My blog has moved!

You should be automatically redirected. If not, visit
http://burrintheburgh.com
and update your bookmarks.

Monday, August 22, 2005

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) Convention News

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) is the largest Lutheran body in the United States with something near 5 million members. I am a pastor with the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod (LCMS) with about 2.5 million.

The ELCA recently concluded their biennial convention at which several controversial resoltuions were under consideration. I'd like to do my best to give a brief summary of two items of interest with some links for further information.

  • A New Hymnal. I subscribe to the notion that the manner of one's worship is symbiotically related to the content of one's beliefs. In Latin, Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi. Worship forms matter. The LCMS, at its convention last summer, adopted a new hymnal which will come out in 06. From what I've seen, it has some weaknesses and many strengths.

  • This summer, the ELCA adopted a new hymnal as well. According to reports, their new worship book contains some very serious theological flaws. The chief concern I have read about is the increasing use of gender neutral language in reference to the Deity. I am understanding of the desire to use gender-sensitive language in many situations and forms of communication. But I think it is intolerable to go out of one's way to neuter God. God has revealed Himself to us as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And that was not arbitrary or his attempt to be culturally sensitive to patriarchal ancient near easterners. God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

    Of course, that is not the only manner in which God is named in the Scripture, but it is a highly significant one. The hubris it requires to reject God's name - Father, Son and Holy Spirit - in favor of something that won't offend Gloria Steinem is astonishing.

    The formula for performing baptisms given to us by our Lord is "in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit." I wonder what this new worship book will do in its baptismal rites. Probably make this traditional name an option, among others.

    I will go so far as to say that I would not consider a baptism done with any other formulation for God's name than "Father, Son, Spirit" to be a Christian baptism.
  • The second, and more widely publicized, issue has to do with homosexuality. I am not familiar with all of the history of this particular question in the ELCA. And what I have read has been byzantine in its complexity, at least to me.

  • Basically, there has been a movement to ordain practicing homosexuals and bless homosexual unions. Many in the grassroots, naturally, have not been as supportive of this drive as the members of the various task forces, special committees, etc.

    As I understand the matter, this was debated extensively at their convention and the final decisions are seen as something as a compromise. I have read varying interpretations of what was finally passed, so it seems likely that even many of the delegates may be unclear on the remifications of what they've done. It looks to me as if they've created their own version of don't ask / don't tell, giving local ministries and bishops leeway to do what they believe pastorally responsible. If you ask me, this is going to result in further chaos. As it says in Judges, each man does what is right in his own eyes.
Here are some links for more:

Dr. Gene Veith, Culture Editor for World magazine writes this about the inclusive language hymnal.

Rev. Dr. Holger Sonntag is an LCMS pastor who'd formerly attended an ELCA seminary. He has his doctorate in New Testament studies from a German university. He writes this incisive article, posted on Rev. Paul McCain's cyber-brethren blog.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, August 21, 2005

On Being Mr. Critical

One reader made a thoughtful comment on one of my previous posts asking me about how I can point my finger at the errorists in other church bodies while my own denomination has plenty of issues as well. His comment was polite, yet challenging. And I thank him for it because I have been thinking about it since then. So I would like to take a moment to get a couple of things off my chest.

  • First of all, for the most part, in this blog I post commentary about current events, pop culture, and news from the international church scene. And just as a train wreck will get more coverage than a birth announcement, my commentary probably tends more towards negatives than positives. I don't think I'm a curmudgeon, but if that's how I come across, please grant your indulgence.

  • Secondly, I certainly do not believe that my church body (the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod) is perfect or free of problems. Oh, we have some doozies! Generally, however, I will refrain from directly addressing specific issues in the LCMS on this blog. For various reasons, I do not believe this blog is the best forum for me to air those matters. But don't think this means I avoid taking a stand when necessary. I do and I have and I will. But probably not on a blog. So when I nag or complain or rebuke others, it is not because I believe I am personally sinless or superior or that my own denomination is perfect.

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, August 20, 2005

Guess Which Movie

This website is kind of fun for movie buffs. It's pretty tough, but I did pretty well on the first two rounds. It gives you a couple of obscure shots from a movie and then you have to guess the name of the film.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, August 19, 2005

African Bishop Calls for the Church of England to be Suspended from Anglicanism

Peter Akinola is the influential Anglican Primate of Nigeria who has been most outspoken against the Episcopal Church - USA for consecrating an openly homosexual bishop. Now he's at it again, persistent fellow. Apparently, the Church of England passed some goofy rule allowing their gay priests to get married as long as they promise not to have gay sex with their partners. Isn't that one of the stupidest things you've ever heard? Just how do they plan to enforce that? What's the point? Because of such craziness, Archbishop Akinola is recommending that the Church of England be suspended from the Anglican Communion. Just you wait. Soon we'll be hearing people calling him divisive. Here's the article.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, August 18, 2005

Brad Pitt's Anti-Semitic Movie

Well, I don't know that for certain. Let's put it this way, Brad Pitt and Paramount Pictures are set to make a film entitled, The Year of Living Biblically. The stated premise is that the main character determines to follow all the rules of the Old and New Testaments literally (gasp!). I think it's a fair assumption that this is not going to make people like me look good.

Some grouchy unenlightened commentators are saying this is likely to just be another swipe at conservative Christians. Maybe. But if I were an Orthodox Jew, like say, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I'd definitely be paying attention.

I took the Jewish angle because it is considered suave and fashionable to mock conservative Christians. Jews get slightly more respect nowadays. Of course, if you really want to be the darling of Hollywood, go Buddhist or better yet, adopt the religion of Sheila-ism. You remember that woman named Sheila who made up a new religion entirely based around herself. That's what most of us reeeeaaalllyy are anyway, no matter where we sit on Sunday morning (or Saturday or whatever).

It's a free country. Let them make whatever movie they please. But when a film intentionally mocks a major world religion (mine or yours), I would expect outcry. Didn't Voltair once say, "I may not agree with what you say. . . and if I don't you can expect me bust your chops"? I may not have that quote exactly right.

Hey, I'm no stick in the mud. I can appreciate a certain level of irreverent humor. But making fun of God's Word is dangerous.

I read one report that suggested a movie called something like The Year of Living Koran-ly. Like that would ever happen. But it does. Everytime you see one of those blow-em-up action flicks where the bad guys are Islamic terrorists, you are watching a movie about people who try to live according to the Koran literally. Read it, if you don't believe me.

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

"Da Vinci Crock," I Mean "Code"

I was so delighted when I heard a while back that the Anglican officials refused to give permission for Ron Howard to make his newest movie in Westminster Abbey. The Da Vinci Code movie, based on the Dan Brown book of the same name will star Tom Hanks and seems to be nearing completion. Then I read this bit from Mere Comments by James Kushiner.

Apparently, not all Anglicans are willing to turn revisionistic, historically illiterate hacks away from using their church properties to slander Jesus. At least not when 100,000 British pounds come into the picture. Yes, a Rev. Alec Knight has allowed the filmmakers to use Lincoln Cathedral. And, of course, the church will be rewarded handsomely.

Sadly, the modern Church of England - as a whole - is not particularly known for its concern for getting the Jesus stuff right, but I was encouraged by a rare bit of backbone shown by the caretakers of Westminster Abbey. [There's the old joke: Why does the bishop lay his hands on the head of the new ordinand? It's easier to remove his spine.] Then I read about this Lincoln Cathedral business. After all, what's integrity when you've got to pay the gas bills each month?

I have read The Da Vinci Code. I have also read other books by Dan Brown. Assuming Ron Howard's film follows the book at all, it will be a horrible movie. It makes me sad, frankly. The people the Church is called to minister to, and the world in which this takes place, is increasingly ignorant of Biblical content. 'Tis a fact. And we're even less well-informed, I think, about the history of Western Civilization. I have spoken to far too many people whose primary (or secondary) source of religious information is T.V. and film. People figure, why do I need to go to Bible study or get my kids involved in church? We go on X-mas and Easter, sorta.

It's one thing to write a novel. It's quite another to write a novel about actual historical subjects without evidence of genuine research and filled with errors any 9th grader a hundred years ago would've been able to spot and then publicly claim to be writing true stuff. Someone said, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." Dan Brown is the poster boy for that slogan. He takes a bit of fact and goes bonkers with it. Gee, buy an encyclopedia already.

Y'know those people who watch Battlestar Gallactica on television and soak in its underlying mythology of how ancient space aliens populated the earth and built the pyramids - - and believe it's true? That's what The Da Vinci Code is doing for many people concerning the historical person of Jesus Christ.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, August 16, 2005

Tom Cruise on Psychiatry

This evening, as I was re-reading the post I put up yesterday, it occured to me that one of my comments (at least) was not as clear as it should have been and could be misleading. I wrote:


Or how about when Tom Cruise (whom I believe to be a terrific actor)
lectured America - in a profoundly inarticulate verbal belch - on the validity
of psychiatric medicine?

That was one sentence in a post about celebrities who spout off on subjects they are poorly informed about. But it dawned on me, as I re-read my words, that my statement could be understood to say that Tom Cruise believes in the validity of psychiatric medicine and I think he's an ignoramus for it. The fact is, I intended to convey the opposite.

Tom Cruise, as a devoted Scientologist, thinks that all psychiatric medicine is quakery. As you may know, he got into quite a ridiculous showdown with Matt Lauer on the Today show over the matter. Go here to read the transcript of that broadcast.

You see, I believe that psychiatry - and the use of antidepressant drugs, in particular - have genuine merit. And I criticize Cruise, and all of his Scientology weirdo friends, for trashing it all entirely. That's a dangerous religion, people.

Some will point to the checkered history of psychiatry. Sure, there are plenty of horror tales and examples of cruelty in psychiatry. But the practice of medicine is an art as much as a science. Name one single field of medicine that doesn't have a freaked out past. I'm sure that in a hundred years - when medical knowledge and technology will contain wonders we can't even dream about now - our great-grandchildren will consider us barbarians for allowing surgeons to actually cut on us with knives. Ooooooh!

The brain is an organ of the body. And like all the other organs, it can malfunction, get sick and respond to treatment. It does get a bit tricky, I realize, because we have to deal with the mind/brain connection. Healing of the mind and healing of the brain go hand in hand, but they are not identical. Clearly, I am of the opinion that the Holy Spirit, the sacraments, and trust in the promises of God's Word bring peace and comfort and aid to the troubled mind.

But I am also quite convinced that maladies such as Schizophrenia, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, Depression, and others can and do respond to medical treatment, including drugs. I thank God for the ongoing developments in treating mental illnesses just as much as I thank him for the x-ray and the polio vaccine.

I'm not saying a person shouldn't exercise caution before undergoing psychiatric treatment. An individual should read and study up on any medication before they take it, psychiatric or otherwise.

But instead of blasting people for taking such meds, as Cruise did, we - especially we in the church - should show compassion toward the sick and those afflicted with mental illness and support them with our love, prayers and actions.

If you, or someone in your family, is mentally ill (or you suspect may be), let me tell you about an excellent organization whose work I highly champion. It's called the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill. They are a wonderful source of information, direction and support, not just for those with mental illness, but for their family and friends as well.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, August 15, 2005

Bono, Celebrities, and Stuff of Substance

[Warning: Glaring generalization ahead] Most of the time, when I hear celebrities commenting on religion or ethics, I know I'm going to need to crack open another bottle of Pepcid AC. Even if I kinda like the person, I frequently wince on account of their breathtaking ignorance of the subjects they choose to comment on. I know this will be a splash of cold water for some, but having your face on GQ or Seventeen doesn't make one an authority on the crisis in the Sudan, epidemiology, or bio-ethics. I'm no expert on most of that stuff either, but I hope I generally know when to plug the hole in my face. One gets the impression that most celebrity Mensa candidates wouldn't know an ebola virus if it challenged them to an arm wrestle. Take for instance, the lovely and talented young actress, Scarlet Johansonn who recently opined that fetal stem cell research is necessary so that we can find cures for such scourges against humanity as polio, etc. Huh? Polio is under control, my dear, and no one had to carve up fetuses to do it. (On that, check out the recent research from Pittsburgh's Children's Hospital which shows that adult, or post-natal, stem cells are as useful for medical research as fetal stem cells.)

Or how about when Tom Cruise (whom I believe to be a terrific actor) lectured America - in a profoundly inarticulate verbal belch - on the validity of psychiatric medicine? This is the guy who believes that the source of all our problems is that we're all infected with spiritual cooties from ancient space aliens. He's not in the best position to call anyone a quack.

Everyone has a right to his or her opinions and I am an ardent believer in freedom of speech. But that is not to excuse pomposity, an inflated sense of self-importance or grinding stubborn ignorance.

My dad used to tell me that it is better to keep your mouth closed and be thought an idiot than to open it and remove all doubt. I've said and done enough stupid things myself to see his point.

[Alert: Refreshing exception ahead] While bags and bags of Hollywood celebrity types are too pampered and self-indulgent to form a meaningful sentence on their own, there are refreshiing exceptions. Readers of this blog have seen my relatively high regard for Bono, the lead singer of perhaps the most famous rock band in action today, U2. Now there is a man who has held AIDS babies and slept beneath mosquito netting.

Christianity Today has given us these excerpts of an interview he did some time ago. You must go here too, while you're at it. And though I don't agree with everything he says, I am pleased to know that at least one hugely influential celebrity is more than chrome-plated faddish activism. His positions on religion and human care go beyond deciding which color of ribbon to wear on his Armani tuxedo to the Wolfgang Puck after-party.

I believe Bono has some truly lucid insights on the person of Jesus Christ and His work as Savior. He seems to have a very accurate and personal understanding of the atonement and his thoughts on Karma vs. Grace sound a lot like, in my vocabulary, Law and Gospel. In fact, some of his comments in this interview are 10 times better than the flacid drivel most American preachers drool out every Lord's day. Take two and half minutes and read it. He even does a bit of C.S. Lewis.

Now I'm not recommending we give the man a blue-ribbon for Lutheran orthodoxy in every point, but I'm certain there has never been a more serious thinking or theologically articulate rock star in the "history of the whole world" (as Bunnie Diehl likes to say). Now that is a celebrity that I'd love to have a beer or three with sometime . . . oh, and Mel too.

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

Is the Nation Really in Favor of Abortion?

Friend and fellow Lutheran blogger, Bunnie Diehl, has made an excellent point here. She cites an article by Matt Kaufman at Boundless magazine. Basically, the point is that if the country is so clearly pro-abortion, as the prophets of death proclaim, then why are they so worried that Roe v. Wade will be overturned? As Kaufman explains it, a reversal of Roe v. Wade would only re-grant the individual states the right to enact their own abortion laws. So what does NARAL have to worry about? If their analysis of the population's views is correct, then reversing Roe v. Wade should have little or no effect on the actual availability of abortion. Unless, of course, the constantly touted statistics about how much Americans love abortion are skewed and misleading. I propose that underneath their bluster, the death merchants realize that the American people would prefer there to be much greater restictions on abortion rights . . . if actually given a say in the matter.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, August 05, 2005

"Til Death Do Us Part" or Whatever

An article at FoxNews.com addresses a disturbing trend in wedding vows. It appears that instead of the traditional 'Til death do us part," some couples today are opting for these much less permanent-sounding alternatives:

  • "For as long as we continue to love each other."
  • "For as long as our time shall last."
  • "For as long as we are together."

If you want to go that route, why prettify the language? Why not just say what you really mean? "Until I get sick of you," or "Until someone better comes along," or "As long as I'm not bored, inconvenienced, or unhappy."

Marriage is a life-long union of one man and one woman. Divorce happens and I understand that. That is evidence of the brokenness of creation. All of us children of Adam are sinful and do sinful things. In some circumstances, divorce may actually be the lesser of two evils. It can be very complicated. Divorce, when it happens in the church, should be addressed with loving application of Law and Gospel (Call to repentance and Absolution). Compassion must be shown to those whose hearts, lives and homes are broken. But to begin your life together publicly acknowledging that "hey, we're gonna give it a shot, but this gig may not work out y'know," is insane. What kind of commitment is that?

Human marriage is an image of the relationship between Christ and His Bride, the Holy Church. If I look in a carnival mirror, my face may be all elongated and distorted in funny ways. But thankfully, that's not how I really am. Honest. Human marriage, after being expelled from Eden, is sadly often a warped reflection of the beautiful thing it is meant to display.

What would our Lord's wedding vows sound like? "I will love you with an everlasting love," or "I'll stick this out until someone with shaplier legs saunters by?"

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, August 04, 2005

Human Fetuses and Panda Babies

David Mills, over at Mere Comments, reminds us of a very important principle in this illuminating post: that it matters how we say what we say. If words are units of thought, then the word choices one makes presumably reflect particular ideas.

He cites two Associated Press articles from August 3, 2005.


"A 13-year-old giant panda gave birth to a cub at San Diego Zoo, but a second
baby died in the womb, officials said Wednesday."--Associated Press, Aug. 3


"A cancer-ravaged woman robbed of consciousness by a stroke has given birth after being kept on life support for three months to give her fetus extra time to develop."--Associated Press, Aug. 3

A number of years ago, I read the book by Dr. Jean Garton called Who Broke the Baby? It opened my eyes to the importance of the language we choose to employ, particularly in controversial debates.

So am I pro-life or anti-abortion? Actually, I am both. But being pro-life includes so much more than just being opposed to abortion. Is it a fetus or a baby? It's both, but to exclusively use the word "fetus" for a pre-born child when the common parlance would be to call it a baby (as the panda story demonstrates) is to reflect a certain bias.

This is also why we should call the process of baby-making procreation rather than reproduction. The first term suggests the miracle of life, that a man and a woman participate in God's creation of a new human being. The second term is about production. A baby is a product. It brings to mind assembly lines and heavy industry.

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, August 03, 2005

Mega-Churches, II

A few days ago, I posted on the mega-church phenom. Then I noticed that Darrell, over at Southern Conservative, posted this very interesting bit on his and his wife's experiences. He was kind enough to link to me, so I thought the least I could do would be to return the favor. I want you read what he writes so that you won't think my post was just the product of a grumpy Lutheran pastor. Oh, I may be a Mr. Cranky-Pants every once in a while, but not this time.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

John Garang is Killed

This is bad news from the Sudan. Check out the story here. As many of you may know, I have had an interest in the Sudan for a number of years now. My good friend, Rev. Andrew Elisa, is the head pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Sudan. And I was privileged to go on a short-term mission trip to Yambio and Baguga in February 2004.

Dr. John Garang was killed earlier this week in a helicopter crash. Garang was the leader of the Sudanese People's Libertaion Movement (SPLM) and its military arm, the Sudanese People's Liberation Army (SPLA).

For 21 years, the Sudan has been engaged in civil war. The militantly Islamic government in Khartoum tried to implement sharia law on all of the people of the Sudan. The majority of the people in the southern part of the country are Christians or animists and resisted the forced islamization.

With help from U.S. special envoy, John Danforth, a long overdue peace agreement was signed in January. Part of the deal was that Garang would become the Vice President of the whole country and in 6 years a vote would be taken to determine whether the Sudan would remain one united nation or become two separate entities.

Garang's death is being called a tragic accident and that is probably the case. But since numerous attempts have been made on his life, his supporters were initially crying foul. Terrible riots followed in Khartoum, leaving many dead.

Please pray for peace in the Sudan. And pray for the persecuted Christians there and in many places around the globe.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, August 01, 2005

All We, Like Sheep, Have Gone Astray

The prophet Isaiah knew what he was talking about when he penned the words above in Isaiah 53:6. I came across a story that is a couple of weeks old by now, so maybe you've read it, but I thought it merited some further attention.

Somewhere in Turkey, while the sheep-herders were doing lunch, one of the sheep munched and grazed himself up to the edge of a ravine and then over the edge. He fell to his death. But the thing about sheep is that they are natural followers. So one after another, the sheep followed the animals before them. And this continued until 1500 sheep went off the cliff. Hundreds died. Many of the later ones survived on account of the cushiony soft bed of wool that was formed.

Sheep tend to wander, not always paying attention to where they're going, simply going after the next tuft of grass and following the herd. In what sense, then, are we like sheep? Maybe in the sense that we are governed more by our appetites than by the voice of the Shepherd or good reasoning. Maybe in the sense that we tend to define what's right or wrong by the standards of our society. And certainly in the sense that we will plummet to our destruction, by our own fault... without the intervention of a Good Shepherd, that is.

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, July 30, 2005

New Japanese Android - You'll Forget She's Not Human

So I stumbled on this article today about Japanese scientists who have created the most life-like human-looking robot yet. Several times throughout the article, it says something like, "one day, we'll have androids that will fool us into thinking they're human." And all I could think of to respond was, "Why in the world would we want that!?" Robots don't have to fool us into thinking they are alive in order to perform the typical mundane or dangerous tasks or to rove across the surface of Mars.

Might there be some beneficial uses for a life-like android? Sure. Spies might use them to infiltrate cells of bad guys. They'd make swell decoys for the military. I'm sure perverts could come up with something. And the late night talk show host prospects are enormous!

But do you really want to live in a world where you can't easily be certain if the person you are speaking to, working under or flirting with isn't a machine?!

Long ago, some people thought they were pretty smart and determined to demonstrate their genius by building a tower to the heavens. "Let us make a name for ourselves," they said. The pagan Greeks called this kind of pride hubris. It always leads to tragedy. In Genesis 11, God confused the language of the people in the land of Shinar to derail their grandiose schemes. It seems to me that - at times - modern science doesn't know when to stop. Life-like androids may not quite raise the ethical questions of cloning or genetic engineering, but like all the best sci-fi movies prove: The wise man is cautious in the realm of science. Not everything that can be done, should be done. You can never predict all the outcomes of your inventions.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, July 29, 2005

Mega-churches Mega-Bad?

Clint Rainey is a journalism student at the University of Texas. His piece for Dallasnews.com on the inadequacy of megachurches is on the mark. He decries the Church Growthy lust for razzle-dazzle, all in the name of being "seeker sensitive." Mr. Rainey questions what the mega-churches are trying to attract seekers to. Certainly not religion. Certainly not doctrine. Certainly not objective truth. Certainly not Jesus. Rather than having seeker-sensitive buildings, services, programs, music, and kitsch, let's try being seeker-sensitive Christians he advises. There's a kernel of wisdom in that, yes?

I would add that instead of being seeker-sensitive, let's be genuinely warm, honest, welcoming Christian people who focus on the cross and, as a church, embody the Spirit of God. Then he who seeks, will have something worth finding.

I'll probably get in trouble for saying this and maybe it's just me, but in my experience (and I say this often), the Christians who yammer the most about reaching the lost and want to use every trendy gimmick to do it, those that belong to the Church-of-What's-Happenin-Now, are just not that nice. At least not to me. While the stodgy, stuffy, sticks-in-the-mud I like to hang out with are quite warm and genuine. At least I know what they think.

The point is that the mega-church movement, in addition to being impersonal, is shallow. A mile wide and a nanometer deep. Offering feel-good self-improvement with a glossy spiritual veneer. Mr. Rainey criticizes the boomer generation responsible for mega-church-mania, saying they seek after "stuff" and "things" when they come to church. It's a generalization, to be sure, but I think he's right. I hope Mr. Rainey is equally correct in his assessment of his own generation, one that is coming to church, insofar as it does come to church, looking for "meaning."

Oh, just read his article.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, July 28, 2005

Batman Began

Today is our 15th wedding anniversary. And a grand decade-and-a-half it's been. To celebrate I took my lovely bride out to eat at an elegant Spanish restaurant I know. It's called Mallorca and is on the southside area of town. The food is outstanding and the service is second-to-none. I asked one of our servers where she was from; the accent was unfamiliar to me. Portugal, she says.

After dinner, we headed over to the new movie theater nearby to see Batman Begins. I wanted to see War of the Worlds but that would've gotten us home too late for the babysitter. However, both of us liked Batman more than we thought we would.

Weakness: Katie Holmes. I'm sorry; I'm sure she's a very nice person and is talented, to be sure. But she just didn't convince me that she was one of the lonely fighters for goodness in Gotham City. Too young or too cute or something. Not strong enough.

Strengths: The rest of the cast. Morgan Freeman is still probably one of the best actors in the history of the whole world. Michael Caine is another sure hit, in my book. Liam Neeson, another favorite. And Gary Oldman, gotta love im. He probably played the best Dracula in the history of the whole world.

Mr. Christian Bales did a fine job. Nice steely gaze he's got going on there. Needs to work on the other 35 zillion facial expressions though. Nonetheless, he's done Batman better than anyone else I've ever seen.

I applaud the writers and director for getting away from the Willie Wonka-ness of Tim Burton which was turning the series into nothing but camp. Each episode was getting more embarrassing than the last. The spooky creepiness does it better justice, I say. But then again, I'm partial to spooky creepy things in general. [I also like my beer, coffee, and chocolate to be dark and bitter to match my persona.]

It can't be easy to make a comic book superhero movie that works. If I put on a cape and a mask, you'd laugh your heads off. But this film, like few others, makes the absurd believable. Huzzah for that!

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Meditations in Tombstone (Arizona)

One of the fun-est things I did while working as a seminary recruitment officer back in the olden days was make a sidetrip to Tombstone, Arizona. I'd been in Tucson meeting with prospective students at a Lutheran church when I noticed the famed Western town nearby on the map. I had a half day I could afford to kill so I hustled on down there.

For reasons I cannot quite identify, I have long been fascinated with the legendary gunfight at the OK corral where Wyatt Earp, his brothers and Doc Holliday whooped the Clanton boys. So the opportunity to walk those same dusty streets was too good to pass up. I was not disappointed. The route there was right through the deadest and hottest desert I'd ever been in. This was before I had a cell phone and I actually got a bit nervous on that lonely road. If my car were to stall, I pictured myself becoming buzzard bait.

The first thing I did was visit the cemetery on Boot Hill, hoping to read some of the famously funny epitaphs. One said:

Here lies Lester Moore
Four slugs from a .44
No Les no More

Re-read that once or twice until the macabre humor of it dawns on you. I was also struck by the great number of Chinese buried there, railroad workers I'd imagine. And the high number of infants and very small children.

Oh, I did a few other touristy things. Had a snort at one of the local watering holes. Saw the presumed site of the OK Corral and watched a re-enactment of the gunfight.

This all comes to mind again because I re-watched the movie Tombstone from the early 90s starring Kurt Russell and Val Kilmer, plus an unmistakable Billy Bob Thornton in a throwaway role. There've been better Westerns than this. And those are not my favorite actors (though I do confess that Kilmer should've gotten an Oscar for his Doc Holliday). It's moderately accurate historically, however and not un-entertaining.

Why I am writing this? I'm curious. What is it about gunfighting, bloodlusting murderers like Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday (or Tony Soprano for that matter) that makes them almost iconic figures for Americans? It's not the classic good vs. evil dynamic because these yahoos were every bit as vicious as anyone they ever felled. Maybe it's just the testosterone effect.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Higher Things Photo

This is me delivering my in-depth sectional at the Higher Things youth conference last week in St. Louis. My topic was Christ in Fantasy Lit and Movies. The room seated 300 and we had maybe 200 or 250. The technology available was excellent. I used Powerpoint for the first time (only had a couple of goof-ups). But the techies were on the mark.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, July 25, 2005

Episcopal Bishop Cans Conservative Priest

Some time ago, I wrote about a storm brewing among Connecticut Episcopalians. A handful of conservative-ish priests and their parishes objected to their bishop, Andrew Smith, participating in the consecration of an openly gay bishop in 2003. They requested to be placed under the ecclesiastical supervision of a more conservative bishop, as an alternative to being under Smith's oversight, something that Episcopal polity allows. When Smith refused to allow that, six congregations began withholding their offerings to the national church.

Well, here is what happened next. I'm here summarizing an article in the latest WORLD magazine. In March, Bishop Smith suspended the six priests. But they rejected his discipline and continued to minister to their congregations. Further, they protested Bishop Smith's oversight by asserting that he would not be welcome to preach or administer the sacraments in their parishes.

Then at 9:30 a.m. on July 13, Bishop Smith and his stormtroopers raided St. John's Episcopal Church in Bristol, Conn., the church of Rev. Mark Hansen, one of the six dissenters. They pried open Father Hansen's office door, confiscated all church records, shut down the congregation's website redirecting traffic to the diocesan site. They changed the locks on all the doors and announced to the congregation that Hansen was no longer their pastor and a Susan McCone would now be in charge. To add insult to injury, Rev. Hansen is forbidden to set foot on the church property or even to communicate with any of the church members.

Bishop Smith claimed that the dissenting priests had "abandoned the communion" when they protested against his spiritual oversight of their parishes. Now if that isn't the pot calling the kettle every shade of black.

Every 10 years, the worldwide Anglican communion holds their Lambeth Conference, a meeting of bishops which governs the church. At the last Lambeth Conference, in 1998, the bishops voted overwhelmingly that homosexual practice is "incompatible with Scripture." Add to this the fact that the Anglican primates (chief bishops) met recently and scolded the Episcopal Church USA for consecrating an openly gay bishop and placed a suspension on the entire EC-USA. If the EC-USA does not repent of its action, it may very well be booted from the Anglican communion entirely.

So let me see if I have this straight. The primate bishops of world Anglicanism condemned the consecration in which Smith participated and which Hansen protests. And the most recent meeting of the highest governing council (Lambeth) in Anglicanism declared homosexual practice to be contrary to the Scripture. These are decisions that Rev. Mark Hansen and his congregation agree with. Yet, Bishop Smith says that Hansen is the one being divisive? Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.

This just goes to prove, that in liberal Christianity, everything is tolerated...except conservatives.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, July 24, 2005

The Barren Cross or the Crucifix?


Fellow blogger, Rev. Paul McCain, has posted an exceptional piece answering whether Lutherans prefer crucifixes or bare crosses. Go here for that. It is a frequent misconception that Lutherans, lumped in with Reformed churches, oppose the use of a crucifix (that is a cross with the statue of Jesus on it). Nothing could be further from the truth. Crucifixes universally adorned Lutheran altars until about 50 years ago.

I did hear a Lutheran pastor one time say that we shouldn't use the crucifix because, y'know, Jesus isn't still on the cross. This is to suggest that a bare cross somehow reflects the bodily resurrection of Jesus. But I have NEVER understood this reasoning. Rev. McCain rightly points out that the cross would have been empty whether Jesus rose from the tomb or not. I have also often noted that Christians who object to the crucifix on the grounds that Jesus is not still on the cross seem to have no trouble with nativity scenes. Is Jesus still in the manger?

I think the real problem is a malady that I have termed Romo-phobia. (This is the new favorite word of fellow Pgh blogger Ales Rarus.) Frankly, I think we should leave the matter up to Christian liberty. But my personal vote is for the crucifix as a superior means of illustrating the basis of our salvation.

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, July 23, 2005

How to Argue About Jesus

The highlight of the past week in St. Louis with the Higher Things Youth Conference was undoubtedly the worship. You haven't lived until you've heard 1200 teenagers absolutely belting out all 10 verses of Salvation Unto Us has Come. People who say that you can't use traditional liturgy and hymnody with youth simply do not know what they are talking about.

I was the preacher at one of the services so I was sitting in the front able to see the faces of the congregation. And I can tell you that these high school men and women were singing and chanting away with gusto. They were, as a whole, more attentive and engaged than any congregation of adults I have ever witnessed - except for when I was in the Sudan.

But the other big strength of this week's conference were the sectionals. Since my wife and I were both leading sectionals ourselves, I did not have the opportunity to sit in on others as I would have liked. I did catch two superb presentations however.

Rev. Todd Wilken, of the Issues Etc. radio broadcast gave a fun and interesting presentation on UFOs.

But I was also deeply impressed with Pastor Klemet Preus's sectional entitled: How to Argue About Jesus. The room he was in seated 300 people. And I would guess that there were 350 in attendance. The title is intentionally provocative. "Argue" sounds so negative. And aren't Christians supposed to be positive people all the time?

But Pr. Preus does us a favor by defining argument for us as simply explaining the reasons one has for one's beliefs. And then arguing about Jesus becomes not only acceptable, but a biblical mandate for all Christians. Essentially, this was a presentation on critical thinking, logic and debate in relation to spreading the Christian message. Preus clarified that we only fight because we don't know how to argue.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, July 22, 2005

Higher Things Youth Ministry Update

Hey all, I apologize for being quiet the past few days. But as I'd mentioned, I've been in St. Louis all week with the Higher Things Youth Conference. And it has gone fabulously well! The sectionals are meaty and interesting. The worship is excellent. And the campus of St. Louis University is a very good facility for this sort of thing.

I did a three-day in-depth sectional on religious/worldview themes in pop culture. My first foray into the world of Powerpoint. I only had one major glitch and that was the day I forgot to plug in the laptop. So I got about three quarters of the way through my presentation and then *blink,* lights out baby! Apparantly, batteries don't last indefinitely.

I will say this. Higher Things is the finest Lutheran youth ministry I have ever encountered or been involved with. The level of biblical teaching that is taking place is out of sight. And I have to say that I have been extremely impressed with the theological integrity and knowledge and maturity of the teens I've met.

One thing floored me on the first day of my presentation. At the end, after talking about movies and such for 45 minutes, I made a side comment that maybe we'd all be better off if we frankly just turned off the blasted TV sets and read a book. And 200 teenagers applauded. I, for one, am glad they are the future and many of the current generation of leaders will soon be the past.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, July 18, 2005

Higher Things Youth Ministry

On my way to the Higher Things Lutheran youth conference in St. Louis, MO where I'll be preaching and delivering some sectionals.

It seems to me that youth ministry, at its best, does three things well:

- Worship
- Teaching
- Fun

We do all three, but we know how to keep them separate.

In a time when entertainment is seen by many as the highest good, much that passes for youth ministry actually does little to hand on the Christian faith. The new book Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers points out that the average American teenager, even those that regularly attend "conservative" churches, actually knows very little of the substance of Christian doctrine. The authors describe the typical teen as a Moralistic Therapeutic Deist.

I had a parishoner one time ask me, "Why do we feel like we have to 'fun-ize' everything?" Good question. It seems to me that we should be able to have a good time in youth ministry, to enjoy ourselves, but also know the difference between a rock concert and a worship service, between a video game and a Bible study.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, July 17, 2005

Fantasy Book and Films: Good and Bad

I have been doing a bit of research lately for a three-part presentation I'm doing next week in St. Louis for 1200 teenagers. My topic is fantasy lit and movies. I will incorporate everything from sci-fi to horror to comic book superheroes to what I'd call fantasy proper: Narnia, Lord of the Rings, and Harry Potter.

And I came across this very helpful article by Dr. Gene Edward Veith entitled: Good Fantasy and Bad Fantasy. I recommend it to you highly. It is a pdf file, so be alert to that before you click on it. I'm sure you could find it in html on the net.

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, July 16, 2005

Hate the Sin, Hate the Sinner?

My blogging buddy, Pastor Tom Chryst, over at Preachrblog, has a good insight that he posted yesterday.

We commonly hear that God hates the sin, but loves the sinner. And I have often thought that that could be a bit misleading. Pastor Chryst does a good job explaining why.

It has always seemed a bit gnostic to me (as long as I have known what gnosticism is), to separate the sin from the sinner. You see, there is no such thing as sin in the abstract. Evil is not some platonic idea in the mind of God. There is only sin insofar as there are sinners. It is not, after all, abstract sins that God condemns to hell. Sins don't go to hell. People do.

At the same time, we preach the cross of Jesus. And there we see that God also, paradoxically, loves sinners and chose to redeem them. Jesus didn't die for abstract principles or ideals. He was no martry. And no one took His life from Him. He freely gave it. Jesus died for real flesh-and-bone people, sinners like me.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, July 14, 2005

"It's My Body!"

This is the slogan I have heard used to defend abortion, euthanasia, the legalization of marijuana or narcotic use, even prostitution. "It's my body, so no one can tell me what to do with it." But is that actually true? Not in the understanding of Christianity. Our Scriptures state: "Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own (1Co 6:19)."

That passage applies to Christians, but it is true of all people that God has given us our bodies and lives, not to abuse selfishly or to terminate at will, but to put into service of our neighbor.

But it just sounds so un-American to say that you are not your own to do with as you please. We freedom-loving people run the danger of making an idol out of personal liberty.

A few weeks ago, my wife and I were watching some news coverage of the Michael Jackson trial and I commented on how strange he looks these days. We've all seen the photos of Mr. Jackson today alongside photos from 5, 10, 20 years ago. The man has had plastic surgery, to an extreme. His nose is so narrow, he looks disfigured. And I told my wife that I could not understand why any doctor would agree to do that to him, even at Jackson's request. Does the argument that "it's my body" really have no limits? What about a doctor who agrees to amputate a healthy arm or leg, because the patient/consumer wants it done - for sick reasons? Want to read something grisly? Check this out.

Wilfred McClay, over at Mere Comments, makes some enlightening observation on ethics and the limits of personal liberty.

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Can Technology Save Us or Not?

Hey all you sci-fi geeks out there!

I'm preparing some presentations that I'll be giving for the Higher Things Youth Gathering in St. Louis next week. And right now, I'm thinking about the genre of science fiction. It seems to me that there are mainly two types of science fiction.

The first type is optimistic about human nature and our use of reason and posits that mankind will gradually evolve and, by means of science and technology, solve all our problems. Under this category, I'd include Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek series and movies.

The second type is pessimistic about human nature and serves to caution us against the folly of placing too much faith in science and technology. Under this category, I'd place Andromeda Strain, I Robot (the movie), Westworld, and Frankenstein.

Movies like Star Wars seem to me to fit better under the fantasy genre. They contain advanced technologies, but the stories aren't about the technology and its potential for good vs. its risks. They're about the characters and the technology is mainly a part of the setting.

Anyone have thoughts to share on this subject?

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

My "Probably the Best Song in the History of the Whole World"

My pal, Bunnie Diehl, has graciously tagged me to come up with the best song - and I quote - "in the history of the whole world." You should check out her list. I'd say it's eclectic, but eclecto-freaky is probably more apt. And she said I can name more than one. I'll stick with pop/rock songs. So fasten your seat belts, 'cause here goes nuthin...

  • Free Bird by Lynrd Skynrd. Seems an obvious choice, I know. But it still moves me. Get the movie Duets and check out Andre Braugher doing it a' cappella. It's way good.

  • Tom's Diner by Suzanne Vega. Always makes me wistful.

  • Don't Bring Me Down by Electric Light Orchestra

  • Mr. Blue Sky by Electric Light Orchestra. I really fell for this one watching Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.

  • Save Me by Aimee Mann. She almost won the Oscar for this song from the Magnolia soundtrack. We saw her in a live outdoor concert a couple of weeks ago. We had great seats. It was a beautiful evening. And she was incredible. O happy day.

  • Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band by the Fab 4. Or Let It Be or Hey Jude or Twist and Shout.

  • Johnny B Good. The Jimmi Hendrix version. I went to the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame and saw the footage of him playing this and it completely floored me.

  • I Got a Woman by Ray Charles. Rent Ray and tell me if you don't think Jamie Fox was so good it's scary.

  • Moondance or Domino by Van Morrison. My wife and I often say that we just don't have enough Van Morrison in our life.

  • Sunrise by Norah Jones. It really makes me feel like the sun is rising. But I also like her Don't Know Why.

  • Train Song by Mindy Smith. Also Come to Jesus. She's got a voice and style that is just warm and comforting.

  • I've Been Everywhere by Johnny Cash. I used to hate him. Now I can't get enough of him.

  • Who Are You by the Who. Who? Saw them do this at the concert for America in New York after 9/11 and my feet began to dance. All by themselves. It just happened.
Well, I could go on and on naming the best songs in the History of the Whole World, but I need to sleep.

That was fun. So now I tag Pastor Tom Chryst, Pastor David Petersen, and Pastor Greg Alms.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, July 11, 2005

Is There a Global Over-Population Problem?

In 1968, Paul Ehrlich wrote a spooky book called The Population Bomb, in which he theorized that, left unchecked, the world's population would increase to a point where it can no longer sustain itself. It sounded reasonable. He predicted that in the 1970s and 80s, hundreds of millions of people would starve to death. Of course, this never happened. Super-sized Americans don't appear to be going hungry. Not that there haven't been famines and people who've starved. But it's not the global pandemic predicted.

While global over-population is a myth, I posit that there IS a population bomb, but the question is "Who is bombing whom?"

I'm here summarizing statistics from a Newsweek article, but don't hold that against me. I've seen this data in numerous places.

Consider this:

* Global fertility rates have dropped in half since 1972, and are continuing to drop
* Estimates are that the world's population will rise from today's 6.4 billion to around 9 billion in 2050. But after that, it will go sharply into decline.
* Birthrates in England, Ireland, Spain, Germany, Italy, Russia and other European countries is well below the rate needed to maintain population. Vladimir Putin has called this a "national crisis."
* The same is true for Japan and other east Asian nations.

* Current population growth in most of Europe - wheresoever it is growing - is due to immigration, a high percentage of which immigrants are Muslims.
* There are some areas which do have a high birthrate. The United Nations projects that the Middle East will double in population over the next 20 years.
* Saudi Arabia has one of the highest fertility rates in the world.

On the basis of this data, I think it's reasonable to fear for the future of what we like to call Western Civilazation.

It's risky to prognosticate, but most will agree that population decline will have serious economic and social repercussions for a country. At the same time, there are radical elements who claim that humanity is a virus and the source of most problems and believe that drastically reducing population is a good idea.

For more information, Charles Colson has an interesting piece here called Wolves in Berlin: Europe's Demographic Crisis.

And I highly recommend looking at the Population Research Institute at www.pop.org (I'm having trouble getting the link to work).

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, July 09, 2005

Cheep! Cheep! by Julie Stiegemeyer


Forgive the shameless plug. But my wife's latest children's book is now available through Bloomsbury and can be pre-ordered through my Amazon link on the right sidebar. With adorable illustrations from Carol Baicker-McKee, this is a must have for kiddies 1-3 years old.

Sphere: Related Content

Intelligent Design: What's the Meaning of Life?

I came across the blog of Denyse O'Leary, a journalist based in Toronto, Canada and I encourage you to give it a look. She covers stories on the current scientific controversy between neo-Darwinists and Intelligent Design theorists.

I first noticed her when I read this article from Christianity Today Online about the film entitled, The Privileged Planet: The Search for Purpose in the Universe based on the book by philosopher Jay Richards and Iowa State University astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez. Apparently, the Smithsonian Institute had agreed to allow an Intelligent Design organization to show the film, but then tried to renege when the Darwinists complained.

The Intelligent Design (ID) movement is simply the attempt to examine evidence of design in nature, which suggests some higher intelligence behind it all. It seems to me that a fair-minded person in the public square is willing to study all the data and theories regarding the origins of life. If the data and theories are scientific in nature, then they belong in the realm of science (as opposed to philosophy, for instance, though the two may certainly overlap). See my earlier post. ID proponents are, as far as I can tell, asking for the opportunity to enter the debate, to not be silenced merely because they fail to toe the line of neo-darwinist orthodoxy.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, July 07, 2005

Too Much Sin-Talk?

The folks over at Be Strong in the Grace have kindly linked to me several times and today I return the favor. Look over the whole site, but check out this insightful post in particular.

Sometimes folks say they get tired of hearing preachers talk about sin and want to hear more about the love and joy of the Christian life. Now there are certainly some churches that do deliver fire and brimstone without letting the message of God's mercy predominate. And that's not good.

But it's important to point out that the joy of Christianity is only found by first paying attention to the seriousness of our need for God's grace in Christ. A person in a cancer ward might get tired of hearing all about those nasty cancer cells and malignancy and radiation and other such unpleasantness. And he or she might express a preference to hear happy stories about health.

Certainly, we want the patient to experience health, but that won't happen if we downplay the malady. Instead, we want to take an honest hardy approach to facing the disease SO THAT we can get on with the healing. Making light of the cancer won't REALLY lead to health. Only a poor facade. God is going to make you feel good (with the Gospel) but only after making you feel bad (with the Law).

Sphere: Related Content

London Has Been Attacked

God Save the Queen!

With deepest heartfelt sympathy, we pray for the families of those killed and injured in today's barbaric murderous attack.

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, July 06, 2005

United Church of Christ Officially Endorses Same-Sex Marriage

According to this article from the Seattle Times, the UCC (sometimes thought to stand for "Unitarians Considering Christ") is now, at 1.3 million members, the largest American denomination to officially support gay marriage. But they might not bear that distinction for long. The Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA), 4 or 5 times the size of the UCC, is set to take a similar vote this summer as well.

The Rev. John Thomas, President of the UCC, thought that it was appropriate the controversial vote took place on July 4th saying that they had "acted courageously to declare freedom." The UCC may consider their "Declaration of Independence" from the immutable law of the Creator to be an act of courage, but it seems foolhardy to me. What kind of church boasts of trashing Scripture as well as disregarding natural law? The reports suggest that some of the more biblically conservative members of the UCC may be taking a hike.

When the British surrendered to the Revolutionary Army in Yorktown, their band played The World Upside Down as they filed past the Americans. Sometimes I think I'm hearing those chords myself.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, July 05, 2005

Rick Warren and the Moral Influence Theory

According to Rick Warren in his The Purpose Driven Life, many of you do not need any more Bible study. That's what he says on p. 231:

The last thing many believers need today is to go to another Bible study. They already know far more than they are putting into practice. What they need are serving experiences in which they can exercise their spiritual muscles.
I couldn't disagree more. The problem many churches face is not an overload of Biblical knowledge, but a deficit of it.

A person could try to explain comments like this one away by saying, "Well, that's not what he meant. He meant that, essentially, faith without deeds is dead." Even if that were the best construction, it is still at best, a sloppy, misleading statement. All of us are prone to making unpolished statements that we later want to clarify. I understand that. Sometimes conservative Christians are guilty of relentless nit-picking, but the quote above is just one of a thousand examples of Warren putting his foot in his mouth, and one of the more benign examples at that.

Here's one that troubled me even more:
If you want to know how much you matter to God, look at Christ wit his arms outstretched on the cross, saying, 'I love you this much! I'd rather die that live without you.'
God is not a cruel slave driver or a bully who uses brute force to coerce us into submission. He doesn't try to break our will, but woos us to himself so that we might offer ourselves freely to him. - p. 79
There are several different ways that theologians have described the work of Christ upon the cross. These are called the theories of the atonement.

One is the Christus Victor theory. This is the notion that by dying and rising, Christ's main feat was to vanquish the devil. It was a cosmic battle and Christ is the victor.

Another theory is the idea of Forensic Justification. This is the view that the cross is chiefly about God the Father acquitting sinners because Jesus, His Son, took their penalty upon Himself.

And a third theory has been called the Moral Influence theory. This is the belief that the cross is mainly God's way of showing us just how deeply He loves us in the hopes that this display of affection will melt our hearts so that we freely embrace Him.

There is, of course, truth to be found in all of these theories. But of the three listed above, the Moral Influence theory is by far the weakest and least biblically attested. And yet, that is the approach Warren uses in the above citation. God does demonstrate His love by means of the cross, but Jesus' death is not a Hallmark card (caring enough to send the very best). It is a blood sacrifice to appease God's wrath for our sin.

The Purpose Driven Life makes some good observations here and there. But it is not a Christ-centered book. The clear gospel message is barely visible, buried and obscured with the anecdotes, principles for living, and rampant scripture quotations twisted from their context.


P.S.
St. James wrote: Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly (3:1)." Being a pastor of a Christian congregation and writing a book (or blog) puts one in the public eye. Some have said, "Leave the man alone. He meant well. And beside, his book has helped a lot of people." God can use very weak earthen vessels to accomplish His purposes, but that does not excuse a pastor from mis-using and mis-applying Scripture. It would be wrong and pastorally irresponsible not to point errors out.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, July 03, 2005

It's Not a Fashionable Disease

HIV-AIDS is a terrible disease. And it is spreading in Africa at an alarming rate. I hope that research will advance to find better treatments and a cure.

That having been said, the President of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Sudan spoke at my church last winter and he alerted us to an equally horrific disease that is much less well publicized. Malaria. He told us that in his country, the UN is reticent to provide assistance for battling malaria because most/all of their attention is on HIV-AIDS. He also informed us that hundreds of children die from malaria in his town every year, but not one has died of AIDS. Clearly, there is a need for helping people with both afflictions.

That is why I was delighted to read this story. President Bush is pledging $1.2 billion for fighting malaria in Africa. Over a million people die every year in Africa from malaria, most of them children.

I feel sympathy for anyone dying from AIDS and believe they should be shown compassion and helped. But frankly, there is a very easy way to prevent the spread of AIDS. It's called chastity. But there is NOTHING you can do in Africa to keep from getting bit by mosquitoes.

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, July 02, 2005

Back From Christian Worldview Conference

I highly recommend the annual Christian Worldview lectures held at the Schwan Center in Trego, WI every summer. It was a bit inconvenient to get to for me. I drove from Pittsburgh to Cleveland (to get a better flight) and flew into the Twin Cities. Then I rented a car and drove another 2 1/2 hours, in the pitch dark forests of nothern Wisconsin. But it was worth it.

The Schwan Center is a comfortable lodge surrounded by beautiful lakes and woods. I even saw a black bear. The food was exceptional. The speakers were scholarly and their presentations were very informative and beneficial.

If you have questions, put them in the comment box. Here is a brief summary of the lineup I enjoyed:

  • Monday - The Confessional and Biblical Worldview (6 hours) by Dr. David Jay Webber of the Lutheran seminary in the Ukraine

  • Tuesday - The Church and Science through the Ages: Seven Key Questions from the History of Science (2 hours) by Dr. Ryan MacPherson

  • Tuesday - The Purpose of Science: Sacred Cow or Sacred Calling? (2 hours) by Dr. Angus Menuge

    Tuesday - Teaching Objective Morality to a Postmodern Audience (2 hours) by Dr. MacPherson

  • Wednesday - The Crisis of the Constitution: From Biblical Absolutes to Evolutionary Humanism (2 hours) by Dr. John Eidsmoe

  • Thursday - The New Polytheism (3 hours) by Dr. Gene Edward Veith

  • Thursday - Dealing with Constructivism and Pantheism in School Textbooks (3 hours) by Dr. Allen Quist

  • Friday - Islam's Unrecognized Threat to Christianity and the West (2 hours) by Dr. Alvin Schmidt

  • Friday - Religions in America - Where Are We Going? (2 hours) by Dr. Mark Braun

    Friday - How Christianity Changed the World (2 hours) by Dr. Alvin Schmidt

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, June 30, 2005

Moralistic Therapeutic Deism

Today, at the worldview conference I am attending this week, Dr. Gene Edward Veith spoke to us about a new book called Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers by Christian Smith and Denton Melinda Lundquist.

It seems that the authors have concluded that the majority of American teens, including those who are active members of conservative churches, basically live by a creed which the authors are calling Moralistic Therapeutic Deism.

The basic tenets of this creed are:

  • God created the world.
  • God wants us to be good.
  • God wants us to be nice.
  • The central goal of life is to be happy.
  • God does not generally interfere in a person's life - except when one has a problem (this is what I call the Divine AAA Membership).
  • And finally, good people go to heaven.

I'm sure that Smith and Lundquist are correct in their assesment of American teenagers. But, with Dr. Veith, I would not limit it to them. I'd say that is how a large percentage of adults think as well.

Except for the first two tenets listed above, none of them are Christian statements. Would it surprise you if I said that the main message of Christianity is not "be nice to people?" It certainly appears that most of the people who actually met Jesus didn't consider Him a nice person. Let's be honest, most of the people who met Jesus found Him offensive. His own disciples were frequently embarrassed by His shocking and unpredictable actions and utterances. If being nice means comporting yourself in such a manner that most people like you, Jesus was not, by that standard, a nice man. And neither are His disciples. Christ warned His hearers to count the cost of following Him for they will be despised by the world even as it despised Him.

The main message of Christianity, you see, is that we are all objects of God's wrath on account of our sin and that God's Son, Jesus, has atoned for our sins so that we may be eternally pardoned. And when this message is communicated, especially the first part, people do not usually thank you for it.

In Moralistic Therapeutic Deism, God's chief interest is to make you happy. The reality is that our greatest happiness is found on the far side of great sorrow. God has to make us unhappy (by revealing the gravity of our sinful condition) before making us truly happy (by absolving us for the sake of Christ). In other words, God has to kill us before He makes us alive.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

Intelligent Design: Just the Facts Ma'am

Well friends, I write to you from the woods of Northern Wisconsin as I am attending a week-long conference here. Today I heard a stimulating lecture on the Intelligent Design movement (ID) by Dr. Angus Menuge, professor of philosophy at Concordia University, WI. If you've ever heard Dr. Menuge then you know that he is not only very knowledgeable and articulate on this subject but has a lively sense of humor as well.

Dr. Menuge was one of over 15 expert witnesses who talked at the recent hearings in Kansas over the teaching in the public schools of alternative scientific theories about the origin of life. His testimony can be found here.

The Intelligent Design movement is one aspect of the current scientific controversy over Neo-Darwinism. ID, in short, is the scientific recognition of evidence of design in all living organisms. The Neo-Darwinist ideologues refuse to admit that a controversy even exists in spite of a growing body of scholarly literature.

Not long ago, the famous British scientist, Anthony Flew, converted from atheism to theism because, as he himself stated, he determined to follow the evidence wherever it lead him. I applaud his intellectual honesty.

The ID proponents are not asking for the advocacy of any particular religious beliefs in the classroom, only that both sides of this legitimate scientific controversy be presented without bias.

According to Dr. Menuge, one of the individuals at the hearing disapproved of teaching the controversy for fear that it might "confuse" the children. As Dr. Menuge commented, that would be like deciding not to explain the two party political system of American government because it's just too doggone confusing.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, June 26, 2005

Researching Embryonic Stem Cells Unnecessary

Scientists from Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh announced in a press release last Thursday that adult or post-natal stem cells have the same ability to multiply as embryonic stem cells. This is highly significant because of the moral problems associated with using stem cells from human embryos. Basically, this means that there are no advantages to using embryonic cells over adult cells, as was previously believed, and one would hope that research using the stem cells from human embryos would therefore cease.

One other huge advantage to using adult stem cells is that they can be taken from the patient himself which would eliminate the risk of rejection. Embryonic stem cells are foreign organisms which the patient's immune system would attack.

People in the pro-life movement have opposed embryonic stem cell research on the grounds that is is wrong to kill human beings for the purpose of conducting experiments on them, even if those experiments would ultimately benefit some people.

The conclusion is that in addition to being immoral (which is reason enough to stop), researching therapies using embryonic stem cells offers no unique benefits and may actually be the less effective strategy.

But don't take my word for it. Read this from some of the world's top researchers in the field.

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, June 25, 2005

Amazing Footage

I knew it!! Tom Cruise is the Sith Lord!! Check this out.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, June 24, 2005

Is Death a Natural Part of Life?

No. It's not. Not if by natural one means that death is the design of the Creator or that it's what is "supposed" to happen to us and thus OK. Every mourner knows that death is not OK. When God created Adam and Eve in the Garden, it was not His purpose for them to die. Death is a result of our sinfulness (sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned - Romans 5). And that's why we hate it. Because it is un-natural. And I'd suggest that God hates death even more than we do.

Russell Moore over at Mere Comments made me think of this with his post today entitled "Death is Not a Happy Ending." He alerts us to some insightful writing in the latest issue of Presbyterians Pro-Life. He quotes Terry Schlossberg's article about the death of Terri Schiavo. Schlossberg states that the Christian faith

"does not welcome death as a friend or as an escape from the burdens of this life. Scripture speaks of death as the 'last enemy,' that which is overcome by the Savior."

That is certainly true. And though I'm unaware of his personal beliefs, I have always found something appealing in the words of Dylan Thomas as he begged his dying father to fight death rather than accept it: "Do not go gentle into that good night.... Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

The Culture of Death is trying to redefine death, to domesticate it. The Culture of Death believes that death is nature's way of making room for life. The Culture of Death believes that a person's value is determined by his productivity so that when a person becomes a burden or a drain, then he should die. It's a "survival of the fittest" thing.

Of course, one must accept the reality that death is inevitable for all of us (except those alive at the parousia). And there are times when a dying person must be allowed to die - though not because it is his/her "right" but because it has become the lesser evil.

At the same as I say all of that, I confess that by His own dying and rising, our Lord Jesus has transformed death so that for those who are baptized into Christ, death has lost its sting. We are set free from the fear of death and, as the Apostle writes, we do not grieve as the world does.

Even Christians may occasionally contribute to this domestication of death when we emphasize that so-and-so has gone to a better place. That's true. And it is comforting. Jesus told the penitent thief, "Today you shall be with me in Paradise." And St. Paul does write that to be absent from the body is to be with the Lord. But we too often fail to recall the promised resurrection on the Last Day, though we confess it in the creed. Russell Moore is right to point out that "The final hope is to share in Christ's resurrection, and so to overturn the curse of sin and the reign of death."

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, June 23, 2005

Chronicles of Narnia Movie


I'm so looking forward to this movie. Anyone have an inside line on whether the film is loyal to the book?

Sphere: Related Content

Major Blog Milestone

Yesterday, I crossed the 10 thousand point in blog visits. More than 10 thousand in almost exactly three months. According to my stat counter, I currently get an average of around 100 unique visitors each day. That has been slowly on the increase. The only other pattern I have noticed is that my traffic usually drop significantly on Saturdays and Sundays. Thanks for reading and keep coming back!

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, June 22, 2005

Different Versions of the Ten Commandments??

For the past two weeks, I have been teaching a Bible class on the Ten Commandments at my congregation. And naturally, one of the first things I wanted to do was address the fact that different groups enumerate the commandments differently. Did you know that Roman Catholics and Lutherans number them one way, the Protestants another, and the Jews yet another? So when people debate whether the Decalogue should be inscribed on civic monuments or displayed in government buildings, they will have to make a decision as to which enumeration to follow. One argument could reasonably be made, I suppose, that by choosing one listing over the others, an endorsement is being made of a specific church or religion.

In my digging, I uncovered an old Washington Post article about this topic. You should give it a look because it shows the three different ways of numbering the commandments. Does this mean there is some kind of discrepancy in God's Word? No. Reading the Biblical accounts in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5, one finds that Lutherans, Roman Catholics, Protestants and Jews all have the same commandments. But since the scriptures themselves do not delineate how they should be numbered, there may naturally arise differing listings.

It appears to me that the main difference between the Roman Catholic/Lutheran numbering and the Protestant numbering is that the Calvinists and the more radical reformers wanted to place emphasis on the whole graven image part, presumably to condemn Rome's proclivity for statues. But since the Lutherans, while not praying to the saints, found no objection in 3-dimensional church art, they understood the graven image prohibition as simply part of having no other gods.

I'm most intrigued by the fact that in the Jewish tradition, the first commandment is not a commandment at all, but a statement of gospel: "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery." As a Lutheran Christian, I can appreciate that very well. The commands then become less imperative and more indicative. A Christian might understand it this way: "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of slavery to sin and the grave by the death and resurrection of my Son, your Lord, Jesus Christ." In that case, the commands become descriptive of how God's children live, not just how they should live or must live. It's a statement of who we are in Christ Jesus. Or as our Lord Himself put it: "You are the light of the world. You are the salt of the earth."

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Playing Book Tag: 5 to 10 I'd Recommend to Youth

Here's something clever floating around the blogosphere. Book tag. Bob Waters over at Watersblogged tagged me.

The game is this:

Imagine that a local philanthropist is hosting an event for local high school students and has asked you to pick out five to ten books to hand out as door prizes. At least one book should be funny and at least one book should provide some history of Western Civilization and at least one book should have some regional connection. The philanthropist doesn't like foul language (but will allow some four-letter words in context, such as expressed during battle by soldiers). Otherwise things are pretty wide open. What do you pick?
  1. Citizen Soldiers by Stephen Ambrose. I always enjoy Ambrose's Word War II books. This one in particular because he highlights the characteristics and virtues that not only make America great, but were the foundation for our victory in that great crusade. An excellent and engaging look at the everyday Americans who saved Western civilization (and France).

  2. Tortured for Christ by Richard Wurmbrand. I read this one myself as a teenager. I don't recall it well enough to vouch for all its theology, but it really opened my eyes to what Jesus meant when He said, "Take up your cross and come follow me." As Bonhoeffer famously said, "When Christ calls a man, He bids him come and die." Wurmbrand was a Lutheran pastor (Romanian Jewish convert) who was imprisoned and tortured first by the Nazis and then by the Communists. He later testified about his sufferings before the U.S. congress and, when some found his account hard to swallow, he stood up to remove his shirt in that august assembly to reveal his scars. Having been briefly to the Sudan myself and knowing that more Christians were martyred in the 20th century than in the previous 19 combined, I think today's youth need to read this book, or one like it. It's short too.

  3. How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must) by Ann Coulter. This one is to fulfill the humor requirement. Not only do I think Ann's perspective on politics and culture to be generally very clear-headed, but her acerbic wit slays me. Her bit on Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ is the number one best review essay I saw. She totally gets it. Her understanding of the atonement is refreshingly blunt. I quoted her in a sermon once. Her earlier book, Slander, is good too.

  4. Table Talk by Martin Luther. This could also fit under humor, in a pinch. I'd more likely file it under wisdom literature. The Blessed Reformer offers pithy dinnertime comments on theology, marriage, politics, and beer.

  5. Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel by C.F.W. Walther. It's a classic. And no one explains this better. Frankly, this book opened Scripture to me unlike anything else before or since.

  6. Novels no human should fail to read: Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens (substitutionary atonement); Lord of the Flies by William Golding (original sin); 1984 and Animal Farm by George Orwell (the threat of totalitarianism); The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis (Jesus); The Fellowship of the Ring by J.R.R. Tolkien (friendship); Les Miserables by Victor Hugo (grace); The Telltale Heart short story by Edgar Allen Poe (guilt); Merchant of Venice play by Wm. Shakespeare (mercy); The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath (depression); A Prayer for Owen Meany by John Irving (divine surprise).
The reason I hate making lists like this is because I know full well that five minutes after I post this, ten more books will come to mind. So be forewarned that there may be a sequel.

And now I get to tag someone. Your turn Preachrblog, Confessing Evangelical, and CyberBrethren.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, June 20, 2005

Run Lola Run

So, last night I watched a German movie called Run Lola Run from 1999 starring Franka Potente (who was with Matt Damon in the Bourne movies). It's a clever film about how the outcome of one's life can often depend on the minor details.

The plot is simple. Lola gets a panicked phone call from her boyfriend, Manni, who says he's going to die in 20 minutes unless he comes up with 100,000 deutsche marks. It turns out he was supposed to deliver the money to a gangster promptly at noon, but on his way to the meeting point, he'd been scared off the subway by the sight of two police officers. In his fright, he left the bag of cash on the train where it was purloined by a homeless man. Now Manni is convinced that the bad guy will suspect him of stealing the money and will certainly kill him unless Lola can help him. His other option, he figures, would be to rob a bank before 12 o'clock. The rest of the film shows Lola frantically running from one point in the city to another to come up with the cash Manni needs.

What makes this interesting is that the film tells the story three times with three very different outcomes, all depending on the smallest of details. It's very creative, edited like a rock video, and surprisingly entertaining.

Another film that covers the same motif is Sliding Doors with Gwyneth Paltrow. Two stories are told with the same characters and the same setup, but one detail early on totally changes the way things unfold.

It reminds me of a science fiction short story I read a long time ago (Asimov?) about a man who invents time travel and goes back to the age of the dinosaurs. While there, he accidentally kills a single insect, but that minor incident alters all of human history. I don't buy the evolutionary premise, but the idea is intriguing.

For instance, in college I used to go on Monday nights to sing hymns and read scriptures at a local nursing home. One night, a friend of a friend was visiting from out of state. If I'd missed going just that one time, I might never have met my wife, my son would never have been born and who knows how many other things would be different?

In our Gospel reading yesterday, from Matthew 10, Jesus told His disciples that their Heavenly Father governs the life of every sparrow and has numbered the very hairs on their heads. It's comforting to know that our benevolent God has the details in control.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, June 19, 2005

Dads and Church

Something quick for Father's Day. Check out these two posts from Pr. Paul McCain:

Post 1 Why Dad is So Important

Post 2 The Truth About Men and Church

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, June 17, 2005

Jesus Christ is Lord... or is He?

Not if you belong to the United Church of Christ, apparantly. The UCC (sometimes facetiously called Unitarians Considering Christ) is about to debate a resolution on this very matter.

For two millenia, whatever Christians may have disagreed on, everyone would have at least been willing to say that Jesus is Lord. Some "conservative" UCC pastors have submitted a resolution to their July denominational meeting which affirms this traditional bedrock belief and requires all clergy to accept it. This may seem like a no-brainer to you and me, but some observers say they think the measure will fail.

This boils down to whether the clergy in the UCC believe that Jesus is God or not. Apparantly many of them do not.

See here for details.

Russell Moore over at Mere Comments summed it up eloquently: Still, it is sad to know that in the United Church of Christ Arius would be considered a moderate.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, June 16, 2005

Happy Birthday to Me! Happy Birthday to Me!

Today, Scott Edmund Stiegemeyer (the first) turned 36 years young. I know; I know. You can hardly believe that I'm that old. I get that a lot. I was most recently carded at a restaurant less than twelve months ago. So although it absolutely positively stretches the limits of credulity, I am 36 years old today. And luvin it.

Actually, as I think about it, I really think of myself as nothing more than an overgrown teenager... for better or worse. I still like rock-n-roll (my son tells me to TURN THAT MUSIC DOWN). I still enjoy many of the same types of movies, television and books that I did when I was 16. Of course, at that age, I was an avid reader of theology and history.

Here's what I did:

  • My wonderful wife and son took me down to the Three Rivers Arts Festival. I love that kind of stuff and bought a silver bracelet for my wonderful wife. We're planning to go back down in a couple of days to hear Aimee Mann.

  • We went to my son's baseball game. He got a double, a ground out, a walk, and a strike out. He mostly played 3rd base and had a good throw to 2nd getting out a runner. His team won. Two wondeful people from my congregation showed up to cheer for my son. It was great to see you Joy and John.

  • My wonderful wife and son took me to dinner after the game to Nakama, a Japanese steakhouse where I had miso soup, salad, hibachi shrimp appetizer, rice, veggies, filet mignon, and two glasses of my favorit beer: Guiness stout.

  • Got home around 10 p.m. and opened gifts. A lovely day.
One major highlight: Eating deep fried Oreo cookies and a deep fried Twinkie at the Art Festival. Ain't life grand?

Sphere: Related Content

More on Terri's Autopsy

You have to admit that this is a pretty ridiculous headline: Terri Schiavo Autopsy: Manner of Death Undetermined. Again, I'm not a doctor, but I'm pretty sure we do know the cause of her death. Maybe being denied food and water for two weeks had something to do with it.

Michelle Malkin, once more, sheds light on a cloudy subject. She writes, "Terri Schiavo, a profoundly disabled woman who was not terminally ill and who had an army of family members ready to care for her for the rest of her natural life, succumbed to forced dehydration at the hands of her spouse-in-name-only.

We know she died of dehydration. And we know that she was severely brain damaged. What the 39 page autopsy did not answer is what caused Terri Schiavo to collapse 15 years ago. We will probably never know that.

The autopsy does not tell us what degree of awareness Terri experienced. But some will ask, "wasn't she a vegetable?" Experts have reminded us that an autopsy cannot determine the existence of PVS.

Supporters of Michael Schiavo now mock those "extreme right-wingers" who wanted to keep Terri alive. I guess they forgot about the legions of lefty Democrats who also defended her life such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Joseph Lieberman, Nat Hentoff, Lanny Davis, and Alan Dershowitz. Only extremist left-wingers think this was a right/left debate.

Some good thoughtful comments from Captain's Quarters, who wrote:

Terri had never requested to die, not with any transparency or formality. All we had for witnesses on her state of mind was a husband who waited until after he had won a substantial lawsuit to recall a conversation in which Terri made an offhand comment about not wanting to live on a respirator, and two of his relatives who corroborated him. The husband had a conflict of interest in the matter, having started a new relationship with another woman and fathering two children. On the other side, Terri's parents and siblings were willing to take over her medical care and the responsibility for its costs.

Amd most of all, as the coroner affirmed yesterday, Terri was not dying.

Despite all of this, Florida decided that it would deliberately kill Terri on the basis of her husband's wishes, without any living will or formal indication of her state of mind....

And when the state decides to kill someone who isn't dying on their own -- as opposed to stopping artificial breathing/cardiac support for those who lack any ability to survive without it -- it should have more substantial oversight before doing so, and it should have more to rely on than an estranged husband's belated recollection of a superficial, general conversation as its basis.

Why do you suppose 26 national disability rights organizations spoke in favor of preserving Terri's life? Because, if we don't check ourselves, this really can become a slippery slope.

Other good insightful commentary can be found at Polipundit and Gatewaypundit.

Sphere: Related Content

New Curriculum at Concordia Theological Seminary