My brief post on the Supreme Court of California’s decision to legalize gay marriage generated some interesting comments, including the following exchange:

Rebunga: “Maybe people will learn one day that they can’t litigate their way to respect, at least not respect from me. So it doesn’t bother me overly that the State of California now nominates gay couples “married.” I certainly am well within my first amendment rights to say that they are not “married ” as far as I’m concerned.”

Grover Gardner: “[W]hat would a gay couple have to do earn your respect? Under what conditions would you be willing to grant it? And why should they await your blessing when they perceive an unfairness in the system that no amount of “respect” is going to resolve?”

In many respects, I agree with Rebunga: You cannot litigate your way to respect. But Grover also asks, as he usually does, a thoughtful question: What does a gay person have to do to earn the respect of one who opposes gay marriage or strongly disapproves of homosexual behavior?

For me, the answer is simple: nothing at all. I respect homosexuals for the same reason I respect every human being: Because they are creatures of God with inherent dignity, who I am called by the Triune God to love as I love myself.

I think opponents of gay marriage need to keep this in mind as we make our stand for traditional marriage. We need to explain our position in a thoughtful and charitable way, and let our opponents know that our concerns are genuinely for the common good and not steeped in hatred. And I say this as someone who has often fallen short in conveying a loving attitude toward my political opponents. Indeed, I consider myself, as the Apostle Paul did, “chief among sinners.” We must always, always remember that we are all sinners in need of a merciful and loving God. 

This is not to say that evil should not be called evil when necessary, but I simply do not believe that the overwhelming majority of homosexuals are motivated by malice. They seek what every person seeks: love. And while I truly believe that the behavior they are engaging in is spiritually damaging, I cannot fault them for desiring intimacy. Our goal then, must be to show homosexuals that the intimacy they seek can only be fulfilled by Jesus Christ, and to love them as Christ does.

Political disagreements can never deter us from our ultimate purpose as human beings: To love God and one another, as we love ourselves.   

Joe Carter continues to show why he is one of the best bloggers around.

This is one of the most moving, honest, and powerful posts that I’ve read in quite some time.

(LvC&EI!)

God Bless Sister Muriel Curran for her Christ-like example on how to forgive those who “trespass against us.” 

(LvJay)

In case you missed it. I recently penned two posts on the (apparent) trend among many protestants to leave mainline protestant denominations for nondenominational churches (here and here). These posts have, in turn, inspired posts and comments over at Mark Shea and Rod Dreher’s blogs; which I suspect will be of interest to SA’s readers.

The Catholic News Agency has this report.

I cannot think of any actor that deserved to play the role of Jesus more than Jim Caviezel.

(LvC&EI!)

This past Friday, I linked to this article, which claims that “Ranks of Southern Baptists Are Still Growing Thinner”; and in so doing, I noted: “I am curious what my SBC buddies think of this article.”

My good friend and co-blogger Joel rightly pointed out that my comment, given my conversion from SBC to Catholicism, came across as uncharitable. I agree with him, even though that was not my intent at all. And for that I humbly apologize. I am proud of my SBC background, and I remain a great admirer of the SBC, a denomination that taught me to love Jesus and the Bible. For that, I will always be thankful. 

Now, allow me to be more specific. This is the part of the article that I am really interested in my SBC friends addressing:

The drop in numbers reflects trends in other declining mainline Protestant churches, which are losing members as nondenominational and unaffiliated churches are growing.

Why do y’all think this is? It almost seems as if some evangelicals want to disconnect themselves from any kind of tradition, and I simply don’t understand that at all. This trend, of course, isn’t just impacting the SBC, but the SBC remains the largest protestant denomination in the United States, and I am curious what my SBC (and other protestant) buddies think about the rapid growth of non-denominational churches over the last 20 or so years.

Courtesy of Deal Hudson.

Courtesy of Joe Carter.

I’m pleased to announce the publication of a new journal of Christian thought by Houston Baptist University. We call it The City. The journal is aimed at the educated layperson in the church. Advisory editors include Francis Beckwith, Adam Bellow, Joseph Bottum, Hugh Hewitt, and Ramesh Ponnuru. Subscriptions are free. The link to subscribe (please do) is:

http://www.hbu.edu/hbu/The_City_Journal_of_Christian_Thought.asp

The first issue is available in limited numbers to those who sign up now. Our editor, Ben Domenech, has done a wonderful job. It is really quite beautiful and contains essays by Louis Markos, Robert Sloan, Joseph Knippenberg, Francis Beckwith, Ryan T. Anderson, and many others. The second issue will become available this summer.

From the Gospel of John 19:30:

“It is finished.” And bowing his head, he handed over the spirit.

From the Gospel of Luke 23: 39-46: 

Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying, “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us.”

The other, however, rebuking him, said in reply, “Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to our crimes, but this man has done nothing criminal.”

Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”

He replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

It was now about noon and darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon because of an eclipse of the sun. Then the veil of the temple was torn down the middle.

Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit”; and when he had said this he breathed his last.

Another excellent post by Joe Carter. Here’s a taste:

I don’t doubt that God exists or that the Bible is his Word. I don’t doubt that Jesus was born of a virgin, that he died and was buried, or that he rose again after three days in the tomb. I don’t doubt that he died for me, a truly wretched sinner, or that I will spend eternity in His presence. I would find it easier to doubt my own existence than to doubt the Nicene Creed. Maybe I’m delusional (though I doubt that) but I have few doubts about my faith.

From Fisheaters:

This day, Maundy Thursday (also “Holy Thursday” or “Shire Thursday”¹) commemorates Christ’s Last Supper and the initiation of the Eucharist. Its name of “Maundy” comes from the Latin word mandatum, meaning “command.” This stems from Christ’s words in John 13:34, “A new commandment I give unto you.” It is the first of the three days known as the “Triduum,” and after the Vigil tonight, and until the Vigil of Easter, a more profoundly somber attitude prevails (most especially during the hours between Noon and 3:00 PM on Good Friday). Raucous amusements should be set aside . . . .

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

The feast of Maundy (or Holy) Thursday solemnly commemorates the institution of the Eucharist and is the oldest of the observances peculiar to Holy Week. In Rome various accessory ceremonies were early added to this commemoration, namely the consecration of the holy oils and the reconciliation of penitents, ceremonies obviously practical in character and readily explained by the proximity of the Christian Easter and the necessity of preparing for it. Holy Thursday could not but be a day of liturgical reunion since, in the cycle of movable feasts, it brings around the anniversary of the institution of the Liturgy. On that day, whilst the preparation of candidates was being completed, the Church celebrated the Missa chrismalis of which we have already described the rite (see HOLY OILS) and, moreover, proceeded to the reconciliation of penitents. In Rome everything was carried on in daylight, whereas in Africa on Holy Thursday the Eucharist was celebrated after the evening meal, in view of more exact conformity with the circumstances of the Last Supper. Canon 24 of the Council of Carthage dispenses the faithful from fast before communion on Holy Thursday, because, on that day, it was customary take a bath, and the bath and fast were considered incompatible. St. Augustine, too, speaks of this custom (Ep. cxviii ad Januarium, n. 7); he even says that as certain persons did not fast on that day, the oblation was made twice, morning and evening, and in this way those who did not observe the fast could partake of the Eucharist after the morning meal, whilst those who fasted awaited the evening repast.

Holy Thursday was taken up with a succession of ceremonies of a joyful character. the baptism of neophytes, the reconciliation of penitents, the consecration of the holy oils, the washing of the feet, and commemoration of the Blessed Eucharist, and because of all these ceremonies, the day received different names, all of which allude to one or another of solemnities . . .

Count me among those who try not to get too excited about various “insults” to Christmas and the advance of the godless heathen secularists.  But I have to chuckle - or maybe grimace just ever so slightly - when I get those catalogs and email solicitations that trumpet loudly that there are just a few days left for your “Holiday” shopping in order to get the items there before, oh, Dec. 23rd.  I understand the sentiment - surely there’s someone, somewhere who would find offense at an advertisement that actually suggested you should be buying for Christmas - but it’s still a bit, oh, silly.

Isaiah was on the money.  Hal Lindsey has a good article on the prophecies and the meaning of Christmas.

Joe Scotchie has a nice essay up on remembering the General. Scotchie concludes the article this way:

 ”Teach him he must deny himself,” the elderly Lee told the mother of a young child. Here again, is the code Lee strived to live by: Self-denial, the determination to live for others. That does lead to frustration. At Washington College, Lee posted only one rule: All students must behave as Christian gentlemen. Lee fell short, as do all who take up the cross. The effort, however, is important. In that sense, Lee is hardly a failure. His life remains a fascination to millions around the world. Two hundred years later, the controversies, the adulation, and the debates rage on. Every year, the books tumble out of the presses. General Lee lives.

I attended a Christmas pageant at my local church yesterday.  At first I was really impressed with the singing and dance steps the group of grade school kids performed.  But then the story emerged.

In this Christmas tale, the town mayor canceled the Christmas pageant within the pageant because of traffic concerns, but the play made it clear he was worried about losing votes from parties offended by Christmas.  The kids have worked hard and decide to go caroling and a’lobbying their neighbors to call the mayor to get the pageant back on in the town square.

At various houses we meet the people who celebrate Christmas, but don’t care about the reason for the season.  After being turned down for help by one couple, a child remarks, “I don’t understand it.  They have lights and decorations and everything.  I thought they liked Christmas.”  Another child responds, “They don’t have a problem with Christmas.  They just have a problem with Christ.”  A little more pointed than poignant, I thought.

Finally, the kids visit a house that is not decorated at all.  The woman who comes out says she didn’t put up lights because she has two small children and her husband is away in the military.  She loves Christmas for the right reasons and is thrilled by their visit.

Guess what, the pageant is on again.  The last lady visited was the mayor’s daughter and he can’t turn her down.  He is so touched by the Christmas pageant he is going to be in it next year as a wise man!

What troubled me about all this is that instead of straightforwardly celebrating the Christmas story, the local church turned Christmas into an affair of church, state, and political action.  Second, instead of winsomely reaching out to those who don’t believe, this tale impugns their motives and seeks to overcome them through lobbying.  Third, the words of this rather arch play are put into the mouths of young children.  I felt as though they were instruments of some strange reverse Soviet propaganda.

There’s a lesson here that shouldn’t be ignored.  Sure, you can lose the message of Christmas by giving in to consumerism and Santa Claus and colored lights, but you can also lose it by worrying too much about whether you’re getting your due in the public square.

Like the SA reader who emailed the article to me, I am saddened by this family rift. Let’s pray that things are resolved in a way that best honors a great and godly man.

(Thanks to John in Montgomery for the heads up)

Given the discussion sparked below, regarding Protestantism and Catholicism, I thought Birmingham area readers would be interested to know that the Beeson Divinity School, at Samford University, will host a Baptist/Catholic “conversation” next week. For more details, click here.

Archaeologists claimed yesterday to have uncovered one of the world’s first churches, built on a site believed to have once housed the Ark of the Covenant.

A few years ago I ran across the passage in John where Christ prays that the believers would be one just as he and the father are one. That led me on a quest to investigate the Catholic Church (which is actually the church of a big part of my family). After a lot of reading and thinking, I pulled up short, despite my conviction that if unity happens, the Catholic Church will be at the middle of it. When I read about the Pope and Patriarch proclaiming a goal of a unified church, it stirred me.

If the Catholic and Orthodox churches were to heal their schism, I’d be mighty tempted to join up. Any other evangelicals have thoughts about this?

Readers of my work here and elsewhere know that I’m interested in the development of Christian higher education. There are heroes in that endeavor that include George Marsden, Mark Noll, and others. I had the good fortune to get to know Robert Sloan who put a vision of distinctive Christian higher ed in place at Baylor and engendered heavy controversy in the process. I continue to follow his work at a new school. Here is a worthwhile slice of his inaugural speech last week: (more…)

Based on a cue from the comments section I went to the Huffingtonpost where Frank now has a blog. The guy has got to be in his fifties by now and he writes a lot like the earnest Kos Kids. I was particularly annoyed by his post about how his parents converted a Jewish ballerina girl who then decided to go into full-time Christian work. In Frank’s eyes this was apparently a tragedy.

Now, I don’t know whether it was better for the young woman to continue in ballet or give her life to new religious passions. There is a debate about that within Christian circles. I think the predominant feeling is that we are all missionaries whether in full-time Christian work or not. I suspect that Frank mischaracterizes even his father’s position in acting as though leading the Jewish ballerina to Christ he ended her balletic career. Francis Schaeffer was, after all, one of the notable Christian leaders who argued for full participation in culture. Frank (aka Franky) is railing against a strawman of his own father.

I don’t know if I’ve ever mentioned it on this site, but I’m a big fan of Francis Schaeffer, the evangelical theologian, writer, activist, etc. Although his work is far from perfect, without it I doubt whether I or many other Christians would ever have moved into the broader world of intellect beyond the slim volumes available in the local Zondervan store. Certainly, I doubt whether I would have begun work for the Ph.D. without his influence.

I recently provided research assistance to Barry Hankins in his book about Schaeffer’s life and work. Though Hankins is sometimes critical, I think he also saw a great deal to admire in Francis Schaeffer. His book The God Who Is There is particularly compelling. My introduction to his work came through the multi-part film series How Should We Then Live.

Schaeffer was an unusual fellow. Though born and raised in America, he rose to fame as the host of a Christian retreat in Switzerland that ministered to young wanderers from the universities of Europe. They crashed at his place and he engaged them continually with an examination of their worldview. It worked amazingly well. He began to tour the United States, blowing minds at Christian colleges and churches, and challenging students at secular institutions. My in-laws were at Wheaton when Schaeffer came to give lectures. This strange man with knickers, long hair, and a chin beard talked about art, music, history, culture, politics, and science. He knew what was happening at the cutting edge of society and could comment intelligently about it. He had seen the films and listened to the music, even the aharmonious works of John Cage.

I give you this background to say that I cannot understand the attitude of his son and longtime partner in his work, Frank Schaeffer (formerly known as Franky Schaeffer). I decided to look in on his website and found the following:

Frank was born in Switzerland to the famous American evangelical theologian/evangelist Dr. Francis Schaeffer. Frank was sent to British boarding schools—from which he ran away at fifteen. He became an artist protégé. His first one-man show was in New York at the Frisch Gallery when he was seventeen. It was followed by successful shows in London and Geneva. Mrs. David Rockefeller bought the first painting sold at Frank’s New York show.

Frank is a survivor of both polio and an evangelical/fundamentalist childhood, an acclaimed writer who overcame severe dyslexia, a home-schooled and self-taught documentary movie director, a feature film director and producer of four (“pretty terrible”) low budget Hollywood features, and a best selling author of both fiction and nonfiction.

As you might imagine, I find the portion I italicized rather galling, as though an evangelical/fundamentalist childhood were a scourge comparable to POLIO. I didn’t have that kind of upbringing. In honesty I felt blessed to run into those kind of folks at Florida State University. I guarantee you I didn’t feel like I caught a crippling disease.

Last I heard, Frank had converted to Eastern Orthodoxy.  I have to hope that his position on evangelicals is not foundational to their church.

then I’d say the ivy hanging on its campus walls is most likely the kind that will give you a nasty rash.

In responding to a reader’s assertion that Mormons are indeed Christians, Andrew Sullivan offers the following rejoinder:

I take the reader’s point. But Muslims also revere Jesus. And the inspiration for Mormonism’s radically innovative understanding of the message and life of Jesus - Joseph Smith’s “discovery” - is so alien to mainstream Christianity (and so transparently loopy) that I don’t consider Mormons Christians. This is not to say I don’t support their religious freedom or their right to play a full part of American politics and society. But they’re not Christians as I understand Christianity.

Is anyone else surprised to see Sullivan opine that Mormons aren’t Christians?

John Andrews at Claremont has it right:

We give thanks for a stable, competitive, mutually respectful two-party system that forces consensus toward the center and fairly registers the people’s choice, so the trustees of power can be turned out when they lose touch or break faith – and the reins of authority can then be peacefully transferred. Much of the world lacks that.

We give thanks for the blessings of material abundance, opportunity, tolerance, innovation, cultural creativity, and the most optimistic educational system on earth, adding up to a magic escalator for group after group from marginal status to full participation in American life – minorities, women, immigrants, the disabled, who next? The striving of millions to come here isn’t just a policy problem, it’s an accolade to us.

We give thanks for living in the most religious nation in the world, a country where humanity’s restless search for God is unfettered by state-sponsored churches or compulsory worship, a country where much individual conduct is still regulated by the sense of moral obligation before an eternal Judge, allowing government’s hand to rest more lightly on our lives.

We give thanks for freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. This daring, exuberant, risk-defying openness gives our system an almost miraculous capacity for self-criticism, self-correction, and self-renewal. This is what doomed slavery and defeated communism. It makes tyranny unlikely here. It is the jewel of humility in America’s crown.

We give thanks for our families. Parents, spouses, siblings, kids, babies and elders, eccentric uncles and cousins, grandparents and grandchildren, foster and adoptive relatives, those difficult in-laws, that couple who fits no conventional definition but just undeniably belongs together, the “stray” at your Thanksgiving table who doesn’t need to be blood to have a place in your heart – what would we do without them? Family transcends all politics, thank heaven.

But consider the last phrase. When “Oh thank heaven” can become a convenience-store slogan, America’s problem isn’t theocracy, it’s superficiality. Too many of us bring only a Hallmark faith to Thursday’s national feast. The mere attitude of gratitude is not enough. As the turkey is carved, remember that thanks are meaningless unless given TO someone – in this case to the Creator of all things. “Our fathers’ God to Thee, Author of liberty, to Thee we sing.” From our house to yours, happy Thanksgiving.

My buddy Joseph Knippenberg has done a nice job, too.

Instapundit notes an editorial in the London Times regarding some controversies in England recently over university attempts to ban Christian groups becausee those groups…get ready for it….actually think you should be a Christian to be a leader.  I know, I know, unbelievable.  In one sense, it really baffles me that anyone thinks it admirable or even defensible to think that groups within a university setting ought to have their leadership open to all, even those who oppose those groups’ constitutive views.  I seem to recall blogging a bit about this before and the very lawyerly (not a compliment, by the way) response has been that, well, universities have the right to set standards for groups they recognize and if groups don’t like it, well, they can simply forgo the “privilege” of being recognized on campus.  That’s fine so far as it goes, but it simply doesn’t capture the moral impulse behind the de-recognition effort: it’s a concerted attempt to restructure religious groups in the image of the state (or the university, if it’s private).

Oh, but what about radical Islamic groups or neo-Nazis, some will ask?  Won’t you then be inviting *them* onto campus?  Well, I suppose they might end up on campus; indeed, I suspect they’re already there.  I say, let ‘em stand up and be counted.  Let ‘em defend themselves from what will no doubt be the severe criticism that comes their way. Banning doesn’t do a thing.

Now, here’s a protestant movement (with a distinctly Catholic flavor) that I can get behind.

(LvMS)