7 Reasons June is Pro-Life Month
- Dobbs Overturned Roe v. Wade
In an historic ruling on June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned the rulings of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. America has lived for 49 years under the tyrannical bloodshed of Roe but God sent a Jubilee release for us and our children. We must not let that great answer to prayers go unnoticed. Pro-Life wins. This is the month to mark and remember God’s goodness to us.
- June is strategic ground to claim
The rainbow mafia has been trying to claim June for a long time. They have many corporations behind them shoving their agenda in everyone’s face. But the Dobbs ruling in June gives a legitimate and prominent way to push back. We should not let this opportunity go to waste to claim June as a celebration of life, God’s goodness to his people, God’s ordinance of marriage, and so much more. Claim June as Pro-Life Month.
- Being Pro-Life cuts to the heart of the Godless agenda
Celebrating Pro-Life month is a great way to cut to the center issue of our time. The godless world is trying to claim that the autonomous self is god. They want their lusts and desires to reign supreme. They are trying to reject the way God made the world: sexuality, gender, when life begins, the nature of being male and female, God’s design for marriage. It is all connected and the godless hate it. The Dobbs ruling is a reality check on their bloodlust. God is God and you are not. Celebrate June as Pro-Life month.
(more…)
Life After Roe: New America After Dobbs
At a recent event titled Life After Roe, which was hosted by the Hale Institute of New Saint Andrews College, a panel of four legal specialists discussed the Dobbs ruling which overturned Roe v Wade. Both pro-life and pro-choice positions were present on this panel made up of two legal professors and two litigators. Read this for an overview of the evening.
The striking thing was how this panel captured quite clearly the crossroads before America.
The Dobbs ruling marks a significant transition for the country as we move from Old America into New America. The order of the panel nicely illustrated this transition. On the left, there was a pro-lifer and pro-choicer, both from Old America, who had one kind of conversation. On the right, there was a pro-lifer and a pro-choicer, both from New America, and they had a different kind of conversation. In New America, the end of Roe is an earthshaking fault line that highlights the divide in this country and the reality that there is almost no common ground between the two sides anymore. The striking thing is that this divide runs not only between pro-lifers and pro-choicers, but also between Old America and New America.
(more…)
God’s Mercy and the Spirit of the Age
Guest Post by Samuel Parkison
As I write this, it is mid-morning in the Middle East. I am looking over a balcony at the ocean, with the Arabian Gulf just a two-minute walk across the street, getting used to the sights and smells and tastes (and heat) of my family’s new home. Some of you know that for the better part of the past year, we have been working to move here for a career transition of sorts. I have come here to be a professor of theology at the first ever evangelical seminary in the Arabian Peninsula. There will be other occasions for me to share more about this particular venture; I’m simply pointing out that this is my new home. I am, geographically speaking, about the furthest away from the United States as I can be. And yet, never have I felt more of a bond with my “kinsmen according to the flesh” (cf., Rom 9:1-2), my fellow Americans, than last night while walking around a giant mall in the UAE when I received a notification on my phone that the Supreme Court ruled to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Gratitude for God’s Mercy
The news stopped me dead in my tracks. My knees got weak, I felt woozy and had to sit down to concentrate just to keep the tears from coming out. So much gratitude. I never thought I would see this day. Of course, I have prayed for it. Hoped for it. Spoken and written about the need for it. But even when the now infamous draft-leak of Justice Alito’s opinion filled me with great hope, I confess it was difficult to keep my cynicism at bay. I have learned to brace myself for disappointment. But last night was real. So, while I am settling into my new home in the Middle East, I continue to rejoice with my countrymen.
No matter how you cut it, yesterday was a win for justice, which means it was a win for America, a people who have been incurring a mind-boggling amount of blood-guilt since 1973. We have been polluting the land with our wickedness and have been begging for the wrath of God Almighty. Think I’m exaggerating? Listen to how Psalm 106 describes child-sacrifice:
[Israel] served [pagan nations’] idols,which became a snare to them.
They sacrificed their sons
and their daughters to the demons;
they poured out innocent blood,
the blood of their sons and daughters,
whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan,
and the land was polluted with blood.
Thus they became unclean by their acts,
and played the whore in their deeds. (Psalm 106:36-39)
The blood of innocent children idolatrously sacrificed in demon-worship (which, I would remind you, does not require the conscious awareness of its worshipers for it to qualify as demon-worship, per 1 Cor. 10:20), pollutes the land. My beloved nation has been doing this very thing on a nation-wide scale since 1973, with the body count of some 67 million deaths. The blood of our innocent has been crying out from the earth, calling for the just wrath of God which makes yesterday so great a mercy I can hardly bear it. What do we deserve? We deserve for God’s holiness to be vindicated by a swift and decisive judgment. We deserve to be destroyed like Sodom and Gomorrah. We deserve to be decimated like Egypt was when God delivered Israel from captivity. We deserve for our walls to crumble like Jericho. And yet, what did we receive yesterday? Mercy. An invitation to repent.
Reactions from the Opposition
Now, as a reminder, we should keep in mind how modest of a ruling came down yesterday. This is important because I have seen a lot of curious reactions. There are two general reactions I want to call attention to here.
Reaction One: “You Aren’t Really Pro-Life Because You Don’t Care for the Vulnerable”
This reaction is represented in the memes and tweets that effectively deride pro-lifers like myself for not really caring about the babies, because if we did we would put our money where our mouths are, stop being so fiscally conservative, and get on board with big government policies that support women in need with medical care, adoption, foster care, etc. My favorite taunt along these lines is, “If you really care about the babies, would you support mandatory child-support for the fathers in every situation? Huh?” To which I reply with a hearty, “Yes! Absolutely! I am pro-expecting fathers to take responsibility for their offspring!”
To the challenge for pro-lifers to support the care of those in our society who are in desperate need of help, I simply agree. The question is, what is the best method for taking care of those in need in our society? My skepticism that big-government policies are the solution for taking care of the needy and vulnerable in our society does not come from my penny-pinching conservativism, it comes from the conviction that the government is intrinsically incompetent to do that work. I say “intrinsically” to emphasize that this is not a deficiency on the government’s part. That’s not what the government is supposed to do, and so it should not be surprising that it’s bad at it.
But even if you disagree with that position, we should point out that it is not as if pro-lifers have been neglecting care for the needy and vulnerable in our society. We have been accepting the challenge to care “holistically” with our dollars and time for decades. On every meaningful metric, it is the religious and pro-life demographics that are the most generous with their time and resources to non-profit organizations that do the work of caring for the orphan and widow without compulsion from their neighbors or government. This is the demographic overwhelmingly represented in foster care and adoption. This is the demographic that starts and funds and operates crisis pregnancy centers whose agenda are not simply to “end abortion,” but rather to care for families in general and needy and vulnerable mothers in particular. However, even if that were not the case, this reaction is a poor argument in favor of abortion. In my recent book, Thinking Christianly: Bringing Sundry Thoughts Captive to Christ, I interact briefly with this line of thinking. Here’s an excerpt from that section:
Let it be known that there is no necessary social prerequisite for getting to speak out against abortion. We should decisively put to death that foolish notion that says before objecting to murdering babies under the banner of “pro-life,” one must satisfactorily establish “pro-life” status by being on the forefront of orphan care, adoption, refugee ministries, homeless ministries, etc. These things are clearly consistent with being “pro-life,” but the increasingly common dichotomy of “pro-life” vs. “pro-birth” should be laughed out of the room. How, pray tell, is it possible to be “pro-life” without first being “pro-birth?”
This is a smokescreen, and to put the matter plainly, Christians who play along are suckers. The goal-post will always change for what constitutes as caring for enough issues to get to care about abortion. Hating “baby-hacking” requires no credentials, especially if those credentials are handed out by those who have no objection to “baby-hacking.” Frankly, I’m quite sure I do not want the approval of such individuals anyway. They can keep it.[1]
Reaction Two: “The Government Has No Right to Control the Bodies of Women“
This reaction seems to assume that what happened on June 24 is the making of a law to illegalize all abortion. But the Supreme Court did not outlaw abortion. All they did was deny that it was a “constitutional right,” which means that if a state chooses to enact legislation that prohibits abortion, that state is not being unconstitutional in doing so. States are not infringing on constitutionally recognized rights by enacting pro-life legislation.
Now, I actually do think abortion should be nationally prohibited, and not only for moral and theological reasons. There is a strong legal argument for the abolition of all abortion on the grounds of, at least, the 14th amendment (this has bearing on the “my body, my choice” argument. Abortion is not merely about a pregnant woman’s body, but also the body of her infant). But the point is that yesterday’s ruling did not force any state to stop performing abortions.
So, think about the mindset that lies behind, for example, protestors in California marching the streets with signs demanding the right to abortion. What exactly are they mad about? What are they protesting? They are mad about the fact that not every state must make abortion legal. That the citizens of a state like Oklahoma maintains the right to elect the representatives they want to reflect their values, which includes a high value for the unborn, is intolerable for these protestors. They do not want Oklahomans to have the ability to establish representatives who will establish and elect those laws. Protestors in California have lost literally nothing by way of “ability.” Their state has enshrined abortion with legislation in anticipation of the reversal of Roe v. Wade. But they are so passionate about mothers having the “right” to kill their pre-born babies that they are protesting other states having the ability to prohibit pre-born-baby-killing. Their own state protecting their ability to kill their babies isn’t enough: they demand that every state everywhere be obligated to do the same. Such a response, frankly, is madness.
Behind the Veil: What’s Really Going On
As a Christian theologian, I have to also point out that this is not only irrational, it is demonic. I’m not calling people on the other side of this issue demons, mind you. No, they are not demons or sub-humans, they are image-bearers of God himself, having more dignity and worth, and value than they themselves could possibly imagine. I am saying, rather, that the spirit that possesses a group to take to the streets in angry opposition to the verdict, “baby-killing is not a constitutional right,” is not a spirit of love and goodness and justice, but rather a spirit that arises from the domain of darkness (cf., Col 1:13). I am quite certain that most of the individuals vehemently opposed to yesterday’s ruling “do not know what spirit they are of,” but that does not make their clamor for abortion any less demonic. The crowd that boils over with rage over the prospect of mothers losing the ability to kill their children is possessed by a dark mindset indeed. What we see (and will continue to see in the coming days) with violent threats and attacks on churches and crisis pregnancy centers is the removing of the veil. The veneer of love and gentleness and justice is being peeled back and the darkness of the culture of death is showing its true colors. It is losing all motivation to be seen as loving and is perfectly content with showing its rage.
Still, I can’t help but suspect that many of the most passionate men and women clamoring for more death are driven by shame and guilt. They shout for abortion as an effort to shout down their own consciences. They have the blood of abortion on their own hands, they know it deep down, and they wish to silence that part of them that accuses. So they stop their ears and cry out that the evil they participated in is “good,” and the good that would have protected their children from execution is “evil.” Rather than applying the balm of grace to their sinful self-inflicted wound, they ignore the wound and try to convince themselves that there is no sin to repent of. They may be throwing rocks at the windows of crisis pregnancy centers, but they are aiming at that part of their souls that knows what evil they have committed. To those, I would simply say, “Give up trying to silence your conscience. It won’t work. You know what you have done. So go ahead and let your conscience speak. Let it call the sin, sin. Then, and only then, will you be in a position to hear a better word, spoken by the blood of Christ. He does not silence the accusation by pretending like it’s not there, he silences the accusation by answering it with his own blood. He does not invite you to ignore your sin. He invites you to let him deal with it in a decisive way. You are not beyond redemption and forgiveness and healing. But it is only those who know themselves to be sick who will seek out a Doctor. So, seek him out; he is not far.”
Concluding Prayers
What now? Well for starters, we should unflinchingly celebrate this surprising mercy that God has shown us. We should praise God that at least some states in this country will slow down on racking up the unfathomable debt of blood-guilt they have been incurring since 1973. We should praise God for the lives that this will save. We should thank God for the gift of sacrificial saints who have worked tirelessly for decades to see this ground made (while many of us cynically doubted that their efforts would succeed). We should thank them for their faithful endurance, and say, “You were right; God bless you and your longsuffering work!” We should thank God for the common grace of a justice system that does some good (even if it is imperfect).
And we should pray for revival. We should pray that our culture of death would disintegrate and that righteousness be established. We should pray that the hearts of those possessed by the spirit of rage and bloodthirstiness would be turned. We should pray that such individuals would have ears to hear their cries for death afresh, and that they would be shocked by the revelation of what their own voice sounds like; shocked into repentance. We should pray that they receive the cleansing blood of Christ for the forgiveness of their sins (both the sin of abortion and the sin of celebrating abortion). We should pray that God would hallow his name, and make his Kingdom come and his will be done here on earth as it is in heaven.
He could do it, you know.
Don’t forget that Nineveh was converted with a five-word sermon. I can’t think of a better invitation to pray for big things like this than the (previously) unthinkable reversal of Roe v. Wade.
[1] Samuel G. Parkison, Thinking Christianly: Bringing Sundry Thoughts Captive to Christ (H&E Publishing, 2022), 105.
*The image for this post is a depiction of Pharaoh demanding the death of Hebrew babies in Exodus 1. It seemed fitting.
Samuel Parkison received his Ph.D. in Systematic Theology from @MBTS). He is the Associate Professor of Theology (Gulf Theological Seminary in the UAE). You can find him on Twitter at https://twitter.com/samuel_parkison
Pelosi, Whoopi, and the Grace of Excommunication
The Roman Catholic Archbishop of San Francisco Salvatore Cordileone announced last week the excommunication of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The Archbishop has cited Pelosi’s refusal to back down from her public advocacy of abortion, which conflicts with the moral positions of the Church, Christian tradition, and the Holy Scripture.
Many news outlets have strangely described the event as the “denial of communion” (Washington Post) or a “communion ban” (Fox News) rather than excommunication. One criticism of the excommunication comes from Whoopi Goldberg – who once pretended to be a nun in a movie and now pretends to speak with even greater erudition than the Archbishop. Goldberg claims, “This is not your job, dude! You can’t — that is not up to you to make that decision.”
The term excommunication itself literally means “out of/from communion” and is from very simple Latin: “ex” and “communicatio.” I believe the modern American sees phrases like excommunication as harsh and as with a sense of permanence, yet this is not the historic understanding of the term. The process of removing a Christian from communion is not related to any particular sin, but rather the obstinate refusal to repent. While various sins certainly place individuals in a grave position at odds with Christian teaching in faith and morals, it is impenitence alone that leads to formal excommunication.
The historic understanding of excommunication is lost on many who would rather paint the church’s role in excommunication as harsh, judgmental, and unloving – yet the act of excommunication is by the witness of Christ and his Apostles an act of love toward the wayward. God’s grace is fully present and offered in the pronouncement of excommunication as a final call away from sin and into the free gift of forgiveness – over even the most notorious of sins.
Did Jesus Teach Excommunication?
Just a few lines down from, “Judge not, that you be not judged.” (Matthew 7:1) our Lord Jesus also says, “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (v. 19) and “‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'” Jesus clearly expected that there would be situations that demand separation and even destruction from those who departed from his “narrow gate” (v. 13-14) and the, “will of My Father in heaven.” (v. 21). Jesus also passes down the authority to enact this separation through his Apostles with his own words, “And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:19).
St. Paul explicitly continued the practice of excommunication and explains that the act might be for the benefit of those engrossed in sin, “deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” (1 Corinthians 5:5) St. Paul saw excommunication as having the power to save, not as a malicious act to permanently destroy. The Geneva Bible includes these helpful notes, “The goal of excommunication is not to cast away the excommunicate that he should utterly perish, but that he may be saved, that is, that by this means his flesh may be tamed, that he may learn to live to the Spirit.”
Does the Church Excommunicate for Politics?
Goldberg contends that, “The archbishop of San Francisco is calling for speaker Nancy Pelosi to be denied receiving Communion because of her pro-choice stance…” While this statement is partly true, Archbishop Cordileone claims that the decision is “purely pastoral, not political.” The idea that an activist Bishop might wield the keys of the kingdom for political reasons is rightly to be feared, yet the issue of abortion is not simply political. There is a plainly spoken and unbroken witness in the Christian tradition from the first-century Didache (“you shall not abort a child or commit infanticide.”) through today in defense of the unborn. There is no doubt that ancient Christians consistently held that life in the womb was to be protected and the taking of this life was a sinful breech of the commandment to “do no murder.” Again, it should be reiterated that Cordileone has not excommunicated Pelosi for a belief about abortion or even “the grave evil she is perpetrating”, but rather for obstinately refusing to repent of her advocacy of abortion.
The Archbishop’s position to excommunicate a powerful governmental figure for their support of a grave evil is not new and has precedence in church history. In 390, Bishop Ambrose of Milan excommunicated Emperor Theodosius, claiming that the “The Emperor is in the Church, not above it.” The same could be argued today, in that Speaker Pelosi is in the Church, not above it. Emperor Theodosius’s excommunication was directly related to his role in the massacre of 7,000 men, women, and children in Thessalonica. After eight months outside the church, Theodosius kneeled his heart in penitence and was restored to communion. Through excommunication, the same grace and hope for restoration is offered to Pelosi.
The emperor himself had not driven a sword into a single individual, just as Speaker Pelosi does not herself scrape out a baby using a metal curette, yet the policies supported and advocated by Speaker Pelosi have contributed to the deaths of millions of unborn children through legal abortion in the United States. The Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood’s research arm, estimates the number of annual abortions to be over 800,000. (from 2017 figures)
In response to the Archbishop, Pelosi has openly criticized the church’s positions, accused the hierarchy of hypocrisy, and went on to receive communion at a church outside of the Archdiocese. Perhaps this speaks to Pelosi’s character or perhaps to the weakness of discipline in the Roman Church, but it certainly is not representative of a spirit of humility or of respect for her claimed ecclesiastical tradition.
The Practical Prayers of Excommunication
During the formative years of my Christian walk I sat under a church that prayed each week for those who had strayed from the Christian faith. We would pray for those who are not saved, but also for those described as “under discipline” (or “excommunicated”). Each week we would recite the names of those under discipline and ask, “that our Lord would bring them to a place of repentance and restore them to the fellowship of Christ’s church.” Seeing them actually return to answer these prayers was always a powerful testimony. My own tradition speaks to excommunication in the Articles of Religion, “XXXIII. Of excommunicate Persons, how they are to be avoided.” Here again, excommunication is affirmed but with the goal that such treatment, “as a heathen and publican” (see Matthew 18:17) would result in reconciliation, penance, and received back into the full fellowship of the church.
Blasphemy Laws
While people condemn the blasphemy laws in God’s law as being barbaric and severe, every society has blasphemy laws. These are the laws that tell you what you can and can’t say about certain people and subjects; “gods” you must worship or, at least, refrain from criticizing. These laws are not arbitrary. They tell you who defines the culture and what the culture is. They tell you who the gods of the culture are; that is, what or who is worshiped. Sometimes these laws are codified and enforced by authorities. At other times they are general cultural practices that are endorsed by the authorities’ unwillingness to stand against injustice. Pressure by activists is put on companies to conform to their morality. If they don’t conform, they will be canceled or attacked. Whether codified or passive among government officials, or a loud, powerful, cultural movement, blasphemy laws exist, and violators will be prosecuted.
(more…)
The Delay of Motherhood
The New York Times addressed the current birthrate decline in the United States. In an article entitled, “Why American Women Everywhere Are Delaying Motherhood,” the authors peruse the landscape of the American scenery and conclude that the prioritization of careers and education have caused women to delay having children well into their 30’s. In fact, the pattern has become quite acceptable and the reason for enormous jubilation among the feminist elites.
America is now experiencing its slowest growth among the population since the 1930s. The traditional route of having children early on has now been quickly substituted for children in the 30s, which inevitably diminishes the opportunities for larger families (the birthrate in America is 0.8%). These are not barren women, but physically capable females who could decide to bear children but decline to do so.
As the NYT observes, the American women find themselves desiring the incentives of careers rather than the incessant needs of little children. They have traded the classic model of womanhood accepted in much of Christendom and classic Western history for the trailblazing academic and career pursuits. Thus, by the time their 30’s arrive, they are psychologically fulfilled and ready to bring children into a world of financial stability and happiness–or at least that’s the theory. The theory is summarized further by a demographer who notes, “Maybe there are fewer babies right now, but people are able to live the lives they want to, and that’s a profound thing.” And another who summarized the sentiment: “I want to know who I am first before having kids,” she said.
This identity crisis is a result of the professionalization industry which treats the priority of the home for the woman (Titus 2:5) as a dismissal of logic. The concept of woman as a beautifier of the home is a strange artifact in the ever-so-modern library of humanity. What we are witnessing in our day is the reversal of categorical trends established in history for new ways of contemplating the woman’s role in society.
It is also worth observing that this quest for “knowing who you are” contradicts basic sociology. Young couples often understand themselves at an entirely new depth when children enter the world. It is true that we may discover the hideous fact that we are self-absorbed beings, but we too may also find that we have the gift of self-giving in a way that never would have been manifested prior to children. We may even say that identities are built in the presence of diapers and sleepless nights. But instead, many women will have to convince themselves that their identities come only through well-furnished apartments and other pre-requisites. And who determines when enough is enough? Ultimately, this is a quest of self-deception for no woman can truly be happy outside their God-giving humanity.
Indeed, the reality of God’s imperative cannot be overturned no matter how much the modern woman seeks to find solace in her childlessness or even in the significant delay to motherhood. She cannot undo “be fruitful and multiply” for “be yourself and simplify.”
Such philosophies cannot succeed long-term. Women under such spell will find themselves utterly dissatisfied when their 30’s are passed. They have changed the benedictions and flatteries of bosses for the gentle and tender affirmation of their Lord and Master.
A Plea to Evangelicals Voting for Biden
Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden is a group formed recently by notable leaders such as Pastor Joel Hunter. For the record, Joel’s massive congregation was less than two miles from my home when I lived in Central Florida. I had friends who sang in the praise band. Their congregation was so large that they had worship services six times a week. Their music was very professional and on special occasions, we attended his congregation at least five or six times on a Friday/Saturday night. I also had the opportunity to meet Joel and speak with him on a few occasions. He was and still appears to be a very kind fellow, though I suggest largely deceived.
In those days, Joel had a close relationship with Condi Rice and he was not timid about mentioning some of those conversations from the pulpit. I had a distant high regard for his interest on social issues and kept a fairly close eye on his evolution in the last few years. In 2016, he voted for Donald Trump, but as he recently stated, it was not long after that where he began to doubt Trump’s ability to unite the country. He found it particularly distasteful when Trump began to demean illegal immigrants.
He even now agrees with some of Trump’s policies but believes that Biden is a more unifying figure and that is what the country needs at this stage. When pressed recently by an NPR journalist about all of Trump’s accomplishments with a conservative flavor, Joel acknowledged them but still feels that Biden has the characteristics of someone who can build coalitions and provide the framework for what Joel calls a “whole life” view or a “consistent ethic of life.” A quick tour through those who signed on to the movement and one can easily dissect a very clear trajectory.
The argument made, which I have heard many times, is that we are to be pro-life from the womb to the tomb, and that those who suffer throughout life, especially the poor and needy, the marginalized, and those most affected by immigration policies, and women tortured by abusers, contemplating an abortion due to harships, are all just as important as those who are still in the womb. Therefore, we are to be concerned with more than just the unborn, but all those born who for a variety of circumstances find themselves in dire places in life.
I find Joel’s argument utterly uncompelling. Interestingly, missing from Joel’s argument is that Donald Trump has avoided the neo-conservative trap and has consistently been an anti-war voice in the last four years. Contra Obama and Biden and Hillary, it is the cantankerous Donald Trump who has argued in favor of bringing troops home and ending what he calls “stupid wars.” My inner Ron Paul is happy! Yet, we would think that a consistently pro-life view would consider the vast implications of an anti-war president. But, no! Not once.
I find this entire combination of Pro-Life Evangelicals and a support for Biden to be completely unfounded, inconsistent, and frankly, infantile. It lacks the gravitas of a thorough social and political analysis. Is it pro-life for Joel Hunter to support Biden when he espouses transgender rights for 8 year old children? As Robert A. J. Gagnon observed, this means that “if you as a parent of such a child don’t buy into the self-dishonoring, Creator-denying delusion, state social services can take your child away from you.” Is that pro-life?
Is it pro-life to support a president who believes that Amy Coney Barrett is not fit to serve on the Court because Biden’s colleague says that Barrett’s catholic dogma lives loudly within her? Is it pro-life to support economic policies that have been tried and found wanting in every conceivable nation? Is it pro-life to support a candidate whose VP is considered one of the most pro-abortion and LGBTQ supporters in the Senate? is it pro-life to embrace a candidate who will undoubtedly seek to infringe upon religious rights and who will re-consider the tax-exempt status of churches? Who admittedly will impose a COVID lock-down which has already led to more suicides, addiction, and spiritual damage than anything I’ve seen in my lifetime?
Joel is mistaken and anyone else who falls for this is mistaken. I plead with you to not allow your animosity for Trump’s style to keep you from considering his actual policies. And of course, we should never forget that the infant in the womb never had a chance to experience life, because the taking of life was decided on his behalf. Evangelicals for Biden is a fallacious pursuit for nobility in a fallen world; an attempt to mix the good with evil in a profoundly eschewed way.
The First Principle of Warfare
There is a fundamental principle for understanding a war, and that is to ask, “who” is proposing what and how? I wish to focus only on the conveyor of the message for this post. The “who” is to receive attention before the “what” and “how.” Why? because we can be easily deceived into accepting ideologies of the “who” on the basis of emotional connection to particular causes. We are, after all, humans. But it is essential, nay, necessary, nay, crucial and essential and necessary put together, that we grasp what the underlying agenda of the “who” is. Of course, I am not suggesting we outright reject all ideas coming from the unbelieving mind but anytime a celebrated “who” of our culture or D.C. proposes only two options to solve gigantic matters, we ought to be looking for third.
Abraham Kuyper proposed a solution based on the Gospels called “common grace” which offers a dose of reality to unbelievers on a sunny day and occasionally on a rainy one. Sometimes unbelievers get electrified with common grace from their daily dispensary. I will be that guy in the corner cheering him on when his compatriots turn against him.
But we are poor interpreters of culture when we assume that some sexy Instagram star with 5 trillion followers who daily exposes her body to the virtual vultures is not trying to use her platform to propagate an agenda of dishonesty and disrepute. I am no longer amused by God-haters in Hollywood or in the woods of social media. As far as I can tell, they are all lost looking for meaning in nihilism and trying to find hope where hope is never to be found.
Again, there is truth to be found in all places, but it is fairly clear that even if a little ounce of truth is found in these simpatico characters from my favorite TV shows, by the time I get done with my analysis there will be little meat left in that ideological bone.
In more ways than one, we are imbibers of cultural norms. “We don’t want to be in the world,” we declare; but the first great cause propagated by our beloved artista seems good when it first meets the eye. So, we pour our wholehearted congratulations and kudos into their bucket, thus legitimizing their claim and clause. But, it’s the “who” that matters. The guy who says he loves life can also be the same guy who says you can kill a baby right to the point before he enters the world. The “who” matters, and we better be very confident that before we engage the “what” and “how” we consider from whence comes the “who.”
Six Prayers for the Unborn
Where does the blame lie as millions of unborn babies are mercilessly and pre-meditatively killed each year? Upon whose hands does their blood leave a stain? How do we speak prophetically as the church to this cultural evil and at the same time speak pastorally to those who have succumbed to the lies? There is much to say about these things, but today I want to put forth a heart of supplication. The greatest way we can stand up and fight for those who cannot fight for themselves is to pray that the hearts of the people be turned back to the ways of the Lord. Sin diminishes as the gospel advances. A heart ruled by God is a heart that loves and serves those made in His image. Here are six prayers taken from Psalm 139 for us to meditate on and pray this upcoming week.
1. That we would trust and value the wisdom of God in the giving of life.
“O LORD, you have searched me and known me! You know when I sit down and when I rise up;you discern my thoughts from afar. You search out my path and my lying down and are acquainted with all my ways. Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O LORD, you know it altogether. You hem me in, behind and before, and lay your hand upon me. Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high; I cannot attain it.” [vv.1-6]
We all know what it is like to be faced with uncertainty and unanswered questions in life. These moments test our faith. Will we trust the wisdom and goodness of God in the darkness? The conception of a child, whatever the circumstances surrounding it, is one of those moments. How will I provide for this child? How will this affect my future dreams and plans? How will others feel or respond to the pregnancy?
(more…)
