Happy Reformation Day!  Yay Protestants!

It has been several years since I have given a talk at Biola University in La Mirada, California. It is an institution that has a number of my friends on the faculty including Craig Hazen, John Mark Reynolds, J. P. Moreland, and Scott B. Rae. So I am very much looking forward to this Thursday, when I return to Biola as a speaker in its Distinguished Speaker Lecture Series for Christianity and Culture.

Scheduled for October 30 at 6 pm in Biola’s Calvary Chapel, I will be delivering a lecture on the topic of abortion and American politics. After the lecture I’ll be meeting for an informal Q & A at the Philosophy House of Talbot School of Theology (Biola’s seminary) with some students in the school’s M.A. program in philosophy of religion and ethics.

If you are in southern California, feel free to attend. The lecture is open to the public.

(cross-posted)

I am a sorry excuse for a Protestant, but a Protestant nonetheless. I was raised among the frozen chosen Methodists, but I have always liked the idea of the Southern Baptist Convention even though I wear shoes and believe the Earth has been around a good deal longer than 6,000 years. How can you not love a dogged commitment to principles backed by the orotund strains of The Old Rugged Cross?

Unfortunately, my anarcho-libertarian distaste for things like Jerry Falwell and Intelligent Design has recently tainted my view of the SBC, so I am thrilled to find something on which we can both agree: CNN commentator Roland Martin is an idiot. According to Mr. Martin, Lifeway Resources, the Southern Baptist-owned bookstore chain, has just banned Gospel Today magazine for doing a cover story on female pastors, which is contrary to Southern Baptist doctrine. (more…)

In the combox of a WWWtW post about my forthcoming book, Return to Rome: Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic, someone who calls himself “Aristocles” suggested I post some excerpts from the book. I have done so at the website returntorome.com. I have also included a detailed table of contents on the site. Just click “Excerpts” or “Table of Contents” at the top of page.

I don’t agree with James Dobson about everything, but I would never join the group against him, Dick Armey or whomever else . . .  I wrote the below (slightly edited) over at the American Spectator blog when this came up earlier:

I have a tendency to react to criticism of Dobson the way an African-American of a certain age might react to somebody going after Malcolm X.  For those of us who grew up in the age of low rent televangelism, Dobson was a revelation (no pun intended).  He was extremely articulate, compassionate, and yes, righteously indignant.

Instead of being yet another preacher, he was a superbly well-educated man who gave up a very nice academic existence to risk his career on this grass-roots radio ministry idea centered around traditional values and the Gospel.  It took a long time for him to become a punching bag of the left because he addressed politics only peripherally during most of his public life.

Since about 1997, he has been far more active.  He is extremely impatient with abortion, appalled by the idea of same sex marriage, and I’m sorry to say, too easily taken in by the wrong side of the Roy Moore controversy.  Nevertheless, I and many others like me will always be grateful to him for having done it all so much better than his predecessors in the movement.  You simply aren’t going to see Dobson claiming to turn the path of hurricanes or having a television moment where he blames God’s wrath on gays and abortionists.  He’s not that kind of guy.

You also will never see him on the wrong side of an integrity issue.  No mishandled funds.  No girl (or boy) problems.  No mansions and Rolls Royces.  He’s a pretty pure flame whether you agree with him or not.

Certain Republicans resent him because they want to treat Christian conservative voters pretty much the same way the Democrats treat African-Americans.  He won’t let that happen and I think he’s right. I’m personally in love with free-market economics, but it’s simply not the priority issue for people who are trying to figure it all out in the light of Christ.

Having said all the above, I understand Dick Armey’s gripe to some extent.  Dobson pushes hard and isn’t easily satisfied.  This conservative-libertarian movement is tough to hold together.  It’s very fortunate for our side that the Democrats are so tightly wedded to socialism and big, international schemes of governance.  It’s what keeps us together.

Christianity Today’s cover story carries the title above.  The opening line: “Calvinism is making a comeback — and shaking up the church.”  The article is somewhat lengthy, but provides a great look at how, and why (e.g., the emphasis on doctrine), young people are moving towards Reformed Theology.

The good folks over at Touchstone Magazine reproduce a letter from Georgetown University Chaplain’s Office to the Affiliated Ministries (evangelicals, including InterVarsity).  Here are the crucial paragraphs:

As a result of our new direction for the upcoming academic year, we have decided to not renew any covenant agreements with any of the Affiliated Ministries. This will become effective immediately. As any previous covenant agreements ended with the 2005-2006 academic, your ministries will no longer be allowed to hold any activity or presence (i.e. bible studies, retreats with Georgetown students, Mid-week worship services, fellowship events, move-in assistance, SAC Fair, etc.) on campus. As well, there will be no Affiliated Ministry presence or participation at our annual Campus Ministry Open House held at the end of August.

Additionally, all websites linking your ministries to a presence at Georgetown University will need to be modified to reflect the terminated relationship. Your ministries are not to publicize in any literature, media, advertisement, etc. that Georgetown University is or will be an active ministry site for your ministry/church/denomination.

While we realize this comes as a great disappointment, please know that we are moving forward with this decision only after much dialogue with the Lord. We have enjoyed working with your ministries in various capacities over the years and will always keep your ministry in our prayers.

If true, it’s appalling.  Any information on why they decided to do this would be quite welcome.

I started a debate over at this blog (unintentionally) that some of y’all might find of interest.

This Cartoon says all that needs to be said about the recent PCUSA decision to allow for alternative ways to refer to the Trinity.

It seems that Challies’s review of Driscoll’s book, Reformission, that Steve linked to yesterday, has caused so much of a ruckus, that Tim added another post to clarify some points. Essentially, he’s trying to get across to his readers that he never intended his book review to become a defense or a condemnation for Driscoll’s pastoral style. He simply used a couple of excerpts to point out a few personal concerns. But reading through yesterday’s comments and reading this new take by Chailles today, I have to wonder (as it pertains to Driscoll’s methods of ministry): what’s the big deal?! So he cusses a little. Has a few beers. Tells guys to quit crying, man up, and move on when they slip up and watch pornography. Again, what’s the real problem here? 

It disturbs me to see the masses of people that came out of the woods to slice and dice Driscoll on these issues. Ever since I “retired” from vocational ministry, and moved into the “real” world, I’ve found it interesting and sad to see just how far removed the evangelical church is from actual society. I realized for the first time that many of the things that consume the average fundamentalist evangelical are absolutely foreign to the outside world. Not to say that those things (i.e doctrinal quibbles, church politics, etc.) aren’t often important or necessary at times, but rather that they simply aren’t understood or relevant to the average “non-church-goer.” What’s even sadder than the fact that evangelicals are slowly becoming irrelevant, is the fact that they simpy don’t know it. I sure didn’t.

I really don’t care to write a whole lot on this (even though I suppose I already have), but when I read hundreds of comments from readers condemning Driscoll’s antics (i.e. a few blue comments and a beer) without ever addressing his results (i.e. thousands have come to Christ through his short ministry), i get a little more cynical over the current state of Evangelical Christianity. Is this what we really care about? “Damn,” I hope not. His ministry is thriving and engaging culture in a part of the country that has tended to show little regard for Chrisitian society and ideology. But does that matter, so long as he cusses every now and then in his sermons? Doesn’t seem to…and that’s unfortunate.

Anyway, I’m not here to defend Driscoll per se, (or, to condemn evangelicals for that matter) but to simply suggest, that a missional and emergent understanding of ministry is one that needs to be viewed and considered. As the larger evangelical movement finds itself drifting further from the culture, a missional understanding of the gospel may just be the very thing that helps it find relevance again. At the very least, take notice that it’s working in some places…just ask the changed lives at Driscoll’s Mars Hill Church in Seattle.

First Things contains an interesting article by a Wheaton professor who looks at, and tries to clear up, issues surrounding the decision to not renew the contract of Joshua Hochschild, an assistant professor of philosophy, who converted to Roman Catholicism. The article looks at the importance of the statement of faith, which all faculty must sign, coupled with the interpretations of the adminstration, and that of Hochschild and other Catholics, regarding the portion involving the Scriptures.

I reckon that David Gelernter’s recent Bradley lecture at AEI will be controversial. You can watch or read it by clicking here.

I was searching for something else and came across a blog called Mainstream Baptist.  Now, one of the most effective tropes in contemporary political rhetoric is to cast yourself as “mainstream” and your opponents as “extreme.”  A sample of what it means, apparently, to be a “mainstream” Baptist

• To be the executive director of the Oklahoma version of the Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.  (Or, as I like to call it, the organization for Americans wish all those churchy people would just shut up.)
• To host a call-in radio show on Sunday mornings.  (I’ve heard it said that many Baptists are doing something else at 11:00 am on Sunday mornings - at the least, hoping the preacher will hurry up so they can beat the Methodists to the best lunch places).
• To cite The Nation as an authority on the Religious Right. (It’s not to say that The Nation can’t be right occasionally, but I wonder what it says about your audience if you think that such a citation will be persuasive?)
• To cite bizarre conspiracy theories about 9/11

All those might be fine and dandy things to be doing, but “mainstream”?  Hmmm…I’m doubtful.

William Underwood has taken over at Mercer University, promising a ‘new’ kind of Baptist Higher Education.  But what that means seems very, very unclear - except that it ain’t whatever Baylor is doing.  (At the very least, those who have been supportive of Baylor’s 2012 initiative ought to view Underwood’s speech at Mercer with some relief, since he pretty clearly thinks it a mistake).  He’s pretty clearly committed to free speech at the university, but it’s less clear what will make Mercer ‘Baptist,’ unless Baptist has come to mean only that one has the liberty to choose what one believes.

In one sense, of course, the unmodified commitment to academic freedom is simply asinine.  At the very least, a commitment to the truth means that you wouldn’t keep someone around if he teaches that the world is flat or that Pluto aligning with Jupiter means you’re going to have good luck in romance on Tuesdays.  Moreover, no university is going to keep someone around who teaches and writes on how certain classes of people are inferior or deserving of slavery (or worse).  (Anti-semites might be an exception to this in some places, alas).

Here’s a prediction: in ten years (perhaps less) Mercer will look *just* like every other middling liberal arts college - no different than, say, Davidson or Furman or wherever.  (Actully, Davidson and Furman are much better than Mercer, but you get the idea).  Unless Underwood can articulate some view of religious education that goes beyond the freedom of individual inquiry, Mercer will quickly cease being a Baptist college and become a “college in the Baptist tradition.” That is, just another college.