Could Monks, Monasteries and Prayer be Key in the Culture War?

Protestants and particularly Evangelicals look upon the idea of monks and monasteries, nuns and convents, with a suspicious skeptical eye. How, they ask, is that kind of lifestyle fulfilling Jesus command to go out into the world? How, they ask, will that help to rescue our corrupt society and bring God’s salvation, justice and order?

Monks in Oklahoma are creating a cloistered compound built to last 1,000 years.

Most Catholic monasteries in this country are devoted to service, operating schools and other institutions, Anderson said. "We wanted to build a community like the ancient monasteries, a place devoted to the contemplative life and prayer."

Contemplative prayer? Is that the same as centering prayer? Isn’t that mysticism? Or New Age and Emerging Church stuff? Some Christians claim that the focus should rather be on a return to the simplicity and purity of the Christian faith.

The courtyard and monks' rooms are part of the cloistered area, not open to the public, as part of the monks' discipline in separation from the world, and silence.

"This is to create an atmosphere conducive to prayer and communion with Christ," Anderson said.

That has the sound of simplicity and purity to me.

Some Christians, such as Tony Campolo, are linking this kind of prayer and communion to a spiritual revival now starting to take root in the Western world. Others, typically faith communities that take strong anti-Catholic stands, condemn such prayer practices entirely.

However, the Pope himself, along with other Catholic leaders, has also warned of certain New Age dangers in contemporary prayer movements.

There is obviously more to monks and monasteries than the issue of contemplative prayer but an open mind to the related aspects of Christian history will do wonders to dispel confusion.

Dr. Albert Mohler on IVF and Evangelicals, Men and Abortion

Dr. Albert Mohler posts two great additions to his blog, one on the recent emphasis in the LA Times on men’s’ voices in the abortion debate and another on IVF.

"We Had Abortions . . . . I've Had Abortions" -- A New Voice in the Abortion Debate

A new voice is emerging in the abortion debate, and this voice is a powerful witness to the tragedy of killing the unborn. This voice is the voice of the fathers of abortion.

"A Rather Unexpected Aspect of IVF" -- Over a Million Human Embryos Destroyed in Britain

Far too many evangelicals seem to turn a blind eye to this reality. While we celebrate the birth of a child and the gift of life, we cannot blind ourselves to the harsh and grotesque reality that this technology also means the destruction of human life.

Many evangelicals fail to see what many proponents of human embryonic stem cell research have noted -- a glaring inconsistency in condemning the destruction of human embryos through stem cell research, while ignoring or dismissing the destruction of embryos in IVF clinics.

More here on in-vitro fertilization.

Abortion Talk: A False Dilemma Exposed

I received the following e-mail commentary today from Pastor Steven W. Cornell, Senior Pastor of Millersville Bible Church, Millersville, PA. It’s also available on Pastor Steve’s blog.

Pastor Cornell, very much like Pastor John Piper, is a shining model of Christian leadership taking a bold, biblical stance in defense of life.

**********

Sanctity of Human Life Sunday

There is a false dilemma at the heart of abortion talk. It goes like this: oppose abortion and you side with politics; support abortion and you side with the health and safety of women. Is it possible that the exact opposite of this is true? Perhaps those who oppose abortion side with the health and safety of women. What do the facts substantiate?

The medical effects of abortion and post-abortion stress disorder clearly indicate that abortion is rarely a good health decision for a woman. In a congressional hearing on the impact of abortion, psychologist Wanda Franz stated, "Women who report negative after-effects from abortion know exactly what their problem is. They report horrible nightmares of children calling them from trash cans, of body parts, and blood. When they are reminded of the abortion, the women re-experienced it with terrible psychological pain ... They feel worthless and victimized because they failed at the most natural of human activities -- the role of being a mother."

Many women battle long term emotional and psychological damage because of profound regret about their abortion. Abortion proponents, who attribute these effects to induced guilt from religion and pro-life activists, trivialize the actual trauma these women endure. As a result, it is not surprising that the greatest measures of support for women facing post abortion stress disorder comes from pro-life ministries. These ministries treat seriously the feelings of women rather than trivializing them.

How long will we be duped by politically motivated deceptions? Protecting abortion is not about protecting a women’s health. Should it bother us when an organization like Planned Parenthood (while prospering on the abortion industry) intentionally deceives people about the traumatic effects of abortion? The irrefutable fact stands that abortion, as a procedure, and in its after effects, is not about the health and safety of women. It’s more about a culture of convenience, self-absorption and money.

It is frightening that a person's “being wanted or planned” is the criterion of her right to life. Yet here is another source of blatant deception. Is the life of the fetus no more than a product of conception? When a woman chooses to terminate her pregnancy is she actually terminating the life of her baby? Why do we have laws related to fetal homicide? Why do Doctor’s perform fetal surgery on a baby in the womb? Consider the following facts:

“Scientifically we are human beings by virtue of our genetic makeup. The human code in the chromosomes is there from the start. We are utterly different from monkeys or rats or elephants as soon as the chromosomes of egg and sperm meet.”

“At eight weeks, all the organs are present - brain functioning, heart pumping, liver making blood cells, kidney cleaning the fluids, fingerprints formed, etc. Yet almost all abortions happen later than this date.”

“Ultrasound has given a stunning window on the womb that shows the unborn at eight weeks sucking a thumb, recoiling from pricking, responding to sound. We can see the amazing pictures in Life Magazine or various books or Web pages.”

“There is a principle of justice that, when two legitimate rights conflict - say the woman's right not to be pregnant, and the baby's right not to be killed - the right that should be limited is the one that would do the most harm.” (Above facts from John Piper)

It’s time to enact laws that would compassionately protect both the women facing unplanned pregnancies and their babies. But until we accept the truth that induced abortion is detrimental to the physical, emotional and psychological health of women and the deliberate destruction of an unborn child, such laws will be considered extremist.

Deadly Ecumenism: Evangelicals and Roman Catholics in the Waiting Room

Russell D. Moore, executive director of the Henry Institute, a senior editor of Touchstone magazine and executive editor of The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology presents a sad and tragic side of "ecumenism" in this article.

**********

The Ecumenism of the Abortion Clinic

We are accustomed to seeing Evangelicals and Roman Catholics praying together outside abortion clinics and working together for pro-life legislation. But we don't think about a less pleasant ecumenism: Catholics and Evangelicals waiting together in the lobby of an abortion facility.

A front-page article in the New York Times last September featured an inside look at the daily workings of an abortion clinic in Little Rock. The piece communicated the calloused yet tortured consciences of the women involved. They don't wish to be seen, or to make contact with others in the waiting room. Even more striking, though, are their religious commitments.

One Baptist college student, having her third abortion, is quoted in the article saying: "My religion is against it. In a way I feel I'm doing wrong, but you can be forgiven. I blame myself. I feel I shouldn't have sex at all."

"I've done this once and swore I wouldn't do it again," said a woman named Regina. "Every woman has second thoughts, especially because I'm Catholic." Regina noted that she went to confession. "The priest didn't hound me," she reported. "He said, 'People make mistakes.'"

The facility's operating room supervisor, Ebony, whom the article chillingly describes as rinsing "the blood off aborted tissues," could understand Regina's story. Ebony, too, has had an abortion. "As a Baptist, she still considered abortion a sin, but so are a lot of things we all do, she said." The article closes with the Baptist's words to the Catholic undergoing the abortion: "No problem sweetie. We've all been there."

Other Ecumenisms

As we talk through the "ecumenism of the trenches" between Catholics and Evangelicals, we should remember the sad truth that there is also an "ecumenism of the waiting room." The women ushered into the death clinics are not usually secularist feminists, proudly wearing their NOW Tshirts. More often, they are girls from St. Joseph's parish or First Baptist's youth group.

They would be counted as "prolife" on the telephone survey. They know all the right answers to the sanctity of life questions, and they can be counted on, when they reach voting age, to cast ballots for pro-life candidates. But when pregnant, they wait together for the abortionist's solution.

Whatever very real soteriological debates exist between Catholics and Evangelicals, they share, at least in the waiting room, the same doctrine of grace: "Let us sin that grace may abound" (Rom. 6:1).

The challenge for our churches is not to be more condemnatory. The message of God's grace is, after all, the heart of the gospel. The atonement of Jesus forgives every sin, including that of the shedding of innocent blood. We must comfort repentant post-abortion women with the truth that "there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ" (Rom. 8:1).

At the same time, like the Apostle Paul, we must remember that grace that is license to sin is no grace at all. The problem is not that "we all make mistakes." The issue is instead that judgment has fallen, in all of its fury, on a crucified Messiah who became sin that we might become the righteousness of God in him (2 Cor. 5:21). As we proclaim God the justifier, we must not forget that this means the proclamation of God the just (Rom. 3:26).

The challenge for our churches is to reclaim the Christian emphasis on repentance. American culture is far too familiar with nominal Catholics who prepare for Lent with a hedonistic Mardi Gras and with nominal Evangelicals who plan to "rededicate their lives" at the altar call after a weekend of decadence.

Those who claim that though I am doing this thing I deem best for me, God will forgive me later, are not only presuming upon the grace of God, they are recapitulating the sin of the first man and woman: to seek autonomy and the self as god while still wishing to remain in the presence of the Holy One. This is not a repentant disposition, but instead a deeply arrogant and satanic one.

If I follow the course of my own desires, even while looking forward to forgiveness, I am worshipping another god: the creature rather than the Creator (Rom. 1:25). Indeed, in this moment, the felt need for forgiveness itself is just another self-focused passion. The sinner seeks to be his own authority for what is best at the moment and to be his own authority for what is best in the future, reconciliation with God--but all on my terms and at my timing.

Real Repentance

Repentance, however, is about more than a formal appeal for the nullification of consequences, as though it were the equivalent of having a parking ticket expunged. Instead, repentance is a conviction that God is right in his holiness to judge this transgression with everlasting wrath. The sinner appeals to God to be merciful, not because the sin is justifiable, but precisely because it is not justifiable at all. Repentance, then, justifies not the sin, but the holiness and justice of the Creator.

Jesus sent away a wealthy politician because he loved his financial assets more than he sought to follow the Messiah (Matt. 19:16–22). In the same way, we must fear that generations of self-professing Christians value their "reproductive freedom" or their "personal authenticity" more than they treasure Christ. And all the while they, like the rich young ruler, approach the throne of Christ talking about eternal life, perhaps even singing "Amazing Grace."

The implications for the Church are stark. If we don't preach a biblical understanding of sin and grace, the local abortionist is ready to take our place in the pulpit.

---

Reprinted from Russell D. Moore, for the Editors, "Sinners Together," Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity, January/February 2006.

[Source]

Light Blogging These Days—Visit Some of These Links

Blogging has been light lately and may continue so for a few more weeks. I’ve been working on some important projects to ensure the survival and success of the Vote Life, Canada! campaign. Any prayers would of course be welcome.

Here are some stories that I have been following. Maybe you’ll find them interesting and helpful as well so I’m posting the links.

**********

Rick Warren recently hosted Hillary Clinton at his AIDS conference. Here’s one report of the event: Clinton gets standing ovations from evangelicals

And here’s good commentary from today’s Christian Post:
Saddleback's Conference on AIDS Gave Hillary Evangelical Cover
Because Rick Warren is a fellow evangelical and has rightly earned the respect and trust of many in the evangelical community (myself included) I am reluctant and yet compelled to question the judgment of including people on the program who do not support the Bible’s teaching concerning the sanctity of life and the protection of the family.

Mark Pickup has a post up that’s worth reading
Ronald Reagan's Clarion Call to America
According to the US Bureau of Vital Statistics, the year before Roe Versus Wade (1972) there were 39 women who died from illegal abortions in America.[4] Suffice to say that abortion advocates SLIGHTLY inflated the numbers…

You’re probably well informed about the Golden Compass controversy with reporting like this from LifeSiteNews
US Bishops asked to Fire Chief Film Critic over Glowing Reviews for "Brokeback" and "Compass"

Here’s a rather detailed posting from John Borst who publishes Tomorrows Trust, a “web based journal of news and opinion on Catholic education.”
Golden Compass 'review' causes media firestorm
Quite frankly I have never seen an educational issue so intense or concentrated in my years of monitoring education issues. The recent Ontario election debate over faith-based schools did not even come close. It was more drawn out. It never did reach the intensity that ‘censoring’ The Golden Compass has achieved.

And finally, Dr. Albert Mohler adds his perspective. [Great job, Dr. Mohler!]
The Golden Compass -- A Briefing for Concerned Christians

More on the US Catholic Bishops’ recent voting guidelines, approved November 14 in Baltimore during the semiannual assembly of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Here’s a pretty standard report
Bishops aim to shape political consciences

But here’s the best analysis I’ve read on the Bishops’ guidelines. There’s quite a lot of commentary floating around on the subject but Dr. Jeff Mirus of Catholic Culture has made an excellent and very useful summary in my opinion.
How Not to Form Consciences for Faithful Citizenship
I’ve finally plowed through what we might call the U.S. Bishops’ quadrennial voting manifesto, “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship”, released at their November 2007 meeting. Never has a document been so technically correct yet so utterly confusing. As a piece of practical voting advice, it is a disaster.

Family activist says studies show damaging effects of porn use
A pro-family attorney says a recent study confirms that pornography has devastating consequences.

Christian Divorce Trends Fuel Debates

34 Yr Old Evangelical to Replace Dr. D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Ministries

Here’s something I’ve been too busy to bring to the front burner until now.

A 34-year-old evangelical has stepped up to the plate to lead a prominent global media ministry in boldly spreading biblical truth to millions. Brian E. Fisher, former executive vice president of Coral Ridge Ministries, was promoted this month to president and CEO, becoming the second ever head of the Fort Lauderdale, Fla.-based ministry. He succeeds the late founder, Dr. D. James Kennedy.

This guy is one smart cookie for 34 years old. Christian Post does a great interview altogether but below are my favorite sections. I only wish other evangelical pastors and leaders would take special note of what he said—and take it to heart.

**********

Christian Post: You have something new at next year's Truths that Transform America conference, called "Pastors, Pulpits, and Politics," which supports the right for pastors to speak on social issues from the pulpit. Is this part of the effort by conservative groups such as Family Research Council and Focus on the Family who had issued a letter to pastors telling them that they have the right to speak on these issues?

Fisher: The last two hours of that conference is a special session called ‘Pastors, Pulpits, and Politics.’ We’re doing something very unique. We’re partnering with a few other ministries and we have American Vision and American Family Association. We’re talking with two or three other major ministries and we’re taking that last two hours and we’re going to be featuring some of the nation’s foremost authorities on what pastors’ rights are in terms of their ability to speak out on political and cultural issues.

And in two hours we’re going to educate America on those issues. We feel as many others do that the Church at large is disturbingly silent on core issues that they shouldn’t be. Many times … the pastors of the lay people don’t know what their boundaries are legally. And so we’re going to be very clearly outlining them. And we’re going to be broadcasting the entire two-hour session live on the Internet. And it will be made available after that – both online and DVD format. Frankly, our goal and the goal of American Family Association and American Vision is that every pastor in America sees this material. We think it is a pivotal, crucial time in the history of our country. And [as it was] with so many other points in history, it is the Church that will be determining factor on which course America goes. It was actually Gary DeMar (the head of American Vision)’s idea. Gary approached us and said ‘Hey, what do you think?’ We said, ‘My goodness, this is a must do.’ We think it could be a historic day.

CP: So you do feel pastors should speak up on politics? Some polls have indicated that people don’t really want preachers talking about politics from the pulpit. Is there any concern about people being turned off from the church by this?

Fisher: There’s the risk but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do it. Pastors have far more rights than they think they do. And I’m just saying about political candidates. We have to be careful to remember that the separation of the church and state does not appear in the U.S. constitution. Pastors, I think, have a moral and scriptural obligation to speak out about cultural issues facing the day. Why do more pastors not get involved with pro-life issues? It confounds me. The world has made it sound like it’s a political issue. It is a moral issue. It’s a cultural issue. It bleeds into politics because there is a legal aspect to it. I’m not necessarily saying about somebody endorsing a specific candidate. What I am saying is if we want to stop abortion, overturning Roe v. Wade is great, but overturning the hearts and minds of young women in crisis pregnancy situations is far more important. And that should be accomplished by the Church as led by the pastors. I would say it’s my view that pastors in America do have a biblical obligation to speak up and out loudly, lovingly about the issues facing America morally and culturally, and by and large, my perception is they’re not doing that. That is completely inconsistent with the many pastors who founded our country, who spoke out about these issues all the time.

CP: Why do you think there is such a silence in the Church?

Fisher: There are a couple of reasons. There is this 50-year cloud of lying in the media that has certainly impacted the church. The media has scared it into thinking that if a pastor opens his mouth on abortion or sanctity of marriage that they’re going to get thrown in prison. And if they don’t start speaking up soon, that is going to be true (laughs). So I think some of it is just intimidation and scare tactics on behalf of the media. I think there is a huge problem of biblical illiteracy in the church. We’re not aware that we are mandated to tackle these issues. Thirdly, and this is the toughest, I do sense there is a defeatist mentality in the church. The church just thinks America is on a slow steady decline to Armageddon and they’re just going to wait it out. That’s a dangerous and incorrect perspective. Otherwise, why would we pray in the Lord ’s Prayer ‘Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven.’ We are to be the chief optimists in our culture and by and large, the church has taken a pessimistic silent attitude to its own detriment.

CP: Do you consider yourself one of the younger generation evangelicals carrying on the torch of such traditional conservatives as Dr. James Dobson and D. James Kennedy? And how do you plan to carry it?

Fisher: It’s been a journey for me. I did not come to Coral Ridge last August to become a leader of anything. I came to run Dr. Kennedy’s ministry. Obviously, the Lord has had other plans as four months after I got here, Dr. Kennedy had his cardiac arrest. I don’t know if I’m what you have said (‘one of the young evangelical leaders taking on the mantle that older conservative evangelicals are passing on’). I am a man who is deeply concerned about America, about the church and about unbelievers. And my role is to do whatever my God tells me. At this point, He has put me in a position to use media to influence our culture and I’m firmly committed to that.

[Source]

Barbara Curtis, Mommy Life Blogger: What Does it Mean to be Pro-Life?

Barbara blogs at Mommy Life, one of my regular stops. Barbara is an amazing mega-mom and mega-blogger. If you invest a few moments into visiting her blog you’ll see why I say that.

Yesterday Barbara offered a brief report on her speaking engagement at a pro-life annual conference which took place on Saturday and then opens up “what I'm sure may seem to some quite a can of worms.”

She shares her thoughts on her pro-life experience with her fellow evangelicals who she says have been lulled into “complete insensibility” in regard to abortion. She claims the evangelical community has been AWOL on this issue and that her and her husband are “on our way to converting to Catholicism.”

Well, you can imagine that the can of worms was indeed opened up! Just check out the comments box on Barbara’s post.

There’s much in the news about a coming split in the evangelical Christian community. That is in fact what happened about one hundred years ago when “fundamentalist” Christians broke away from their liberal “mainline” denominations and received the label “evangelical.”

When Christians grow indifferent to the truth and become silent on issues crucial to their faith, their brothers and sisters whose consciences remain uncompromised will find other faith communities with which to associate—or they will break away into their own more orthodox groups if their numbers are sufficient. Some, like Barbara, will explore possibilities outside their own community, particularly if they see there authentic expressions of Christian living which are lacking elsewhere.

Evangelical leaders need to be asking themselves some very hard questions these days—for the sake of their congregations but also for the sake of their own souls. Have they in fact been lulled into “complete insensibility” about not only abortion but about other very fundamental aspects of their faith?

And how far can you go before you step over the line?

Pastors, think about it.

Southern Baptist Dr. Richard Land Laments the Tragedy of Abortion and the Self-Absorption of God’s People

Dr. Richard Land is president of The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, the Southern Baptist Convention's official entity assigned to address social, moral, and ethical concerns.

His column in today’s Christian Post, which appears below, indicates a heart heavy with the weight of America’s greatest moral poison.

**********

Living for Life

Some days I just have to stop and ponder: Where are we going as a nation? What future are we leaving our children? As you might imagine, if we continue on the path we are on as a society, our future is not all that bright. And our children’s future looks even bleaker.

The Bible tells us that children are an inheritance from God (Psalm 127:3). Yet America is like the prodigal son. We have taken the inheritance of our unborn children and have gone to a far city. We have wasted that inheritance in riotous living, and now we are reduced to feeding among the swine for the husks of life.

The infamous Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, the scandalous crown jewel of a climate of hedonism and self-absorption that took root in the 1960s, unleashed a torrent of legalized killing in our nation. An estimated 47.6 million Americans, approximately one-sixth of the population of the United States, have been aborted since that fateful decision.

That is an incredible number of innocent lives lost. It is symptomatic of the noxious moral poison that has been let loose, polluting our culture, debasing and devaluing individual human life, and cauterizing our conscience to the value of every single human life.

The callous disregard for human life is reflected even in the films and television programs that pass for entertainment and certainly in how we treat one another in society, perhaps even to the increase in discourteous driving habits.

It was not always this way. Human life once was valued richly. The early Jewish faith bore an uncompromising witness against abortion, and so did the Christian faith from which it sprang.

There is a compelling reason why among all the people groups in the Mediterranean basin, the Jews were the only civilization that did not practice abortion as a routine matter, and, indeed, did not practice infanticide, the killing of already born children, as a perfectly accepted social practice.

King David wrote,

For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them (Psalm 139:13-16).

“Covered me” literally means “knitted me together.” “Curiously wrought” literally means “embroidered.” God knitted us together and embroidered us in our mother’s womb.

Every time I read that passage, I think about one of my earliest memories from childhood—watching my mother sit in a rocking chair and embroider. It was a constant source of amazement for me that she could take that tangled mess of thread, in many different colors, and carefully pull them out one by one and embroider a beautiful design. And for each design, she had a different pattern to follow.

God embroiders and knits us together while we are still in our mother’s womb, and he has a different pattern for each one of us. God is involved every time that conception takes place, and He has all of our parts written in His Book before any of them are formed.

Yet these are Truths our culture appears to have forsaken.

Apart from a spiritual awakening shaking our churches and reviving the people of God, our nation’s psyche will not be healed. Bible-believing Christians cannot simply keep their faith to themselves, hidden under a box, so to speak. We must allow it to season and enlighten our culture (Matthew 5:13-16). To a large degree, God has placed our society’s very existence and its future vitality in our hands.

My hope and my prayer is that we will one day soon wrestle to the ground and put away the culture of death that grips our nation. Not only for our sake should we be compelled to act, but for the sake and safety of generations to come.

[Source]

After 100 Years, Are Evangelical Christians Lining Up For Another Major Split?

Here’s a very intriguing look into the current state of America’s evangelical community from Sunday’s New York Times. I warn you though—it is a very long article. It amounts to ten pages online.

But if you’d really like to get a great overview of the intersection of American evangelicalism and politics, this is the best, most up to date primer I’ve seen for a while.

The primary engine driving these Christians from the pulpits and pews into politics and keeping them there—aside from the generic “culture war” concern—seems to be abortion. I’m not surprised. It’s just a wonder there’s not more following them.

I’ll introduce the article by quoting from the first page which sets the pace for the rest of the piece.

**********

The Evangelical Crackup

The hundred-foot white cross atop the Immanuel Baptist Church in downtown Wichita, Kan., casts a shadow over a neighborhood of payday lenders, pawnbrokers and pornographic video stores. To its parishioners, this has long been the front line of the culture war. Immanuel has stood for Southern Baptist traditionalism for more than half a century. Until recently, its pastor, Terry Fox, was the Jerry Falwell of the Sunflower State — the public face of the conservative Christian political movement in a place where that made him a very big deal.

With flushed red cheeks and a pudgy, dimpled chin, Fox roared down from Immanuel’s pulpit about the wickedness of abortion, evolution and homosexuality. He mobilized hundreds of Kansas pastors to push through a state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, helping to unseat a handful of legislators in the process. His Sunday-morning services reached tens of thousands of listeners on regional cable television, and on Sunday nights he was a host of a talk-radio program, “Answering the Call.” Major national conservative Christian groups like Focus on the Family lauded his work, and the Southern Baptist Convention named him chairman of its North American Mission Board.

For years, Fox flaunted his allegiance to the Republican Party, urging fellow pastors to make the same “confession” and calling them “sissies” if they didn’t. “We are the religious right,” he liked to say. “One, we are religious. Two, we are right.”

His congregation, for the most part, applauded. Immanuel and Wichita’s other big churches were seedbeds of the conservative Christian activism that burst forth three decades ago. In the 1980s, when theological conservatives pushed the moderates out of the Southern Baptist Convention, Immanuel and Fox were both at the forefront. In 1991, when Operation Rescue brought its “Summer of Mercy” abortion protests to Wichita, Immanuel’s parishioners leapt to the barricades, helping to establish the city as the informal capital of the anti-abortion movement. And Fox’s confrontational style packed ever more like-minded believers into the pews. He more than doubled Immanuel’s official membership to more than 6,000 and planted the giant cross on its roof.

So when Fox announced to his flock one Sunday in August last year that it was his final appearance in the pulpit, the news startled evangelical activists from Atlanta to Grand Rapids. Fox told the congregation that he was quitting so he could work full time on “cultural issues.” Within days, The Wichita Eagle reported that Fox left under pressure. The board of deacons had told him that his activism was getting in the way of the Gospel. “It just wasn’t pertinent,” Associate Pastor Gayle Tenbrook later told me.

Fox, who is 47, said he saw some impatient shuffling in the pews, but he was stunned that the church’s lay leaders had turned on him. “They said they were tired of hearing about abortion 52 weeks a year, hearing about all this political stuff!” he told me on a recent Sunday afternoon. “And these were deacons of the church!”

[Source]

Mark Pickup Reports That He Has Closed Down Human Life Matters

In yesterday’s edition of Robert Jason’s newsletter it was reported that Mark Pickup has closed down the HumanLifeMatters website, although his blog is still operational at this point.

This is a sad development, particularly in light of the circumstances cited by Mark in his letter which appears below. What is most disturbing is Mark’s experience which in his own words indicates the extreme difficulty of “evangelical and Catholic Christians being able to work together, arm in arm, to resist the culture of death rising in Canada.”

Please pray that God will provide guidance for Mark in his decisions for the future.

**********

The End of Human Life Matters

It is with sadness that I write this note. HumanLifeMatters has failed.

I envisioned evangelical and Catholic Christians being able to work together, arm in arm, to resist the culture of death rising in Canada. I was naive. Although Edmonton's former Archbishop Tom Collins liked the idea and encouraged the Archdiocese to work at a board level, through its life office representative, the evangelical side of the vision was less forthcoming.

My personal conversion to Catholicism was like a nail in the coffin for my idea. The Baptist General Conference withdrew financial support, the Alberta BGC Executive Minister resigned with a flare of anti-Catholic rhetoric.

I felt sick for my Lord's prayer for unity in John 17. His comment in John 10.16. What of Saint Paul's call for unity in Romans 12..5, or Galatians 3.28 or Ephesians 2.16, or 4:4-6? Does 1 Corinthians 12.13 have no application? Was it me who misunderstood the Scriptural principle of unity amongst those who stand at the foot of the cross and claim allegiance to Christ as our first love? Could we not look past denominational differences, historical grievances, and work together in the cause of Life? Apparently not.

To be fair, not all evangelical representation left immediately, but eventually, other evangelicals on the board resigned. We sputtered along, and I was eventually left with one evangelical and one Catholic. That was it.

I approached the Edmonton Archdiocese to see if they would take HLM under their wing. However, Archbishop Collins was transferred to Toronto. His replacement understandably does not want to take on anything new until he is comfortable in his new post.

And so after five years, I end where I began. Either I misunderstood what I believed God was asking or I failed Him.

I will close HumanLifeMatters' federal registration number, the website is already closed. I have not decided whether to close the HLM blog.

Mark Pickup

Who Speaks For America's (And Canada's) Evangelicals?

That’s a very good question to ask, but unfortunately there’s no clear answer. However, raising the question may prompt some Christians to give second thought to an aspect of Christian leadership not often discussed.

Every organization of people needs a spokesperson if it’s to be a credible group or if the group has a worthwhile purpose, certainly if it expects to accomplish an urgent goal. Coca Cola has its CEO and so does IBM. The Catholic Church has a Pope.

So who speaks for America’s Evangelicals? Or Canada’s Evangelicals? Do they not hope to accomplish anything useful or urgent, such as incorporating a biblical world view in their nation? What about change on the level of social justice through political means in society? [Considering the biblical mandate as a whole, that would seem to be a modest goal.]

Or is there some inherent fundamental flaw which exists among them that prevents such leadership?

Wouldn’t it be wise for Evangelicals to try to resolve such questions and the fractured image and voice they present in our society?

Division among Christians is a prime deterrent to securing legal rights for unborn children who are human beings like you and me, created in the image of God.

Open Letter To Brothers & Sisters At Saddleback Church

Since Rick Warren, world famous author of “Purpose Driven Life” and mega-church pastor of Saddleback Church in California, sparked controversy through an invitation to pro-abortion Senator Barack Obama to speak at Saddleback’s AIDS conference, I have wanted to post my own detailed response on behalf of unborn children in Canada (as well as the US.)

Today I discovered an Open Letter addressed to Rick Warren from Gregg Cunningham, Director, The Center For Bio-Ethical Reform. Gregg says much of what I wanted to express, and more. It’s a lengthy letter but well worth the read.

There are important issues involved here, most notably the responsibility for high profile evangelical leaders, as representatives of Christ, to take an uncompromising stand in defense of unborn children. The evangelical community in the US and in Canada is generally very weak on pro-life activism although there are notable exceptions. What is especially alarming is the trend for evangelicals to highlight other causes such as modern day slavery and AIDS while consigning child-killing to the sidelines as a “political” issue.

If you are unclear about the dynamics of this controversy, it may help you to know that Rick Warren is revered as a national spiritual leader in America with a huge degree of influence in evangelical circles. Pastor Warren, along with a “new breed” of evangelical leaders such as Bill Hybels of Willow Creek Community Church, seems to be defining a new paradigm with respect to social justice issues. They are more likely to speak out about more liberal causes like AIDS, Darfur, poverty and global warming than “controversial” social issues like abortion and same-sex marriage.

Vote Life, Canada! views the urgency of Gregg's letter to Rick Warren in the same light as its own recent Open Letter to the Catholic Bishops Of Canada.

****************************

OPEN LETTER TO BROTHERS & SISTERS AT SADDLEBACK CHURCH

Pastor Rick Warren and the "Global Summit on AIDS and the Church ": Saddleback Delivers; Obama Chortles & Jesus Cringes

From: Gregg Cunningham, Director, The Center For Bio-Ethical Reform

(Author's note: A draft of this letter was submitted to Pastor Rick Warren through A. Larry Ross Communications, his public relations firm, with a request for corrections of perceived misstatements of fact. Despite confirmation of receipt of the draft, no reply was forthcoming. Since the intial draft of this letter, Senators Obama and Clinton declared candidacies for the Presidency.)

ChristianityToday.com has posted a Billy Graham biography with a focus on the great evangelist's early crusades. The story is oddly relevant to the controversy sparked by Pastor Rick Warren's AIDS conference invitation to pro-abortion Senator Barack Obama.

...[A]t a time when sit-ins and boycotts were stirring racial tensions in the South, Graham invited Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to discuss the racial situation with him and his colleagues. Then, before a capacity crowd at ... [Madison Square] Garden, he invited the black leader to join him on the platform and to lead the congregation in prayer. In his introduction, he said, 'A great social revolution is going on in the United States today. Dr. King is one of its leaders, and we appreciate his taking time out of his busy schedule to come and share this service with us tonight.'

The words did not explicitly endorse King, and King's prayer called for nothing more revolutionary than a 'brotherhood that transcends color,' but the implication was unmistakable: Graham was letting both whites and blacks know that he was willing to be identified with the revolution and its foremost leader, and King was telling blacks that Graham was their ally ... his voice was important in declaring that a Christian racist was an oxymoron.

Not so long ago, the argument that a racist could never be a true follower of Jesus was controversial. Today we debate whether a genuine salvation experience would invariably preclude the advocacy of abortion rights.

Pastor Warren's embrace of Senator Obama was as calculated as Pastor Graham's inclusion of Dr. King. Both were designed to send a message. Pastor Graham sought a closer association with civil rights activism. Pastor Warren seeks a closer association with AIDS activism. Both decisions were obviously going to be controversial. Among the civil rights activists Pastor Graham could have embraced, Dr. King was the most contentious for reasons which had everything to do with civil rights. Among the AIDS activists Pastor Warren could have invited, Senator Obama was the most divisive for reasons which had nothing to do with AIDS. Dr. King was controversial because he fought a system which was killing black people. Senator Obama is controversial because he champions a system which is killing unborn children. Pastor Graham's gesture insulted racists. Pastor Warren's offended pro-life activists. Pastor Graham wanted to distance himself from racists. Pastor Warren has removed any lingering doubt that he is moving away from pro-life activists.

He claims to be pro-life but he defines the term narrowly. He is a pro-life pacifist (as opposed to "activist " as in AIDS activism) whose opposition to abortion is essentially conceptual. He is detached. He avoids resistance which demands the risk and sacrifice he invests in the fight against AIDS.

He's "against " abortion in the same way the priest and Levite might have opposed mugging in Christ's Parable of the Good Samaritan; a theoretical, disengaged condemnation. It is not the anguished opposition which compels aggressive intervention. Feeling pity for victims is, of course, very different from taking pity on them. At least that's what Pastor Warren says about AIDS.

New York Magazine, May 28, 2007, in a statement not submitted to A. Larry Ross for comment, columnist John Heilemann quotes Pastor Warren on pro-life activism:

Whereas Falwell bemoaned the emerging strain of Evangelical environmentalism as 'Satan's attempt to redirect the church's primary focus,' Warren declares, 'The environment is a moral issue.' And regarding his pro-life stance, Warren says, 'I'm just not rabid about it.'

Merriam Webster Online defines "rabid " as "going to extreme lengths in expressing or pursuing a feeling, interest, or opinion. " When Pastor Warren says he's "just not rabid " about abortion he is in essence saying he is not hot, not cold but kind of lukewarm about abortion. In Revelation 3:13-22, Jesus says, "I know your deeds .... So because you are lukewarm and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth. " Is God "lukewarm " over child sacrifice or is He rabid?

In Ezekiel 16:20-21, 35-36, 43, He says, among other things, that His own people "... have enraged me ... " with child sacrifice.

In Psalm 106:37-42, He says, among other things, that because of their child sacrifice "... Jehovah's anger burned against his people and he abhorred them. That is why he let the heathen nations crush them. "

In Jeremiah 7:24-26, 30-31, He says, among other things, "... and they burn to death their little sons and daughters as sacrifices to their gods -- a deed so horrible I've never even thought of it .... "

In Jeremiah 19:3-5, 7-9, 11, God says, among other things, that because of child sacrifice, "... will I break this people and this city, as one breaks a potter's vessel, so that it can never be mended. "

It is pretty easy to take God's temperature here – and He is not lukewarm. He is hot. White-hot.

********************

Rest of Gregg’s Open Letter can be found here.