Why Israel's Attack on Gaza is Necessary

From the Wall Street Journal:

Gaza's newly acquired rockets put about 2/3 of Israel's people into the range of fire. 

From Wikipedia:

Since 2001 Palestinian militants have launched thousands of rocket and mortar attacks on Israel from the Gaza Strip.  As of November 2012, the attacks have killed 64 people, mostly civilians, and injured thousands, but their main effect is their creation of widespread psychological trauma and disruption of daily life among the Israeli populace.  Medical studies in Sderot, the Israeli city closest to the Gaza Strip, have documented a post-traumatic stress disorder incidence among young children of almost 50%, as well as high rates of depression and miscarriage.

We would not expect any other nation to live under the threat of daily terrorism for so long, and we shouldn't expect Israel to do so either.

Teddy Roosevelt On Immigrants In America

In response to this news.

Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on immigrants and being an American, June 26, 1907.

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.  But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...  There can be no divided allegiance here.  Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all.  We have room for but one flag, the American flag...  We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

~ Theodore Roosevelt 1907

And for those who say this doesn't sound compassionate, let me say that the most compassionate thing we can do for immigrants is to help them assimilate, rather than remaining in gangs and ghettos, unable to speak the language their newfound home, only to become wards of society rather than becoming meaningful contributors and participants in it.
 

What I wrote my Congressman about the humanitarian crisis on our border

Dear Representative,

As much as my heart goes out to the children who are pawns in this whole ordeal on our southern border, I believe we need a Congressional investigation into how this humanitarian disaster came about.  I have seen it reported in credible news sources that a federal government website was advertizing for transportation contractors as far back as January to handle the coming influx of these children.  I have also seen examples of the information flyer it is reported that many of the children had with them to tell them what to say to immigration authorities to maximize their chances of being allowed to stay in the US.

These children didn’t suddenly wake up one morning and tell their parents, “Adios, Mama and Papa, I am going walk across part of Central America (crossing multiple borders) and the whole of Mexico in the heat of summer to go to the United States.”

One does not have to be a conspiracy theorist to see that this involved coordination—a coordinated effort to bring these children here and flood our border in an effort to destabilize our whole immigration process.  The American people deserve to know how and why this happened, and who is responsible, so this does not continue—for the sake of the children who are being exploited, as much as for us.

Casting all your cares on him, for He cares for you

The challenge each of us continually faces is “Who is in control in my life?”  Is it God or do I have to rely on my own efforts?

If the Lord really is #1 in my life, then I must resist my natural tendency to be afraid.  I can do this by drawing aside from the situation and bringing it to God in prayer.

In Philippians 4:6-7, the Apostle Paul tells us, “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.  And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.”

When I quote this passage from memory, I often tend to leave out the words "with thanksgiving."  But those two words are the key.  If we are truly giving thanks for what God has done, it is nearly impossible to doubt what he can and will do in the future.  So those two words, "with thanksgiving" are essential in not being anxious, but in letting our requests be made known to God, or in the words of 1 Peter 5:7, "casting all your anxiety upon him, because he cares for you."

Prayer is our way of saying, “Heavenly Father, I know you love me and I know you want to guide me in the situations where I need your help.”

Jesus didn’t worry.  Instead he used to regularly draw aside to pray—to spend time with his Father.

We, as Jesus' disciples, would do well to follow his example and learn to bring our fears to our loving Heavenly Father.
 

Burger King introduces gay Whopper

(But only in San Francisco)

WPXI reports: 

"The Proud Whopper" comes in a rainbow colored wrapper and goes on sale Wednesday morning.

The burger chain’s Senior Vice President of Global Brand Management Fernando Machado says it "showcases who we are as a brand." (emphasis added)

Machado says the unusual burger also helps efforts to support the chains newest slogan "Be Your Way."

["Be your way!" ???  Are you kidding me???!!!]

Proceeds from the sale of the Proud Whopper will be donated to scholarships for LGBT high school seniors graduating in 2015 through its own Burger King McLamore Foundation.

The only real difference is the wrapper itself and the Proud Whopper costs the same as any other whopper.

Read more on the story at USA Today. 
 

A Walk for the President

"He ascended into heaven..."

[Because every time Ascension Day rolls around, I read stories like this one, where someone tries to get value out of the Jesus' Ascension while denying that it actually happened, I am reprinting this piece I wrote in 2005.]

---------------------

After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.  They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. "Men of Galilee," they said, "why do you stand here looking into the sky?  This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven" (Acts 1:9-10).

Where is heaven?  Do you ever stop to think about it?  The Book of Acts tells us that Jesus ascended into heaven.  But where is heaven?

A friend of mine recently reminded me of a little chapel in Walsingham, England, that depicts the Ascension of Christ.  The ceiling of the chapel is painted like the sky with clouds, and sticking out of one of the clouds on the ceiling you can see a pair of feet!

However much we may believe in the Ascension of Christ, illustrations like this chapel ceiling seem quaint and make us laugh.  Skeptics, however, respond to such depictions by dismissing the reality of the Ascension altogether.  Liberal Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong, in his article, “A Call for a New Reformation,” says, “The story of the Ascension assumed a three-tiered universe and is therefore not capable of being translated into the concepts of a post-Copernican space age.”

Similarly, the late Church of England Bishop, John A.T. Robinson said that because of astronomy and space travel we know that heaven and God aren’t “out there;” the place to look for God and heaven is “within.”  Robinson even cites Luke 17:21, “the kingdom of God is within you," in support of his view.  Well, of course, in context, the kingdom of God is at work in us and through us.  But the tendency of Robinson’s view is toward a pantheism which says that the only place God and heaven are to be found is within the creation and within us.

Cardinal John Henry Newman had a different view, which, to my mind, captures the truth quite well.  Commenting on the biblical passages where Jesus says the kingdom of God is “at hand,” Newman says that the kingdom runs alongside our world and is ever near it, and that someday, when we least expect it, our world will resolve itself into the kingdom of God.

Remember that Newman wrote this 100 years before scientists (and science fiction writers) started telling us about “parallel universes.”  Is the kingdom of God a parallel dimension to our own existence?  Perhaps it is.  That is why there may well be unseen angels hovering around us at this very moment.

Of course it entirely sensible that, for the disciples sake and for ours, Jesus is seen ascending into heaven.  For Jesus simply to have disappeared or faded away would have represented dissolution or annihilation.  Jesus ascends to show us he is going to a place—a place from which he will return—a place that is higher, better than where we are.

So where is heaven?  Is it “out there, somewhere?”  Is it above, below, within, or along side us?  The best answer we have concerning heaven is the promise of Jesus:

In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you.  I am going there to prepare a place for you.  And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am (John 14:2-3).

Heaven is God the Father’s house—the place where Jesus is and where we will someday be with him.  And if heaven is the place where Jesus is, then—wherever it may be—it will be perfect.
 

FAIL!!!

H/T: Anglican Unscripted and The Quinton Report

The above ad appeared in the Charleston City Paper, an alternative weekly.  The text reads:

The Virgin Mary Followed by Bloody Marys

The ad, run by the Church of the Holy Communion, an Episcopal Church parish in Charleston, South Carolina, then goes on to list several restaurants in the area (Hominy Grill, Fuel, Cafe Lana, & Five Loaves) along with mentioning Spoleto festival venues are nearby.  The Episcopal Church of the Holy Communion bills itself as an “Anglo-Catholic Episcopal Church.”

George Conger, commenting on Anglican Unscripted (51 minutes into the video), rightly noted that the ad flaunts the worst aspects of "Gin and Lace" Anglo-Catholicism.  This ad may have an ephemeral attraction for socialite Charlestonians who want a little religious ritual before their Sunday brunch, but it doesn't do much to commend the real reason why the Church exists.  In fact, it sends exactly the wrong message.
 
[P.S., If you want to know what the real business of the Church is, read my previous post.]

The Power of One

The Church today would be a different kind of place if it were not for a short, dark-skinned, red-bearded, half hermit who single-handedly fought an empire for the truth of the Gospel.  For much of the fourth century, A.D., it was Athanasius contra mundum—“Athanasius against the world”—and Athanasius won.

One letter.  To some historians his was a battle not worth fighting.  His argument hung on the stroke of a pen, a single letter, one iota—the Greek letter “i.”  But embedded in that slender distinction was the essence of the Christian faith, and Athanasius would defend it with his life.  “We are contending,” he wrote, “for our all.”

Up to this point, the Church’s major threats had all come from outside—Roman emperors who sought to work their will on Christians who steadfastly maintained that Jesus is Lord and not Caesar, and Greek philosophers who presented questions that the Church, in time, developed the ability to answer.

Bishops, who led God’s people after the death of the apostles, and whose chief duty is to guard the deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, shed much ink—and much blood—defending the ideals and ideas of Christian faith against the heavy tide of a hostile and haughty world.

But by the early 300s, egos and ambitions had begun drawing battle lines within the Church.  Christians were fighting Christians over theological positions.  Most of the differences formed around explanations of the Trinity:  Did Christians worship one God, or three?  Was the Father greater than the Son and Spirit, or equal?

Then around 318 came an upstart church leader named Arius, asking the question to rattle all questions:  Was Jesus even God at all?

One word.  The distinction boiled down to a single word, distinguished by the single Greek iota we have just mentioned.  Was the Son of the same substance (homoousios) as the Father, or was he merely of a similar substance (homoiousios) as the Father?   It was a controversy that not only occupied the minds of scholars but also the marketplace banter of everyday folk.  It demanded the attention of the Emperor Constantine, who summoned bishops from East and West to an unprecedented gathering in the city of Nicea, in A.D. 325.

When their two month meeting had ended, the resulting creed accurately declared Jesus Christ to be “very God of very God, begotten not made, of one substance (homoousios) with the Father.  Arius was declared a heretic, deposed and disgraced, and everyone assumed that the matter was closed.

Yet the matter continued to confuse and divide.  Constantine, who, like many leaders, valued unity of their institutions over the truth of the Gospel, ordered the new bishop of Alexandria to reinstate Arius as a member in good standing, a sharer in the Church’s communion.

One man.   But the new bishop was a man named Athanasius, who promptly told the Emperor that he could forget it.  According to one story, Athanasius stopped the Emperor’s procession through the streets one day, grabbing the horses of the Emperor’s carriage by the reins—an act that could have gotten him instantly killed by the Emperor’s guards—in order to warn the great Constantine that these matters of the Christian faith were even greater than he was. ]

The consequences were that important, and this is why:

• If the Son is a created being, not of the same substance as God, then the Son is not God.
• If the Son is not God, then his birth in the person of Jesus is not the incarnation of God. 
• If God is not truly incarnate in the person of Jesus, then his atoning death is worthless.

“For he alone,” Athanasius wrote, “being Word of the Father and above all, was able to re-create all, and was worthy to suffer on behalf of all and to be an ambassador for all with the Father.  For this purpose the incorruptible word of God entered our world.  The Word is God from God; for ‘the Word was God’” (John 1:1).

In other words, if Jesus is anything less than God—whether angel, or exalted teacher, or new age cosmic avatar, his death and resurrection cannot be the atoning sacrifice that breaks the curse of human sin.  We can say that Jesus is our Savior, but if the reality of Jesus as God incarnate does not undergird our faith, we are just engaging in wishful thinking.

Naturally, Athansius’ defiance did not win him any friends at the imperial palace.  Constantine’s opinion of the young bishop took such a turn for the worse that he banished him to the uttermost western part of the Empire, sending him from Egypt to Gaul (modern France) in the dead of winter.  It was the first of five exiles he would endure throughout his 45 years as bishop, as he resisted imperial pressure for the sake of the Gospel.

Several emperors came and went during Athanasius’ lifetime, and he would be allowed to return—always to the delight of the people of Alexandria.  But then imperial pressure would heat up again, Athanasius would take his place in the fire, and no one who flinched from the truth of the Gospel would be allowed a moment’s rest in his presence.

Athanasius recognized that the Incarnation is a mystery.  No one could fully understand it.  But there are those whose pride, arrogance, and self-interest would not allow them to believe.  And Athanasius would not keep silent while they robbed God of his power and the Gospel of its truth.  “We take divine Scripture and set it up as a light upon its candlestick, saying: 'very Son of the Father, natural and genuine, proper to His essence, very and only Word of God is He…'  But let them learn that ‘the Word became flesh;’ and let us, retaining the general scope of the faith, acknowledge that what they interpret wrongly has a right interpretation.”

Other bishops, fearing a church split on their hands, pressed the compromise of the homoiousios—that Christ was of similar, and not the same, substance as the Father.  The change in the Greek word was so small—just one letter—that one would hardly notice it, a change in pronunciation so small that those reciting the creed could ignore it.  But to Athanasius it was the difference between life and death.

“God Himself made the decision to take on flesh and to become man and to undergo the death of the Cross, that by faith in Him, all who believe may obtain salvation….  Only so is our salvation fully realized and guaranteed.”

He would die, in 373, before the fruit of his labor could be seen.  But, in 381, bishops at the Council of Constantinople would uphold the doctrine of the deity of Christ that Athanasius taught.  The Nicene Creed would survive as the accepted understanding of the Trinity and of the Person of Christ.  The Church would go on, by the power of the Holy Spirit, to proclaim a pure Gospel to this day—because of the power of one letter, one word, and one man to demonstrate that the truth matters.
 

Bishop Peter Beckwith to serve in Anglican Diocese of the Great Lakes

The Anglican Church in North America's Diocese of the Great Lakes has announced at their Diocesan Synod that Bishop Peter Beckwith has signed the Jerusalem Declaration and will be serving as an assisting bishop in the Diocese.  Bishop Beckwith was Bishop of the Episcopal Church Diocese of Springfield from 1992-2010.

During his time as Bishop of Springfield, Beckwith referred to himself as “a faithful Christian in the Episcopal Church.”  However, his effort to be faithful to the biblical and apostolic Gospel meant that his vision for the Church differed markedly from that of Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.

In a June 30, 2006 pastoral letter, Bishop Beckwith described the Epjscopal Church as having “adopted a Gnostic theology and a New Age spirituality.”  At the same time, the Diocese of Springfield’s standing committee issued a statement declaring Jefferts Schori “to be outside the bounds of Christian orthodoxy and the clear parameters of the Christian faith, as understood from an Anglican perspective” and made an unsuccessful request for direct oversight from the Archbishop of Canterbury.

In March 2013, Beckwith was one of nine Episcopal bishops forced by Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori to undergo a process of "conciliation" after they signed amicus curiae briefs in support of the Diocese of Fort Worth and the Diocese of Quincy in their legal efforts to separate from the Episcopal Church.
 

UPPER SOUTH CAROLINA: Bishop Waldo Permits Congregations to Perform Same-Sex Blessings

I would love only to blog about the good news—I really would—like the growth of Christianity in China or the number of Muslims in countries beyond the reach of any Gospel witness who are becoming followers of Jesus through dreams and visions.  But in the western world—where even historic, formerly mainline churches are becoming post-Christian—the news often isn't good.

This evening I read the news that the Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Upper South Carolina is now permitting congregations to perform same-sex blessings.  (The full document is here.)  This really wasn't much of a surprise.  Sarah Hey at Stand Firm (who lives in that diocese) has blogged her pessimism regarding the "Bishop’s Task Force on Unity" (a task force of three conservatives and eight liberals) that was appointed to study the question of same-sex blessings.  Fr. Bradley Wilson's decision to resign from the Task Force, in April 2013 (because it appeared the bishop had already made up his mind to do same sex blessings) proved to be prescient. 

Nevertheless, when I read the news this evening, it hit me like a punch in the gut.   This is South Carolina, after all, where same-sex unions are not recognized legally and probably one of the least likely states ever to do so.  The Dean of the 4000-member Trinity Cathedral, in Columbia, the Very Rev. Timothy Jones, has issued a letter stating that he will not authorize the blessing of same-sex relationships in his congregation, but remains committed to “respectful conversation.”  The rector of the almost-equally-large Christ Church, in Greenville, the Rev. Harrison McLeod, had written to his congregation almost a year ago, saying that Bp. Waldo's approval of same sex unions in the Diocese looked to be inevitable, but that he will not authorize the blessing of same-sex relationships in his congregation either.

So in a state where the legalization of same sex unions is highly unlikely, and in a diocese where two of the largest congregations in the entire Episcopal Church have said they will not bless same-sex unions, and where performing same-sex blessings is not likely to play well except to a relatively small number of activists on the issue, Bp. Waldo approves them anyway.  So why did this happen?  And for whom?

The significance of this action is that it puts the Diocese of Upper South Carolina on record as buying into the Episcopal Church's idolatry and slavish submission to the zeitgeist.  And, however seldom the newly approved rite will be used, it gives Bishop Waldo the satisfaction that he has accomplished something that is apparently essential to his own theology and sense of justice.

I am very familiar with the justice arguments put forward by those who favor same-sex blessings--that if even one couple receives this blessing, justice has been accomplished, and it is an advance for the gospel (their gospel, that is).  For the moment, my concern is not the merits of the debate, per se.  My concern is for what this says about the tenability of orthodox Christianity in the Episcopal Church.

How many dioceses in the Episcopal Church currently do not bless same-sex relationships?  I have not done a tally, but I suspect there are fewer than 20 out of 99 domestic U.S. dioceses that have not authorized the blessing of same sex relationships, and several of these simply have not declared their position yet.  I think it is an accurate assessment that, apart from three or four notable exceptions, there is not a diocese in the Episcopal Church that is more than one episcopal election away from blessing same sex unions.

To those who have been paying attention to the course of the Episcopal Church over the past few decades, this will not come as news.  But for a great many pew-sitters, the implications of this are huge.  First, the reality shifted from "General Convention does a lot of crazy things, but it never amounts to anything" to "Some dioceses may be doing this, but this diocese never will.  Now, all that many Episcopalians can do is say hopefully, "the Bishop may approve same sex blessings, but this parish will never do them."

However, in a Church where orthodoxy is increasingly the exception instead of the rule, and where the training of new clergy is increasingly heterodox, the fact remains that any diocese in the Episcopal Church could only be one bishop election away (and any parish only one rector search away) from doing what the Diocese of Upper South Carolina now has done.
 

"He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross"

Working on a sermon for this Sunday, I was once again struck by this precious truth regarding the work of Christ for our salvation from the Epistle lesson (1 Peter 2:24): 

He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

Over the years I have been surprised and saddened at the number of learned individuals and clergy whose educations had taught them to hold the penal substitutionary atonement of Christ for our sins in disdain.

It seems that the denials I have encountered are from individuals who find it hard to believe that God has a righteous indignation (wrath) toward our sins that needs to be assuaged; and that there is a justice in God that needs atonement in order to forgive our sins.

But what do verses such as these say to us?

For Christ also suffered [died] once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit... (1 Peter 3:18).

It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification (Romans 4:24-25).

 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21).

What do the redemptive analogies of the Passover Lamb (Exodus 12) and the Scapegoat (Leviticus 16:9-10) teach us?  That, like the Passover Lamb and the Scape goat, Christ took the penalty for our sins that we might live.

Make no mistake, the substitutionary death of Christ for our sins is the heart of the Gospel message, and if it is not the heart of your theology and your personal beliefs, you are in big trouble.

Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God (Romans 7:4).

This is our only hope.  And if you are one of those who has been led to think differently about the meaning of Christ's death and your salvation, then what more can I say other than to suggest respectfully that it is not too late to think again?

Schori's Visit and the Pax Nashotah

(H/T Virtue Online)

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is reporting on Thursday's visit of Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, to Nashotah House Theological Seminary.

While reporting that "The Episcopal Church... is among the more liberal of the 39 provinces in the Worldwide Anglican Communion..." and that "the Anglo-Catholic Nashotah House is one of the more conservative Episcopal seminaries," religion editor, Annysa Johnson, went on to say that,"...the seminary works to nurture an ethos — something it calls Pax Nashotah — in which individuals with theologically diverse views live and work respectfully together."

The term "Pax Nashotah" was coined in a very complimentary blog reflection by Bishop Dan Martins after a May 2009 visit to Nashotah House.  (He updated his impressions in similarly laudatory terms following another visit in 2010.)  Bp. Martins later became an alumni trustee and, following Bishop Ed Salmon's move from Chairman of the Board to become Dean and President, Martins became the next Chairman of Nashotah House's Board.

Since I was the Dean and President under whom the Pax Nashotah that Bishop Martins observed came to be a reality, let me offer the following clarification:

The climate we were blessed to have at Nashotah House during those years (the Pax Nashotah) was never intended to be an ethos, as the Journal Sentinel reports, "in which individuals with theologically diverse views live and work respectfully together."

The climate in Anglicanism in those years was (and continues to be) one in which many who remained in the Episcopal Church sometimes demonized those who had left, beginning with the departures of the Dioceses of San Joaquin and Quincy in 2008, followed by the Dioceses of Fort Worth and Pittsburgh in 2009.  (More recently, Katharine Jefferts Schori herself has been accused of doing precisely this in a sermon preached in South Carolina.)  Departing Anglicans, for their part, have also demonized those who have remained in the Episcopal Church.

The "Pax Nashotah" that came to exist during the latter half of my deanship at Nashotah House was was one in which Anglicans of different jurisdictions could live, work, and worship together respectfully, not in spite of "theologically diverse views," but precisely because they shared a unity in Christian faith and teaching.

The students who enrolled at the House represented a variety of jurisdictions, together with students from dioceses of the Episcopal Church who were looking for the orthodox education that Nashotah House offered.  We were seeking to be, first and foremost, an orthodox Christian institution, one where ecclesiastical affiliations or jurisdictions did not matter.  We were there to become the best servants we could be for Jesus and His Church.  We would leave the matter of the jurisdiction where we were called to serve up to Him.

It is the theological unity that undergirded the Pax Nashotah that has been challenged by the current administration's decision to invite Katharine Jefferts Schori (and a procession of bishops whose views approach Jefferts Schori's in varying degrees) to preach at the House.  This is the subtle but significant shift that has taken place:  The position of Nashotah House has shifted from jurisdictions not mattering as long as we all agree in the truth to theological differences not mattering as long as we can all get along.  

You can read Katharine Jefferts Schori's sermon at Nashotah House on the Episcopal Church website.  Although her reference to Jesus is supported by Scripture references in a footnote, the reference to "Wisdom and her prophet" sounds more Gnostic than Christian.  This won't surprise anyone who has been paying attention.  Jefferts Schori's theology is exactly what a modern-day Gnostic would believe.  Her denial of Jesus as the only way to the Father and her views regarding salvation are ones with which a Gnostic would agree.  Her claim that St. Paul of Tarsus' curing of a demon-possessed slave girl as described in the Bible was  "depriving her of her gift of spiritual awareness" is precisely what a modern-day Gnostic or Neo-Pagan would say about it. 

The message should be clear:  Any orthodox Christian seeking to work in the Episcopal Church today needs to have a game plan for reforming it or at least for maintaining orthodoxy in the spheres in which he or she ministers--knowing that it will be in the face of enormous challenges, even (or perhaps especially) from the Episcopal Church's top leadership. 

When the initial controversy erupted surrounding the invitation of Katharine Jefferts Schori's to preach at Nashotah House, Bp. Martins reportedly said that there had been lots of heretics in the pulpit at Nashotah House during his three years as a seminarian.  That is undoubtedly true for Nashotah House at that time, and that was precisely the kind of ethos from which we were intentionally moving away during my deanship. 

There is no point in cataloging here once again the numerous errors that have become part and parcel of current Episcopal Church teaching.  There is no point listing once again the errors that have characterized Katharine Jefferts Schori's own preaching and teaching.  There is no point enumerating Jefferts Schori's depositions and lawsuits against faithful Anglicans, including Nashotah House trustees, alumni, and supporters.  The current administration of Nashotah House has shown it doesn't care. 

The new agenda seems to be that a relationship with the Episcopal Church, even with its heretical leadership, is paramount.  But what is to be gained from this relationship?  A few more students from dioceses of the Episcopal Church whose influence will move the seminary in a more heterodox direction?  A little more money?  What does it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his soul?  It is the soul of Nashotah House that is at stake in the invitation to Katharine Jefferts Schori and the direction of the House that this invitation represents.   

A Spoonful of Pelagius Makes the Heresy Go Down

I arrived at lunch with a well-known Christian leader who was traveling through Montrose and was seated at the table just in time to find myself in the middle of the Augustine-Pelagius debate revisited.

"ARRRRGGHHH!"  I thought to myself, "I have been through this debate so many #$%^ times I can't stand it!"

Our well-known Christian guest had nothing good to say about Augustine.  He went on to say, "if what some people think about salvation is true, only about 5% of the people who have ever lived will be saved."  "But," he said, "when you stop to think about all those who have died before the age of accountability--those who have died in childbirth, or as young children, or through abortion or infanticide—it could be a lot more than that, perhaps as much as 70% of the 40 billion or so who have ever lived.  And that gives me hope!"

At this point outwardly I am smiling and trying to be gracious (since I also was a guest at this luncheon), while inwardly I am hitting my head against an imaginary wall so hard I can see stars.  Here is a Christian leader who derives hope from the fact that infant mortality, abortion, and infanticide will account for most of the population of heaven!  (I don't mean to disparage the great work this man has done or the numerous books he has written, but that is the inescapable conclusion of his statements on this subject.)

Still smiling and trying hard to remember that I am a guest, I raise the concern, "It seems to me that if we really believe in the awful reality of eternal torment in hell and eternal separation from God, then it seems from what you are saying, that it would be preferable for people to die before they reach the age of accountability."

Not to be deterred by this negative consideration, this fellow went on, "Some people say there is no biblical justification for an age of accountability, but I see it right there in Paul;" and he proceeded to quote 1 Corinthians 15:22, "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."  He then said, "You see, to die you have to first be alive.  So that means that all of us when we are born are alive, and it is at the age of accountability that we die when we knowingly sin."

So I proceeded to assert the orthodox understanding of that verse:  "No, what that means is that you and I and every human who ever lived were positionally in Adam and died when he died, i.e., when he sinned."  (The theological term for this is "federal headship;" and, while the term is used most often in Reformed or Calvinistic theology, it is the same concept of original sin that was articulated through St. Augustine and finds its expression in Catholic theology as well.  The representative headship of Adam is virtually the universal understanding of the the Church, both East and West.)

Later, I was talking with another participant in the luncheon who I could see was also troubled by the conversation.  I couldn't help but make the observation that, if you want to belong to a religion that believes that Christ's Atonement eliminates original sin, that we are born in innocence, and that makes an "age of accountability" officially a part of their theology, there is a religion you can join: They are called the Mormons.  As Mormon theologian Sterling M. McMurrin has stated, “the theology of Mormonism is completely Pelagian.”  (Sterling M. McMurrin, The Theological Foundations of the Mormon Religion.  University of Utah Press, 1965.)

To be clear about what we mean when we use the term Pelagianism:  Pelagianism is a heresy taught by Pelagius, a British monk who lived in the 5th century A.D. and was a teacher in Rome.  Pelagius denied original sin, the doctrine that we have inherited a sinful nature from Adam.  He taught that Adam only hurt himself when he fell, and not the entire human race.  Pelagius taught that, therefore, a person is born with the same innocence and moral abilities as Adam was when he was first made by God.  He taught that people can choose God by the exercise of their free will and reason.  God's grace is merely an aid to help individuals come to him.

Semi-Pelagianism is a weaker form of Pelagianism that does not entirely deny original sin and its effects upon the human soul and will; but, it teaches that God and man cooperate to achieve man's salvation. This cooperation is based on the ability of a person to make a free will choice.  Semi-Pelagianism teaches that man can make the first move toward God by seeking God out of his own free will, and that man can cooperate with God's grace even to the keeping of his faith through human effort.  This would mean that God responds to the initial effort of a person, and that God's grace is not absolutely necessary to have faith. 

In contrast, the theology that comes from Augustine through the Reformed but also through the Catholic tradition to a large extent is that: (1) humankind has been affected by sin in all of our faculties to the extent that we are incapable of choosing the good, apart from God's grace (Romans 3:10-12).  (2) God's grace is extended to us by virtue of his sovereign love and mercy and not because of any good that is inherently in us (Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:5).  (3) Christ's atoning death is the sole basis for our being reckoned righteous before God and saved (1 Peter 3:18, Hebrews 9:26-28).  The application of Christ's Atonement is efficacious for those who are referred to in Scripture as God's elect (Matthew 24:31; Romans 8:33-34; Romans 9:11; Romans 11:7; 2 Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:1).  (4) The grace of God is manifest to us, once the Holy Spirit opens our eyes through regeneration, in a way that is effectually compelling.  ("Unless one is born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God" John 3:3, 1 Corinthians 2:14).  (5) Those whom God has truly saved by his grace are saved everlastingly (John 10:28).

You could categorize these two schools as the "God's choice" vs "my choice" schools or the "sovereign grace" vs. "free will" schools.  But it is important to note that every time the "my choice" school has gone up against the "God's choice" school before a Church council or synod, or the issue has been dealt with in a Church canon, confession, or article of belief—in either the early Church, the Roman Catholic Church, or the churches proceeding from the Reformation—the "my choice" folks have lost:

• Councils of Carthage (412, 416, and 418)
• Council of Ephesus (431)
• The Council of Orange (529)
• Council of Trent (1546) Roman Catholic
• 2nd Helvetic Confession (1561-66) 8-9. (Swiss-German Reformed)
• Augsburg Confession (1530) Art. 9, 18 (Lutheran)
• Gallican Confession (1559) Art. 10 (French Reformed)
• Belgic Confession (1561) Art. 15 (Lowlands, French/Dutch/German Reformed)
• The Articles of Religion (1571), Art. 9. (Anglican)
• Canons of Dort (1618-19), 3/4.2 (Dutch/German/French Reformed). 

Not to be deterred, those who persist in exalting human choice and who have a weak view of the necessity of grace still walk among us, even wearing the mantle of Christian leaders.  What can we do?  Pray.  Persuade.  Persevere.


A Note about the Eastern Orthodox and the Doctrine of Justification

The Eastern Orthodox churches never thought through the issues of  justification in the way that the juridical Roman mindset of Augustine's time was prone to do.  Nor did the East experience the medieval accretions to Roman Catholic theology that gave us the Treasury of Merit, the "Romish Doctrine" of Purgatory, Indulgences, and other unfortunate errors that were countered in the Reformation.  In 1629, Cyril Lucaris, who later became Patriarch of Constantinople, but who had studied in Calvin's Geneva, published a short treatise known as his Confession.  Cyril's exposure to Roman Catholicism in the West and the theology of the Reformation led him to express opposition to the errors of the Roman Church and to attempt to show how Calvinism could be compatible with Orthodoxy.  Since the Orthodox Church had not lived through the developments and errors of the West and had no saint in their history who had done work on the doctrine of man or of sin in the same manner as Augustine, the faith Cyril proclaimed seemed like an innovation and heresy to those in the East and was condemned by a Eastern Orthodox Synod, in Jerusalem, in 1672.  (There are some Orthodox authorities today who dispute Cyril's authorship of his Confession, but most sources, including Orthodox sources, continue to attribute the authorship to him.)

This rejection of Calvinism (and the continued failure of the East to appreciate Augustine) is the basis for Metropolitan Jonah's denunciation of Calvinism in his address to the Anglican Church in North America's Inaugural Assembly in 2009.  The resolution of this thorny theological problem will only come when representatives of the Orthodox and Western churches can engage in a thorough study of the doctrine of justification.  This is immensely important; in fact, it is essential if unity on this question is ever to be achieved.  The Anglican Church in North America's dialogue with the Orthodox Church in America presents a wonderful place where this study could begin.  I pray it will happen in my lifetime.

Yes, in Montrose

It has been a remarkable week.  Following a glorious Holy Week and Easter at All Saints Anglican Church, I went across the line into Utah for a couple of days of sightseeing in Monument Valley and Arches National Park and returned home in time to get ready for another remarkable weekend.

On Friday evening, Chris and I were guests of the Gideons International for one of their conventions or, in Gideon parlance, an "encampment."  Most people know the Gideons for the Bibles they place in hotel rooms or the pocket New Testaments they give to students around the US.  But the Gideons are truly international, currently publishing the Bible in 94 languages (with more translations in progress) and distributing them in 197 countries.  Last year they gave away more than 84 million Bibles.  (That is more than two Bibles given away every second.)  Do you ever wonder if those Bibles placed in hotel rooms and given to students actually have an impact in leading people to Christ?  Yes they do; and the Gideons have plenty of testimonies of changed lives to prove it.

We were blessed to hear a banquet address by the International President of the Gideons, Dr. William Thomas, a physician and surgeon from Sheffield, UK.  In his address, Dr. Thomas mentioned his friendship with Archbishop Benjamin Kwashi of Jos, Nigeria, and the fact that Abp. Kwashi's conversion to Christianity came from an encounter with a Gideon Bible.  I was one of Ben Kwashi's examiners when he completed his DMin degree at Trinity School for Ministry.  Later, after I was Dean and President at Nashotah House, we conferred an honorary D.D. degree on Ben--a great man of God and a dynamic witness to the Gospel in an area of Nigeria where martyrdom is an almost daily possibility.  As the only Anglican clergyman in the banquet hall of 1000 people, I couldn't help but reflect on how amazing it was to be here in Western Colorado, listening to a speaker from the UK tell about his friend from Nigeria who I had known since my days on a seminary faculty in Pennsylvania.  But that is the sort of thing that seems to happen regularly since I moved to Montrose.

This spring I am taking the course Perspectives on the World Christian Movement.  Although I have a doctoral minor in Missiology and have taught Missions at the seminary level, I have never had the opportunity to take the Perspectives course.  Montrose, population 18,000, hosts the Perspectives course every 18 to 24 months.  No other town this size in the United States (that isn't a suburb in a larger metropolitan area) even manages to host the Perspectives course, much less to host it so frequently.

Several churches in the Montrose area (Colorado's "Western Slope" of the Rockies) got together and decided to underwrite the entire cost of a Bible translation for the Mepha'a tribe--an unreached people group in southern Mexico.  It is called the Western Slope Bible Translation Project, and is a groundbreaking approach to funding new translations by the Wycliffe Bible Translators.

I am blessed to serve a remarkable congregation.  Among the members are three other Anglican priests (one ACNA, one PEAR-USA, and one REC) and their wives.  Professors from Westminster Seminary, Philadelphia and Trinity, Ambridge, PA own houses here and are a part of our congregation during sabbaticals and vacations.  Another local professor who is a permanent resident of Montrose, who also teaches for TSM and San Francisco Theological Seminary, and his wife make our congregation their home and bless us with their gifts in teaching, spiritual direction, and music. 

We have five teams of musicians, including a wind ensemble, who provide our worship music on weekends.  A higher percentage of our congregation is involved in music ministry than any other congregation I know.  Through a program known as Community Options, our musicians provide a program of music therapy for developmentally challenged adults in Montrose.  They perform together in a group known as Joyful Sounds.  One of the things that impressed me most when I interviewed here (in addition to the generally high level of volunteerism) was this group of musicians, several of them with advanced degrees, devoting their time to helping developmentally challenged adults make music--and having fun doing it!  That kind of humility and selflessness speaks volumes.

This morning my colleague, who is a postulant for the vocational diaconate, preached at our 8am and 10am services.  She has taken her course in Introduction to the Old Testament and is now enrolled in the New Testament course in the Diocese of Quincy's St. Benedict School for Ministry, which I have had a part in founding.  Having spent more than 30 years in seminary education, I can attest that most of the three-year MDiv graduates I have known couldn't have preached a sermon that handled the Scriptures as clearly and as well.  I am blessed and gratified to have her as a colleague in ministry.

Montrose probably has more non-profit organizations per capita than any other city in North America.  Members of All Saints Anglican Church have been involved in founding Haven House, Christ's Kitchen and other ministries.  Habitat for Humanity's Montrose operation dwarfs that of many larger cities.  The congregation's latest initiative is a community garden on acreage behind our church, designed to be an outreach to lower-income individuals in our community. 

This afternoon, Chris and I attended the closing service of Kairos Prison Ministry weekend at the Delta Correctional Center.  Men from All Saints and other Montrose churches selflessly devote their time to providing Christian discipleship among the prison population.  One of the first events to which Chris and I were invited after arriving in Montrose was a concert at the Montrose Pavilion by alumni of the Kairos program--men whose lives had been transformed returning to say thanks and give testimonies about the ministry that had introduced them to the Savior who had changed their lives.

Tomorrow, a local Christian businessman and philanthropist has invited me to have lunch with missiologist and author Don Richardson, author of such books as Peace Child, and Eternity in Their Hearts.  Richardson, who is in demand as a speaker all over the world, is spending this week preaching in churches and teaching in Montrose.  Yes, in Montrose.

Next Saturday, Christians from all over Montrose will take part in ShareFest.  This annual initiative mobilizes churches in local communities in an effort to show the love of Jesus Christ in in tangible ways, undertaking jobs of maintenance and repairs in schools and parks, and performing other tasks for folks unable to do for themselves.  Once the smallest community in the United States to begin a ShareFest, Montrose now attracts one of the largest number of volunteers proportionate to its population.  And so it goes.

People have asked why, after 30 years in theological education and involvement in the larger church, I came to Montrose.  To be honest, I can't say I have always known the answer to that question.  But God did.   

"And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good" (Gen. 1:31a). 

China on course to become 'world's most Christian nation' within 15 years

The number of Christians in Communist China is growing so steadily that it by 2030 it could have more churchgoers than America 

(From the London Daily Telegraph where there is more:)

It is said to be China's biggest church and on Easter Sunday thousands of worshippers will flock to this Asian mega-temple to pledge their allegiance – not to the Communist Party, but to the Cross.

The 5,000-capacity Liushi church, which boasts more than twice as many seats as Westminster Abbey and a 206ft crucifix that can be seen for miles around, opened last year with one theologian declaring it a "miracle that such a small town was able to build such a grand church".

The £8 million building is also one of the most visible symbols of Communist China's breakneck conversion as it evolves into one of the largest Christian congregations on earth.

"It is a wonderful thing to be a follower of Jesus Christ.  It gives us great confidence," beamed Jin Hongxin, a 40-year-old visitor who was admiring the golden cross above Liushi's altar in the lead up to Holy Week.

"If everyone in China believed in Jesus then we would have no more need for police stations.  There would be no more bad people and therefore no more crime," she added.

Officially, the People's Republic of China is an atheist country but that is changing fast as many of its 1.3 billion citizens seek meaning and spiritual comfort that neither communism nor capitalism seem to have supplied.

Christian congregations in particular have skyrocketed since churches began reopening when Chairman Mao's death in 1976 signalled the end of the Cultural Revolution.

Less than four decades later, some believe China is now poised to become not just the world's number one economy but also its most numerous Christian nation.

"By my calculations China is destined to become the largest Christian country in the world very soon," said Fenggang Yang, a professor of sociology at Purdue University and author of Religion in China: Survival and Revival under Communist Rule.

"It is going to be less than a generation. Not many people are prepared for this dramatic change."

China's Protestant community, which had just one million members in 1949, has already overtaken those of countries more commonly associated with an evangelical boom. In 2010 there were more than 58 million Protestants in China compared to 40 million in Brazil and 36 million in South Africa, according to the Pew Research Centre's Forum on Religion and Public Life.

Prof Yang, a leading expert on religion in China, believes that number will swell to around 160 million by 2025.  That would likely put China ahead even of the United States, which had around 159 million Protestants in 2010 but whose congregations are in decline.

Read the rest of the article.

[A tip of the hat to Midwest Conservative Journal for sharing this article.]

Colorado Deaths Stoke Worries About Pot Edibles

From ABC News, where there is more:

A college student eats more than the recommended dose of a marijuana-laced cookie and jumps to his death from a hotel balcony.  A husband with no history of violence is accused of shooting his wife in the head, possibly after eating pot-infused candy.

The two recent deaths have stoked concerns about Colorado's recreational marijuana industry and the effects of the drug, especially since cookies, candy and other pot edibles can be exponentially more potent than a joint.

Twenty-six people have reported poisonings from marijuana edibles this year, when the center started tracking such exposures.  Six were children who swallowed innocent-looking edibles, most of which were in plain sight.

A Colorado law enforcement official had this to say:

"Sadly, we're going to start to understand over time all of the damage and all of the problems associated with marijuana," said Thornton police Sgt. Jim Gerhardt, speaking in his capacity as a board member of the Colorado Drug Investigators Association.  "It's going to dispel the myth that there's no downside, that there's no side effect, to this drug.   It's sad that people are going to have to be convinced with the blood of Coloradans."

Read it all.

A clergy friend of mine with contacts in the local high school says that the number of times the police have been summoned to the high school to deal with intoxicated students has more than doubled in the three months since recreational marijuana became legal in Colorado.  Although students are too young to purchase marijuana legally, the increased use of illegal marijuana by students seems to be the result of the signal being sent by the state's legalization of the drug, which is that this is just another adult pleasure to try if you can.

What we are seeing is a tragedy in the making.  Please pray for Colorado. 

(If there is any upside from this whole situation, it is that other states may think twice about legalizing marijuana after looking at what has happened in Colorado.)

The Lord is risen indeed!

Matthew 28:1-10

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is the greatest event in the history of the world—except, perhaps, for one other event, the one that happened three days earlier—namely, his death.

This is what I conclude as I ponder the two claims of Matthewm, chapter 28:  (1) that Jesus was crucified; and (2) that Jesus has risen from the dead and is alive and will be with us to the end.   There would have been no need for the resurrection if Jesus had not died; and there would be no saving significance to His death if He did not rise.  Both are utterly crucial.

I. Jesus Has Been Crucified  –  The time is early Sunday morning.   Mary Magdalene and the other women have come to the tomb of Jesus.  They see an angel whose appearance is like lightning (Matthew 28:3).  Then, according to Matthew 28:5-6, “The angel said to the women, ‘Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified.’”  This is the first important fact in this text: “Jesus has been crucified.”

Jesus said to His disciples several times that this was His destiny.  For instance, in Matthew 17:22-23: “Jesus said to them, ‘The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men; and they will kill Him, and He will be raised on the third day.’”  In Acts 4:27-28, the disciples prayed these words to God: “Truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever Your hand and Your plan predestined to take place.”  The death of Jesus was not an accident or merely the result of a great injustice.  It was the plan of God.

This is the teaching that runs throughout the New Testament: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son . . .” (John 3:16).  “[God did] not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all” (Romans 8:32).   Jesus was crucified by design, not by accident.

II. He Is Risen  –  But the Cross of Christ can’t be precious to us if Jesus is still dead.  So the resurrection of Jesus is just as crucial as his crucifixion.  And so we see the second important claim of this Gospel passage: “The angel said to Mary and the others, ‘He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said. Come; see the place where He was lying.’”

The resurrection of Jesus demonstrates His triumph over death and His authority over all things.  From there He works out His saving purposes in the world—with authority over all nations and industry and business and science and education and entertainment and weather and stars and light and energy and life and death. He is Lord over all; and His purposes and His promises cannot fail.  And, as we are in Him and living for Him, He is with us—in all His majesty and power and authority—to the end of the age.

Wisconsin Governor Refuses Atheist Demands to Remove Scripture from Social Media Pages

From here:

The governor of Wisconsin is refusing the demands of a prominent atheist activist organization to remove a Scripture citation from his Twitter and Facebook pages.

As previously reported, the Madison-based Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF) sent a letter to Walker this past week after becoming aware that he had simply posted 'Philippians 4:13' as his status on his social media accounts last Sunday. The Scripture reads, "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."

"This braggadocio verse coming from a public official is rather disturbing," FFRF wrote in the letter. "To say, 'I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me,' seems more like a threat, or the utterance of a theocratic dictator, than of a duly elected civil servant."

It demanded that the governor delete the post, contending that it is unlawful for Walker to endorse religion on his official social media pages.

"On behalf of our membership, we ask you to immediately delete this religious message from your official gubernatorial Facebook and Twitter," the letter stated. "May we hear from you at your earliest convenience?"

However, Laurel Patrick, the press secretary for Walker, told reporters this week that the governor will not bow to atheist demands.

"Governor Walker will not remove the post on his social media," she wrote in an emailed statement. "The verse was part of a devotional he read that morning, which inspired him, and he chose to share it."

Read it all.

Truer words...

An article in the Daily Telegraph dealing with the challenges ahead for Church of England Archbishop Justin Welby elicited the following comment from a reader:

Religion is founded on a notion that it has teachings or scriptures from a divine (supernatural) source, and this source is provides insights into ultimate truths which can not be discerned by mere mortals investigating nature.

Any religious institution which believes it needs to modernise its beliefs is admitting that its beliefs have never had such a divine source - they are man-made and, like all man-made things, need to be modernised periodically.  Consequently, that institution no longer represents a spiritual belief system, but is simply a political organisation which pretends to be founded on spiritual beliefs.

That pretty much sums up the Church of England.

This comment is not only my quote of the day, it may be the quote of a lifetime.  And it reminded me of something I said in a recent sermon:

I have an abiding distrust for what C. S. Lewis called "chronological snobbery."  Chronological snobbery is the notion that the ideas of our own day are better than the ideas of a bygone day just because the ideas are in our day.  Chronological snobbery feels that things are truer because they are newer.

Now there is a difference here: Truth in areas such as science is a matter of discovery.  So, indeed, new discoveries may invalidate previously held ideas and replace them with new ones.  The discovery that the Earth revolves around the Sun, instead of the older idea that the Sun and other celestial bodies revolved around the Earth, is just one example.

I remember when I was young, being at my grandparents’ house and looking up the word “atom” in an old dictionary (from around the year 1900).  The definition said that the atom was the smallest particle of matter and could not be divided.  Well, by then (early 1960’s), even as a child in grade school, I had already been taught about protons, electrons, and neutrons—and, indeed, I knew that the atom could be split with powerful and sometimes destructive force.  In science, new discoveries teach us new truth.

However, in Christian faith and theology, truth is a primarily a matter of revelation, not discovery.  Oh, we may discover new insights out of what has been revealed in Scripture.  But we do not discover new truth that invalidates the clear revelation God has given us.

For example: we will not come to a new discovery in theology that God is an impersonal force, not a Person, that Hell does not exist, that human beings are not sinners because of the Fall, that the atoning death of Jesus Christ is not necessary for salvation—though there are theologians writing, teaching, and holding distinguished professorships who will try to tell you each of those things.  These theologians and denominational leaders and people who follow them believe that theologians today can formulate ideas that make the truth of Holy Scripture, the faith once delivered to the saints, obsolete.

A pointed example from our own day:  Some people want to redefine marriage, and they say that Jesus never said anything that would prohibit doing so.  What Jesus did say that bears on the issue is this:  Speaking to a group who had asked him about divorce, Jesus says, “Have you not read, that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’?” (Matthew 19:4-6)

So the teaching of Jesus is that this is God’s design for human sexual relations, and he grounds it in the creation order (Genesis 2:24).  And, sure enough, whether you are Chinese, or Indian, or a member of a tribe living in the jungle, men marry women and women marry men, and that is how we got 7 billion people living on the planet.  Because the creation order is a reality even in cultures that have never been influenced by the Bible.  So when we talk about redefining marriage, we are talking about not merely something that the Church has never done before, we are talking about something that human civilization has never done before.

Observing truth from the creation order that is consistent with the truth of God in revelation is known as “natural law.”  Natural law refers to the use of reason to analyze human existence and deduce binding rules of moral behavior.  In jurisprudence it serves as a means by which the laws of given political community or society may be critiqued.

If you follow confirmation hearings of Supreme Court justices you may remember nominees being asked what their views were on natural law (such as Justices Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, and Chief Justice John Roberts).  You see, there are politicians who don’t want justices who believe that there is a “givenness”—a revealed nature—to the way things are, and that there is a natural order of things with which laws must be consistent.  It interferes with the idea that we can make up laws to do whatever we want.  But I digress.

This chronological snobbery of which I was speaking is irrational because being new is no guarantee of being true.  It’s pure arrogance to think that a thought in my head is better than a thought in the head of St. Athanasius, Thomas Aquinas, or Martin Luther, just because I live in the twenty-first century and they lived in centuries past.  There is no logical connection between the truth of an insight and the century when God puts it into somebody’s mind.

Many of the theological errors we see today are really the heresies of a past age in new packaging.  So I try to flee every temptation to be a chronological snob.  C. S. Lewis prescribed at least one antidote.  He said that every third book you read should be from outside your own century.  It was good advice.

Numerous commentators have noted, for more than twenty years, that there are two religions in the Episcopal Church.  (Just try Googling the phrase "two religions in the Episcopal Church" to see the copious number of references.)  By extension, this might be said as well for the Anglican Communion.  If one is willing to take a step back and look at the larger picture, is probably most accurate to say that there are two religions today both calling themselves Christianity, and the battle between the two is being fought in every historic Christian tradition.

The difference between these two religions is described succinctly by the comment I quoted from the Daily Telegraph.  It is the difference between what J. Gresham Machen called "Revealed Religion" and "naturalistic liberalism," which, as Machen said, "is not Christianity at all."

How the conflict between these two religions will play out remains to be seen--except I believe I can say with certainty that when, in response to Peter's confession, Jesus promised, "upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it," it was not the false Christianity of naturalistic liberalism that he was talking about.

This means that "revealed" Christianity will ultimately be seen as the victor (at least by God, whose verdict alone matters), even if it is the martyr's victory.

The great frustration in the meantime is that there are ostensibly orthodox Christian leaders (be they bishops, seminary presidents, trustees, etc.) who do not realize there is a battle or, if they do, are not willing to fight it if it means martyrdom—or even a loss of temporal position, prestige, or institutional connections.

I don't need to dwell on what our Lord thinks of such worldly compromises and lukewarmness.  Scripture is abundantly clear on that.

But it is, as I say, frustrating to see orthodox Christians ostracized for raising the alarm and to see institutions lost so that their leaders can remain in comfortable slumber.