Friday, January 28, 2005


Doug Wilson on evangelicals and syncretism:

Syncretism is rampant in evangelical circles, and the elders of Zion sit around scratching their beards. Modern evangelicals are a piece of work. On the down side, we are helping to advance false worship of a false god. On the bright side, we got Rolling Stone magazine to accept an ad for our new gender-tinkered version of the Bible. Our prophets have the backbone of a wet napkin. We attack the great doctrinal issues of the day with Occam's sponge, blurring everything. Our grasp of central Christian truths looks like a watercolor that somebody left out in the rain. That is the serrated edge, and those who don't like it need to learn to be more upset with overt idolatry than they currently are with colorful metaphors.

Finally, some good news! Doug Feith wants to "spend more time with the family." Check out Tom Fleming's essay on Feith.

Conservatives have become thorough-going statists. In The New Yorker, Seymour Hersh gives readers the skinny on Pentagon operations in Iran. Tony Blankley thinks Hersh should be thrown in jail. Blankley evidently believes that the administration should be allowed to lawlessly act outside congressional oversight, but a journalist who brings such malfeasance to light should be sent directly to the pokey.

Richard Land says that "religious right has won its fight with secular fundamentalism" and "the American people have decided... that they want religious values to be part of public policy.” The evidence of "victory" proferred by Land is that Jim Wallis is running around the country endorsing statist means of various sorts to end poverty. Land goes on to say that evangelicals should emulate Martin Luther King as an example for how to bring faith into the public sphere. (Didn't Joe Biden already try this?) According to Land, MLK "took his religious convictions and how they informed his moral values, and he came out into the public square and he challenged America to live up to the principles and the promises of its founding documents, and he persuaded a critical mass of the society." Uh, yeah.

My Baptist cohorts read Deuteronomy 6 and they come up with this. This is one of the things that happens when churches write "mission statements" and ignore catechims, confessions, covenants and creeds.

The Emergence of the Homeland Security State.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Entertaining, your piece about Richard Land, Darrell. Emulate Martin Luther King, indeed. At the time that King was mounting non-violent protests in the South, Land's church was almost certainly segregated with not a few congregants fulminating and ready to take up axe handles against the uppity niggers! Not exactly cutting-edge, eh?

An honest way forward on a matter of this kind is to identify oneself unequivocally with a genuinely Christian theological antropology and to object strenuously when you witness the systematic abuse of human beings, something Land can't quite manage even now either when it comes to the destruction of innocent life in Iraq or to the dismemberment of tiny embryos right here in the United States. Recall Land's very vocal support for the Bush stem-cell compromise in 2001? Who can forget it? It is of little comfort to read pious statements about "convictions" and "public policy" after the fact. I'm sure that it never would have occurred to Land to have given even passing consideration to more genuinely robust guidance, say Donum Vitae, when forming his "ethics" respecting the disposal of deceased human beings. I quote relevant portions of Donum Vitae below as a matter of interest.

"Donum Vitae (Instruction on Respect for Human Life In its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation: Replies to Certain Questions of the Day, Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 1987):

"To use human embryos or fetuses as the object or instrument of experimentation constitutes a crime against their dignity as human beings having a right to the same respect that is due to the child already born and to every human person...
The corpses of human embryos and fetuses, whether they have been deliberately aborted or not, must be respected just as the remains of other human beings. ....Furthermore, the moral requirements must be safeguarded, that there be no complicity in deliberate abortion and that the risk of scandal be avoided" (I.4).
"It is a duty to condemn the particular gravity of the voluntary destruction of human embryos obtained 'in vitro' for the sole purpose of research..." (I.5)."

Pro-life is as pro-life does.

John Lowell

9:10 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home