You are currently browsing the monthly archive for August, 2007.
This article from Cal Thomas gives a scary glimpse into America’s future as a nation if we do not take drastic steps to resolve our border and immigration problem. You can find the original article here.
Vanishing England
By Cal Thomas
BELFAST, NORTHERN IRELAND — Perhaps there will not always be an England. An exodus unprecedented in modern times, coupled with a record influx of foreigners, is threatening to erode the character of the land of William Shakespeare and overpowering monarchs, a land that served as the cradle for much of American thought, law and culture.
The figures, making headlines in London newspapers, tell only part of the story. Between June 2005 and June 2006 nearly 200,000 British citizens chose to leave the country for a new life elsewhere. During the same period, at least 574,000 immigrants came to Britain. This number does not include the people who broke the law to get there, or the thousands unknown to the government. Britain’s Office of National Statistics reports that middle-class Britons are beginning to move out of towns in southern England that have become home to large numbers of immigrants, thereby altering the character of neighborhoods that have remained unchanged for generations.
Britons give many reasons for leaving, but their stories share one commonality: life in Britain has become unbearable for them. They fear lawlessness and the threat of more terrorism from a growing Muslim population and the loss of a sense of Britishness, exacerbated by the growing refusal of public schools to teach the history and culture of the nation to the next generation. What it means to be British has been watered down in a plague of political correctness that has swept the country faster than hoof-and-mouth disease. Officials say they do not wish to “offend” others.
Hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers are about to be granted “amnesty” to stay in Britain. The government’s approach is similar to that pursued by President Bush, who failed to win congressional approval for his amnesty plan. In Britain it appears likely to succeed. Migrants will be granted immediate access to many benefits, including top priority for council housing. Taxpayers will foot the bill.
The Shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, called the policy a “stealth amnesty.” Again, in a comment reminiscent of the debate in America, Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch UK, said: “This is yet another example of the Alice in Wonderland world of human rights. If you break British law for long enough, you acquire rights not penalties.”
British media have carried stories about an Italian immigrant who murdered a schoolteacher and was sentenced to life in prison. He is about to be released after serving just 12 years. The government wants to deport him to Italy, but a combination of British human rights legislation and European Union law are making it impossible to do so. This does not bode well for deporting Islamic terrorists who call for the overthrow of the government and incite young people to acts of violence.
Abraham Lincoln said no nation can exist half slave and half free. Neither can a nation be sustained if it allows conditions that result in mass emigration, while importing huge numbers of foreigners who come from backgrounds that do not practice assimilation or tolerance of other beliefs. When one factors in the high number of abortions (one in five pregnancies are aborted in England and Wales), the high birth rates of immigrants (15 times those of white Britons), it doesn’t take a population expert to predict that the days of the England we have known may be numbered.
The problem for Britain and the United States isn’t just the change in demographics. It is the reluctance of both countries to inculcate the beliefs, history and, yes, religious ideals, which made our nations so successful that others wanted to come and be a part of them. The difference between many of the current immigrants and those of the past is that the previous ones wanted to become fully American or fully British. The current ones, in too many cases, would destroy what makes our countries unique. And the “leaders” of Britain and America refuse to stop it. The greater tragedy is that the people of Britain have little say in any of this, so they are taking the road of last resort. They are leaving.
One of my passions over these past few years of seminary has been studying the Church Fathers. Not even knowing what the word “patristic” meant when I arrived in Fort Worth in December of 2003, a love of these ancient theological pillars was taught and instilled in me by my professors here at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. While it may surprise some, my Church History and Systematic Theology professors taught me that it was these men that forged the theological foundations of our faith that has lasted these past millennia. While these ancient theologians are human are often erred, so much of our preaching and teaching can be enriched by these great giants of the faith.
Through the passionate teaching I have experienced on the church fathers by great scholars like Dr. Malcolm Yarnell, I began to see the desperate need we have as Southern Baptists (and all conservative evangelicals in general) of reintroducing the early fathers to our churches. One of my goals for the future of this blog is introducing the reader to some of these early fathers and share their wisdom and passion for God’s word with you.
On this note I want to introduce a book that I am currently reading for my Theological Method course. “Retrieving the Tradition & Renewing Evangelicalism: A Primer for Suspicious Protestants” by D.H. Williams is a book that attempts to reveal to the reader the role of tradition (particularly from the early and even the medieval church) in the development of our theologies. I am just beginning the work, but I hope to share with you in the coming weeks some of the more pertinent observations from the book. If you happen to have read this book please feel free to respond to me with your impressions.
I leave you with these words from Jerome:
“Do you dread poverty? Christ calls the poor blessed. Does toil frighten you? No athlete is crowned but in the sweat of his brow. Are you anxious as regards food? Faith fears no famine. Do you dread the bare ground for limbs wasted with fasting? The Lord lies there beside you…. Does the boundless solitude of the desert terrify you? In the spirit you may walk always in paradise. Do but turn your thoughts there and you will be no more in the desert.” Letter 14.10
As the 2008 political season continues to heat up it comes as no surprise that some in the Christian community will remind us of our duty as “Christian Leaders” to sit down and shut up concerning our biblically informed political beliefs. I came across a great example of this from our “fair and balanced” friends over at the Associated Baptist Press. Dr. David Gushee from Union University has provided the reader with 17 rules on how a Christian leader should act concerning politics. You can find the post in its entirety here, below are the 17 points along with some humble commentary from yours truly on the items that are particularly ill-conceived.
1. Christian leaders must not officially or unofficially endorse political candidates or a political party.
· Are we asking our Christian leaders to commit to a political “don’t ask don’t tell” policy. Every Christian, and every pagan for that matter, has just as much right to directly or indirectly support a political candidate or position.
2. Christian leaders must not distribute essentially partisan or single-issue voter guides that purport to be apolitical or nonpartisan.
· Agreed in principle. However I don’t see a problem with the distribution of single issue or partisan voter guides that make no attempt to claim a nonpartisan view. I am guessing here, but I think Dr. Gushee would disagree with me.
3. Christian leaders must not publicly handicap or comment upon the political horse race.
· See First Amendment of United States Constitution
4. Christian leaders must not provide private or public advice to particular politicians, parties, or campaigns concerning how they can strategize in order to win evangelical or Christian votes.
· Agreed in principle. However there is a big difference to someone who does not have Evangelical Christian values trying to “speak Christian,” and someone who actually shares those values and needs assistance in communicating his beliefs to a wider audience. I would offer advice to the later candidate and not the former.
5. Christian leaders must not calibrate their public teachings or writings in order to affect the outcome of political elections or to gain and hold the support of politicians.
· Let me see if I understand this correctly. If I write or preach supporting the sanctity of life, and it changes someone’s view on the issue, am I in error? We are called to stand up boldly and proclaim that which is biblical and that which is an abomination before God. Our business is the changing of minds and hearts toward the pattern of Christ.
6. Christian leaders must not attend political rallies or campaign events of one candidate or party unless they are prepared to attend rallies and events of all candidates and parties.
· Last time I checked being a Christian leader does not negate my right to have an opinion and supports those who share in it.
7. Christian leaders must not invite political candidates to speak in church pulpits or on church grounds unless they are prepared to invite all political candidates of all parties to do so.
· Similar to the last item, this promotes an “all or nothing” mentality. Despite this absurd piece of logic I do think it would be a great idea to invite candidates from different political ideologies. People need to see why some idea are just plain wrong for themselves, rather than how they have it spoon fed to them on CNN.
8. Christian leaders must not identify the potential or actual victory of any politician as a victory for God or God’s kingdom.
· I agree with Dr. Gushee that Christian leaders need to be careful in this area. However if a day comes where infanticide is abolished or my daughter can pray freely in her school, I will proclaim that day as a victory for our God.
9. Christian leaders must limit their direct contact with politicians or staff in order to avoid even the appearance of undue loyalty or involvement.
· See comment to number 6
10. Christian leaders must not engage in voter registration campaigns or get out the vote efforts aimed at mobilizing the voters of one political party rather than another.
· Find me a voter registration drive that is not partisan and maybe we could talk.
11. Christian leaders must not direct the funds of their organizations toward direct or indirect support for a particular political candidate or party.
· Without the consent of the organization I agree. However if through whatever decision making structure the organization has in place it was decided to direct some funds, then so be it.
12. Christian leaders may not sidestep these rules by drawing a distinction between their activities as a “private individual” over against their service in their public role.
· My apologies to Dr. Gushee if this is somewhat offensive, but this is idea is just dumb. Public individuals are well within their rights to act as private persons. As leaders we are not avatars of the organization we serve 24/7. Every leader has their own personal beliefs and interests and they should be able to peruse and promote those interests as any other citizen. If a pastor disliked the local diner, and told others about it, is he acting in place of the church and condemning the diner? Of course not. He is stating a personal preference and standing by it. This may be a crude analogy, but I think you get the point.
13. Christian leaders must offer Christian proclamation related to the large number of public issues clearly addressed by biblical principles or direct biblical teaching.
· Agreed. But this does seem to conflict with most of his previous statements. I am curious where Dr. Gushee would draw the line.
14. Christian leaders must encourage Christian people toward active citizenship, including studying the issues and the candidates and testing policy stances and candidates according to biblical criteria.
· Heartedly Agree.
15. Christian leaders must model and encourage respectful and civil discourse related to significant public issues as well as political candidates.
· Heartedly Agree
16. Christian leaders must model and encourage prayer for God-ordained government, its leaders and their policies.
· Heartedly Agree
17. Christian leaders must teach and model respect for the constitutional relationship between religion and the state as spelled out in the First Amendment.
· This statement is really a condensed version of most of the previous statements. Free Speech and Freedom of Religion are intertwined. You can not truly have one without the other. However many liberal and moderate political elites think that if your political speech comes from a religious (mostly Christian) belief system then it is not really speech. It is simply promoting ones religion over the religion of others. Thus any perspective form a biblical Christian standpoint is seen as intolerant and oppressive. I seriously doubt that Dr. Gushee would say that I do not have the “right” to express my political beliefs as a Christian leader. He is simply stating that I should not express these opinions in respect for the authority I have over people in the Chrisitan community. However the same basic point remains. Because my speech comes from a biblically (conservative) informed perspective it is not considered speech but somthing else. We must stand against this kind of distinction. We should be free to express our political perspectives, especially if it is sourced in the Word of God.
Political activism should never take the place of proclaiming the gospel. When this happens we become no better than Christian charlatans like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. We should always strive to have the gospel at the front of our mind and on our lips. But with the proclamation of the gospel we are also instructed to bring the full Word to the people. Whether it is abortion, poverty, marriage, defense of the weak, or the variety of other issues the Bible speaks of directly or indirectly, we should be equally bold in proclaiming these truths to a lost and fallen world.
Matthew 5:13-16 3 “You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people’s feet. 14 “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.
For my faithful readers (both of you) I will be returning to my semi-regualr postings this weekend. With my summer class complete I have a bit more of what passes for free time in my house. Thanks for your patience!
Bishop Joe
