend that bishops demonstrate restraint in disciplining people and congregations that call ministers in mutual, chaste and faithful, committed, same-gender relationships, and called for restraint in disciplining professional leaders. So we still have the same standards, we just are not obligated to enforce them. So those synods who have not been enforcing the standards will continue as they have been and those who have been more inclined to enforce the standards will be discouraged from doing so, at least until the Social Statement on Sexuality is adopted. Anyone who would like to have input on this study should go to http://www.elca.org/faithfuljourney/ to download Journey Together Faithfully, Part Three, Free in Christ to Serve the Neighbor: Lutherans Talk about Sexuality. The response forms are due November 1, 2007. The first draft of the social statement will be released for discussion throughout the ELCA and response to the task force in March, 2008.
As stated earlier, our Bible Study times focused on Galatians and the freedom of the Christian. Repeatedly we were reminded of Paul’s condemnation of the Galatians for turning back to the keeping of the law as a requirement of being a Christian. On Friday, the Rev. Timothy J. Wengert from LTSP began his study by quoting Paul, “In Christ you are free! Free from sin, free from law, free from death, free from the devil and evil, free from guilt and shame, free from doubt and despair.” Then he asked, “So, now that you are free from doing anything, what are you going to do?” I think that is a very good question for all of us, individuals, churches and the church at large. It also raises a very Lutheran question for me, “What does this mean?” If I were to take all the Bible studies, sermons and speeches I heard at Churchwide Assembly at face value, I would have to say that we have no obligation to follow any law in the Bible, as long as we are loving, accepting and tolerant, and as long as we pursue justice in the world.
Friday evening we celebrated the Twentieth Anniversary of the ELCA at a banquet held at the Hyatt Regency. The food was wonderful and the entertainment hysterically funny! The Bottle Band from St. Luke’s Lutheran Church in Park Ridge, Illinois, used bottles to play everything from Bach to the blues and kept the attendees in stitches for the entire performance. Think of our clowns playing music….quite well….with bottles.
The closing worship on Saturday was another celebratory experience with dancers from the Thai Community Church of Chicago and singers and musicians from the Assembly voting members and congregations of the Metropolitan Chicago Synod. An installation ceremony for newly elected officers was part of the closing worship.
I would be happy to discuss the assembly or answer any questions that I can. Minutes, photos, videos and summaries are available at http://www.elca.org/assembly/, for those who are interested in more details.
Respectfully submitted,
---Katie
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor
Grand Forks Herald
August 15, 2007
In the newspaper of Sunday, August 12, you may have read the article, “Evangelical Lutherans assembly asks to keep gay clergy.” It stated that at the 2007 Churchwide Assembly of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, voting members decided by a margin of 538 to 431 to “urge and encourage” the bishops of the denomination either to “refrain from or demonstrate restraint in disciplining” gay and lesbian clergy who choose to violate the ministry standards of the church.
While this decision is only advisory and not legislative, we still find it discouraging. Members of our denomination are wandering away from the firm foundation of Scripture and confessions. The tradition in which we have been raised and in which we teach has lost its moorings and appears to be adrift in the contemporary currents of affirmation and acceptance.
It is troubling that at 21 of the 65 synod assemblies held this spring and summer, church members passed resolutions that point toward the legitimization of sexual behavior that is prohibited by the clear witness of our Holy Scriptures. This direction comes not only from several condemnations of homoerotic expression in the Bible, but also from many passages that give shape to the context and purpose of human sexuality.
Regardless of what a church assembly decides, Christians are to follow the witness of Scripture. Martin Luther stated that, “We let bishops and councils decide and establish whatever they please. But if we have God’s Word before us, we, and not they, are to decide whether it is right or wrong.” Assemblies are to yield to scripture, not to find ways to bend its guidance to their own will.
The head of our church, Jesus Christ, has commanded us to preach a message of repentance and forgiveness. Rather than condoning sin, we are to call people to turn away from their sins and to receive the forgiveness of Jesus Christ. The good news of eternal life in His Name is given to all who believe, regardless of background or status. Such an announcement of forgiveness is much different than the setting aside of discipline.
In the end, one may ask a classic Lutheran question -- “What does this mean?” Do our own bishops, pastors, and church councils continue on a path where destructive behaviors are neither acknowledged nor confronted, but rather allowed to continue? Do we set aside standards and policies because they no longer fit with the times? Do we find ways where each one of us can plead for “restraint in discipline” simply because we no longer care to be part of the new life in Jesus Christ?
We ask for the prayers of each Christian who reads this letter: prayers for the members of the denomination in which we serve, that all of us may be called back to our scriptures. For those who are members of the ELCA, we also ask that you take up prayer and action. Ask your pastor what he or she believes and teaches on this matter. Write to your bishop and ask for a response. Take up your own responsibility to preach and teach when those in your midst are failing. Keep up the good fight for the faith. Though institutions and buildings fall away, our Lord and his promises endure forever.
Pastor Daniel Ostercamp, Badger, MN
Pastor Paul Koch, Wannaska, MN
Hat tip to Pietist.
---Katie
Grand Forks Herald
August 15, 2007
In the newspaper of Sunday, August 12, you may have read the article, “Evangelical Lutherans assembly asks to keep gay clergy.” It stated that at the 2007 Churchwide Assembly of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, voting members decided by a margin of 538 to 431 to “urge and encourage” the bishops of the denomination either to “refrain from or demonstrate restraint in disciplining” gay and lesbian clergy who choose to violate the ministry standards of the church.
While this decision is only advisory and not legislative, we still find it discouraging. Members of our denomination are wandering away from the firm foundation of Scripture and confessions. The tradition in which we have been raised and in which we teach has lost its moorings and appears to be adrift in the contemporary currents of affirmation and acceptance.
It is troubling that at 21 of the 65 synod assemblies held this spring and summer, church members passed resolutions that point toward the legitimization of sexual behavior that is prohibited by the clear witness of our Holy Scriptures. This direction comes not only from several condemnations of homoerotic expression in the Bible, but also from many passages that give shape to the context and purpose of human sexuality.
Regardless of what a church assembly decides, Christians are to follow the witness of Scripture. Martin Luther stated that, “We let bishops and councils decide and establish whatever they please. But if we have God’s Word before us, we, and not they, are to decide whether it is right or wrong.” Assemblies are to yield to scripture, not to find ways to bend its guidance to their own will.
The head of our church, Jesus Christ, has commanded us to preach a message of repentance and forgiveness. Rather than condoning sin, we are to call people to turn away from their sins and to receive the forgiveness of Jesus Christ. The good news of eternal life in His Name is given to all who believe, regardless of background or status. Such an announcement of forgiveness is much different than the setting aside of discipline.
In the end, one may ask a classic Lutheran question -- “What does this mean?” Do our own bishops, pastors, and church councils continue on a path where destructive behaviors are neither acknowledged nor confronted, but rather allowed to continue? Do we set aside standards and policies because they no longer fit with the times? Do we find ways where each one of us can plead for “restraint in discipline” simply because we no longer care to be part of the new life in Jesus Christ?
We ask for the prayers of each Christian who reads this letter: prayers for the members of the denomination in which we serve, that all of us may be called back to our scriptures. For those who are members of the ELCA, we also ask that you take up prayer and action. Ask your pastor what he or she believes and teaches on this matter. Write to your bishop and ask for a response. Take up your own responsibility to preach and teach when those in your midst are failing. Keep up the good fight for the faith. Though institutions and buildings fall away, our Lord and his promises endure forever.
Pastor Daniel Ostercamp, Badger, MN
Pastor Paul Koch, Wannaska, MN
Hat tip to Pietist.
---Katie
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
I'm for the Free Market and Free Trade, but....
....I have really started looking at where the products I buy are produced. And if they are produced in China, I think twice about buying them.
I am not a fan of China. They have a different view of the value of human life than we do. They force women to have abortions if they violate the one child policy, sometimes even at eight or nine months gestation. Some years back the stories of "window babies" made our news - baby girls were left near the window of a home in the hopes that they would get sick and die, and the family would not have to waste their one opportunity to have a child on a (useless) girl. How many people do you know who have adopted boys from China? Doesn't happen much, if at all. But girls are just thrown away. I won't even go into to how badly people are treated in the workplace, much of which is just a slave labor situation.
Yet, I believe in the free market and free trade because ultimately it benefits everyone. People get jobs and consumers get the best value for their money. The free market works well because people make informed choices and producers who produce good products at a good price will flourish and people who produce junk will fail.
That needs to come into play now. We need to wake up and check who made what we buy, because China is making junk. Not only that, they are making junk that can kill us. It all boils down to valuing human life more than money. Or perhaps it is because we have difficulty suing producers in China who produce deadly products.
Read more at Bob Lonsberry's blog. (Click on the title.)
And be careful about buying Chinese junk.
---Katie
I am not a fan of China. They have a different view of the value of human life than we do. They force women to have abortions if they violate the one child policy, sometimes even at eight or nine months gestation. Some years back the stories of "window babies" made our news - baby girls were left near the window of a home in the hopes that they would get sick and die, and the family would not have to waste their one opportunity to have a child on a (useless) girl. How many people do you know who have adopted boys from China? Doesn't happen much, if at all. But girls are just thrown away. I won't even go into to how badly people are treated in the workplace, much of which is just a slave labor situation.
Yet, I believe in the free market and free trade because ultimately it benefits everyone. People get jobs and consumers get the best value for their money. The free market works well because people make informed choices and producers who produce good products at a good price will flourish and people who produce junk will fail.
That needs to come into play now. We need to wake up and check who made what we buy, because China is making junk. Not only that, they are making junk that can kill us. It all boils down to valuing human life more than money. Or perhaps it is because we have difficulty suing producers in China who produce deadly products.
Read more at Bob Lonsberry's blog. (Click on the title.)
And be careful about buying Chinese junk.
---Katie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)