Working under the assumption that a movie ought to be shown before the event it is meant to commemorate, I wondered this weekend if the folks at ABC mistimed their showing of a classic film. But then again - maybe not.
This past Saturday, Easter Eve (4/11/2009), ABC broadcast the much-beloved film by Cecil B. DeMille, The Ten Commandments. The film is a classic. Here is an excerpt from ABC's press release:
Starring Charlton Heston as Moses, this dramatic Biblical epic is presented with an all-star cast, including Yul Brynner as Pharaoh, Anne Baxter as Queen Nefretiri, Edward G. Robinson as the overseer of the slaves and Yvonne DeCarlo as Moses' wife.
The Ten Commandments won the 1956 Academy Award for Best Special Effects and received nominations for Best Picture, Best Art Direction/Set Decoration, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing and Best Sound.
Unfortunately, the movie was trounced at the Oscars by Around the Word in 80 Days (Best Picture) and The King and I 's Yul Brynner (Best Actor). Heston was not even nominated for an Academy Award.
Since the weeklong celebration of Passover began last Wednesday night (4/8/2009), I probably would have shown The Ten Commandments before the beginning of Passover on the previous Saturday. In that way, the events of the Jewish captivity in Egypt and the Israelite's deliverance from bondage would have been retold before the entirety of the holiday.
That said, ABC may have had the far better approach - whether by accident or design.
From a Christian perspective, there is a beautiful Old Testament-New Testament flow in showing a film about Moses and the giving of the Law at Sinai on the eve of the Resurrection Sunday. Jesus observed in Matt 5:17 (ESV): "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." A central promise made by the Lord and delivered through one those prophets is found in Jeremiah 31:33 (RSV):
But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jeremiah's declaration and its fulfillment seems to be echoed in this writing by Paul to the church in Galatia, "And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, 'Abba! Father!'" (Gal. 4:6 ESV).
Recently, I had the pleasure to meet Peter and Helen Evans, authors of the book, Get Serious: The Church's Stand on Contemporary Culture. The book's subtitle asks, "Who ever said Christianity was nice?" Last Saturday, I read their book to really find out how the church views issues, such as euthanasia, animal rights, welfare, and genetic engineering. This book provided no sugar-coated response, rather, a thought-provoking and insightful look into these issues with various representatives from the Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox churches. The book is written in an interview style format and answers the questions one may have about the Christian perspective on these issues.
For example, on the topic of euthanasia, Mr. and Mrs. Evans ask an Eastern Orthodox priest, Jonathan Tobias about euthanasia and focus on recent events, like Terri Schiavo's case, how the church views life support measures and suicide. Fr. Tobias provides detailed answers to the questions from a religious perspective.
Overall, the book is well written, and it offers a perspective that provokes serious conversation with a pastor or a small group.
On March 4, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Omar Ahmad Al Bashir, the president of Sudan. The warrant charged Bashir with individual responsibility on five counts of crimes against humanity and two counts of war crimes. Specially, it alleged he is criminally responsibility for a campaign of murder, rape, torture, pillage, and forcible transfer against the civilian, and largely Islamic, population of Darfur. The ICC alleges the campaign, conducted over the 5 year period from April 2003 to July 2008, was planned at the highest levels of the Sudanese government. The attacks were carried out by the Sudanese armed forces, the Sudanese police force, the Sudanese national security service, and allied "Janjaweed" militias. The warrant claims Bashir either coordinated the design of the campaign or, as head of state, used state agencies to implement the campaign.
The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom ("USCIRF"), established by the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 ("IRFA"), issued a press release today. It took to task the State Department, which, under President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, had failed to release publicly its 2008 list of countries of "particular concern," that is, countries where the denial of religious freedom is particularly severe. Such a list is required yearly under IRFA; however, it took an official inquiry from USCIRF to get the 2008 list released by the State Department ("DOS").
You can't say the FRC blog isn't timely. Over the past two weeks my colleague Michael Fragoso and I have written on this blog about the emerging position of CNBC as a major, national news source and the adverse impact of that development on the Obama administration.
This state of affairs escalated enormously over the weekend after CNBC's Jim Cramer was slapped silly on Jon Stewart's Comedy Central program last Thursday. Stewart is part of the Democrat-Left-Borg collective that hurtles through space attempting to bludgeon those who oppose their agenda into abject submission. (For an excellent analysis of Stewart's completely dishonest attack on CNBC's Rick Santelli read this post by Dan Gifford on the Big Hollywood blog.)
Stewart has been on television for years, but I don't recall that he ever attacked the integrity of CNBC before. Of course, CNBC never before pointed out that the Obama economic program was failing miserably. Therein lies the difference. When was the last time Stewart viciously sandbagged a Lefty guest while declaring his righteous outrage? Answer: [Hear crickets chirping] Never happened.
In short, we have entered an unparalleled time in which the Hollywood-media-"news"-industrial-complex makes little or no attempt to pretend that it is not advancing the socialist, anti-family, anti-church agenda of the Left. Where will Barack Obama be tonight? On the Jay Leno show, I believe. The alliance begun during the presidential campaign appears to grow stronger daily.
In the last couple weeks The Politico (www.politico.com) has published a series of extraordinary stories describing planned attacks originating from the White House and Leftist activist groups targeting political enemies. Read this piece as an example. As such, it was not surprising that Tony Blankley observed here in today's Washington Times that the atmosphere in Washington has become incredibly poisonous and ugly.
Well, folks, about two months down and forty-six to go. It's going to get interesting.
Interesting column by George Will on food and sex.
I think Mary Eberstadt may be on to something, and I surely hope the theory follows through to mean more prudishness in sex will follow! But I have my doubts. People quite easily can measure the negative effects of gluttony by the numbers on the scale and their cholesterol count, etc. But an STD? Why that's not MY fault, it was so-and-so who gave it to me. People who are honest and introspective, however, will be able to conclude that a lifestyle of serial monogamy has led to their unhappiness. Isn't it interesting that the simplest answer that so many refuse to consider - faith in the God of Abraham rather than Lord Vegan -- will make you both physically and psychologically healthier and happier?
By the way, my husband and I know Mary well and of course this article made me think of what she served us for dinner at her house not long ago -- pulled pork sandwiches from a local deli!
Jewish World Review Feb. 26, 2009 2 Adar 5769
Prudes at Dinner, Gluttons in Bed
By George Will
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com
Put down that cheeseburger and listen up: If food has become what sex was a generation ago - the intimidatingly intelligent Mary Eberstadt says it has - then a cheeseburger is akin to adultery, or worse. As eating has become highly charged with moral judgments, sex has become notably less so, and Eberstadt, a fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, thinks these trends involving two primal appetites are related.
Live Blog from CPAC 2009: New Challenges in the Culture War
CPAC definitely offers a vast array of speakers in the conservative movement, and this year's conference is no exception to the rule. Right now, I am live blogging from the New Challenges in the Culture War panel discussion, which features many renowned experts in the pro-life movement. The panelists include: Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey, Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse of The Beverly LaHaye Institute and Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel and Liberty University School of Law.
We've all seen the bumper stickers. They are a somber black with white numbering: 1.20.09. They appeared shortly after George W. Bush was re-elected in 2004. In one sense, they were reassuring. Those who hated Bush-and they were intense-were indicating their willingness to wait for the end of his constitutionally prescribed term. The real crazies wanted to impeach him. Some members of the loony Left wanted something even worse.
It's now just one month after the day longed for by millions. I've been struggling to recall anything said in that Inaugural Address. I remember the day-cold and clear. I recall the wonderful crowds-millions of people, cheerful and hopeful. At least 1.8 million folks came to the National Mall and not one person was arrested. God bless them.
Still, it is strange, isn't it, that we cannot recall any ringing phrase, any soaring statement from that long-awaited day of days?
President Obama gave his first interview to the Al Arabiya television network. He talked of a new U.S. effort to reach out to "the Muslim world." He's hardly the first one to use that phrase. Think tank director John Esposito of Georgetown University regularly speaks of the Muslim world.
Question: What would be the reaction from the pundits and the talking heads if the President spoke of the U.S. reaching out to Christendom? That word used to describe the collection of countries in which Christianity predominated. You can well imagine. He would be denounced immediately as a theocrat. The very idea of Christian countries offends the cultured despisers of religion. Or, at least it offends the despisers of some religions.
My wife and I took our teenage children to London ten years ago. We tried to get in to Westminster Abbey for Easter sunrise service, but England's ancient church was filled to overflowing. So we darted in to the smaller, more accommodating St. Margaret's Chapel next door. Following a powerful resurrection sermon, we stepped out to be greeted by the booming bells of the Abbey. We could not hear the vicar's Easter greeting for the din. We could not hear one another's voices as the pealing of the Abbey bells was so thunderous. With a motion of my head, our family trooped off, marching a mile away before we could speak and be heard.
Those bells are the voice of Britain's past. In 1940, they were silenced by order of Prime Minister Winston Churchill. With the daily threat of German invasion, no church bells sounded in the island fortress for three years. Church bells ringing during the Battle of Britain would have signaled Hitler's landing. Only with the defeat of Rommel's Afrika Korps at El Alamein in November, 1942-where "the glint of victory" reflected off their soldiers' helmets-did the church bells of Britain joyfully ring forth.
Britain's Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali returned to that theme of church bells during his recent visit to Washington. The Pakistani-born prelate was asked whether Muslim muezzins should be permitted to call the faithful to prayer in British cities. "Certainly," the Anglican leader said, "as soon as church bells ring out in Mecca." Bishop Nazir-Ali came to sound an alarm-but for a different kind of invasion. He said Britain's national existence is menaced by a cringing Establishment. Britain is a Christian culture supported by centuries of English law. Both of these elements are being undermined by a quiet surrender to the demands of political correctness and relentless Muslim pressure.
Should Britain expel the Muslims already there? Should Britain cut off future Muslim immigration? No, the Bishop replied. As Christians, Britons have a duty to welcome the alien, a duty to show him hospitality and not contempt.
"The European Union is all for human rights," he said, "but they are unwilling to say where human rights come from." They come, he maintains, from the Judeo-Christian ethic. Jews and Christians believe that we are made in the image and likeness of God. Thus, we are endowed with our fundamental human dignity. It is from this source, and not from the Koran, that we derive our laws.
To Bishop Nazir-Ali, the Archbishop of Canterbury's acceptance of Muslim shari'ah law probably reflects the opinion of the Britain's deracinated elites, the Establishment. Nazir-Ali said that many times, Muslim women who are coerced into so-called cousin marriages plead for help from the police. In their distress, they are handed over to Muslim police officers, who simply return them to the very families that threaten them with death. "All people in Britain must have access to British law," Nazir-Ali firmly said.
London is now the center of international Muslim investment, fueled by petro-dollars. The power of that moneyed interest is driving many government decisions.
There is something else at work here. The secularists in Britain and Europe can give no reason why humans should have rights. They cannot say that one culture recognizes human dignity and another crushes it. Their cringing before Muslim threats only encourages more concession. Already, there are vast areas of British and European cities where the police fear to go.
In lands where Islam has predominated, the status of Christians and Jews has been clear for centuries. They are tolerated at best, but subordinated. They are called dhimmis. This Arabic word is often translated as "second-class citizen," but it is hardly that. It is best understood as a caste system to which the dhimmis are consigned-and to which they are forced to consent. In this caste system, dhimmis are forever marked with the badges of servitude-legal and spiritual inferiority.
The very enlightened secularists of Britain, Europe and the U.S. still hold nominal power. Increasingly, however, they use that power to give way, to salaam, before the daily growing power of their demanding guests. While holding temporary sway, these cringing elitists can best be described as dhimmicrats-empowered only to be impotent.
Listening to Bishop Nazir-Ali-who has received death threats for his fearless Christian witness-you have to wonder why the rest of the Church of England clergy are not standing up and speaking out--or at least ringing their church bells.
I listened this morning to President Obama as he addressed the National Prayer Breakfast. I was filled with awe. Not because of his smooth delivery or his gracious style. Rather, that his style so completely belies what his motives are. This president is the most pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, anti-life movement president in the history of the United States, and oh by the way, very likeable as he glides through with his wrecking ball on life and marriage issues. When he refers to the fact that religion should not divide people, does any thinking person doubt that he is speaking of abortion and marriage policies?
This president seems so completely owned - not just politically, but mentally as well - by the liberal philosophies which are drummed into students' brains on college campuses, that he has the audacity to tell a Prayer Breakfast audience that he will change the Faith-Based Offices from faith-based to faith-based plus non-faith-based groups. What might some of those be? Perhaps, Planned Parenthood because they have done such "fine work" in the community?
He can get away with diminishing the purpose of the faith based offices with Americans who are not familiar with the ways of politicians, but this writer sees right through to his intent. His gleaming smile cannot hide the giant wrecking ball he wields. He has begun the dismantling of the protection of marriage (because standing up to the gay attack on Christians and their beliefs is "divisive"), he has voted against protecting human life in and out of the womb (because to defend the voiceless is "divisive") and he will put in place those people and those organizations who know just how to do it (read bios here.)
Sadly, he is popular enough to attend a national prayer breakfast and deliver a speech that carried more criticism of religion than the worth of it. I know that by blurring the tenets of all religions he was sending a message of hope to radical Muslims who have pledged to kill those who disagree with them. Oddly, I get the feeling he was sending the same message to those of us who would stand and defend the unborn and who would demand that the sacrament of marriage be left alone.
The homosexual Episcopal bishop Gene Robinson will offer a prayer at a pre-inauguration event at the Lincoln Memorial on Sunday. Here's part of what he told National Public Radio about his preparation (thanks to David Brody of CBN for this link.):
Robinson: I have actually read back over the inaugural prayers of the last 30 or 40 years and frankly I've been shocked at how aggressively Christian they are. And my intention is not to invoke the name of Jesus but to make this a prayer for Christians and non-Christians alike. Although I hold the scripture to be the word of God, those scriptures are holy to me and Jews and Christians, but to many other faith traditions they have their own sacred texts. And so rather than insert that and really exclude them from the prayer by doing so, I want this to be a prayer to the god of our many understandings and a prayer that all people of faith can join me in.
NPR Host: The god of many understandings?
Robinson: "Yes. I was treated for alcoholism three years ago and grateful to be sober today. And one of the things that I've learned in 12 step programs is this phrase, 'the god of my understanding'. It allows people to pray to a God of really many understandings. And let's face it, each one of us has a different understanding of God. No one of us can fully understand God or else God wouldn't be God."
NPR Host: I'm not sure that a God of many understandings has been invoked at an inauguration before?
Robinson: Well, I've done a lot of things for the first time in my life and I will be proud to do this one.
Let me note a couple of things here. Robinson says he is "shocked at how aggressively Christian"inaugural prayers" of the last 30 or 40 years" have been. Forty years ago would have been the inauguration of Richard Nixon, which was probably the first inauguration I ever watched, and I think I've watched all but two of them (when I was overseas) since. I haven't actually done the research Robinson has, but I don't remember any as "aggressively Christian." My impression is that prayers at such events tend to be blandly, generically monotheistic, while perhaps also being "aggressively" patriotic. Giving an altar call would be "aggressively Christian." Simply praying "in Jesus' name," or quoting from the Bible, is not.
Secondly-does it strike anyone else as odd that a Christian clergyman, a bishop no less, takes his theology from a twelve-step program? Such programs have helped a lot of people, and I'm glad Bishop Robinson got help for his alcoholism-but didn't the man ever go to seminary? A Christian seminary, even?
Robinson is right in a certain sense when he says, "No one of us can fully understand God or else God wouldn't be God." But Christians believe that our own incapacity as finite humans to figure out God on our own is the very reason why God took the initiative to reveal himself to us, both in the person of Jesus and in the words of Scripture. That's where Christian theology goes beyond the twelve-step theology.
With that said, though, Bishop Robinson seems to be mis-applying even the twelve-step theology. The idea is for each individual to pray to "the god of my understanding." That is not the same as one individual praying to "a God of many understandings," which is what Robinson is pledging to do.
I would submit that when a Christian clergyman prays at a public event "in Jesus' name," he is doing exactly what the twelve-step program calls for-praying to the "[G]od of [his] understanding." It is those who would deny him that right-not the Christian clergyman-who are guilty of the worst form of intolerance.
This week, almost all of us will join with our families for Christmas Eve services. We will gather in our family circles on Christmas Day to exchange gifts, to sing carols of joy for the newborn King, and to share Christmas dinners at over-laden tables. This is a good thing to do. And while we are mindful of those who are alone at this time of year, the vast majority of us will be surrounded by our loved ones. We will hopefully be able to put aside the cares of the day, of the preceding weeks. Little thought will be given, or even should be given to the bad economic news of recent months, to political woes, or even to wars and rumors of war.
This precious freedom was not a cheap gift. In this country, the freedom to worship, to speak, freedom from want, and freedom from fear were bought dearly. And that challenge was taken up again and again throughout our history. It is being met today in Iraq and Afghanistan, in the skies, and beneath the seas.
We're often told that it is too bad we do not have more people engaged in the fight to defend faith, family, and freedom in this country. Far too many, we understand, take for granted all the freedoms we were purchased at a high price.
We could always use more volunteers, more generous supporters, more Christian friends praying that we will make wise use of our resources. We, too, pray that we will make a strong case for the independence and integrity of the church and the family when we are confronted in the public square.
Tonight, though, we should thank you, the few who read this message, who pray, and who lead in your churches and communities. We should have more, but we should always be grateful to the Lord for what we have.
General George Washington could certainly have used twice or three times as many troops when he entered the boats on that ice-choked Delaware River on Christmas Night, 1776. He had with him only 2,400 men. They were freezing. They were wet. Many were sick. Many marched with bleeding feet wrapped in rags, leaving bloody footprints in the snow.
If America had had a military draft in 1776, we could have raised a Continental Army truly worth of the name. We would have seen 300,000 young men called to the colors.
But General Washington crossed the Delaware with less than one percent of that number. Yet, his prayers were answered. With that little band, he bought America's freedom, he saved a continent.
So to you, our little band of friends and supporters, God bless you. We thank each one of you for your steadfastness, for your generous backing, for your availing prayers. We could achieve nothing without God's favor and your help. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
Is it too wrong to wish someone a "Merry Christmas?"
It seems like America has been plagued by the notions of being politically correct lately. Too often, you walk into a retail store and they are offering holiday sales, not "Christmas" sales.In today's society, you are persecuted if you say, "Merry Christmas," because the powers that be deem it too controversial.
If your child is in school, they do not throw Christmas parties complete with Santa Claus and the goodies. Instead, they throw Holiday parties with no such entertainment (except for a controversial movie or two). If you buy a Christmas tree, the man who puts the tree on top of your car wishes you, "Happy Holidays." I believe you bought a Christmas tree, so where is the customary "Merry Christmas?"
Now, it seems like there is an assault by the leftists and religious separatists to remove Christianity from Christmas. According to the Stop the ACLU blog, there is a community threatening to stop Christmas carols from being sung in public places. Why? Because the organizers do not want to risk alienating the Muslims or Atheists due to Christ, and this is especially odd considering that the community is 75% Christian and 1% Muslim.
Enough is enough, right? Christmas is about celebrating the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ and giving to others in his name. There is nothing politically wrong about doing this, and it is time we return to our faith, especially in the times we are facing ahead. It will be our faith in God that will sustain us.
In the Second Week of Advent, Newsweek Gave to Me...
Via the Corner, there is this profoundly misleading piece from Newsweek on marriage and the Bible. In it, Lisa Miller attempts to go through the Bible bit by bit, showing how "Biblical" marriage is a ridiculous construct that no reasonable person would want-polygamy in the Old Testament, and Pauline prudishness in the New. In the end, we should just adopt the Bible's narrative of "inclusion" to be good Christians and accept same-sex marriage.
Just to take one of her points: are self-described "Biblical" Christians bound to the polygamy of the Patriarchs? Of course not. In the 10th Century, Aelfric, Abbot of Eynsham, was asked to translate the first seven books of the Bible by his king into what is now known as Old English. In his preface to the Book of Genesis he expresses his unease at such a task, worried that those who do not understand the canons of Scriptural Interpretation might misunderstand facts of the Old Testament. Certain Biblical actions followed "the customs of the age" but were robustly condemned by the contemporary Church and had been since its inception, such as the polygamy of the Patriarchs or the attempted sacrifice of Isaac. Aelfric notes that those who hear these stories should not be allowed to dwell on the literal actions of the Patriarchs, but rather on the educative functions: such as polygamy as representing the fecundity of the Church, or the sacrifice of Isaac prefiguring Christ on the cross. Instead, he feared, any powerful Saxons who had this read to them by an unthinking priest-as the non-clerical classes were largely illiterate at the time-would see Genesis as a license to commit polygamy or engage in human sacrifices, against the expressed teachings of their Church, but with an apparent "Biblical" mandate.
Likewise, all of Miller's "novel" objections to St. Paul's famous "It is better to marry than to burn" line* or questions about Christ's evident chastity have been answered countless times throughout Christian history, but that doesn't stop her from making them as if she's done something terribly groundbreaking in the process.
Frankly, dealing any more with Miller's specifics would not be at all fruitful. She elides much of the New Testament, and her history is reliant on the quotably wrong Stephanie Coontz. Where does one begin to answer imputations that King David was a homosexual? How can one comprehend-let alone respond to-an argument that first apparently admits Christ's virgin birth and then proceeds to equate the Holy Family to "Jesus has two (Immaculate) Mommies"? The Bible is simply a weapon-at-hand for her preferred policy ends. She's the sort of person Aeflric was worried about.
*It is worth noting that even here Miller's translation betrays a prejudice. She takes St. Paul to mean "burn with passion." Perhaps. He also might mean "burn [in Hell]." The early Fathers were divided on the issue, as were many prominent glossators. It's funny how the inconvenient, morally absolute reading-found in King James, among other translations-doesn't get picked up by Miller.
It's been five years since the Episcopal Church consecrated its first openly gay bishop, but the shockwaves are still rippling through the national church. Across America, congregations have exploded in protest. Despite pleas from many in the 2.2 million-member church, Episcopal leaders stubbornly refuse to back down from their liberal, pro-homosexual theology.
After months of negotiations failed to bring the denomination back to its conservative teachings, a band of 11 Virginia churches took the unprecedented step to sever all ties and realign under the Anglican Church of Nigeria. Together, these congregations made the courageous-and costly-decision to separate from a denomination whose American roots are more than 300 years deep.
But the stand for Biblical truth has come at great price to the faithful in Virginia. They face financial hardship, eviction from their property, and a multi-million dollar lawsuit from Episcopal headquarters.
Since early 2007, the Diocese of Virginia has attacked the churches in a vicious suit that threatens to confiscate their church homes. With almost no resources, the 11 churches banded together in defense of their land, resulting in the largest property dispute in the history of the Episcopal Church.
At every stage of the Episcopal Church and Diocese of Virginia court battle (now four rounds old), Circuit Court Judge Randy Bellows has ruled in favor of the breakaway churches. Last week, Judge Bellows rounded out this series of victories by ruling that Truro Church-the second largest parish-"could retain ownership of land sought by the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia." In a story of true David versus Goliath proportions, the news continues to stun the mainstream church.
But despite how far the Virginia parishes have come, the Episcopal Church shows no sign of giving up. Its national leaders have vowed to fight these decisions all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary. In a press release, the Diocese says it "will continue to explore every legal option available" to seize these church homes. Despite the mass exodus this month from parishes in Pittsburgh and San Joaquin (see George Will's Sunday column "A Faith's Dwindling Following") and the impending rift in Fort Worth, the Episcopal Church leaves no doubt that the legal battle has just begun. In fact, it could continue for years.
If you're interested helping the churches at "Ground Zero" in the Anglican crisis, please log on to Truro's website and consider standing with them for biblical truth.
Most people are well aware that underage drinking can exact a deadly toll, approximately 5,000 youths every year. What may prove even more disturbing is just how young underage drinkers can be. According to the National Institutes of Health, 11 percent of eighth grade students have engaged in binge drinking (blood alcohol content of 0.08 or higher), and this percentage increases to 22 percent of tenth grade students and 29 percent of twelfth grade students.
Analyzing additional federal survey data, the latest Mapping America reports that one of the most significantly protective factors against abusive underage drinking is frequent religious attendance.
The 7th Circuit sends the Italian genius packing ...for now
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that The Freedom From Religion Foundation had no legal standing to sue the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs for incorporating chaplain work into its veteran health care. What does this have to do with Gramshi, the Italian genius of soft communism?
To have the federal government expand its reach into virtually every corner of life (family, school, health, the economy) and simultaneously to push for a radical "wall of separation of church and state" is to ban religion from life. It is the perfect scenario for a slow but Sherman-like "march through the institutions" as Gramsci envisioned.
The plaintiff in a case against Veterans Affairs for their support of chaplains' work with ill patients, The Freedom From Religion Foundation, clearly falls among the ranks of those dedicated to a Gramsciite deconstruction of American society, not a building up of her strengths nor even of the care of her sick soldiers.
One of the participants in this recent Pew Forum interview is Jennifer Butler - the Executive Director for Faith in Public Life. You may remember that this group organized the Compassion Forum early last month. Faith in Public Life said they would discuss the abortion issue at the forum and issued this statement: "We hope to get to the heart of the issue and why it's so divisive. We hope to try to pry the door open to potential common ground and ask if the political labels we use when it come to abortion really capture where Americans are on the issue."
However, in this Pew Forum interview, Ms. Butler proudly points to her strong connections with Planned Parenthood and her speaking engagement at the "Planned Parenthood prayer breakfast":
BUTLER: Yeah, well, it is interesting you asked that. I am
speaking at the Planned Parenthood prayer breakfast tomorrow. And
we have worked very closely with some think-tanks in
town with Third Way and with Center for American Progress. Many of these groups
are also very interested in connecting more strongly with faith communities. And
I'd say there has been a resurgence in their interest, an intensification since
2004. So I think it is extremely important to build those bridges there...
...There has been some recent progress in that arena because it has
been a point of tension. I mentioned earlier our work with Third Way. And they
worked with leading evangelicals and progressives to outline a strategy for
approaching the abortion issue which, interestingly enough, did not involve
compromise. And they were very clear that they didn't want a
watered-down solution to the problem, nor did they want
people having to compromise on their ideals...
Butler should explain how working "closely" with Planned Parenthood helps achieve
"common ground" to solve the "problem" of abortion.
The FRC Action Values Voter Straw Poll has been making lots of news, but one of the poll questions that hasn't yet gained as much attention was question #3, which asked participants to rank the order of importance among a set of issues. Here are the results:
Here's the statistical breakdown:
ISSUE
VOTES
PERCENTAGE
Abortion
2398
41.52%
Same-sex "Marriage"
1141
19.76%
Tax Cuts
626
10.84%
Permanent tax relief for families
563
9.75%
Federal "hate crimes" legislation
331
5.73%
No vote on this question
181
3.13%
Taxpayer funding for abortions
151
2.61%
Prayer in schools
93
1.61%
Reinstatement of the "Fairness Doctrine"
88
1.52%
Public display of the Ten Commandments
57
0.99%
Enforced obscenity laws
54
0.94%
Embryonic stem cell experiments
48
0.83%
Voluntary, student-led prayer in schools
44
0.76%
Total
5,775
100%
Now that you've got the numbers, feel free to crunch away.
They're the proverbial topics you're told never to speak of at the dinner table, yet the pervasiveness of both ensures that they can't help but intersect. I'm speaking, of course, about religion and politics.
To further this often forbidden conversation, The Pew Forum on Religion and Public life has launched a new microsite devoted to the 2008 presidential candidates and their views on religious issues. Right now, there are only three Democrats and three Republicans represented, but the site states that there's more on the way. You can peruse a candidate's "religious biography," and find out what they've said on issues like abortion, church and state, faith-based initiatives, stem cell research, gay marriage, and more. The site also links to worthy news articles related to a candidate's religious stance.
Bible Belt Refuses to Buckle under on Religious Courses
A Texas legislator, Rep. Warren Chisum (R), has introduced a bill that would require schools to offer history and literacy classes on the Bible. The proposal, now under debate in the House Public Education Committee, would affect over 1,700 districts throughout the state. If it passes, Texas would join several other states in offering elective courses on the most widely distributed book in the world.
Although some are criticizing the move as a violation of church and state, the bill's sponsor said, "We're not going to preach the Bible, we're going to teach the Bible." Proving that the Good Book is experiencing an educational revival, five other states are considering similar proposals.
Q: Why are there so few Buddhist rhythm and blues bands?
A: Because Buddhists don't have any soul.
Some Evangelicals are doing some unusual, but interesting, outreach.
Evangelicals hope to 'reach' Buddhists
Workshops coincide with Dalai Lama visit
If you're a Tibetan Buddhist or you're leaning that way, you may not know it, but you need Jesus.
That's the thinking behind a series of Christian evangelical workshops -- including one later this month in Wheaton -- that will coincide with the Dalai Lama's trip to Chicago and other American cities this spring.
The Dalai Lama is set to visit Chicago in May. A Philadelphia-based Christian missionary group is holding a series of workshops on how to share the gospel with Tibetan Buddhists.
Interserve USA is putting on the workshops to teach Christians how to talk to Buddhists and, perhaps, to win converts. More . . .
And in case I haven’t offended Richard Gere yet:
Q: Why don't Buddhists vacuum in the corners?
A: Because they have no attachments.
Bible thumping, gun toting Christians as terrorists?
In a scene that could have been written by Rosie O'Donnell a school in Vermont ran a terrorist simulation that strikes me as a little out of sync with reality:
"Investigators described them (the psuedo-terrorists) as members of a right-wing fundamentalist group called the “New Crusaders” who don't believe in separation of church and state. The mock gunmen went to the school seeking justice because the daughter of one had been expelled for praying before class."
Yes that makes sense, Christians as terrorists. God forbid (oops there is that phrase) they should instead have the terrorists portrayed by religious fanatics that actually have a basis in reality (say a group that would fly planes of innocent civilians into a building full of innocent civilians) and not in TV shows.
Saint George may have slain the dragon, but it's becoming painfully obvious that even he cannot conquer Great Britain's wave of political correctness. As the country copes with an influx of Muslims, the church and government are finding it extremely difficult to maintain their British identity. As an example, the Church of England is considering removing the cross of St. George from its flag because of its association with the medieval crusades. The debate has enraged citizens who are concerned that the country may soon become unrecognizable in its pursuit of cultural pluralism.
This week, British papers are also reporting a growing problem with the public school curriculum. For fear of "offending" Muslim students, teachers have become increasingly hesitant to teach history lessons on the Holocaust because of the students' predominantly anti-Semitic feelings. A government study found that educators are also afraid to tackle the 11th century crusades, in which Christians fought Islam for control of the Holy Land, or the Arab-Israeli conflict. Since the curriculum often conflicts with what some children are taught at the local mosques, some teachers are dropping the lessons altogether.
Sadly, it reflects the international trend to use history as a means, not for teaching the truth but promoting a value-free form of tolerance. As Chris McGovern, a government advisor, said, "Children must have access to knowledge of these controversial subjects, whether palatable or unpalatable." Until Britons rise up to defend the traditions that they hold dear, these P.C. policies will only facilitate their nation's decline. Americans should take notice!
When it comes to promoting faith on Capitol Hill, there is safety in numbers--"219" to be exact. That's the House meeting room where a group of members gather each week to ask the Lord's blessing on our nation. In 2005, Rep. J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.) made it official by creating the Congressional Prayer Caucus, a group of leaders committed to praying for our nation and protecting the rights of all Americans to pray. In the past two years, the number of Caucus members has grown to 42 (almost a 10% of the representatives in the House).
Yesterday, FRC attended the press conference in which the Caucus announced its plan to spread what they call "219 prayer groups" across America. They hope that as the faithful meet to pray these "spiritual blocks" will form a powerful wall of protection around America. We applaud Rep. Forbes' leadership in helping to fulfill 2 Chronicles 7:14: "If my people, who are called by my Name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin, and heal their land." We invite you to join with the 219 group and FRC, which also has a prayer initiative as part of our Church Ministries Program. Both are keys to the revival our country so desperately needs.
Following Mommy's Steps: Hamas' Tool to Recruit Children Bombers
A "music video" broadcast on a Palestinian Hamas TV station on Wednesday features a young Palestinian girl singing to her mother who is preparing to carry out a suicide bomb attack. The caption of the video reads, "Duha, daughter of suicide bomber Reem Riyashi, sings to her mother." In 2004, Riyashi killed four Israelis after blowing herself up on a border crossing between Israel and Gaza.
Initially the little girl is frightened (“Mommy, what are you carrying in your arms instead of me.") but after seeing her mom on TV, the daughter has a change of heart: “Instead of me you carried a bomb in your hands. Only now, I know what was more precious than us. May your steps be blessed, and may you be flawless for Jerusalem. Send greetings to our messenger Muhammad.”
By the end of the video the girl decides to become a bomber herself. After finding explosives in her mother’s drawer she says, “My love will not be (merely) words. I am following mommy in her steps.”
Despite protests from some members of Congress, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) allowed the radical Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an organization with reported ties to terror groups and funding from Arab regimes, to hold a discussion on Islam in America's greatest symbol of freedom and democracy - the U.S. Capitol. Pelosi allowed CAIR access to the Capitol despite its animosity toward the very government in which she serves. The group has refused to renounce Muslim extremism or condemn fundamentalist terror groups like Hezbollah and Hamas.
Tuesday, its leaders even offered their support to a lawsuit filed on behalf of six imams who were escorted off a U.S. Airways flight after making anti-American statements, disrupting passengers with shouts to Allah, requesting unneeded seatbelt extenders, and arousing suspicion by moving from their assigned seats to a pattern associated with the 9-11 attacks. At a public press conference to announce the suit, CAIR forced Washington Times and CBN reporters off the premises saying they were "not welcome." Perhaps CAIR's leadership is concerned that these journalists understand the danger behind their radical agenda.
A new survey from The Barna Group explores the so-called "God gap" between Republicans and Democrats, examining 32 measures of religious commitment, belief and activity. The study shows that while Republicans continue to hold advantage in attracting born again Christian voters, Democrats are not as far behind on measures of Christian commitment as might be assumed.
The study finds that Republicans were more likely than Democrats to:
Strongly assert that the Bible is accurate in all of the principles it teaches (57% versus 40%)
Twice as likely to believe Satan is a real spiritual entity (33% versus 17%)
More likely to reject the idea that good works can earn salvation (35% versus 23%)
More commonly describe themselves as absolutely committed to Christianity (61% versus 48%)
The report also notes that 53% of Republicans say they attended church in the last seven days (compared with 41% of Democrats) and only 22% of Republicans qualified as unchurched (as opposed to 34% among Democrats).
A suit was filed on Tuesday in Pennsylvania by the Alliance Defense Fund on behalf of a 10 year old boy whose freedoms of religion and free speech were violated. During a Halloween celebration, officials at Willow Hill Elementary School in Glenside, Pennsylvania informed the boy that he could not wear a crown of thorns or tell others that he was Jesus.
Alternatively, school officials said that, because his garb included a robe, he could identify himself as a Roman emperor or some other religiously neutral figure. Since both the boy and his mother found the pagan elements of Halloween offensive, they did not want to celebrate Halloween in the typical manner; however, the mother of the boy also did not want her son to feel isolated from his schoolmates simply because he was not wearing a costume.
As many of us get ready to leave to celebrate Christmas with our families, let us end on a high note with some inspirational Christmas stories from this year (For the three people who have missed it, This Day in History/Quote of the Day will return when I do next week.)
First off let us look at Santa's helpers who work on his behalf in all the malls. A recent survey found that 90 percent say they get their beards pulled daily; About half nearly lose their glasses from clutchy kids every shift; Some 60 percent are sneezed or coughed on up to 10 times a day; About a third have been wet on and more than half say they get their boots stepped on as many as 10 times a day. Despite all this the survey, commissioned by Auntie Anne's pretzel shops, revealed that Santa's love their jobs.
"Everybody comes in a good mood and that puts me in a good mood," said Steve Macarus, 39, of Elgin, who was playing Santa at Navy Pier on Wednesday. "It's the best job I've ever had," said Johnson, a retired printer. "There's no, 'Aw, do I have to go to work today?' I look forward to it."
The only number from the survey I have a dispute with is:
Some 75 percent of kids say they've been good all year, the survey reported.
Now going to Vermont and a story that we hear a version of every year. A good hearted soul in Barre, VT put a coin from 1908 that is potentially worth up to $14,000 into one of the Salvation Army's red kettles. You can donate any type of coin you want to the Red Cross here.
From Maine comes the story of how for "15 years, the Worcester Wreath Co. in Harrington has been taking Christmas wreaths to the Arlington National Cemetery in Washington, D.C., to decorate the graves of fallen U.S. soldiers and sailors. A burst of publicity this year came with two developments. First, instead of just focusing on the Arlington cemetery, the company started what it calls "Wreaths Across America" and sent six wreaths each to 230 state and national cemeteries in the 50 states and Puerto Rico. The expansion was the bright idea of Karen Worcester, who with her husband, Merrill Worcester owns and runs the company." The picture on the blog is from their current laying of the wreaths.
Finally for any last minute shoppers with $18,920.59 to spare might I suggest you pick up the Twelve Days of Christmas? Every year PNC tabulates the cost and this year saw it getting close to the $19 thousand mark:
Every American
in America
Liked Christmas a lot...
But Barry Lynn,
Who worked against religion,
Did NOT!
Barry Lynn hated Christmas!
But especially the whole Christmas reason!
I'm not sure why. Perhaps he saw worshiping the Son of God akin to treason.
But he was not alone, not at all, in his ridiculous fight.
The ACLU and People for the (Un)American Way also saw Christmas as a terrible blight.
Every December these groups would sue and sue, spending every red cent
On a misguided and twisted definition of the Constitution's first Amendment!!
They didn't like religious Christmas carols!!
Or a child distributing a candy cane!!
They hated Poinsettias and Christmas trees!!
They would find activist judges to cause all great pain!!
They hated a lot, for all of their days, mentioning Christ made them mean!!
And God forbid (yes they hated that phrase) you displayed a Nativity scene!!
One Christmas season they stole all the creches, the stockings and mistletoe
They stole all the carols, even the First Noel!!
They stole all the trees!! They stole all the presents!!
They laughed out in glee: "We will show these religious peasants!!"
So Christmas morning came and the liberals hoped it would just be like any other day
But, no, for you see America . . . they celebrated anyway!!
The Left was foiled once again - what could have gone wrong?
People were praying!! And worshiping with song!!
"Joy to the World," "Silent Night," "Away in a Manger"!!
All sung in worship!! Was the Left's assault on Christmas finally in danger??
The ACLU and Barry and Ralph - they just didn't understand
It wasn't the trappings that were important, but God being born to man
But the people, they knew, as did every Founding Father
Religion strengthens our nation, and is far from a bother.
The Founders recognized this, from when they first landed on America's shore
That Christ . . . perhaps . . . means a little bit more!
It is OK to have "Christmas trees" and a nativity scene
Judges can not stop it, nor could even Howard Dean.
So I say to you, without trepidation or fear
May you have a Merry CHRISTMAS and a blessed New Year!!
In Baghdad, the blackened cars outside churches and abandoned houses where people once worshiped point to an even greater emptiness in Iraq. Since the war, Christians have faced great persecution and hardship, all signaling a new era in a country that was once the cradle of their faith. While it may be home to the ancient cities of Ninevah and Babylon, Ur and the Garden of Eden, families of God are fleeing Iraq--afraid for their lives and the daily threat of terrorism. Frightened by a future where they would be hunted or outcast, thousands of Christians have fled for safe havens.
In the past few years, the fragile peace between the country's Christians and Muslims has been shattered. God-fearing Iraqis have watched helplessly as their brothers and sisters in Christ fall victim to bombings, assassinations, kidnappings, and intimidation. In the face of great suffering, the shrinking population still searches for asylum. By record numbers, nearly half of what was once considered the world's oldest Christian body has disappeared. As one religious leader said, "The situation that is in the country will not allow us to practice our services freely. It is not safe to go [out] from home. We are meeting every Sabbath, but it is very difficult. We expect an explosion at any time during the day." Like every Iraqi, he prays for a better tomorrow. "We hope that things will change," he said. "But no one knows except God."
Two thousand years ago, the fate of the world hung by a similar thread. A virgin birth. The innocent manger. A promise of salvation. All were endangered by a Middle Eastern tyrant who slaughtered millions in hopes of killing the rightful King, Jesus Christ.
District's 10-year-old policy stirs debate before the high school's annual holiday concert.
The "Hallelujah Chorus" from "The Messiah," "Glory, Glory" and "Weep O Mine Eyes" are among the repertoire of musical selections to be sung by the nearly 300 members of Howell High School choirs at 7 tonight and Thursday.
But, for every religious song performed by the nine choral groups, 3.33 others have to be secular yuletide offerings as required under a school district's policy.
"We're falling within the guidelines. I comply with (the rules) although I don't agree. I just find the whole thing disturbing that we're not able to do all the literature I'd like to do," said Rod Bushey, choral director at Howell High.
First off let us look at Santa's helpers who work on his behalf in all the malls. A 
District's 10-year-old policy stirs debate before the high school's annual holiday concert.
