Thank God the Congress did not extend tax cuts that were disportionately geared to the wealthy, resulting in an income inequality not seen since before the Great Depression.
One thing you seem to be able to count on with the last 2 term presidents is ginormous deficits, a gift for future generations.
But Republicans CUT taxes quite a bit (so much so that this household now gets refunds instead of paying out as we did under Pres. Clinton!). The real regret is that the Republican led congress did not take up the issue of making the taxes permanent before the Democrats took over.
As I understand it, they had to wait until the end of the tax cuts effective time period and that time was set for after the elections.
Of course, the Democrats say they will let them expire without extending nor making them permanent, which is NOT good news for us or for U.S.
Bob from Boone #7: I used the term “fundamentalist” because…following your negative “ghetto” analogy…that sounded like the way you were interpreting his comments. I would imagine there are a number of people moving to Ave Maria (maybe even this man) who, when they speak of being in a place where others think like they do, simply mean there are some common and basic principles and values that help frame the community (in this case Christian and Catholic) without which there is no community. I’ll admit that my comment originates with my reaction to the word “ghetto” as a negative qualifier of everything that followed: Ave Maria, that man’s comment, Catholic Communities, Christian Communities, etc… Maybe I should have reacted more succinctly. Like this: Why don’t you be nice and lighten up.
PS: If we have to be negative and stick with the ‘ghetto’ term, then I’ll stand by the Sewanee analogy….and I resonate with Angllicanuum’s comments on that point (#9). And, yeah, I went to Sewanee.
Chris, you are correct about no official developments. In fact, when he was JPII’s cardinal advisor and head of the CDF (ca. 2002), Cardinal Ratzinger issued a statement in the name of the Holy Father in which he reiterated the conclusion of Leo XIII’s bull and also gave Apostolicae Curae as on example of an infallible statment. That was a surprise to many, includng some Catholic priests I know, since it has been the common view that the only infallible pronouncements since 1870 (if my feeble memory is correct) are thought to be Papal Infallibility and the Dogma of the Assumption of the BVM.
Of course, #2, an official document on Ecclesiology under the name of the CDF and the Pope is quite distinct from private opinion—we agree on that.
While there’ve been many speculations on both sides of the Tiber, especially since the “Dutch Touch”, there have been no official developments in the Catholic view of Anglican orders since the Leo XIII’s Bull Apostolicae Curae.
OK, so I’ve carefully not read any of the comments above to avoid any “spoilers.” I waited in line a the local Wal-Mart for an hour Friday night to get Deathly Hallows in spite of the fact that my wife and teenage children were all out East visiting [grand]parents and I’m living on leftovers and coldcuts until they return.
Having finished Deathly—ahead of my 16-year-old daughter, for once, which will annoy her, but then nearly everything does—I have to say that it’s very well written, has no real surprises, and presupposes the same pop-Christian metaphysics as the rest of the books do. (I keep wondering how on earth Christians could object to a series of fantasy novels whose major theme is the disfigurement of the soul by cruelty and murder—where “soul” is a concept understood in a way indistinguishable from that of first-century Judaism or even [gasp!] Christianity.)
If you’re a Harry Potter fan, you won’t be disappointed. If you’re not, you need to read the earlier books first—as you do to understand the movies, which sometimes put a hundred or so pages of exposition into a two-minute scene.
[[ Possible mild spoiler ]]
Ms Rowling seems to have run into the problem that other writers have found—the complexity of the buildup would require too much narrative space to fully resolve—so she has a “Harry and Albus in Somewhere” scene, in the fine English literary tradition of Shaw’s “Don Juan in Hell” interlude in Man and Superman. It’s a fine substitute for her usual semifinal scenes between Harry and Dumbledore, which typically have much important (if once commonplace) moral wisdom to impart.
Perhaps the whole series—rousing good stories—could be summarized by the old joke:
“God (and with Him Dumbledore) is dead!” —Nietzsche [or Voldemort]
“Nietzsche (and Voldemort) are both dead!” —God and Dumbledore
If you’re hooked on Harry, the book won’t disappoint. If you’re not, you shouldn’t be wasting your time with this thread anyway…
And Gene Robinson and all the New Hampshire Episcopalians aren’t Anglicans by Brian’s twisted reasoning.
I’ve never understood why anyone would join a religion which was not convinced that its own core, essential teachings were True. And that, of course means that other religions don’t have things quite right—are “defective” in some way.
As the son of a Methodist and a Catholic I saw this situation from the inside. My mother was a Methodist, her parents were Unitarian-Universalist, other great grand-parents were Quakers. Others in my Mom’s drect family line were Christian Scientists and two were Durch Reformed (now called by some other name, I believe) ministers
As a teen-ager seeking for Truth, all I could think of my mother’s Protestant family (although they were all very good people) was what a joke if you are seeking Truth. Either you must make yourself your own pope, or just embrace whatever floats your boat, or submit your beliefs to a majority vote by people who may be under society’s corrupt sway. All they had in common was disdain for the pope and Catholics and a determination to ignore all the many passages in the NT which featured the role of St. Peter. It seemed the Catholic concept of Christ’s words and Biblical events(especially those regarding St. Peter and the sacraments) rolling with power through the centuries under the impetus of the Holy Spirit , was beyond them. The only living, active word among them seemed to be protest as in “PROTESTantism.” It also gave me an insight into how harmful divisions are to Christianity. No wonder Christ prayed that all may be one.
As for apostolic succession, I believe Rome (in the late 19th Centuey) declared its opinion that the line of succession had been broken in the Anglican-Episcopal Church.
#6—uh, I think you’d have to read more than the first book to make the charge that you do. The “magic” isn’t what guarantees success or failure and it’s not a theme of the books. Sacrificial love, courage, moral decision-making and growth, and mercy are the themes. These are complex books, and any young person reading them would be very alert to the problems and pitfalls of making bad moral decisions.
This last book has overtly Christian themes and understandings, as even the secular press is recognizing. I finished it in the wee hours of the morning—I was really hit by the remorse/repentance bits. The book does a super job with its discussion of evil and resistance of bad tendencies.
As more of a personal aside than a comment on this particular quotation, I found Dr Swindoll’s children’s books—charmingly illustrated—very useful as texts and “conversation starters” [apologies to Rev Dr Toon] with my children when they were in elementary school. Although I’ve never read any of Swindoll’s adult-oriented books, I’m sure that his wonderful combination of Christian perception and basic human wisdom shines through in them. Another item on my To-Do list… [Sigh…]
I am surprised to read the disparaging comments toward Ave Maria. I find the experiment a worthy one and I wish it much success. I have one good friend who was in Ave Maria’s first graduating class, and another who lectures there occasionally. Both have high regard for the institution of learning—fine scholarship with an aim to revive the Catholic academy, may their attempt be fruitful. In terms of a community, how wonderful is the idea of raising a family, living and working, in a community where the church (and civil society) are indespensable pillars of the ethos and social structure.
This is a microcosm of the Christian vision for society (allowing for the reality of pluralism, of course, which I would assume is not casually disregarded). Granted, the architecture of the cathedral is disappointing, but the idea is laudable and methinks the experiment is exciting.
RE: “The GS invaders have argued that these people are still Anglican. This issue has been decisively resolved by ++Rowan.”
Brian’s a smart man and knows better—which means his blurring of the distinction between “Anglican” and “members of the Anglican Communion” is deliberate—and transparently obvious.
The only “issue” that Rowan “decisively resolved” is whether he acknowledges bishops of a province who are not within the geographic region of that province as bishops of the Anglican Communion. He does not. They may be bishops of that province in which they were consecrated but if they are ministering in a place that does not have more than one Canterbury-acknowledged Province, they are not bishops of the Anglican Communion.
He said nothing at all about whether they are “Anglican” and indeed he has been quoted as saying that he considers all sorts of varying groupings that are not in the Anglican Communion as “Anglican”.
Also, I don’t think the GS Primates in question are blustering or “blowing wind”—I think they are merely making their own positions crystal clear. That is the way of good communication and healthy relationships. It is up to the ABC to make his own positions crystal clear, and I have no doubt that someday he will.
After both parties have made their positions crystal clear—standing forthrightly in their own chosen Anglican identity—it will be very clear just who will be with whom.
As I have stated since the close of 2004, I don’t believe that the GS and Canterbury will ultimately be together. I believe that there will be two separate Anglican entities. Of course, I hope for the better, but acknowledge the reality of the probabilities.
The good news is that someday all of this will be over and the two bodies—made up of whatever groups of Anglicans—will go their merry ways. I think the past four years have clarified and encouraged and widened the distance greatly between reasserters and reappraisers. I do not think that the two groups will ever be in communion with one another in any sense at all once this reaches closure.
And all this time, I thought I was a member of “St. Peter’s Anglican Church.” I’ll contact my Rector immediately and notify him to change all signage and letterhead to read “St. Peter’s nondenominational Protestant Church.”
Thanks for the clarification.
Can anyone tell me if the Vatican considers the Anglican Communion, including ECUSA, to be acceptable in apostolic succession of the clergy?
You’ve been reading too much of that stuff from the Vatican, Brian.
You are neither a “dissident Episcopalian” nor an Anglican.
A “dissident Episcopalian” is someone working from the inside to effect change. Sarah or Kendall+ or +Iker fit that category.
You are a nondenominational Protestant affiliated with the Anglican Church of Uganda.
It really is amazing that liberals can complain so much about the interventions in America and then say in their next breath that the GS folks are all bluster, posturing, making empty threats, etc. Which one is it?
It is separate, IMO. The interventions are a problem because they are encouraging people to leave and try to take their property. They do this with false promises. The GS invaders have argued that these people are still Anglican. This issue has been decisively resolved by ++Rowan. The new “Bishops” may indeed be members of their respective Provinces, but they are not Anglican Bishops. So the newly emboldened dissenters are forcing lawsuits which are costly and a distraction.
As for whether or not the GS Primates are “blustering,” the wind has already been taken from their sails. They have used many different valid methods to convince the ABC to discipline TEC and all have ultimately failed. Now they resort to interventions and threats in order to coerce the ABC. This is where they are just blowing wind. For my part, I hardly believe that MOST of what they say are empty threats. I believe Uganda and Rwanda are genuine in their statements.
Jeremy has it exactly right. And Ave Maria, FL, will be even less successful in maintaining an intentional community than the Massachusetts Bay Colony because of the rapid expansion of the Naples area expands, and also because there are now federal and state fair housing laws. I give Ave Maria 20 years for it to exist a functional intentional Catholic community. And, given the increasing estrangement between Mr. Monahan and conservative Catholics (his constituency) because of his control-freak reputation, it’s a fair question as to whether town and gown will be stillborn at the outset.
I think it would be a kick if a bunch of immigrant Hispanics moved into Ave Maria. They, of course, would be all Catholics, but the majority of conservative Catholics would complain about how all the shabby Hispanics ruined the place.
In order for me to finish “Deathly Hallows,” I have to read “Sorcerer’s Stone” and all the rest first. So no rush on my part to get the last book . . .
Apparently, I’m a “dissident Episcopalian” under bishops who are “violating the boundaries” of the Episcopal Church. Hmm, I thought I was an Anglican who left the Episcopal Church. Oh, wait. I forgot, TEC never removed me from their membership roles. Is it any wonder I’m still a “dissident Episcopalian” and these bishops are “violating their boundaries” since, apparently, I’m still in an Episcopal diocese, not a Ugandan diocese, like I thought.
The title should be:
Democrats try to squeeze voters.
I have not noticed that Republicans abolished taxes. This whole Democrat-Republican dichotomy is adolescent in society. And it is repugnant in the Church.
Thanks for the heads up. It just returned to one of our “arthouse” theatres where I live.
Our rector is a priest and a mom and she seems to do a fine job in both roles. What I really wonder is how a man can be both a dad and a priest. Men are notoriously bad at multitasking.
#3, Well, “councilor” does mean “member of a council”, though I do agree that the pastor most likely said “conciliar”.
These are good words to read if we are going to continue to claim to be catholic in any sense of the word. Either we are together in our faith as received or we are all inventing new ways to do our own thing.
Unfortunately those new things are rapidly degenerating into culture wars and conflicts over territorial borders. There is a difference between cultural expressions of our faith and denying the faith because our culture doesn’t think our faith is relevant for the 21st century. I think Chris Sugden has put his finger on the problem quite well.
This conflict has evolved from simply being a dispute concerning the faith we have received to now being a serious struggle to make sure that no _____________ (fill in the blank with your favorite Anglican monster) is going to tell me what to do.
Good analysis of language BB!
The funny thing about SR’s use of the word “mainstream” though is that she doesn’t actually mean it. She knows the progressive activists aren’t “mainstream Anglicans” nor are they even “mainstream Episcopalians”. Even the moderates, who long for all of this to go away and for both sides to be quiet, know good and well that the progressive activists don’t represent anything close to “mainstream” anything, but are in fact truly bizarre.
Of course, neither are Baby Blue and Sarah “mainstream Episcopalians”.
So she said the phrase that she did over on another thread without any thought that any reasserter or moderate reading the phrase would agree. Goodness, I don’t even think that progressives would agree that they themselves are “mainstream” . . .
It’s sort of like the old Pravda saying things like “Millions of Soviet Comrades threw flowers onto the grave of Lenin today . . . ” when all the “Soviet Comrades” know good and well that the flowers were all ordered by the government and delivered in the night via dumptruck. Or like Baghdad Bob saying “the enemy is being destroyed—they are all running back to America even as we speak and none of them are outside the gates of Iraq.”
Neither Baghdad Bob nor Pravda, nor the Iraquis nor the Russians, nor the Americans, nor the world media believed a single word—but it’s just said as a matter of dull ritual.
Ah, yes Democrats, always wanting to do good with other peoples money taken by force. Remember the power to tax is backed up by the full power of the state.
Oh dear. I would have hoped that the Toledo journalist would have checked the spelling of conciliar. Instead we get this mis-quotation from the Orthodox pastor: We are a councilor body .
The invasion from Afric is real, substantial and may be permanent. TEC has therefore excellent reason to complain of this invasion, and their “spin” is entirely just to this degree.
And the African agenda must be a complicated matter, not simply a case of giving the orthodox a home of the own. This case is true, but oversimplified. For African Anglicans, this opportunity is a rare one, one not many nations have ever gotten, a chance to bell the cat and walk away safely with the catnip. The temptation here is so strong it would be surprising if agroup did not succumb to it.
Again, the money and power involved is big, perhaps massive. The money that is not flowing into TEC’s coffers will now be flowing into African ones. American churches are a very rich vein to mine.
Third, it is difficult to imagine an African Anglican church looking at American culture broadly without concluding that they are looking at moral decay and corruption. Their entry into American culture will then be seen as (a) an infusion of healthier blood into a decadent society (b) an opportunity for black Americans to be saved from a rotting society by reestablishing a lifeline to their “home.”
Finally, this invasion will give to many in Africa a feeling that their star is rising, that they have momentum, something much of Africa has never had. Since their stand is orthodox and since they are quite willing to get along without the A of C, then there must be a feeling that the Church of England is dying and its new Canterbury will be in Africa. Prestige is as rewarding as money and power and as good a reason as any to press one’s case to the bitter end. TEC must see now that the longer it is intransigent, the more leverage it gives African Anglicanism. TEC is therefore between arock and a hard place, - damned if they do and damned if they don’t - and Africa is not likely to have missed this salient feature. LM
All right, it’s late enough that I think I can drop a very small spoiler: I really, really don’t like the fact that the Good Guys occasionally use unforgivable curses on the Bad Guys in moments of Righteous Anger, with no consequences. (Nothing goes wrong that can be traced back to the decision to use an Unforgivable.) I understand that one of the points of the book is to bring out the fact that, as Solzhenitsyn said, the line between good and evil runs through every human heart. But if the Unforgivables are really evil (and that’s been what the series has been saying, up ‘till now—“No unforgivable curses from you, Potter!”), to use one without consequences seems inconsistent.
The other problem I had is too much of a spoiler, so I’ll share it with LJ by E-mail.
I have yet to find a woman who is good at pursuading in theology. I have heard moving and winning stories, I have heard brilliant essays on the desire to worship.
Makes no difference, however. I hope that my granddaughters aspire to a higher calling than being president, being an astronaught, lawyer, or priest. I hope that they consider well the ministry to children that no one in the world could love as much as they can - their own. May God protect them from the temptions of lesser ministries.
Confusing practical cooperation and fraternal concern at the local level with Ecclesial Communion strikes me as a very Anglican thing to do, as does an appeal to the private opinions of individuals. However, the document in question purports to address Catholic ecclesiology, of which Eucharistic Communion is the the heart, and which transcends private opinions.
Among the Baptists I grew up with, “church” refers to the local fellowship of believers. I never remember hearing of the church as “the Body of Christ”, nor of any significance attached to the congregation, beyond good fellowship and support in one’s individual walk with Christ. From a Catholic, or Orthodox, or even Anglican perspective, that’s a very different meaning of “chuch”. I might add that the typical Baptist congregation displays much love and genuine concern for members, often more so than the typical Catholic parish. However, we are discussing what the various traditions claim to be, not what they are like.
shhhh! William! Don’t give too much away!
It’s interesting that two or three stories above this one is one with the title “Being born-again does not make you a Christian”.
You cannot possibly mean that the message of Acts 4:32- 5:11 is that we should avoid collectivism, in favor of competitive economics:
32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.
This passage is clearly in praise of the arrangement in Jerusalem. As one who takes Scripture as God’s word I do not want to write this passage off as bleeding heart nonsense.
I think as a Christian community we need to think way beyond the dichotomy of Democrats and Republicans. As an Expat Yank in Canada these categories are nearly meaningless to me anyway. So we need to think way beyond Conservative, Capitalist, Liberal or Communist. Our communal goals are very different from the secular world’s. No one should talking about a free ride. I am self employed and clock a lot of hours for my families daily bread. But I am not happy with the economic setting I find myself beholden to. I cannot help but think in the present age we could not get a little creative, inspired by the above Scripture and do something of value. We leave too much up to our society, when we should be forging new teritory for Christ. The practical finances of the capitalist along with the communal responsibility of collectivism would make a good combination.
Sarah Hey has an excellent analysis up on StandFirm about the progressives - the institutionalists and the ideologues. I actually call the ideologues “activists” for they were baptized in the streets of protest, rather than on the rolling hills of the golf course (metaphorically speaking). But I think we see here - with both 815’s spin and others like Susan Russell applauding that spin - that the activists are seeking to claim the institution as representing their activist agenda. Notice too how Susan uses the word “Mainstream Episcopalians” and the flight is on to move the Episcopal Church away from the Anglican Communion (as the recent use of the phrase “communion” to denote “province” by the Bishop of Virginia in his latest correspondence to depose twenty Virginia clergy who moved to a different Anglican province in the Anglican Communion). We do need to be on our guard with the reinvention of words - like “mainstream” or “communion” in these times - both as we prepare for the September 30th deadline, but also because the 815 lawsuits are driving much of ENS communications. Their audience is not the people in the pews, but the judges on the bench. We must not forget that.
To do this, they use terms like “foreign prelates” and crossing “Episcopal Church boundaries” (never mind what that the Anglican archbishops said in their official communique to the Episcopal Church or the fact the Episcopal Church has rejected requests by the archbishops and are now acting unilaterally as though the Episcopal Church is, in fact, its own Communion) - the audience is for the lawsuits so that the institutionalists can hold on to the property. It’s about preserving power and the activists, like Susan Russell, need to have the power preserved in order to make their social innovations legitimate in the eyes of the stockholders, I mean laity (so the money and support will not diminish).
Watch very carefully how the word “Episcopal” and “Communion” are being used over the next few months.
Also notice how the Americans love to use the word scheme in the American context, not the British context in which it was written (and again, this points out how non-Anglican the American church desires to be - they are using British English in an American context against the writers of the Comunique). Scheme in the American lexicon denotes an illegal conspiracy to defraud. Scheme in British English simply means “plan.” We ran into this when the Alpha Course got started in the United States and we had to explain to the folks in London that they had to stop using the word “scheme” with Americans. I can remember the first time I heard the word in England and I was shocked that so many people thought schemes were good!
The Archbishop of Canterbury would find no problem in using the word scheme and it is too bad that the Bishop Schori did not warn him that the word would have a completely different meaning in the American context. The Episcopal Church has siezed upon that word and never translate it into the word “plan” because it suits their own agenda to use the word “scheme.” It would be like using the word “fag” - which again, has the worse connotations in the American context (I’m not sure it will make through the elf-filter, but you can see my point) and in England it simply means cigarette. Again, I spent a lot of time getting shocked when I was in school in London when I would hear the word before I found out what the British meant by it.
Words have meanings - especially in courts of law - and right now it seems to me that the lawsuits are driving the ENS spin machine, not truth.
What we need is an affirmative action program for female clergy.
I propose that General Convention change the Canons to REQUIRE every parish to consider one female for the position of rector, and HALF of all parishes in a given diocese to have female clergy as head rectors.
That will teach all of the parishes to repeal their Manifest Prejudice against women as Senior Clergy, and ECUSA will grow and flourish as the Unitarians have done.
This morning I attended Mass with my wife. Her church and mine have had a covenant relationship for nearly thirty years now, at times more active, at other times less, depending on the leadership. Every Sunday at Eucharist, we at St. Luke’s include in the Prayers of the People, prayers for St. Elizabeth’s our covenant parish.
I was struck this morning by the fact that in the Eucharistic Prayer at St. E’s, Fr. Joe included a prayer to God “for our Episcopalian and Lutheran brothers and sisters, with whom we covenant in this community.” I was also struck by the two hymns we sang at communion, both familiar to those of us who use the 1982 Hymnal: George Herbert’s “Come my Way, my Truth, my Life” and “Lord of all Hopefulness.” It was nice to have that Anglican touch.
After Mass I asked Maria if that was the first time Fr. Joe included the Episcopalians and Lutherans in the prayers of the Canon. Could this be a response to the CDF Statement, I wondered? She said he had used it before the Statement was issued. It is clear to me that he takes our local covenant seriously. So do a large number of older members of St. E’s, who sometimes study and serve in the community together with members of St. Luke’s. Many of our RC friends we’ve talked with found the Pope’s statement troubling, but also thought that it was written for internal consumption. I do find it hard to think of it as “an invitation to ecumenical dialogue,” as one cardinal put it.
In fact, communal finances do work quite well in certain conditions. Nothing in the scriptural accounts indicates that the system didn’t work, although problems are noted (the Greek complaints, for example). There is nothing sacred about our American one-man-one bank-account system, nor sacred about communal finances. Remember that Peter told Annias and Sapphira they were entirely free to keep their property, though not to lie about donating it. Monastic and religious communities through history have lived communally, with great profit to the Church at large. Protestant communties, such as the Bruderhof, have also managed long-term communal arrangements. I think some Mennonite and Amish settlements may operate communally as well. It’s an option.
And bob carlton, if you can turn down the snide-meter for a moment, perhaps you can check out Thessalonians: “if they won’t work, they don’t eat”.
Having spent a good part of 35 years in various human services activities with handicapped people, homeless folks and now convicted felons, I would support the notion that handouts debilitate and degrade. As the cliche goes: a hand-up, not a hand-out; the last statistics I saw on Pres. Clinton’s welfare reform in the 90s indicated strong success in moving folks from handouts to productive work, which is what we want. Finally, the poverty statistics in this country are skewed by not counting government funds received (and, I think, certain other kinds of income) so that poverty will never be eliminated, on the books, no matter how rich we are.
This is the real “finally”: Obama should get the praise due him for his comments. The more I hear, the more I like him. I probably won’t vote for him for other reasons, but I give him credit where credit is due.
hmmmm…I need to take a minute to check my spelling before posting. I meant to accuse TEC’s theology of “syncretism,” that is, combining various, opposing beliefs, not of being “synchronistic”.
When I read this moving article I thought of Simone Weil, a secular French Jew who had a powerful experience of Christ in her life and came to believe in him. She loved the Catholic Church and frequently attended its services, especially prayer in front of the Blessed Sacrament. Yet she refused to be baptised, because of her distrust of the Catholic Church’s use of power.
I am a Catholic priest myself. I love the Church and the ministry which is my privilege and God’s gift. Yet the scandals have wrought terrible damage. I can only hope that it will be a purifying experience for the church. Above all one feels for the families who have been through such terrible suffering. This can never be God’s will.
BTW I was struck in the article by the prominent role played by lawyers. One criticism of the Church in this scandal has been that too much attention has been paid to lawyers and too little to pastoral care. Regarding suffering: On the one hand we live in a world that is in God’s providential care. On the other hand, we live in a world where there is natural law and free will. God’s care for the world surely has to allow for the latter as well.
Finally I notice that the writer asks the question of why bad things happen to good people? I am surprised that no one seems to have referred him to Rabbi Harold Kushner’s wonderful book (written after his teenage son died) Why Bad Things Happen to Good People.
I fear that the writer is confusing (allegedly) religious humans with God.
All of the instances of betrayal he reports are of humans being perverse, sinful, and evil. Not God. Of course, “discovering” that people are perverse, sinful, and evil isn’t news. If I were a reporter, I wouldn’t want to cover a beat that only disclosed non-news either. The writer needs to take a different approach - be a religion writer who focuses on God and God’s working through His broken, fallen worshippers.
# 9 - Let’s see how it pans out!
The Religion of Peace (TM) strikes again.
After ten blessed years of school uniforms, my to-be high school daughter now only has to conform to a dress code. The stores are not making conformity easy. There are a lot of slutty low-cut, spaghetti-strapped, micro-mini short skirts and dresses out there. My solution has been to raid the sale racks at Talbots for skirts and dresses of a modest length - but I pity the parents who cannot afford this.
Let us not forget that the first Church sold all that they had and shared it.
Let’s also not forget that it didn’t work and was quickly abandoned. In fact, it was abandoned so quickly that Luke assumes his readers have never heard of the practice.
Just think of how Muslims would respond if some purportedly Christian group kidnapped 23 mullahs.
Jeffersonian, I don’t see anyone being robbed right now, unless, like me, you are appalled by our poor stewardship of tax dollars thrown down the hell-hole in Iraq.
Jeffersonian, I am curious - does the milk of Christian kindness motivates the Republican Party ?
Return to blog homepage
Return to Mobile view (headlines)