Evangelical Free Market (place of ideas)

Unglued

2008-09-18T17:50:00.002-04:00

I’ve subscribed to the magazine Paste for the past year, but I will not be renewing the subscription. There were things I liked about getting the magazine in my mailbox every month. The CD sampler that came with every issue was always worth listening to, and in a few cases I learned the hard way that the magazine put the very best (or perhaps the only good) track from a recently released album on each sampler. This has nothing to do with why I’m letting my subscription expire. I’m letting it expire because of the magazine’s billing – not the cost of the magazine – but how it describes itself as “signs of life in music, film & culture.”

If “signs of life in music and film” means positioning the magazine to be the indie version of Rolling Stones then congratulations are in order. If “signs of life in culture” is a way of saying “we also review video games” then mission accomplished, baby! But I expect more, much more from a magazine with such a promising and hopeful tagline. Sadly, the magazine just trades in hero-worship of Britney and Madonna for the likes of Neko Case and Cat Powers. It blindly raves over Wes Anderson films in lieu of Jerry Bruckheimer blockbusters. Now I’m a big fan of “The Covers Record” and Rushmore so I like the idea of a magazine which features this side of the music and film industry, but Paste really doesn’t offer anything more than a platform for the popular for being odd and obscure to market itself to people who don’t like swimming in the mainstream.

Recording on an independent label does not make a musician’s work refreshing or redemptive; it just means the artist has chosen (or was forced to choose) a different route. Justifying reviews of video games because they are an art form – do we even have to go there? Maybe I could buy into this logic if the magazine didn’t regularly review video games that glamorize the carnage of war. After all, nothing says “signs of life” like “Age of Conan: Hyborian Adventures!”

Fortunately there are alternatives to Paste. NPR’s podcasts of “All Songs Considered” canvasses the music scene and host Bob Boilen always provides the proper ratio of introduction and review to actual song content. And Brent Thomas now offers several episodes of his podcast “the Habañero Hour,” which features Christian music that isn’t content to simply pattern itself after the Top 40. Recently my friend Scott began a new blog which is really a forum for several friends to recommend music and movies we’ve enjoyed. While I don’t expect Scott, Tim or any of my other friends to say something really earth-shattering about Scarlett Johansson covering Tom Waits (see the June 08 issue of Paste), I’m optimistic that even as I become unglued I will still manage to find true signs of life in the culture.

Paging All Complementarians - Hello is anyone out there? Hello...

2008-09-04T16:24:00.003-04:00

Supposedly all Conservative Evangelicals are ecstatic over the addition of Palin to the McCain ticket. I don't buy it. I think that the "leaders" of Conservative Evangelicals were looking for anything that would give them an excuse to run arms wide open back to the GOP after they got to air their grievances about the not-so Conservative McCain. These leaders have chosen party politics over what should be one of their most significant issues: the family.

Check out Cindy McCain's egalitarian response to a question on "the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer" about Palin's ability to be both mom and veep:

NewsHour with Jim Lehrer:
“As a mother who has raised four children yourself, do you think it’s appropriate for questions to be asked about how she’s going to manage the vice presidency, potentially the presidency in an unforeseen circumstance, while she has a large number of children, five children, an infant with special needs and a daughter who is pregnant?”

Cindy McCain’s response:
“These questions would not be being asked if she were a man, and quite frankly I’m insulted by it. I’m insulted by anyone that would assume that just because a woman has children she can’t do her job. She not only can do her job, but she brings with her a different kind of perspective. A mother with a special needs infant – that absolutely brings a different perspective to this whole discussion about human rights and the rights of others who are less fortunate. She also brings with us, you know a mother of a large family who has done all that she has done and has done it really well, myself being a mother of a lot of kids, running a business, working with my husband, doing the non-profit charity stuff, all women know that we can do it, we can do it really well and the more you give us the better we are.”

Dear Lou (part one)

2007-05-18T12:20:00.000-04:00

Lou Dobbs wrote “A Call to the Faithful” recently and I’m pretty sure that he considers himself to be addressing religious Americans and Evangelicals in particular. So in the next two posts I take it upon myself to respond. Disclaimer: Please note - even though I may use the third person pronoun “we” repeatedly, I know that I can’t possibly speak for all of the faithful. If you think I get a few things (or everything) wrong feel free to let me know.

Dear Lou,

I’ve only watched your show a handful of times, but I did get your letter. It seems you aren’t too crazy about Christians in the public square. I can’t say I agree with you there, it is after all public, and, you can’t expect us to leave God out since we the faithful are after all faithful.
Truly, I don’t think your spat is with most of us, but really it’s more about Jim Wallis, who is speaking out against your stance on illegal immigration.
Come on Lou, this is really much to do about nothing. First of all, why wouldn’t Jim choose Jesus over you? We all want to choose Jesus over you. Shoot Lou, I want my wife to choose Jesus over me. I sin and He never has or will, He died for her sins and I didn’t, and He’s Lord and I’m not. It really is that simple.
Second, I find it very interesting that you make an appeal to Scripture even after you get all worked up about we the faithful encroaching on the state with our beliefs. So which is it Lou? Is it okay for us to look to the Bible to understand God and the world He created or isn’t it? I think by your own admission, you know it is perfectly legitimate for us to enter into these kinds of dialogues, but regardless of what you think we the faithful will continue to attempt faithfulness to God in all avenues of life.
Third, I think you got it right. This is something we the faithful like to consider part of “common grace.” In Abraham Kuyper’s important book, Lectures on Calvinism, he writes:

The highest duty of the government remains therefore unchangeably that of justice, and in the second place it has to care for the people as a unit, partly at home, in order that its unity may grow even deeper and may not be disturbed, and partly abroad, lest the national existence suffer harm.”

Now Lou, we know you’re a smart guy and you’ve pointed out that the issues in regard to illegal immigration involve both justice and the safety of U.S. citizens, what you may not know is that it is precisely because of Romans 13 that Kuyper writes in this manner. So read more Kuyper and less Wallis and you may find out that even though Kuyper would choose Jesus over you there’s still a lot of common ground.

Respectfully,

We the Faithful

Dear Lou (part two)

2007-05-18T11:20:00.000-04:00

Dear Lou,

Again, thanks for the call. We addressed the true subject of your letter, your anger at Jim Wallis for countering your crusade against illegal immigration, so let’s talk about the smoke and mirrors part of your letter.
First of all, why go after Jim Dobson? You can’t be serious! We the faithful are grateful for the attention he’s given the family over the years, but the man is wildly off his rocker these days, and we would appreciate it if you ignore most of what he says. The latest flap about him endorsing Newt Gingrich over Fred Thompson is just the latest example. We the faithful would rather recite the prose of T.S. Eliot, who said: “It must be clear that I do not mean by a Christian State one in which the rulers are chosen because of their qualifications, still less their eminence, as Christians”, than listen to Dobson off topic.
Now about the infamous Land Letter. Yes, it is possible to justify superficially the advent of many wars via the manipulation of Augustine’s Just War Theory. The Land Letter should remind us of the dangers of trusting neoconservatives disguised as preachers. I can’t help but nod in agreement with Bill Kauffman when he writes, “the soft young men in three-piece suits who write their little pamphlets proving that whatever slaughter our government is currently engaged in is a ‘just war’ should be laughed back to the seminaries they quit,” but let’s not use Land (or those “soft young men”) as the straw to reduce JWT to hay. It should be noted that Augustine’s principles for what qualifies military action as either just or unjust stands in line with what we agreed was the highest duty of government: “that of justice.”
So Lou, we (the faithful) plead with you, don’t confuse the loudest guys in the room for speaking for the rest of us. You’ve probably heard by now that one of the signers of the Land Letter, D. James Kennedy, closed the doors to his Washington office on the same day you sent your letter to us. You might consider that a personal triumph – fewer Christians in Washington, hooray! But there are quite a few of us who are glad he’s not on K Street or M Street misrepresenting us and confusing the roles of the church and the state. We believe that God has given both the church and the state to man, and, both possess distinct purposes as determined by the same God who created and sustains them. We also believe that we need to continue to seek God because as sinners, even we the faithful lose sight of God’s priorities and the justice that can only be defined because God has established it. In spite of the fact that we get it wrong sometimes, we will not disengage from the public square, because the square only exists because the God who put the stars in place has shown us in His Word what the He requires of us and it is “to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with… God” (Micah 6:8).

See you around,

We the Faithful

Virginia Tech and the Streets of Laredo

2007-04-20T12:24:00.000-04:00

“But please not one word of the man who had killed me.
Don't mention his name and his name will pass on."

NPR ran a short story this morning regarding how the media has not consistently reported the name of the Virginia Tech terrorist.

I don’t care how his name is pronounced. The word order of his name is of no use to me. I don’t want to read his writings or watch his videos.

The people who were murdered are the names that reporters should make sure they pronounce correctly and consistently. Instead of figuring out the killer’s name or trying to understand what was going on in his head, go to this NPR story which reflects on the lives of this tragedy’s victims.

Confessions of a Book Addict

2007-04-19T23:38:00.000-04:00

Sometimes I hold my breath right before I walk into a bookstore so that first inhale of pulp-filled air is fully appreciated.

Going to a friend's to watch TV? Yeah I got a book for that, it's called one I've already read and underlined extensively so that I can brush up on the finer points.

I read at stop lights.

My idea of being social is sitting at a table with others while reading.

Hello, I'm Sean Dennis and I'm addicted to books.

So here's my biggest problem: I can't recommend a book for you. There are a number of good books I've read so far this year that I would love to tell you to read, but I can't do it. I could play it safe and only endorse the books that are of the evangelical theological persuasion, but it seems a shame that we can't talk about the books that have really forced me to think. It's one thing to read Francis Schaeffer (and if you haven't you should - consider that a recommendation) and say "isn't the Christian worldview great!" It's another thing to read a book by a non-Christian and think like Schaeffer about the worldview it presents and critique it from the perspective of Schaeffer's understanding of God, man, and the world.

But suggesting a book to read isn't exactly like suggesting a movie title at Blockbuster (trust me I wore the shirt and shirked the responsibility of trying to do away with brick and mortar stores by pressing customers to sign up for the online movie pass). Most books worth reading take the investment of time to read and think on. I can't suggest a title because I don't know what your time is worth. Although I will say if you're watching "Deal or No Deal" and "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?" every night then you can afford to read anything.

I can recommend one book for you, but the book you should read, How to Read Slowly, is written by a kindred spirit. In chapter six, "A Time to Read: Knowing What to Read and When," James Sire writes,

You see, I have a problem. I read too much. I pay attention to plot, image, character and theme when I should be paying attention to wife, sons and daughters, the peeling house paint and the leaking toilet tank. Actually, I need advice about how to spend time not reading. So perhaps I'm not qualified to advise others.

So I'd like to thank my brother for noticing my leaky toliet and fixing it for me, thus allowing me more time to read, and even though I can't recommmend any books (other than Schaeffer and Sire - who really provide primers for reading the works of others), I do have some suggestions:

1. Go to the jungle, but don't spend your money there.
I use Amazon all the time to look up titles, and I'm constantly updating my wish-list for family who know that the only thing I want for Christmas is a couple of books, but I don't buy from Amazon because it's just bad economics.

2. Get to know your local independent bookseller.
It's not only good for your local economy to buy from a neighbor instead of an online business, but chances are that guy behind the counter is just waiting to engage someone in a conversation about good books. Since you've already read Schaeffer and Sire, you can present your understanding of any book from a consistent Christian perspective which hopefully will be a chance to bring the gospel into everyday conversation.

3. Support your local library.
Keep that book an extra day or two and be sure to pay the applicable fines. I'm willing to bet that the library in your town is full of "out-dated" books (I prefer the term "classics"). Sure Mitch Albom may be all the talk in your suburban Starbucks but his mush pales in comparison to the great works that are just collecting dust on a shelf downtown.

4. Tolle lege!

The vindication of the pater familias

2007-04-03T12:44:00.000-04:00

In birding-speak, my dad is a life-lister. I am not. I do not compile my sporadic lists into one master list of all birds previously encountered, because as an amateur (read: lover of) I find it more enjoyable to take in each sighting without frantically looking to see if a lifeless list gets a new check mark on it.

My dad, the life-lister, is always on the hunt for a strange bird. Our birding excursions sometimes go like this:

“Look it’s the extremely rare…”
“No dad, it’s a Red-tailed Hawk.”

“Hey, I think that duck over there isn’t on my list.”
“Really, you don’t have a Mallard on your life-list?”
“You think that’s a Mallard?”
“Yes dad, it most certainly is a Mallard.”

You can call me a sour grape if you want, but I don’t discriminate. My binoculars give equal time to the Red-tailed and the Ferruginous Hawk.

So it’s probably a good thing I wasn’t with my dad at our home church in Michigan this weekend when he spotted a Mountain Bluebird, a bird that should not be in Clyde Township or anywhere in the Great Lakes State for that matter (we may have trash heaps from Canada, but we don’t have mountains).

I can hear myself saying, “No, dad it’s some kind of warbler that you can’t make out from here.”

The female Mountain Bluebird has stuck around and birders (armed with life-lists, no doubt) are traveling from all over the state and as far away as Minnesota to catch a glimpse.

Congratulations on the sighting, dad! I promise to cut you some slack the next time we go out together.

(picture taken by Scott Jennex)

Saying goodbye to our old Kentucky home

2007-03-28T14:14:00.000-04:00

The rarely updated and seldom read Evangelical Free Market is getting a new home. No we aren't switching to a new website, we're moving to Tennessee (more on that later).

Even if it's front porch isn't big enough to congregate on, the little Cape Cod on Lancashire has been a great home. We'll miss the aroma of Krispy Kreme and Tai Siam in the backyard while throwing a golf ball for Seamus. It will also be hard to come to terms with the reality that our days of walking to Heine Brothers Coffee at the Loop, the Highlands farmers' market, ear-X-tacy, and other original Bardstown Road establishments are drawing to a close. Most of all, we're grateful for the opportunities we've had to enjoy the company of friends and family whether it's meant a kitchen, living room, den, and backyard full of people or just time well spent with one or two guests. Thanks to all who shared life together with us in this place.

Cupid's deadly arrows

2007-03-15T09:51:00.000-04:00

Sylvia Poggioli’s recent piece on NPR entitled “Ancient Love Stars at Rome’s Eros Exhibit” focuses on the current art exhibit at Rome’s Colosseum that depicts Eros or Cupid in ancient Greek and Roman culture, but it is mostly a not-so-subtle message that we should be more accepting of homosexuality. The online edition of Poggioli’s story states:

"'In antiquity, erotic practices that had nothing to do with procreation — male and female homosexuality — were completely accepted by society,' the archaeological superintendent says.
But there's one aspect of erotic love in antiquity that contemporary society is unable to embrace.
'In the case of men, the homosexual experience was a one-sided relationship between an adult and an adolescent boy,' Bottini says. 'It was seen as a teacher-pupil relationship. We call it pedophilia and it's unacceptable for us.'
But, organizers say, even the legendary sexual freedom of the Greeks was subject to certain important restrictions: It affected only adult free-born males, and it had to avoid demonstrations of wild behavior. And there was an established order based on the submission of woman to man, youth to adult, slave to master."

Legendary indeed…
Robert Graves’s historical fiction I, Claudius, is not as warming to the sexual exploits of the Greco-Roman elites. Graves’s Claudius pens in his autobiography, “… I have always thought it at once pitiful and disgusting to see a full-grown man, a magistrate, perhaps, with a family of his own, slobbering uxoriously over a plump little boy with a painted face and bangles; or an ancient senator playing Queen Venus to some tall young Adonis of the Guards cavalry who tolerates the old fool only because he has money.”

Pedophilia or the “one-sided relationship between a adult and an adolescent boy” is unacceptable today, but the further our culture removes itself from the underpinning of its religious heritage the closer it moves toward its own slow suicide. Perhaps the next art exhibit at the Colosseum should focus on Avernus.

Hear or read Poggioli’s story
Read an online biography of the man who wrote Claudius's autobiography

Please step away from your computer

2007-03-08T08:19:00.000-05:00

(after you check out the following lectures on life in the digital age)

Dr. Quentin Schultze of Calvin College
"Beyond the Digital Rat Race: Using Technology Wisely in Our Lives, Work, and Churches" given at the Carl F. H. Henry Center for Theological Understanding as part of its Scripture & Ministry lectures.

Ken Myers of Mars Hill Audio
"Electronic Media and Restless Souls" given at the Institute for Christian Worship

Rabbit baked in Tarragon Mustard, Garlic, and Cream

2007-03-07T08:46:00.000-05:00

The recipe given below comes from one of the finest books authored by man, The L.L. Bean Game & Fish Cookbook by Angus Cameron and Judith Jones.
If you didn't bag any rabbit this season (or don't have any left in the freezer) then substitute with the small furred animal of your choice. Personally, I agree with Angus that the tastiest of the furred game is the squirrel.

The Recipe -
2 rabbits, cut in serving pieces
3 Tb. red wine vinegar
1 cup chicken broth
3 Tb. tarragon mustard
(add 1/2 tsp of dried tarragon per 3 Tb. of Dijon mustard)
3/4 cup heavy cream
2 Tb. minced garlic
1 - 2 Tb. chopped parsley
1/3 cup minced parsley
freshly ground pepper
salt

Coat the rabbit pieces with the mustard. Mix the minced garlic and minced parsley together with a little salt, and sprinkle half over the rabbit.
Combine the vinegar and broth and pour into a large baking dish. Sprinkle the remaining garlic and minced parsley over, then put the rabbit pieces on top.
Bring to a boil, then cover the baking dish and bake in a preheated oven at 350 degrees for an hour. Check after 45 minutes to see if tender and turn the pieces of rabbit. When tender throughout, remove rabbit and keep warm.
Pour the cream into the juices in the casserole and boil to reduce the liquid by half or more - it should have the consistency of a light cream sauce.
Salt and pepper the rabbit pieces and return them to the casserole. Spoon sauce over and taste to correct seasoning if necessary. Sprinkle chopped parsley on top and serve.

The picture provided of this fine meal is slightly larger than what the recipe will normally yield (it should serve six) thanks to Kyle who bagged that gigantic fox squirrel linked above. I recommend serving the dish on a bed of brown rice so that the most is made of the delicious sauce.

The Next Conservative "Movement"

2007-02-20T16:49:00.000-05:00

Rod Dreher's Crunchy Con blog has a link to an excellent piece in The American Conservative entitled "The Next Conservatism."

Ironically, the new conservatism movement proposed in the article will eventually face the same (or similar) problems conservatism deals with today. Weyrich and Lind provide a good overview of Kirk's definition of ideology, this is a necessary task in positioning conservatism against its foes, but just as T.S. Eliot needed to define "culture," Weyrich and Lind must also define "movement" and ask whether or not the next conservatism should become such a thing.

Wendell Berry essay "In Distrust of Movements" is a must read when considering such things. While not identical to the piece that is in print the article linked below provides a quick understanding of his sentiment on the subject matter (click: here).

Madea misses the target

2007-02-15T12:54:00.000-05:00

This might be a case of being outside the demographic and looking in at something I don’t understand or appreciate. If the title of the movie is any indication of who the intended audience is I only meet the billing by one-third, so maybe I’ve got no right to gripe about Tyler Perry’s Diary of a Mad Black Woman but I do have a pretty good reason: its handling of the gospel.

Helen McCarter, played by Kimberly Elise, journals in her diary regularly about her life. Her marriage to one of the most successful lawyers in the city suggests that she probably writes “Dear Diary” because it is a rare occasion when he is home, oh yeah; he’s also a first-rate pig who praises her contributions in public settings and then drops her off at home for his girlfriend. That is until Charles, played by Steve Harris, decides he needs to dump Helen completely for the mistress. The prenuptial signed over a decade ago means Helen gets nothing and when she in utter shock and disbelief raises a stink Charles physically kicks and drags her out of the house.

Bottomline: Helen possesses Biblical grounds for divorce (adultery – Matt 19:9 and desertion – 1 Cor 7:15 ).

In her time of despair, Helen turns first to her nutty Grandma Madea, played by Tyler Perry, and eventually to God and a fine Christian man named Orlando, played by Shemar Moore. While Madea is irreverent, Perry preaches through the drama about seeking forgiveness instead of revenge and moving on instead of harboring a grudge. In a culture that worships the created rather than the Creator, it is encouraging to see a movie take a direction other than self-empowerment and pop psychology. Yet just when the movie appears to be at its climax it sinks into despondency.

Before the divorce is finalized Charles repents of his sin and begins a new life in Christ. It is a moving scene in a Southern African American church, perhaps a little too neatly packaged, but I’m a sucker for seeing people embrace the gospel. This it seems, would be the most appropriate ending to the movie, but what about Fernando, I mean Orlando? You might say the stars were so bright for Orlando; he was a first-rate gentleman even though he was pursuing a woman going through a divorce, after all he did personally see Charles abuse her. So Perry drops his sermon notes and embraces a Hollywood ending. Helen hands her repentant husband the signed divorce papers and runs to Orlando.

I realize that under normal circumstances I’m asking for way too much. After all Helen went through who could ask her to go back to Charles? But there is nothing normal about the gospel that reconciles us to God through Jesus Christ while we were still God’s enemies (Rom 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:18-20). Not only does Scripture state a wife separated from her husband should remain unmarried (1 Cor 7:11), it calls us to be “ambassadors of Christ” because we have received the “ministry of reconciliation.” Perry turned a love story into a tragedy by settling for a cheap Hollywood romance when he could have demonstrated the awesome power of the cross. I won’t be watching his latest release Daddy’s Little Girl, but then again I’m probably outside the demographic.

Tyler Perry’s story as told by Morning Edition’s Kim Masters (click here)

It's true

2007-02-14T09:53:00.000-05:00

Driving south on Interstate 65 between Louisville, Kentucky and Nashville, Tennessee I came up over a hill that had to its East a very large adult video store. I looked to the West and as I passed two semi-trucks I noticed the familiar ominous Ten Commandments billboard that’s followed up by the famous “Hell is Real” sign (not unlike the one pictured above which is actually from a highway in Ohio).

Normally I pass by these signs and they don’t even register or they might harken me back to they days of going to the Bible church that only used the King James Version, but this time thanks to the CD playing in the car I thought a little more about that store, those semis, and the signs in between. In the song playing, Johnny Cash belts out:

But as sure as God made black and white,
What's done in the dark,
Will be brought to the light.

You can run on for a long time,
Run on for a long time,
Run on for a long time,
Sooner, or later, God'll cut you down.
Sooner, or later, God'll cut you down.

Go and tell that long tongue liar,
Go and tell that midnight rider,
Tell the rambler, the gambler, the back biter,
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut 'em down.

Suddenly it all made sense and I found myself thinking; yeah John, you tell ‘em. Yeah fundamentalist-farmer in the middle of no-where Kentucky, you tell ‘em. They might laugh and scoff and many an Evangelical might shy away from you because it doesn’t seem polished, professional, or seeker-friendly but for every midnight rider who decides to take a break from the road by stopping in at the lion’s den there’s a place much worse than the loneliest highway.

In his book, Losing Our Virtue, historian and theologian David F. Well writes:
While the great majority of Americans believe that they actually keep the Ten Commandments, only 13 percent think that each of these commandments has moral validity…. While pornography has blossomed into a 4 billion dollar industry that accounts for a quarter of all the videos rented in ships, seen in the thriving hotel business or on cable, only 2 percent experience guilt about watching. And, not surprisingly, at the center of this slide into license and moral relativism is the disappearance of God. Only 17 percent define sin as a violation of God’s will (59).

Those signs are undoubtedly offensive to many who pass by every day, but hopefully for at least 2 percent who make a stop at the next exit it will register that what they do or don’t do late at night will be of consequence on the day when “the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.”

2007-02-02T19:42:00.000-05:00

Listen to the EFCA Midwinter Ministerial on inerrancy, hermeneutics, and eschatology by clicking here

Seamus and I haven't listened yet, but we hope to get a chance this weekend.

Truly Reformed Dogs...

2007-02-01T10:39:00.000-05:00

would rather devour Machen than bacon.

At times Seamus comes across like one of Machen's warrior children (just ask D.R.), but as Willem VanGemeren has stated, "the genius of Reformed Theology lies in the work and ministry of the Holy Spirit. This means that systems of theology and eschatological views should be held with humility and love, because such persons walk in the Holy Spirit."

Okay, so maybe Seamus isn't a warring Reformer (but he did eat that book cover) and maybe this post has more to do with me than him (this is probably a good thing since I doubt he ever gets introspective - though he is a smart dog). It seems that Frame's assessment of conservative and Evangelical Presbyterians can be said of most every part of the Evangelical church, he writes, "Being in a church without liberals to fight, they turned on one another." This is to deny VanGemeren's quote above and the very heart of the Evangel.

Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God. Eph 5:1,2

How the culture of death wins when pro-life candidates are elected

2007-01-31T09:43:00.000-05:00

Yesterday Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) spoke on NPR’s Fresh Air with Terry Gross. It proved to be an insightful interview with an intelligent Democrat strategist. The following statement comes from about 10 minutes and 50 seconds into the interview (which can be heard in its entirety by clicking here):

Even with Bob Casey in the Senate, who is firmly anti-choice, the pro-choice movement is in much better shape. In fact, I talked to some of the very, very active woman leaders some of them who were really on the far-end after the election and I said to them we might have backed Barbara Hafer who was the candidate against Santorum and she might have won but we would have had to put 12 million into that race and instead we were able to take that money because Casey was so popular…and we would put it into Jim Webb’s race, he’s pro-choice, his opponent Allen was anti-choice, into Claire McCaskill’s race, she’s pro-choice, her opponent was anti-choice; Jon Tester, he’s pro-choice, his opponent was anti-choice. So the overall cause of pro-choice was advanced in a sort of dialectical way, as Marx would put it, by supporting Bob Casey.

For those who thought that voting for a Democrat in a national election could be conceivable due to the candidate’s position on a few critical issues, think again. This is what we call zero-sum game, and Schumer knows it. Can Republicans play the game with the same tactics? I’m not convinced that the Pro-life movement will allow it even if in the long run it makes sense strategically.

Either History or Progress? A glimpse into a recent online interview with Dr. David Dockery

2007-01-30T13:29:00.000-05:00

I remain indebted to Union University, not because of its financial aid department (like many of my friends), but precisely because of those very same friends. I have every reason to believe that Union has been and continues to be one of the finest places for Christian learning at the undergraduate level, and for this very reason I ventured to read the interview of Union University President David Dockery by the seminal Baptist blogger of Provocations and Pantings, Timmy Brister.

Brister did not shy away from asking Dockery about many of the more controversial issues in Southern Baptist life (i.e. alcohol, blogging, Calvinism, church membership woes) and for each of these questions Brister received an answer. The answers to these questions were nothing short of what one would expect from an important and intelligent man who has an entire institution to think about before he weighs in. This is not to say that I found Dockery to be dishonest, but merely to point out that a man in his position cannot afford to be the new focal point of the continued barrage of uncharitable and misinformed attacks against Calvinism.

In reading Dr. Dockery’s statements, one is reminded this man is much more than a University administrator. He is a scholar and possesses a vast knowledge of church history (and in particular the history of the Baptists). Dockery points to the historic “Two Streams” of Calvinism and Arminianism in Baptist life and theology and the United States in hopes of preserving the denomination’s work from those who due to lack of clarity believe they must save the denomination from “hyper-Calvinism” and those who due to a lack of charity believe they can claim the church for Calvin. As a man who knows his history, he has every reason to see room for Arminianism and Calvinism within the church; he has after all seen convinced Arminians and devoted Calvinists make lasting contributions.

It seems we are more suited for weathering today’s storms when we are firmly anchored in history, yet this is not enough for every situation. I’m reminded (not so surprisingly) of Kirk’s words on this subject:

The Permanence of a society is formed by those enduring interests and convictions that gives us stability and continuity; without that Permanence, the fountains of the great deep are broken up, society slipping into anarchy. The Progression in a society is that spirit and that body of talents which urge us on to prudent reform and improvement; without that Progression, a people stagnate (The Politics of Prudence, 25).

Thus, Russell Moore can reflect upon Southern Baptist history and state, “the local Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan was far too often a member in good standing of the local Southern Baptist church. He was able to justify a hateful heart by assuring himself that black people aren’t really made in the image of God” as part of an explanation as to why The Baptist Faith and Message (2000) contains an article that speaks against the sin of racism despite belonging to a denomination that has its foundation upon the controversy of slavery. With the enduring Word of God as its guide, the SBC produced a creed that hopes for both permanence and progression. In Permanence staying true to the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. In Progression recognizing that due to sin even good intentioned saints err and that the faith must be clarified and contended for all the more fervently as a result.

Yes, historically speaking many Southern Baptist laypersons have been teetotalers and many a Southern Baptist preacher has declared complete abstinence from alcohol is the only choice for a Christian. They believed passionately in their position and they fought stalwartly for the cause, nevertheless at the end of the day their belief must be considered in light of what the whole of Scripture declares. This was necessary for Southern Baptists to progress beyond a history stymied in slavery and it should be considered in light of what can move from a matter of personal conviction and discernment into a imposition upon the Word and the gospel.

EFM Recommends - Here I Stand; A Life of Martin Luther

2007-01-10T09:50:00.000-05:00

Living theology. Flawed and encouraging saints. Stories of grace. Deep inspiration. The best entertainment. Brothers, it is worth your precious hours. Remember Hebrews 11. And read Christian biography.

The above words bring John Piper’s chapter “Brothers, read Christian biography” from Brothers, We Are Not Professionals to a close. One recalls Hebrews 11 vividly when examining the life and contributions of Martin Luther, and Here I Stand; a life of Martin Luther by Roland H. Bainton reminds us that faith is more than a platitude appealed to on Sunday mornings. Living by faith takes place in the midst of struggles that give us cause to wonder whether our next breath will be our last. Bainton’s account of Luther’s life recalls many occasions when he knew Anfechtungen, the dark night of the soul. Quoting Luther, he writes:

If I live longer, I would like to write a book about Anfechtungen, for without them no man can understand Scripture, faith, the fear or the love of God. He does not know the meaning of hope who was never subject to temptations.
David must have been plagued by a very fearful devil. He could not have had such profound insights if he had not experienced great assaults.

Bainton provides glimpses into many of the profound insights and great assaults Luther experienced. The man was called many things in his lifetime: a drunken German, a heretic, a son of iniquity, the Saxon Hus, a wild boar in the vineyard, the very devil. Despite these names, God is not ashamed to be called Martin Luther’s God, for he has prepared for him a city, and it is not Wittenburg.

a "teaser" for my Southern Baptist friends...

2007-01-10T09:41:00.000-05:00

You've read my recommendation for Here I Stand; a life of Martin Luther by Roland H. Bainton, so now I want to give you a small teaser.

A teaser is defined as:
1. a. One that teases, as a device for teasing wool. b. One who engages in teasing; a tease.
2. A puzzling problem.
3. An advertisement that attracts customers by offering something extra or free.
4. Slang. An attention-getting vignette or highlight presented before a televison show.

About halfway into the book, Bainton quotes the following plea from Martin Luther:

Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we then prohibit wine and abolish women? The sun, the moon, and stars have been worshiped. Shall we then pluck them out of the sky? Such haste and violence betray a lack of confidence in God. See how much he has been able to accomplish through me, though I did no more than pray and preach. The Word did it all. Had I wished I might have started a conflagration at Worms. But while I sat still and drank beer with Philip and Amsdorf, God dealt the papacy a mighty blow.

Kirk, Coulter, and the Question Mark

2007-01-04T17:06:00.000-05:00

Back in late November, James Fitzpatrick made very good use of the question mark. The first question was the title of his op-ed for The Wanderer in which he asked, “would the late Russell Kirk think of Ann Coulter as a positive force in the conservative cause?” His second use of the question mark didn’t quite follow convention, but it sets up most of his piece; he writes, “Kirk? I suspect that few younger conservatives will even know his name, despite the fact that he is generally credited with being one of the founders of the conservative movement.” The last two questions run right next to each other so I’ll first display them and then explain them in their context: “Is McCarthy on to something? Has conservatism lost its intellectual vigor, its soul?” The McCarthy referred to by Fitzpatrick is Daniel McCarthy who when looking at what passes for conservativism in the United States sees College Republicans parading “in shirts proclaiming ‘George W. Bush Is My Homeboy’…. where once students were at least familiar with the names Kirk and Weaver, or Mises and Nock, today they look to Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter for guidance. They're little acquainted with the wisdom of the contemporary Right's founding generation, and it shows.”

My own experience suggests that McCarthy is dead on. In conversations and email exchanges with self-proclaimed young conservatives, dropping Russell Kirk’s name is about as effective as sending your senator one of those little tear-out postcards. One proud hater of all things liberal berated me for bringing a movie star like Kurt Russell into the fray. It would be funny, if it wasn’t so sad. On the other hand, if you question the integrity or intelligence of Sean Hannity (two things I am prone to do) well let’s just say that’s the equivalent of broadcasting to the world that you obviously voted for John Kerry and couldn’t be happier hearing “Speaker Pelosi.”

Yes, McCarthy is clearly on to something, but does that mean that conservatism has become wishy-washy and soulless? The answer depends on how you define conservatism today and how you answer the original question, “what would Russell Kirk say about Ann Coulter?”

If conservatism in 2007 is represented by the same man who can in one breath rail against James Webb and can praise Arnold Schwarzenegger, then conservatism has become wishy-washy. If Ann Coulter is the darling of the conservative movement then it needs to go soul-searching. Yet, I do not believe Russell Kirk would even go so far as to call Hannity or Coulter conservatives.

To expect that all the world should, and must, adopt the peculiar political institutions of the United States – which do not often work very well even at home – is to indulge the most unrealistic visions…. Such naïve doctrine led us into the wars in Indo-China – the notion that we could establish or prop up in Viet Nam a “democracy” that never had existed anywhere in southeastern Asia. Such foreign policies are such stuff as dreams are made of; yet they lead to the heaps of corpses of men who died in vain.

That was Russell Kirk explaining the Neo-conservative foreign policy of exporting “Democratic Capitalism” in his book The Politics of Prudence. Does it sound like something that a conservative can safely say today? Does it sound like Kirk would be fond of the loud-mouths of conservative talk radio? Russell Kirk where have you gone?

Read James Fitzpatrick's article by clicking here.

The 2006 EFM Man of the Year

2007-01-02T10:51:00.001-05:00

This morning whilst eating my breakfast I was reminded of the “EFM Man of the Year.” It seems that his likeness was burned onto the surface of my toast. At first I thought I was delusional, but after splashing some oj made from concentrate onto my face I knew what I had to do. I quickly took a picture of the toast with my digital camera and downloaded it onto my trusty computer. Then, being the savvy businessman that I am, I placed the toast for sale on ebay. It looks like I stand to make a small fortune selling my burned toast (these people don’t even seem to mind the small nibble I took out of one corner), and I anticipate a bidding war at the conclusion of the auction that will allow me to rationalize buying a flat screen HD TV just like all the other crazies out there.

Okay, you and I both know that was a lie. If you know me (and I trust that if you’re actually reading this blog that is the case), you know that:
One: I drink coffee, not orange juice made from concentrate.
Two: My computer is not “trusty.”
Three: Me, a savvy businessman? Yeah, right.
Four: If you see a flat screen HD TV in my home, check the address because I’m afraid you just walked in someone else’s door.

Let’s try that again:
This morning whilst eating my breakfast I was reminded of the “EFM Man of the Year.” My omelette may not have resembled him, but I think he would appreciate its ingredients. The caged-free eggs were laid from the chickens of a local Kentucky farmer. The sausage was ground and harvested by my own hands. The Evangelical Free Market (place of ideas) Man of the Year is none other than Wendell Berry. The decision has both nothing and everything to do with breakfast.

First I must confess that I knew very little about Wendell Berry before reading Rod Dreher’s Crunchy Cons. Second I must also confess that I never saw the man before seeing him at this year’s annual “Festival of Faiths.” The event in Louisville that I lovingly refer to as either the “Heretic Ball” or the “Festival of Fakes.” This is the irony of Wendell Berry. On one hand, you can find his book, Life is a Miracle, being read by first year seminarians in Dr. Russell Moore’s theology class. On the other hand, you find him conversing with a Buddhist monk from Silicon Valley (yes, Virginia there really is such a thing) about strip-mining.

In a world that is continuously reported to be more fractionalized, more sectarian, more partisan, and more divided, Wendell Berry is gaining allies. He needs more (that’s where you, me, and breakfast comes in). He says as much in his essay, “A long job, too late to quit”:

I hope it will be possible for my great-grandchildren to learn the same thing that Virginia [his granddaughter, not the girl losing hope in Saint Nick] learned [“What is good about hard work is that it teaches you about little pleasures.”], by working with their parents in the same homeland. I began my own defense of that possibility more than thirty years ago, when I had far fewer allies than I have now. For me, it is a long time too late to quit.

And just like that Wendell Berry stays on message. He reminds us all, in a day when people are fighting over “next generation” video game consoles and spending money they don’t have on flat screen HD TVs there are things worth fighting for, like the family and the farm. Mr. Berry, though you’ll never read this (for a host of reasons, to include the fact that you don’t own a computer), congratulations on becoming the 2006 EFM Man of the Year. It may not have been much of a contest, or even a title that anyone was looking forward to, but I hope it provides the assurance that your message is being heard and you are still winning allies.

another has entered the race...

2006-12-27T11:16:00.000-05:00

It seems that I read not one but two new books this year. Shepherds after My own Heart; Pastoral traditions and leadership in the Bible (part of the New Studies in Biblical Theology series) by Timothy S. Laniak is a must read for senior pastors and elders. Read it together and shepherd together. I cannot promise that it will all make sense to the lay reader, but enough will sink in to make it more than worthwhile. In a year when there was undoubtedly scores of books written on how to be a better church leader, there probably was not a book more closely knit to God's understanding of Christian leadership.

Book of the Year! Book of the Year!

2006-12-27T09:39:00.000-05:00

I read a lot. Mostly non-fiction with a few novels thrown in during the course of a year and then a horde of supermarket tabloids... I just can't seem to get enough of those, and then there's Soap Digest, where would I be without Soap Digest anyways I digress. So a friend just asked me what I considered to be "the book of 2006" and it seems like a pretty good question considering that I am always in the middle of one to four books. One problem: I don't read new books. The two books I'm reading right now (both are collections of essays) were written in 1930 and 1957. I don't intend to be a complete snob about it, I don't look at the copyright page of a book that I'm interested in and say, "Oh, there's no way I'm reading that, it's in its first printing." Although, I do like to read books that have established themselves as worthy reads. For example, there are so many history books out there so there ought to be a Pulitzer Prize attached to either the author's name or the book itself. Again, not a steadfast rule, but let's face it there's only so much time one can read. I mean c'mon, I'm no nerd. I have the semblance of a social life. Occasionally, I do call someone up and he or she does agree to spend time with me (thanks mom and dad).

I checked the median age of the books that I received for Christmas (all books I asked for thanks to Amazon.com's wishlist) and it seems that I have a thing for twenty-three year-old books. Of 8 books, 1983 was the average. Not one of those books saw its first printing in 2006. In the year 2006, I read only one new book, and, so in a field of one, my book for the year 2006 is none other than Rod Dreher's Crunchy Cons. Congratulations, you did it! I tried to get through The Myth of a Christian Nation, but I couldn't help but think, "I liked this more when it was called The Politics of Jesus and written by John Yoder, and even then I didn't like it." When the year 2029 rolls around I figure that I can speak more definitively on "the book of 2006." Until then, I'll be perusing the aisles of my favorite used/independent book stores in search of established gems.

Our Founding Father on the Myth of Governing without Religion

2006-12-26T22:03:00.000-05:00

It is true that I took a rather substantial hiatus from blogging, but I kept busy during much of November and December. Given the men who are being positioned as the front-runners of the Republican party for the 2008 Presidential election, it looks like "secular conservatism" will be trying to assert itself as a legitimate foundation for political order. This being the case, I will be visiting this topic from time to time in the future. For now, I think an excerpt from President George Washington's "Farewell Address" sums up the truth:

And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

Further thoughts on the so-called secular conservative life

2006-11-01T16:29:00.000-05:00

When Heather MacDonald writes, “conservatism doesn’t need God,” I think it’s fair to surmise that she hopes for a day when talk of faith in God is eliminated from all political discourse. She opines that charlatans of days gone by are evidence that we cannot know whether a candidate is a good person based upon his vocalization of religious beliefs or personal piety.

These assertions of MacDonald’s are far from groundbreaking. Jesus tells those who would consider following him to, “beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 6:1). Before he gave the disciples his model prayer, or the Lord’s Prayer, he said, "And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you” (Matthew 6:5,6). We come to find out that Jesus knew a thing or two about hypocrites who love to seduce people into thinking they’re faithful servants of God when in reality they were nothing of the sort. Later on he came right out and said to one such group, “You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: 'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me;’” (Matthew 15:7,8). So it seems when MacDonald says that we cannot know much about a candidate based upon what he says publicly about his faith, she seems to be on to something.

Unfortunately for MacDonald she has a much larger problem: she cannot evaluate a candidate based upon his words alone nor can she evaluate a candidate by any true standard. She mockingly asks whether we can know if a candidate is a “good person” because he “talks about his faith,” but I ask MacDonald and other so-called “secular conservatives” on what basis can anyone be considered “good?” How can a secularist define who is “good” and who is “bad” when most people seem to do what is in their “best” personal interest? Maybe it is the “good” person who acts in his best interest and never does anything to hurt anyone else… Although maybe it isn’t such a “bad” thing to hurt some people sometimes, after all some people don’t always know what is “good” for them… Instead of going down this slope any further, I’d like to turn to James Sire’s work The Universe Next Door in which he writes of the secularist, or naturalist:

“For a naturalist, values are manmade.… If there was no consciousness prior to humans, then there was no prior sense of right and wrong. Furthermore, if there were no ability to do other than what one does, any sense of right and wrong would have no practical value. So for ethics to be possible, there must be both consciousness and self-determination.”

In observing human nature and behavior, MacDonald had concluded that there are ethical problems in the world today and through experience she knows that some things work well and other things don’t work so well, like the difference between two parent and one parent families. Yet when secularists deny the existence of God they also deny the existence of absolutes and objective standards, and without any fixed standards man is but a step away from barbarity. Fortunately, the one true God has communicated to us through his written word that there is a reason problems exist in the world today and he provides an expectation that we submit to living rightly before him and among others. Far from being a “conversation stopper,” God’s word provides the impetus for rigorous debate on how we can be most faithful in seeking God’s righteousness in the world we have inherited from both charlatans and good men.

A Reformation Day Refutation of Heather Mac Donald’s So-called Conservative Life (part one of a series)

2006-10-31T15:00:00.000-05:00

It has been a week since Heather Mac Donald’s op-ed, “Conservatism doesn’t need God,” showed up on my desk. I have thought over and over again how to best address her work, and it seems that my problem is similar to Martin Luther’s dilemma when he approached writing The Bondage of the Will in response to Erasmus’ Diatribe. Luther wrote, “you, see, what kept me from rushing in with an answer to you was not the difficulty of so doing, nor pressure of other work, nor the grandeur of your eloquence, nor fear of you, but simply disgust, disinclination, and distaste.” There is much to be said against MacDonald’s writing and I do not intend to say it all in one sitting (my consumption of coffee renders this an impossibility). Therefore, my hope is to turn to this subject a number of times in the next few days before and after Election Day 2006.

Let me begin by stating that MacDonald’s composition is in many respects an assault against the God of order. Of course, MacDonald should take pride in this since she denies his existence. Despite reading “Conservatism doesn’t need God” numerous times I am still not convinced it communicates one overarching thought, though I take its title to be the thesis.

She begins by demonstrating how Democrats have become more interested in conveying a faith-based face. This, she claims, is a troubling development for “secular conservatives.” The reason for this concern appears to be due to her opinion that “the infusion of God talk into both parties’ campaign discourse adds nothing to the public’s ability to vote wisely.” So why is it that a “secular conservative” is alarmed or threatened by Democrats wielding religious-speak? Why is a “conservative” bemoaning the tactics of Democrats if the same tactics are so easily discredited and ought to be abandoned by conservatives? Should she not be hoping that the pendulum swings so that the DNC becomes known as “God’s party?” Moreover, how does this advance her thesis? I am not a tenth grade composition teacher, I cannot claim to belong to a think tank, nor an editorial board, but on the surface the dots don’t seem to be connecting for me.

MacDonald, we should remember, is the result of a very complex evolutionary process. It should not surprise any good Darwinian to encounter a mutation in the mix. If we are solely the product of chance then it is rather remarkable that MacDonald says anything that is remotely intelligible. Thus it seems that her inability to write coherently is an advancement of her belief about the nature of things. Perhaps conservatism doesn’t need God after all. Despite this evidence I shall do my best (against all “natural” odds) to disprove this in the days to come.

Heather MacDonald's "Conservatism doesn't need God"

Introducing the Java Log (in picture)

2006-10-26T07:49:00.000-04:00

For a full account of the product's origin and quality read Kyle's review. Despite its finer qualities, see why neither of us are excited about the prospects of burning artifical wood fires by examining the pictures below.

All my rowdy friends

2006-10-13T15:08:00.000-04:00

seem to be creating their own blogs this week. Fortunately instead of more of the same food for thought, I think it's safe to say that these guys will be bringing some different fare to the table. Check out why Kyle is sitting around and what Ashby is cooking!

If it's been some time since you've visited some of my other rowdy friends it's worth noting that Jason and Jodee have some pictures of their newborn Zachary Glen, D.R. has posted on his blog after a 3 month hiatus, baby Ruth of the Morse Clan is plunging into Postmodern thought, and rumor has it that something new is under the sun at Timmy G's red bearded viking.

with the hope of preserving the Permanent Things

2006-10-11T08:25:00.000-04:00

Does "your" Jesus look a lot like you?

2006-10-05T10:34:00.000-04:00

The online magazine, Slate, has a feature called “recycle” in which they republish articles of yore. The column most recently recycled, “Your Own Personal Jesus,” does some recycling itself as it reminds us that its still cool to believe that Jesus is not only whoever you want him to be, but he is also whoever anyone else wants him to be:

Which of these Jesuses—and the countless others that exist—is the real Jesus? In a sense, they all are. The emergence of Jesus as a computer programmer in The Matrix shows how he can be reinvented for any age, even the future. But in another sense, none of them is the real Jesus. He remains a mystery.

This proposition (if in its self-contradiction it can be called such a thing) made by writer Chris Suellentrop reveals his own penchant for computer games and society’s desire to see any and all Jesuses except for the one revealed in Scripture. In the end anyone who wants to discover who Jesus is outside the realm of the New Testament canon ends up with the Jesus they want to see. Paul Barnett’s book, Jesus and the Logic of History, summarizes the Historic Jesus Quest’s later developments by stating, “the Jesus of the ‘third questers’, as they are called, often looks remarkably like the scholars who write about him: postmodern, ideologically reformist and emininetly reasonable.” It seems C.S. Lewis’ words are as relevant as ever:

A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic-on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg – or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.

See what Jesus actually taught (click: here)

Postmodern Moms and the Workplace

2006-10-04T08:30:00.000-04:00

When Joanna left a firm earlier this year for a company that had better benefits (to include not being in the office on Saturdays and not being in a hotel for most of the fall), she met with a supervisor who had the following words printed on a poster behind her office desk:

Who am I letting down if I stay?
Who am I letting down if I leave?
Will I have to ask myself the same questions everyday?

Every working mother struggles with difficult and emotional questions.
Am I doing the right thing for my children? my career? myself?

...

Every mother is different.
Every mother is the same.

The poster originally served as an advertisement for a seminar for mothers and mother-to-be in the workplace. However the poster's message probably provided strength for this particular wife and mother each morning she left her progeny to the care of others so that she could be about her work. It's okay for her to continue on her path in the workplace even if others leave because "every mother is different." One mother lets her children down if she stays at work. Another mother lets herself down if she leaves work. Yet again, maybe a mother lets her children down if she leaves work... After all, you can't dress your baby up in Gap Kids with only one income. Imagine how horrified some children might be when they grow up and discover that mom and dad didn't vacation with them in the Hamptons because mom and dad decided that mom needed to stay at home during the day... moms and dads can be so selfish! Then again, every mother is different; every mother is the same.

“eating local honey makes your backyard richer”

2006-10-02T10:09:00.000-04:00

This bit-o-wisdom comes from Hattie Ellis, who recently wrote Sweetness and Light: The Mysterious History of the Honeybee (Crown/Harmony, 2005). Ellis is one of four authors highlighted in an online article by Eric Miller called “An Obsession with Bees” (HT: Crunchy Cons). The story of the honeybee reminds us of the incredible Creator God. Ellis’ words are a subtle reminder of the benefits of buying locally produced food.

For information on who you can buy from in your area, visit two of the links I provide under good books, food, and music = good times:

Local Harvest
Local Farmers Market Search

Introducing the Picidae Family

2006-09-26T10:34:00.000-04:00

Last week, a friend and I were in a patch of woods when a pileated woodpecker landed in a tree above us. Upon seeing the bird, we could not help stopping to observe it. The occasion caused me to reflect upon the first time I saw what is still considered by many to be “our largest woodpecker” (noted in Sibley Guide to Birds). On a beautiful day in Northern South Carolina, I stood mesmerized for a long period of time by the bird, and, when I determined that I could run for my binoculars without it leaving I took off in a dead sprint. I returned void of breath and watched with the lens up to my eyes as if my arms would never tire. Due to its sheer size, the bird looks like it belongs to another age. It is truly a spectacle to behold.

For those who don’t know, there is some debate in the birding and ornithology communities as to which woodpecker is the largest today. Not that they’re having a hard time keeping the birds still so that they can measure them; it has more to do with Bobby Harrison and company, who did exactly what my oldest copy of an Audubon Bird Guide (1946) says in regard to the ivory-billed woodpecker:

Destruction of the vast forests of the South, especially the luxuriant hardwood forests of the river bottoms, has apparently doomed this splendid bird – largest of our woodpeckers. It is so rare that any record of one is noteworthy and should be passed on at once to the National Audubon Society, which is trying to save the bird from extinction.

Harrison and other members of the Cornell Lab of Ornithology identified the ivory-billed, known also as the Lord God bird (because people are known to say “Lord, God!” when they see the enormous bird), almost 60 years after it was thought to be lost forever. This encouraging rediscovery was put to song by Sufjan Stevens in a way that perhaps only he can, “Lord God Bird” declares:

And the watchers beware, lest they see it fall
And paradise might laugh when at last it falls
And the sewing machine, the industrial god
It’s the great god bird with it’s altar call
Yes, it’s the great god bird with its altar call
Yes, it’s the great god bird through it all
(listen)

This brings us to Boiling Springs Lakes, North Carolina where another Picidae of the South, the red-cockaded woodpecker can be found. A consultation of my old field guides causes no consternation, but the one most likely to accompany me on the trail today warns that this bird is “rare and declining” and “found only in mature pine forests.” For the folks in Boiling Springs Lakes, the bird is the reason people are clear-cutting their property. After all what would you rather do, provide a habitat for an endangered bird or protect the resale value of your property by making sure the bird can’t live there? It seems that some in this “Christian nation” still see the mandate over creation as a reason to make parking lots.
(Read the NYT story here)

The Conflicted Voice of Jesus Camp

2006-09-22T10:53:00.000-04:00

One would expect to see a reviewer for the Village Voice rave about a movie poised to bash evangelicals with all the same language as a connoisseur of vintage wine, “this movie lingers in the mind with hints of vanilla and yellow stone fruits long after it’s gone...” Interestingly, Rob Nelson sees right through Jesus Camp as he writes (it’s a short review so I’ve include all of it):

God is in the details no matter what you believe, but this red-state-baiting doc is content to introduce its appalled exposé of evangelical Christian youth culture with shots of a fast-food- and flag-lined highway and the words "Missouri, USA." Welcome to hell, kids. Art-house horror has rarely been scarier than it is in the hands of filmmakers Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady, for whom a drive-through car wash illustrates the evils of American cleansing. Missouri— yikes!—is also the home of Pentecostal minister Becky Fischer, a super-size general in the army of the Lord who commands young attendees of her Kids on Fire camp to worship a cardboard Dubya, clutch tiny fetus dolls, and sing along to spiritual hip-hop ("kickin' it for Christ," y'all). The doc these kids would make with flea market camcorders couldn't possibly be as ugly as this absurdly hypocritical critique of the far right's role in escalating the culture war. The classier indoctrination to which Gap-shopping urban Democrats subject their kids might look damn spooky, too, but it probably wouldn't sell.

Ouch. Ewing and Grady aren’t the only culture warriors with a hand in this film’s making; the documentary’s voice is that of Mike “Pap” Papantonio who can also be heard on the struggling Air America radio network. A reading of Papantonio’s bio on the Air America website (the abridged wikipedia version is here) reveals that Pap is a conflicted progressive who recognizes there is something wrong with the world today and that God is in fact in the details. The bio quotes the lawyer and Methodist who looks at the future of the legal profession with dismay, he writes in In Search of Atticus Finch, "Seventy percent of kids coming out of law school want to represent corporations and get paid exorbitant amounts of money…. They're willing to sell their souls to the highest bidder. We need to bring more quality to what we do as lawyers, we need to be better servants to the community and we need to have more political involvement for positive change in the country."

I find myself in substantial agreement with Papantonio, but I suspect that he will not find the solutions in mainline Protestantism, and so he has resorted to maligning the worst of evangelicalism for its anti-intellectual fanaticism. Hopefully he will come to see that another arm of evangelicalism recognizes that God is not just in the details, but is the God of all truth.

Two New Links

2006-09-20T08:51:00.000-04:00

In the spirit of my last post (which I'm sure no one read by virtue of its title), I've added two new links. The first is a blog that started last week by Jim Wallis and bears the title of his New York Times bestseller God's Politics. Wallis is currently engaging Ralph Reed and thus far the response has been enormous(click: here). The other link is to the blog run by the editors of Touchstone Magazine, called "Mere Comments" (click: here). For those of you not familiar with Touchstone, you should know that it dubs itself "a journal of Mere Christianity" in homage to C.S. Lewis. I think the magazine does an outstanding job living up to this claim, and its blog will act superbly as a counterbalance to Wallis' for those who desire to know what is being said by Christians from the right and the left in the marketplace of ideas.

Post-Postman - the Age of Egocasting and Democratic Discourse

2006-09-14T09:45:00.000-04:00

Neil Postman showed us what happened to “public discourse in the age of show business” with his work Amusing Ourselves to Death and now Christine Rosen is revealing what is happening to discourse in “the age of egocasting.” Rosen’s article, “The Age of Egocasting,” in The New Atlantis deserves considerable attention given our innate ability to welcome any technology that provides more comfort and consequently fewer challenges. Here is one excerpt from her article where she hones in on the sage words of University of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein:

"As the customization of our communications universe increases, society is in danger of fragmenting, shared communities in danger of dissolving." Borrowing the idea of “the daily me” from M.I.T. technologist Nicholas Negroponte, Sunstein describes a world where “you need not come across topics and views that you have not sought out. Without any difficulty, you are able to see exactly what you want to see, no more and no less.” Sunstein is concerned about the possible negative effects this will have on deliberative democratic discourse, and he urges websites to include links to sites that carry alternative views. Although his solutions bear a trace of impractical ivory tower earnestness—you can lead a rabid partisan to water, after all, but you can’t make him drink—his diagnosis of the problem is compelling. “People should be exposed to materials that they would not have chosen in advance,” he notes. “Unplanned, unanticipated encounters are central to democracy itself.”

The democratic process requires that we understand what others think and so does the culture war. In Peter Kreeft’s book, How to Win the Culture War, he lays out, “To win any war, and any kind of war, the nine most necessary things to know are the following:

1. that you are at war
2. who your enemy is
3. what kind of war you are in
4. what the basic principle of this kind of war is
5. what the enemy’s strategy is
6. where the main battlefield is
7. what weapon will defeat the enemy
8. how to acquire this weapon
9. why you will win”

If you don’t think there’s a culture war then maybe it’s time to end the TiVo subscription and take the white plugs out of your ears. The “news sources” section on this blog intentionally includes voices from both the right and the left; I invite you to a planned and anticipated encounter with materials and ideas that are not central to your own worldview.

We Remember

2006-09-11T14:34:00.000-04:00

Five years ago I was in the Daniel Library researching the life of John C. Calhoun. Where were you?

Take the Fugitives' Stand: Read All the King's Men

2006-09-11T10:45:00.000-04:00

Despite its poor timing All the King's Men is already considered Oscar-worthy by many in the Hollywood scene. This is hardly a surprise given the cast, but instead of going out on the town on September 22 and watching the movie why not read the book?

The movie might display good acting but it will inevitably fail to capture scenes like, "...it was the kind of apartment house where the bulb burns out and nobody ever puts a new one in and there is always a kiddie car left on a landing and the carpet is worn to ribbons and the air smells dankly of dogs, diapers, cabbage, old women, burnt grease, and the eternal fate of man." My guess is that the movie will revolve so tightly around Willie Starks that the audience will fail to see that Starks, and other characters like Adam Stanton, only serve as aids in Jack Burden's hunger, quest, and discovery of truth.

Speaking of truth, there was a group of Southern men known as the Fugitive Poets who wrote a series of essays called "I'll Take My Stand." These men were united in their resolve to cherish the old over the innovative, and as agrarians they believed that "industrial society" was robbing Americans of their souls. The Fugitive Poets were the kind of men who would advocate reading a long book over watching a two-hour movie. Robert Penn Warren (1905-1985) was a Fugitive Poet. He wrote a book called All the King's Men, you should read it.

Andy Replaces Brownie

2006-08-22T22:04:00.000-04:00

It was a little over a year ago when President Bush uttered the words, "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job." Since then we've seen that this statement couldn't be further from the truth. The quote has been played over and over again to erode confidence in the President.

Now there's a new quote in reference to another member of the Bush administration that should weaken the confidence that many of his most loyal constituents place hold for him. The simple words, "And I support Andy's decision" refers to the temporary head of the FDA, Andrew von Eschenbach, and his move to make Plan B an over the counter drug for women over the age of 18.

We can probably talk all day long about whether or not Plan B is actually an abortifacient. According to Medical News Today (disclaimer: I'm not a medical expert so I can't speak to the credibility of this source), scientists believe Plan B might prevent fertilization. One thing is certain, an over the counter drug like Plan B takes us deeper into a world where the individual and personal freedom are worshipped in ways that denigrate God-given gifts like sex and human life.

I do not support the President's decison to support Andy's decision.

The Early Church and Politics

2006-08-13T22:10:00.000-04:00

In Jesus and the Logic of History, Paul W. Barnett reveals that the very first Christians were understood as having something to say about the political, cultural, and religious climate they lived in. He writes,

What struck the Romans was the intensity of the connection between the Christians and Christ. Roman loyalty to Caesar and the state was the fundamental expectation of all members of society, with the sole exception of the Jews. Romans, therefore, took powerful, even shocked, exception to the Christians' loyalty to this 'other king'.... This loyalty, which was expressed in private gatherings of adherents, was seen as politically subversive. (34)

The early church understood that the Kingdom of Christ made demands on every part of their lives. I hope that the world can still see an intense connection between Christians and Christ and that they remain shocked by our loyalty to him.

Moore on the Apolitical Preacher

2006-08-13T22:03:00.000-04:00

Russell Moore possesses an economy of words that I apparently lack when he writes, "Greg Boyd's not apolitical, no matter what he says." That pretty much sums it all up.

Boyd continues to garner the praises of the mainstream media. This time it is the kind folks at National Public Radio (read some of the conversation: here). This shouldn't come as a surprise. I listen to NPR regularly and have noticed that they've given a great deal of attention to the Dixie Chicks lately, especially lead singer Natalie Maines. This is of course due to their (the Dixie Chicks' and NPR's) anti-Bush crusade. I decided to use NPR's search engine to see how much they've focused on the Dixie Chicks versus Toby Keith, one of the most popular country acts today who has been outspoken in his support for US troops. Here are the results: Dixie Chicks - 67 (11 entries for this year), Toby Keith - 18 (1 entry for this year). I suspect that between now and November we can expect to hear more and more from anyone who can be perceived as a dissident voice from the corridors of the right, whether it be Boyd or Maines. The media's attempt to convey the message that the Republican party's base is eroding could not be more obvious.

The Bigotry of Ricky Bobby

2006-08-08T17:45:00.000-04:00

Ted Baehr writes the following about the most popular movie in America right now:

Strong humanist worldview with very strong politically correct elements that ridicules white Southern Christian males, the Bible Belt, Jesus Christ, the Nativity Story, Christians, NASCAR, the South, men with Southern accents, and American masculinity while promoting moral relativism, plus movie uses strong pansexual homosexual elements to mock conservative and Christian attitudes toward masculinity in a politically correct way...

That's right the movie mocks Christians and NASCAR! Some culture, movie, and sports commentators are insisting that Hollywood is finally catching on to the fact that many Americans love NASCAR, but not Ted. He seems to think that the movie is nothing more than an attempt to emasculate Southern men. I'm no Southerner, but I'm pretty sure that most of the ones I know will survive the attacks of Will Ferrell and company. They might even laugh. My guess is that they'll laugh at Ricky Bobby, themselves, and also at Baehr. After all, there is something sadly comical about trying to defend the Nativity Story and men with Southern accents in the same breath.

Since I'm down in South Carolina for the next month, I'll try to keep everyone posted. If I'm able to observe the deterioration of Southern Christian males, the Bible Belt, NASCAR, the South, and of course those accents you'll read about it here.

Insurgent Snipers and Conventional War

2006-08-03T22:25:00.000-04:00

USA Today doesn't interest me at all, mainly because Neil Postman's assessment of it in Amusing Ourselves to Death as a "newspaper" modeled after the format of television is horribly accurate. Yet, a friend just pointed out an article to me that I didn't see elsewhere.
The article, "Insurgent snipers sent after troops," reveals information found in an Iraqi insurgent manual on sniping U.S. military personnel. In particular, the manual suggests that shooting chaplains and military doctors is an effective way to wage "psychological warfare." Unfortunately this is a USA Today article so John Diamond doesn't actually say anything about how this is a direct violation of the Geneva Conventions, which states:

Art. 24. Medical personnel exclusively engaged in the search for, or the collection, transport or treatment of the wounded or sick, or in the prevention of disease, staff exclusively engaged in the administration of medical units and establishments, as well as chaplains attached to the armed forces, shall be respected and protected in all circumstances. (link)

This should serve as a reminder that our enemies in Iraq (and Afghanistan) are not interested in preserving any of the conventional rules regarding modern warfare. They will stop at nothing to defeat us and will use any means to win. Nevertheless, we must expect our nation to only engage in war when it is justified and to fight justly.

2006-08-03T21:36:00.000-04:00

For more information go to: http://www.reformationchurches.org

Is Greg Boyd right this time?

2006-07-30T22:02:00.000-04:00

Sunday’s New York Times has the pastor of Woodland Hills Church on the front-page with the title “Conservative Evangelical Pastor Steers Clear of Politics, and Pays.” It is none other than the infamous Greg Boyd. The NYT does not shy away from the controversy Boyd has encountered in the past due to his heretical view of God’s sovereignty (my words, not the NYT’s), yet the article’s intent is to show Boyd as a model for evangelicals who need to stop preaching Republican platform politics.

The article, written by Laurie Goodstein, shares how Boyd became “alarmed while visiting another megachurch’s worship service on a Fourth of July years ago. The service finished with the chorus singing ‘God Bless America’ and a video of fighter jets flying over a hill silhouetted with crosses.” I share Boyd’s concern about many so-called evangelical churches that confuse the Kingdom of God and the United States of America and the responsibilities and obligations regarding each, and I think he is on the money when he says, “I am sorry to tell you that America is not the light of the world and the hope of the world. The light of the world and the hope of the world is Jesus Christ.”

At the same time, I think that Boyd needs to spend some time considering what “Christ” means. Contrary to popular belief, “Christ” is not the last name of Jesus. It is his title. The church serves the Christ and exists as the visible expression of His Kingdom in this age, as such the church has a responsibility to be about the King’s redemptive purposes. Obviously this implies the task of evangelism, but it also involves intervening for the oppressed and prophetically declaring truth to a world that is morally bankrupt.

Boyd also needs to consider that by being silent on these issues, he is still communicating a message. If he chooses to avoid speaking on the evils of abortion and homosexuality, they don’t magically go away, and he therefore fails his congregation by not equipping them to think biblically about the world they live in as sojourners. William Berggren (a member or perhaps a former member of Woodland Hills?) made a similar point when he said, “If the church were [sic] awake when abortion was passed in the 70’s, it wouldn’t have happened. But the church was asleep.”

The New York Times is undeniably hopeful that more evangelicals will quite down in the months leading up to the November elections, but what about the churches of the left and the mainline denominations? Will there be any articles that focus on the ill-conceived social agendas of “progressive” churches? Will they decide to praise the heroics of a pastor of a liberal megachurch that doesn’t talk about politics? Will Jim Wallis be compared to Pat Robertson? Don’t hold your breath.

Poll on Environment

2006-07-29T15:50:00.000-04:00

I was at Christianity Today and came across a poll that asked the following question:

Should evangelicals lobby on global warming?
• No, there is no such thing.
• No, our priority should be evangelism.
• No, the science is still unclear.
• Yes, it is our job to care for creation.
• Yes, concern for the climate is neighbor love.
• Yes, we need to address all social issues.
• I don't know.
Take the poll

I'm surprised that one of the statements was not "No, evangelicals should not lobby." Perhaps that is an indication that evangelicals have done a significant job of severing ties from fundamentalists that would make this kind of statement. On the other hand, I would expect a fundamentalist, not an evangelical, to rally behind the statement "No, our priority should be evangelism." As if evangelism keeps us from all other tasks and duties in this world - I know that I was personally vexed this morning as I considered shaving and brushing my teeth, I mean why do that when I could be passing out chic tracts in front of Krispy Kreme.

I also found it interesting that a number of these "positions" were stated in the recent Albert Mohler radio program that addressed the issue of Christianity and the environment. If you want to listen to the show, follow the link on my recent post "Rod Dreher on the Albert Mohler Program."

I plan on looking at global warming in the future, but I think I should probably state at the forefront that I'm not going to rule out the possibility of global warming just because Albert Gore believes in it. As an evangelical I have a responsiblity to look at the issues and that means not disavowing something serious just because I don't like the people associated with it. Finally, I have a question (one that probably reveals how I voted on the poll). Can anyone think of a social issue that evangelicals should not address?

Reality (T.V.) Bites

2006-07-21T08:32:00.000-04:00

I took a break from the opening pages of Jesus and the Logic of History by Paul W. Barnett to call a friend who advised me to turn on ABC to see the extraordinary feat of a young man, who while in desperate need of a hobby learned that he could move his feet to the demands of "Dance, Dance Revolution" and simultaneously juggle flaming objects. It seems that we no longer have to go to the state or county fair to see the more peculiar members of the human race. They now have a home called summer reality T.V. and they are on all the major networks. May I suggest reading a good book or two instead of convincing yourself that staring at a guy walking a tight rope is time well spent.

Here's a sampling of some of the books I've read since May:
Living the Cross Centered Life - C.J. Mahaney
Humility - C.J. Mahaney
Peace Like a River - Leif Engler
Shepherds after My Own Heart - Timothy S. Laniak
Love Your God With All Your Mind - J.P. Moreland
Crunchy Cons - Rod Dreher

I've also been dabbling in and out of John James Audubon; The Making of an American by Richard Rhodes, The Citizenship Papers by Wendell Berry, and This We Believe which is edited by Akers, Armstrong and Woodbridge. Yesterday another friend gave me a copy of Erwin McManus' Seizing Your Divine Moment and I plan on reading that as I read Barnett's work.

Don't limit yourself to my recommendations. Frontpage Mag recently compiled a list of books that its contributors and friends are reading this summer. Some of them, like Ann Coulter, need to get a life and diversify their reading habits some, but I suppose I need to remove the log from my own eye before I say anything else on this subject! Overall there are some good suggestions in there (is Rachael Mardsen a crunchy con?), especially if you are interested in reading books pertaining to the field of international politics.

For more recommenations (and some reviews) go to the Discerning Reader website.
For a listing of local and independent bookstores near you go to the Book Sense store locator.
Happy reading!

Rod Dreher on the Albert Mohler Program

2006-07-20T17:34:00.000-04:00

Russell Moore, dean of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and author of The Kingdom of Christ; the New Evangelical Perspective, is hosting the Albert Mohler radio program this week in Mohler's absence. His guest today is the author of Cruncy Cons, Rod Dreher. The Albert Mohler program is available to listen to and download on MP3 format (click: here)

buy me some bocca and tofu snacks

2006-07-20T12:35:00.000-04:00

Yesterday as the Detroit Tigers were busy maintaining their lead in the standings over the White Sox (and tying the three game series at a game a piece), I was busy maintaining a hot charcoal grill for our church small group's B.Y.O.M(eat). There was a cornucopia of meats; steak, chicken breasts, hot dogs, hamburgers, turkey burgers, and chicken sausage all graced the grill with their presence. We tasted and saw that it was good.

Yesterday, I also heard about a recent ranking by PETA for the "Top 10 Vegetarian-Friendly Ballparks." My initial reaction to this and most other things PETA-related is repulsion. I mean c'mon, what's baseball without a ballpark frank (they plump when you cook 'em)! When PETA says they're against cruelty to animals what they mean is that they're anti-hunting and fishing and totally against the consumption of any animal or fish. As the previous paragraph reveals, these guys would probably want to put me on an animal crimes tribunal and when they investigate my freezer and see the frozen trout they would want to stick a barbed hook in my mouth and cast me into the deep. PETA fails to understand that it is not wrong to eat meat, but they do understand a few things.

The radical animal-rights organization does recognize that there are many reasons to be alarmed about the way that factory farms treat animals. While we may disagree on whether or not animals can be enjoyed on a platter, I can agree that animals should be treated with dignity as a part of God's creation. This means hunting and fishing with conservation in mind and being conscientious when shopping in the market or taking in a ballgame.

is any freezing ethical?

2006-07-19T15:43:00.000-04:00

This is the elephant in the room when the debate on embryoic stem-cell research takes place. At the end of the day, I find myself in substantial agreement with what the Feinbergs wrote in Ethics For A Brave New World:

Even if only one egg is taken and implanted, if it is expellled, that still follows a deliberate act of the couple and doctor to perform a procedure which put the embryo in a precarious position. Obviously, this is less objectionable than fertilizing many eggs and implanting several with the knowledge that several are unlikely to implant. However, given the small chance of success with ony one egg, we think IVF even in these circumstances takes too much risk with human life (235).

They continue and note several other important issues to consider, such as the problem of experimentation on someone (the embryo) without his or her expressed consent, and the question of what is to be done with embryos that are now frozen. They write:

we believe an IVF-conceived embryo has been produced by immoral means, once it exists, there is still an obligation to treat it morally. Killing it or allowing it to die is immoral. Freezing it and later implanting it makes it no less of an experiement than in other IVF cases, but at the current state of our technology, these procedures seem the most likely ways to protect the child, and that must be the overriding concern (240).

This takes us to the the Snowflake Embryo Adoption Program, an organization which hopes that one day there will be no need for this type of work because they are opposed to the freezing of embryos just like the Feinbergs, but recognize that saving embryos that are now frozen is a significant cause that must be undertaken. Take the time to learn more about this program by following the link to its website.

Like the people at the Nightlight Foundation who run the Snowflake Program, I hope that there will come a day when the question of freezing embryos will no longer be asked. After all, there is another option that is too often overlooked: adoption. For this reason, I commend the blog of two friends who are not only poster-parents of the adoption process but are also examples of what it means to live out the gospel of Jesus Christ. Enjoy the many pictures of the newest additon to the Davis family!

"All the News That's Fit to Print" is shrinking

2006-07-18T17:00:00.000-04:00

According to this news story on Reuters.com the New York Times is reducing the size of its paper to such a degree that it will carry 5% less news. The company is also letting over 200 jobs go to cut costs.
I'm sure that many conservatives, like Hannity, will be claiming this as a major victory against those who propagate the liberal media bias. Maybe those claims of victory are correct in their assessment. It especially seems like the connection can be made right now in light of the current controversy with the NYT and the Bush administration.
You'll note that yesterday I posted a series of quotes on the current Israeli-Hezbollah conflict from Saturday's edition. I don't typically find in-depth articles on the Drudge Report and rarely do I see anything of journalistic substance on any of the major news networks (whether it be CNN or Fox News). Sure the NYT has its biases and agendas, does that mean it isn't worth reading?

Something Stinks in Georgia

2006-07-18T12:03:00.000-04:00

Last week Marvin Olasky wrote a brutally honest op-ed for Human Events Online on why Ralph Reed should not be the face of Republican party politics in Georgia (click: here)

Yesterday you would have thought that Sadie Fields, of the Christian Coalition of Georgia, was tasked with rewriting "Sweet Home Alabama" for her own state and for the honor of Reed. It goes something like this:

Well I heard Mister Olasky sing about him.
Well, I heard ole Marvin put him down
Well, I hope Marvin Olasky will remember
A southern man don't need him around anyhow

Sweet home Georgia
Let's hope the state is never blue
Sweet home Georgia
Lord, I'm coming home to you

In Atlanta they love the candidate for lieutenant governor
Now we all did what we could do
Now Jack Abramoff does not bother me
Does your conscience bother you?
Tell the truth

Okay what she really wrote can also be found at Human Events Online (click: here). Here is the part where Sadie quits acting like she's writing Ralph's obituary and cuts to the chase:

Marvin Olasky's overwrought attempt at guilt by association is unfair and mean-spirited. He seems to argue that because Reed had a friend who did something wrong, he is disqualified from serving. That may sell magazines, but it does not reflect the redemptive love of Christ. I can only speculate about Mr. Olasky's motives. The fact that he cites far-left commentator Garrison Keillor says enough for me.

This statement is so wrong on so many different levels it's almost painful to see in print. First, Reed may not have been proven guilty of any criminal charges, but his ties to Abramoff are undeniable and in the court of public opinion and politics the case is closed. Second, calling Jack Abramoff a friend of Ralph Reed's is not only undesirable, it's untrue. We know Abramoff despised Reed and only used him to muster up evangelical opposition against competing casinos. Third, what Ralph Reed did does disqualify him from serving; the man's reputation is tarnished to such a degree that he discredits not only Republicans and conservatives, but also Christians. Fourth, Olasky is in a position to call it like he sees it. He is after all an editor of a periodical. Fields is right about one thing: the fact that Olasky is in agreement with Garrison Keillor means that something really stinks. Only the stench isn't from Olasky or Keillor.

In their own words - Messages from the Middle East

2006-07-17T13:31:00.000-04:00

"We've decided to put an end to this saga and to change the rules of the game whereby a terrorist organization that is part of the Lebanese government can push the region to the abyss." - Isacc Herzog, a member of the Israeli security cabinet

"You, Zionists, . . . you wanted an open war and you will have it.... You want your government to change the rules of the game? This game will change. Now you know whom you're fighting with. You are fighting the sons of Muhammad and Ali." - Hassan Nasarallah, leader of Hezbollah

"No one will tolerate the presence of Hezbollah forces along the border, operating freely as a state within a state, operating against Israel as it prlease and holding Israelis hostage, choosing when to pull the trigger." - General Nehushtan of Israel

"In Lebanon and Gaza we took unilateral steps and withdrew and thought we'd have tranquility. They interpreted it as continued weakness, and we are determined to break this pattern." - an anonymous Israeli politician who was not authorized to speak publicly

"We address all the arrogant powers of the world, including the United States and Israel, and tell them to realize the true reality and take lessons from history that show that all world powers, no matter how strong they are, prove to be failures and will definitely vanish." - Shiek Asad al-Nasri, an Iraqi Shiite cleric and ally of Moktada al-Sadr

Men like Sadr, and his followers who can speak openly to fellow congregants like Nasri did as part of the above quote, demonstrate that wars with Islamic fundamentalists are a sure bet in the Middle East and the rest of the world. The anonymous Israeli politican recognized that no amount of peace talks or negotiations, and no appeasement of any kind will quench the desires of the ideologically driven "sons of Muhammad and Ali." I expect Israel will get a handle on this latest conflict with Lebanon, but Iran and Syria are not making the world a safer place and Iraq is a far cry from a haven for democracy.

____________________
The first four quotes are from "Israel Vows to Rout Hezbollah as Violence Escalates"
The final quote is from "Radical Shiite Cleric Hints at Militia Attacks to Protest Israel's Actions"
both articles were printed in the Saturday, July 15, 2006 editon of the NYT.

cultivate your garden

2006-07-17T08:59:00.000-04:00

It’s eight-thirty in the morning and I can hear one of my neighbors mowing. Smart move. This morning the temperature is hovering just below 80 degrees but it will reach the mid 90’s this afternoon. So why am I writing about my lawn instead of mowing it? Probably because I’d rather let it get a little long right now than sentence it to death from the scorching hot sun.

Recently some friends were talking about our actions and morality. One of them was making the case that everything we can do falls within one of three categories: moral, immoral, and amoral. He gave mowing the lawn as an example of an amoral action. I think the fact that Adam was placed in the Garden and then told that he had been given “‘every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit’” indicates that being “green” is not just a trendy thing to do or a way to keep up with the neighbors, but a way to be good stewards of what God saw and called “very good.”

Here are 10 principles for lawn care as seen in a recent Audubon magazine: http://magazine.audubon.org/audubonathome/audubonathome0605.html

10 Steps to a Healthy Lawn

1. Adjust Your Attitude
Lush lawns flourished long before chemical fertilizers and pesticides became widely available following World War II, even if those lawns weren’t the verdant fairways promoted by today’s lawn companies. Flawless greens require lots of chemicals, watering, and care. And because they’re unnatural, they’re neither drought- nor pest-resistant. You can learn to love a lawn that’s less than an emerald carpet.

2. Promote Diversity
A lawn should not be a monoculture, a single species of turfgrass, where all other plants are relegated to weed status. For example, lawn companies label clover an invader to help them sell weed-and-feed products and other broadleaf herbicides. In fact, before backyard chemicals came on the scene, clover was a common ingredient in lawns and an important plant in fixing nitrogen for turfgrass. Be it a cornfield or a lawn, a monoculture is always unnatural and hard to maintain. Seed your yard with a mix of species, such as white clover, fescues, and perennial ryegrass, and with other plants and grasses suited to your region’s climate and soils. Mixed-species lawns are better able to resist pests and tolerate drought.

3. Go Organic
If a pest is attacking your turf, consider this: Pesticides are indiscriminate—they kill beneficial bugs along with the so-called bad ones. Pesticides also wipe out up to 90 percent of the earthworms, as well as the fungi, bacteria, nematodes, and other organisms that make your soil healthy. Many pesticides are toxic to amphibians and fish, which means they’re especially pernicious when used near streams, lakes, and wetlands. What’s more, if you use pesticides on your lawn, they will end up inside your home—on children’s clothing and in house dust. There is usually an organic alternative. For example, milky spore powder, available at lawn and garden stores and at nurseries, is a naturally occurring bacterium that kills lawn grubs. You can also plant grasses that contain endophytes, a fungus that naturally repels some common lawn pests such as cinch bugs and armyworms.

4. Get Past the Grass
Smooth, closely cropped carpets of grass currently cover more than 20 million U.S. acres—a number that will continue to rise as cities sprawl into undeveloped areas. Although such a lawn might absorb runoff better than asphalt or concrete, it is a poor alternative to a forest or prairie. Think about how you use your yard. You can replace unnecessary lawn with native groundcover alternatives such as phlox, bearberry, and dwarf dogwood, or with perennials, shrubbery, and trees, all of which will trap nutrients before they reach waterways. Front yards are often ideal places to start replacing grass. Mostly decorative, they are close to sidewalks, streets, and gutters, so their runoff usually goes right down the drain and winds up in waterways.

5. Mow High
Don’t give your lawn a crew cut. Let your grass grow 3 to 4 inches high. It will look fuller, and the shade will conserve water and deter weeds—such as crabgrass—that need full sun to germinate. Mowing short also stresses the lawn and makes it less drought-resistant. Try mechanically aerating your turf by poking holes in it with a garden fork. (You can also lease a walk-behind aeration machine at a local rental center.) Aeration loosens compacted soils, allows water to penetrate deeper, encourages earthworms, and helps the turf spread.

6. Shake the Rake
By leaving grass clippings on your lawn and letting them decompose, you reduce fertilizing requirements by up to 50 percent. A light layer of compost raked over the lawn once or twice a year will supply the rest of a lawn’s fertilizer needs. Compost also releases nutrients slowly. If you must rake clippings, put them in a compost bin, where they provide a shot of nitrogen, heat up the pile, and accelerate decomposition.

7. Easy Does It
Plants can take up only so many nutrients at one time; the rest percolate down to the water table, end up in surface waters, or build up in the soil, says Stephens. He has known homeowners to dump whole bags of chemical fertilizer on narrow strips of lawn between a sidewalk and street. (The first rain takes most of it down the gutter and into rivers and streams.) The lesson: More is not necessarily better, even with an organic fertilizer. “A nutrient is a nutrient. It doesn’t matter if it comes from an organic material or a chemical fertilizer. It has the same effect in a waterway,” says Stephens. Never fertilize before a heavy rain, he advises. The best time is early in the morning.

8. End Erosion
Soil particles easily absorb nutrients—especially phosphorous—and when soil washes into rivers, the nutrients ride along. Cathy Carpenter, a retired colonel in the U.S. Army Nurse Corps, grows black cohosh, woodland hydrangea, and sassafras on her two-and-a-half-acre suburban lot near Quincy, Illinois. Her yard slopes at about 15 degrees, and when a nearby retention pond overflows, it drains into the creek out back and then into the Mississippi, 10 miles away. When Carpenter built her perennial beds, she framed the area with landscaping timbers, leveled the ground, and created raised beds. She even lined the timbers with landscaping cloth, which allows excess water to escape. “That way, if we get a gully washer, the soil is not leaching out.”

9. Water Smarter
Replace sprinklers with soaker hoses, which put the water where it’s needed—at plant roots. Soaker hoses reduce evaporation and waste. If you must use a sprinkler, water at daybreak, when it’s cool and evaporation is slower. Avoid frequent, low-volume watering, which promotes shallow root growth and thatch buildup. Water deeply but less often. Your lawn will adapt, especially if you work to build better soil.

10. Build a Buffer
If you live along a waterway, avoid mowing to the water’s edge. Instead, allow grasses and other herbaceous plants to grow tall and thick so they slow runoff and trap soil particles and nutrients. Tall grass may seem ugly and unkempt, but buffers can be managed like gardens and planted with perennials, flowers, shrubbery, and native grasses. George Tyler, who retired in 2002 and traded that small suburban plot in Bloomington for a home on Sugar Lake, near Aitkin, Minnesota, planted a riparian buffer strip along his waterfront. He says, “The ducks, cranes, beavers, and muskrats prefer my 150 feet of shoreline to my neighbors’ manicured lawns that go right down to the lake.”

welcome to the market

2006-07-14T10:55:00.000-04:00

Wurzel's Flea Market in Fort Gratiot, Michigan has always been the type of place where you can find just about anything. Free kittens, vintage license plates, fresh produce, antiques, you name it and it's probably there (somewhere). The good, the bad, and the rusty co-exist under one old barn and are also sprawled out over its gravel parking lot. You can't tread too quickly through the aisles of Wurzel's because there's no telling what you might miss beneath a cheap fold-out table or what character with a story to tell you'll pass by without even exchanging pleasantries.

Hopefully, the Evangelical Free Market Place of Ideas will share some common ground with Wurzel's. Sure there are snazzier places to go on the internet and many people fly past the flea market and think, "what a dump." But I'd like this to be a place where you can peruse the columns and consider things you might not think about or see elsewhere. If you think that strip malls and mega-grocery stores have everything you could possibly ever want or need in this life then keep your cruise control set, but if you like to slow down on occasion to take in the scenery this might be a place for you to come from time to time.

- Sean Dennis, proprietor of the Evangelical Free Market Place of Ideas

Fox Fear and Reagan Worship

2006-07-14T00:34:00.000-04:00

Former Democratic U.S. Congressman/current General Secretary of the National Council of Churches/ordained minister within the United Methodist Church Robert Edgar is the type of guy you would expect to hear at a luncheon held by the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. After all the CBF is “moderate” just like the NCC and UMC are “mainline” or “mainstream.” Edgar had marching orders for his June 22 audience; he called on them to follow in “the footsteps of Jesus,” which apparently means rising up to meet the real foes of Christians everywhere. According to Edgar the enemy is none other than “fear, fundamentalism, and Fox News.” This sort of rhetoric is not surprising given the leftist agenda of the N.C.C., but what is equally troubling is the response from the right.

Mark Tooley of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, an organization that recognizes the peril that the UMC and other mainline denominations are in and is seeking renewal, was hot on Edgar’s trail. This is to be expected given the nature of the IRD and the fact that Tooley is also a Methodist. Yet Tooley does what so many other “conservatives” do when irked by men like Edgar, he pilgrimages to the holy shrine of Ronald Reagan. Tooley writes:

More attuned to reality, Ronald Reagan denounced a true Evil Empire in his celebrated 1983 speech to the National Association of Evangelicals. Unlike Edgar, Reagan was hopeful, inspiring, and targeting a wicked regime that had murdered and enslaved hundred of millions. Thanks in part to Reagan, that empire of evil soon thereafter fell.

In contrast to Reagan, Edgar speeches are little more than shrill whines about his own country, which he absurdly credits with transcendent evil. Traditional Christian clergy are dedicated to resisting the world, the flesh, and the Devil. But Edgar and his National Council of Churches prefer to target the United States of America and its appendages of "fear, fundamentalism, and
Fox News."

So there you have it. The difference between a conservative and a liberal is the conservative knows the enemy and the remedy. Evil is another nation-state or organization outside of the U.S. and the way to conquer evil is to remind ourselves of how we are morally superior in every way due to our form of government and our economic system. I am not suggesting moral equivalence when comparing the United States and the Soviet Union, however Tooley seems to have completely forgotten that the “world” “traditional Christian clergy” speak out against by necessity should include the trappings of our own country. This land may have been made for you and me, but it is not the land of promise, and when clergy like Tooley get the gospel according to Ronald Reagan confused with the true gospel they are no less dangerous than the Robert Edgars of these United States

sources:
The Pearcey Report
Front Page Mag
News from the National Council of Churches

We begin posting on Friday...

2006-07-12T16:19:00.000-04:00

until then it's all about the scratching.