Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Life issues’ Category

A Culture of Lying

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Commentaries of others, Culture Shifts, Life issues, tagged , , , , , , on February 3, 2013| Leave a Comment »

robert knightThe following is excerpted from “The Allure of the Lie” by Robert Knight.  It’s worthy of your read.

We are hip-deep in a culture of lying. It’s the coin of the realm for liberal politicians, the “mainstream” media and Hollywood, all of whom cover for each other. Since an accusation of lying amounts to fighting words, journalists reporting the lies tend to use softer terms, such as prevarication, dissembling, not forthcoming, not fully disclosed, misleading, redirecting, etc.

Lying often is accomplished with euphemisms. Government spending is “investment.” Raising taxes is “revenue reform.” Torture is sanitized as “enhanced interrogation techniques.” Global warming is morphing into “climate change” to accommodate obvious departures from the warming scenario. Gambling is “gaming.” Defense of religious freedom is a “war on women.” There’s a slew of terms invented to validate sexual immorality. The sin of sodomy became homosexuality and then merely gay. Adultery became “finding oneself,” “open marriage” or “swinging.” Prostitutes are “commercial sex workers.” Two men – with no bride – are considered “married.” Pornography became “erotica.” And abortion – the killing of unborn children – is “choice.”

The culture of lying has become so entrenched in American political culture that any deviation is swiftly punished. People who question any part of the theory of man-caused global warming, for instance, are branded “deniers.”  End of discussion. Question the junk science behind the “born gay” myth and you’re a “hater.” If you believe God created marriage as the union of a man and a woman, you’re not only a hater but a bigot. If you favor photo ID laws to thwart fraud, you want to “suppress the minority vote.” If you question the morality or wisdom of putting women into combat, you’re against “equality.”

Often, liberal policies are sustained by repeated citations of a single study or studies, however flawed.  The granddaddy of those is Alfred C. Kinsey’s fraudulaent sex studies . . . .

One of the biggest lies in recent years is that there are no real biological differences between men and women – that masculinity and femininity are artificial social constructs. The latest fallout from this departure from reality is the Pentagon’s opening the military to homosexuality and putting women into combat. We’re told that everyone in the armed forces thinks this is wonderful. Sure they do. It would be a career-ender in this culture of lying to say otherwise.

The culture of lying depends heavily on cooked studies, weasel words and a compliant media that parrots them without examination. It’s a house of cards that’s waiting for a gentle breeze of truth to blow it over.

As G.K. Chesterton observed, “Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”

Robert Knight is a Senior Fellow for the American Civil Rights Union
and contributor to The Washington Times.
He wrote this article following Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s
testimony before Congress.
I encourage you to read the complete article here

Read Full Post »

Bearers and Defenders of Life: Conclusion

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Faith & Practice, Life issues, Vocation, tagged , , , , , , , on February 2, 2013| 1 Comment »

woman soldier with gunDeborah was a judge and prophetess.  To this, many of my gender quickly add, “Deborah was also a courageous military leader in battle.”  But, what does God’s Word tell us?

Let’s Think About It

Q: Deborah was a prophetess.  A prophet or prophetess speaks on behalf of another but, as far as I can determine, not as a public speaker for God during a congregational gathering.  A prophetess might give counsel, settle disputes, or offer thankfulness and praise to God.  Deborah was also a judge.  What was the condition of Israel in the years prior to her leadership (Judges 2:13, 16-17; 3:7, 13; 4:1-4)?

A: Martin Luther took note of the service of Deborah and other women as rulers.  He said that they “have been very good at management.”  He suggested that women’s leadership in other areas of life might motivate men to properly fulfill their responsibility.  It is important to note that Deborah became a judge after the people of Israel repeatedly “did what was evil in the sight of the Lord.”  Evil, in every way, opposes God’s created order for men, women, and the benefit of a thriving society.

Q: We may think that Deborah was sent by God into combat against Israel’s enemy.  But, is this the case? 

A: A careful read of Judges 4:4-15 reveals that God did not ask Deborah to carry the sword in combat.  He asked Barak through Deborah.  Victory was promised to Barak if only he would obey, but he chose not to.  Barak said he would do the Lord’s bidding only if Deborah went with him into battle.  Deborah told Barak that the glory in battle would not be his because the enemy Sisera would be delivered “into the hand of a woman” (v. 9).  The woman Deborah refers to in this verse is not herself, but Jael.  Dr. Vogel explains: “Deborah accompanied Barak to Mount Tabor, but no further.  Consistent with Deuteronomy, she donned no battle gear nor engaged in the conflict.   Barak (unaccompanied by Deborah) led 10,000 men into the valley to a resounding victory. The rebuke for Barak’s recalcitrance was rendered when a heroic woman, Jael, was given the opportunity to slay the fleeing enemy commander, Sisera.  She did this in her own tent, with household equipment [a tent peg], not as a warrior on a battlefield.”  (“Women in Combat: Two Views,” The Lutheran Witness, May 2003, p. 16-20)

Q: Deborah served as a judge and prophetess.  She counseled Barak as the leader of Israel’s troops.  Yet, how did she sum up her role in Judges 5:7?

A:  Deborah was praised for her leadership, yet she does not sing about being raised up as a warrior.  She sings of being a “mother in Israel.”  Though no biological children of Deborah are mentioned, she is an encourager and helper for her people.  Scripture, like much of human culture, consistently distinguishes the roles of men and women.

Q: Specialist Hollie Vallence, quoted in Part 1 of this series, was asked by her country to sacrifice home and family.  In doing so, she explained that she had to build an “ice wall around her heart.”  Is this consistent with God’s design?  What are the consequences for women, men, and children if a mother hardens her heart?

A: Luther noted that a woman is merciful by nature because she is born to show mercy and to cherish just as a man is born to protect.  This is why, Luther says, no living creature has more mercy than a woman, particularly in respect for her infant.  Men are known to focus on one project, putting all others aside, until it is finished.  In times of war, this allows them to leave their home and family for periods of time in order to “do their duty.”  It is not that they always feel brave and fearless, but perhaps their vocation of steward and protector allows them to do what they need to do for wives, sons and daughters; indeed, for future generations.  They are free to accomplish what is necessary, knowing that their children are in the capable and loving care of mothers.  Here, then, is the woman partnering with her husband and serving her country by guarding hearth and home while he is doing battle with the enemy of that home.  In war, as in work, men understand other men.  When a country is serious about winning victory over its enemy, it brings well-trained men together, with no distractions, to focus on the job at hand.  These men may return home “changed,” but most can resume life as usual.  Mothers, as explained by Hollie Vallence, are not programmed to put distance between themselves and young children.  Dr. Vogel offers wisdom: “If God is indifferent to the woman-warrior concept and a woman chooses to serve in a noncombatant role, God is not offended.  If, however, God is not indifferent to the woman warrior concept, and a woman seeks service as a combatant, does she not become a victim of her own will and disobedient to that of God?”  Is there a problem with women in the military?  No, but as in any workplace, there will certainly be a changed environment and cautions to heed.

Q: Will God bless a people or a nation whose men send women to the front lines of battle?  Will He bless the men (defenders of life) who send women (bearers of life) to meet the enemy?  To be shot at, brutalized, or sacrificed in the name of “equality” or “rights?”

A: God was not pleased with the man who used Deborah as a kind of “human shield.”  That is because the Groom of the Church does not stand behind his Bride.  He stands in front of her.  Small tribes and great countries who honor the human rule of chivalry understand that great sacrifice may be necessary in order to protect mothers of children for they are a people’s future.

Conclusion

It is not that God wants men to die, but that He entrusts to them the noble role of protector and defender.  As the Man of Sacrifice, Jesus led the way into battle.  He did not send others.  Jesus faced the greatest weapon of mass destruction – the anger of God upon sinful people.  He did not stand behind “human shields,” letting you and me die so that He might avoid pain and death.  In the battle for the life of His Bride, Jesus “took the bullet.”  He died so that we might live.

Jesus is both a model and Savior for men and women.  He wants us to follow Him and imitate His behavior.  Sinful as we are, we will want to test the boundaries.  We will put ourselves in God’s place, but such pride can put others at risk.  Is all hopeless?  No!  The One who faced our enemy – and won the eternal victory – reaches to us with nail-pierced hands, saying: “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy.  I came that you may have life and have it abundantly” (John 10:10).  I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life” (14:6).

“Bearers and Defenders of Life” is Lesson 11 of
Men, Women, and Relationships, first published in 1999 and revised in 2004.
(Lutherans For Life, Concordia Publishing House)

Read Full Post »

Bearers and Defenders of Life (Part 3)

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Faith & Practice, Life issues, Vocation, tagged , , , , , , on January 30, 2013| 1 Comment »

woman combat gunWho lobbies for women in combat?  Is it with national security… or something else… in mind?

In light of terrorists and all-male armies around the world, should we regard serving in combat as an “equal job opportunity?”

Elaine Donnelly and the Center for Military Readiness, released a 42-page report mid-January exploring the unintended consequences of putting women on the front lines.  “It will do great harm to women in the military, especially those who will find themselves in the infantry – something there’s no indication they wanted.”  Mrs. Donnelly asks an important question: “Why is the Secretary of Defense ramming this on through?”

This, says Mrs. Donnelly, “is social engineering to achieve a political end in the name of diversity”. . . [but] it is unfair to the women, it’s unfair to the men, it’s problematic for the readiness and efficiency and effectiveness of infantry battalions.

Let’s Think About It

Q: Civilized cultures have always trained men to protect and defend women and children.  Christian fathers who follow the example set by Jesus mentor sons to be gentlemen and treat girls and women with upmost respect and care.  However, the effective utilization of women in combat requires that men put aside such behavior in order to treat a woman like just another man.  What kind of culture does this create?

A: Even non-Christians note that groups tend to disintegrate and face extinction when societies fail to train their men to protect and defend women.  Men on board the Titanic gave their lives for women, not because they were all Christian men, but because Biblical teaching for society had become the “law of the sea.”  The titanic chivalry of “women and children [into the lifeboats] first” flows from Ephesians 5:25.   There is also the issue of mentoring.  When we focus on “it’s my right” or perpetuate the myth that “equal means ‘being the same,’” how are we instructing a younger generation?  What is a young man taught to think about women as they endure the rigors of military training side by side?  What do boys learn from fathers who intentionally put women in harm’s way?  What is the carry-over to life outside the military?  If society will not tolerate male aggression toward women in everyday life, is it wise – or necessary – to make an exception in combat?  A civilization that wants to thrive does well to think beyond the present to the future.

Q: What are the realities of both training and battle conditions?

A: We may want to envision pleasant images of skilled women managing high tech equipment, young men and women successfully practicing self-control in close quarters, and enlisted men snapping to the attention of female drill sergeants, but evidence reveals much to the contrary.  There are reported increases of sexual abuse, unfaithfulness of spouses, unintended pregnancy, a supposed “need” for easier access to abortion, and deployment of single moms.  Jessica Lynch, pulled from her Humvee and taken prisoner in Iraq, was raped and sodomized by her captors (I Am A Soldier, Too; the biography of Jessica Lynch by Rick Bragg).

Q: “Equal means ‘being the same’” may sound good, but can we really ignore the differences between male and female anatomy?  Mrs. Donnelly says, “Women don’t have an equal opportunity to survive in combat.”  Why might this be?  How might the anatomy of a woman put her more at risk than a man?

A: In seeking a bush for privacy, how does a woman avoid sniper fire and landmines?  Men can quickly unzip and zip, but is it the same for women?  In addition to dignity and modesty, what about hygiene and gynecology?  There are drugs that “shut down” a woman’s menstrual cycle, but is this natural and healthy?  Feminists and social engineers may deny the differences between men and women, but will the enemy?  How might a female prisoner of war be treated differently than a man?  If he is obedient to his calling as a defender of women, what lengths might a male soldier go to in protecting a female soldier?  

Q: Rev. F.A. Hertwig asks, “If there is a threatening noise at the front door, who do you expect should be the first to investigate?  Will the man sit back and send his wife, daughter or mother while he goes to the basement?”  (“Letters” in The Lutheran Witness, June 2003, p. 4)  When Eve stood in harm’s way before Satan, how did Adam respond (Genesis 3:6, 12)?  What is the significance of these verses when it comes to the discussion of women in combat?

A: Genesis 3:6 reveals that Adam sinned when he failed to remember God’s Word and use it in the battle between life and death.  Adam failed to protect his wife from Satan’s attack.  He failed to bring order out of chaos for the sake of future generations.  Rev. Hertwig, a pastor in Lincoln, Missouri, explains Genesis 3:12 in this way: “When God stood at the door, a confused and fallen Adam sent his wife, Eve, to face the catastrophe.  He chose to deny the one who had come from his side.  For the rest of his 930 years, he lived with daily contrition each time he looked at his bosom friend.  His protecting embrace had all the more fervor mixed with regret that he had failed.”  Rev. Hertwig continues, “For a man to see his wife, mother or daughter writhing in the mud with a bayonet rifle is repulsive to the core.  When Adam retreats, yes even in the face of God, he has in a miserable moment surrendered to the devil.  To venture the ‘absence’ of specifics on our subject is an accommodating detail to the devil’s question, ‘Yea, hath God said?’” (The Lutheran Witness, “Letters,” June/July 2003)

Deborah is held up by many Christians as the Old Testament example of a woman in combat.  But, was she?  Part 4, the last in this series of posts, will take a closer look at Deborah and Jael.

“Bearers and Defenders of Life” is Lesson 11 of
Men, Women and Relationships first published in 1999 and revised in 2004.
If you’re curious about this collection of 12 studies on
Biblical manhood and womanhood, please contact
Lutherans For Life or Concordia Publishing House.

Read Full Post »

Bearers and Defenders of Life (Part 2)

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Life issues, Vocation, tagged , , , , , on January 27, 2013| 1 Comment »

women combat waitingAmericans have developed a bad habit of turning social experiments into policy and code.  Do you know what I’m talking about?

A social experiment arrogantly opposes God’s created order.  It has the look and feel of liberty but, in reality, puts human life at risk.   Abortion and the “marriage” of two men or two women are social experiments.  So is the political correctness of putting women into combat.  Social experiments are reckless and foolish.

Let’s Think About It

During His life on earth, Jesus honored and elevated women in remarkable new ways.  Certainly, He could have chosen both men and women to serve as His apostles.  He did not.  Jesus was not only aware of the created differences of male and female (after all, He was present at creation Genesis 1:26), but of their differing yet complementary roles and vocations.  Equality does not mean that everyone does the same thing, but that male and female each have the opportunity to serve God and others according to their design.

Q: How might the Christian woman consider serving in combat in this light?

A: We might begin with some personal introspection.  I know that God created me.  I am His design for His purpose.  But, like Eve before me, I am tempted to doubt the Creator and, in fact, position myself as lord of my own life.  My choices are too easily influenced by personal feelings, circumstance, convenience, pride, envy, short-sightedness, and search for identity.

Dr. Leroy Vogel, retired U.S. Navy chaplain and professor emeritus at Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, writes, “While it may be argued that there is no specific Scriptural passage that forbids a woman to serve as warrior, the apparent accommodation of some within the Church to the spirit of the age that turns warrior into a unisex role would appear, at a minimum, to be a departure from the divine wisdom of the Creator regarding the differentiation of the sexes.”

Q: What is the issue – sexual equality or ordered equality?

A: Dr. Vogel notes that when we ignore the Biblical account of creation, sexual differentiation and roles are viewed as “social constructs and, if society has created the distinctions, society can abolish them.”  To overturn the created order of differentiation and roles is to abandon Biblical faith.  “Scripture is clear,” writes Dr. Vogel.  “God made two sexes [genders], equal but with assigned roles.  Sexual equality is not the issue; ordered equality is.  Scripture and the tradition of the Church assign to man the role of defender, protector, warrior.  To woman is given the role of life-giver, nurturer, sustainer.”  Dr. Vogel offers a curious Hebrew interpretation of a Deuteronomy 22:5 (NIV translation): “A woman must not wear men’s clothing . . . for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this.”  Dr. Vogel submits that this verse is about more than cross-dressing.  He explains that “men’s clothing” in Hebrew is translated keli-gerber.  Keli denotes “equipment,” specifically a soldier’s equipment.  The Hebrew noun geber denotes “mighty man” or “hunter” or “warrior.”  So, writes, Dr. Vogel, “a legitimate translation of the phrase uses language of a decidedly military flavor: ‘No woman shall put on the gear of a warrior.’”  It seems that the church fathers John Calvin and Martin Luther agreed.  “Luther knew Hebrew,” writes Dr. Vogel, “and comments on the verse as follows: ‘A woman shall not bear the weapons of a man . . . it is improper . . . Through this law [God] reproaches any  nation in which this custom is observed.’”  Why, you ask?  Dr. Vogel answers, “Because God created male and female with specific and complementary characteristics.  It is in their relationship with one another that the two constitute the full expression of humanity.” (“Women in Combat: Two Views,” The Lutheran Witness, May 2003, p. 16-20.)

Q: What is the significance of Genesis 3:20 for this issue?

A: Woman’s glory is found in her God-given role as life-giver and nurturer.  Dr. Vogel paraphrases Luther, saying that “women were created not to kill and destroy, but to be a vessel for life.”  A culture that encourages women to destroy life is a culture that rebels against God’s design for His creation.  A culture that doubts the created differences between the “defender” of life (male) and “bearer” of life (female) is a culture that has been deceived by Satan’s question: “Did God really say . . .?” (Genesis 3:1).

Q: George Gilder writes, “The ancient tradition against the use of women in combat embodies the deepest wisdom of the human race.  It expresses the most basic imperatives of group survival: a nation or tribe that allows the loss of large numbers of its young women runs the risk of becoming permanently depopulated.  The youthful years of women, far more than of men, are precious and irreplaceable.”  (Men and Marriage, p. 135).  What brings a society to the place where it forgets or ignores this truth?  What does the future hold for such a society?

A: There are two worldviews: God’s and all others.  The Christian who trusts God’s Word can be confident that the Creator of life has a way that things of life work best.  Consider the words of God to Job (Job 38-41).  God speaks His worldview to us through His Word – from Genesis to Revelation.  He speaks His Word to us through Jesus Christ who, literally, is the Word become flesh (John 1).  But, perhaps, when we are blessed with resources and exist without threat of enemy at our door, we can become complacent and self-absorbed.  At such times, might our hearts and minds be influenced more by the foolishness of the world than the wisdom of God?  What does 1 Corinthians 1:16-30 say about wisdom?  What does the future hold for people who seek after personal desires or the world’s view?  “. . . [T]he world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever” (1 John 2:15-17).

Before moving on to Part 3, here’s something to ponder.  Edwin Feulner, president of the Heritage Foundation, writes, “The reason we all know the idea of women playing pro football is absurd is because we’re serious about football.  It’s tough game, and if you allow yourself to be distracted by irrelevant issues like ‘sexual equity’ when you should be making your team the toughest it can possibly be, you’re going to get creamed.  So why are we letting feminists impose ‘sexual equity’ on an area that makes football look like a tea party; something that is  not a game, but a matter of life and death for our nation as well as for the ‘players,’ namely, our military?”

“Bearers and Defenders of Life” is Lesson 11 of
Men, Women, and Relationships first published in 1999 and revised in 2004.
If you’re curious about this collection of 12 studies on
Biblical manhood and womanhood, please contact
Lutherans For Life or Concordia Publishing House.

Read Full Post »

Bearers and Defenders of Life (Part 1)

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Life issues, Vocation, tagged , , , , on January 27, 2013| 1 Comment »

women in combat“Women in combat” is a life issue.  It is an issue to which God speaks.  In this post and several to follow, I would like to offer questions, answers, and commentary for Christians to ponder. 

The question, I think, that we need to be asking is not: “Can women be in combat?”  The question is: “Should women be in combat?”  I don’t know about you, but I’m looking for, shall we say, better ammunition for my argument than “if men can do it, so can women.”

Bearers and Defenders of Life

Discussions of men and women in combat bring mixed reactions.  Some people believe that women do not belong in combat because they do not have the physical capacity to endure the rigorous standards of training or the hardships of war.  Some believe that it is a woman’s “right” to defend her country and that she can do so as well as any man.  Besides, they insist, modern warfare seldom involves the physical force of front-line battle

Let’s put reason and logic to work: Consider the physical differences between men and women, such as their bone and muscle structures.  Gender-integrated basic training undermines rigorous standards.  But, this argument can be countered with examples of women who have developed body strength and can keep up with a man.

Consider the sexual attraction between men and women.  Gender-integrated training and combat duty creates an environment in which men and women are vulnerable to sexual misconduct and abuse.  But, this argument can be countered with practiced self-control.

This debate deserves more than opinion.   It deserves more than a simple “it’s my right.”

So, what are real soldiers saying?   A classmate of my son’s served on board ship in the Persian Gulf.  In a conversation, this 21-year-old woman confessed a breakdown in respect for both women and men.  Everything, she said, took on a “sexual connotation,” modesty was nearly “impossible,” and the rate of pregnancies on board ship was “higher than on shore assignment.”

Specialist Hollie Vallance was quoted in the Dallas Morning News (2-20-91) before being shipped to the Gulf War.  She said, “I never really thought about going into combat.  I never dreamed anything like this would happen in my lifetime, let alone right after I had my first child.”  She continued.  “I’ve built an ice wall around my heart to try to cool the pain, and sometimes I worry that [my husband and baby daughter] won’t be able to melt it away.”

In a commissioned survey of women in the Army, 79% of enlisted women and 71% of female noncommissioned officers said they wouldn’t volunteer for combat.  Only 10% of the female privates and corporals agreed with this statement: “I think that women should be treated exactly like men and serve in combat just like men.”  Less than one-quarter of mid-grade sergeants answered yes.  (The Washington Times, 10-5-98).

A young husband and relative of mine serving in the Persian Gulf was forced to share his tent with a woman soldier.  He told me “it was not a good situation any way you chose to look at it.”

Pfc. Jessica Lynch and Army Specialist Shoshana Johnson returned home from the War in Iraq in the spring of 2003 as heroines.  Although neither of them was technically in a combat position, they were, nonetheless, placed so close to the front line of battle that they were each captured by the enemy.  After being rescued, neither of them, it seems, wanted to be “poster girls” for women in combat.

Is there a problem with women serving in the military?  I don’t think so.  A strong, effective military respects and utilizes the abilities of women in medicine, teaching, and tactical maneuvers.  But, to pretend that women are no different from men, place them together in close quarters, lower standards of physical endurance, and compromise training is to place men, women, families, and country in harm’s way.

The question we need to be asking is not: “Can women be in combat?”  The question is: “Should women be in combat?”

In the end, it really doesn’t matter what our opinion might be or how we feel about it.  What does matter is what God says.

In gaining perspective on women in combat, do you find significance in the name of the first woman?  Genesis 3:20 tells us that Adam named his wife Eve.  Eve, in Hebrew, means “life.”  How this must have angered Satan who despises the humans that God so loves.  But, it was God’s plan that Eve became the mother of every living person.

During a Titus 2 Retreat, some women will tell me that having women in combat must be o.k. because, after all, Deborah went into battle against the enemy of the Israelites.  But, have they read the whole account found in Judges 4:4-22?  Did Deborah lead the troops into battle or fulfill the role of encourager?  Why didn’t the man Barak receive glory for the way his enemy died?  Was the enemy killed by a woman with a weapon on the battlefield… or not?  (Be patient.  We’ll come back to this in Part 3.)

The prophet Nehemiah told the men to do battle for their families.  He said, “Do not be afraid of them [enemies].  Remember the Lord, who is great and awesome, and fight for your brothers, your sons, your daughters, your wives, and your homes (Nehemiah 4:1-14).

Want to continue this discussion with some Q & A?  Then please continue to Part 2 of this series.

“Bearers and Defenders of Life” is Lesson 11 of
Men, Women, and Relationships first published in 1999 and revised in 2004.
If you’re curious about this collection of 12 studies on
Biblical manhood and womanhood, please contact
Lutherans For Life or Concordia Publishing House.

Read Full Post »

How Does the Church Justify Abortion Apathy?

Posted in Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Life issues, tagged , , , , , , , , , on January 25, 2013| 1 Comment »

sandy hook school shootingThe Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre caught the attention of most Americans.  It should.  The brutal killing of students and teachers is a national wound.  It should be.  Parents and families mourned the loss of 26 human beings whose lives were cut short.  We all should.  What happened at Sandy Hook was evil.  Evil should always be resisted.

On this 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, 54 million other deaths should also capture our attention.  Be felt as a national wound.  Bring us to our knees in mourning.  But, 3,500 preborn babies are aborted every day in this country and people act as if nothing is happening.  An evil of monumental proportions is taking place before our very eyes, yet people who call themselves by Christ’s name appear unmoved and indifferent.

How can this be?

Rolley Haggard, writing for Breakpoint, observes that apathy and silence on abortion are evidence of a theological problem.  He notes that some will argue that Scripture is silent on abortion; after all they say, the term does not appear once in the Old or New Testament.  Nor are there any commands to “vote pro-life” or “peacefully demonstrate in front of Planned Parenthood.”  So, some Christians actually believe they have discerned the “letter of the law” and are obeying it by keeping silent.

But, asks Haggard, what about the “spirit of the law”?   The purpose and intent of the law?  St. Paul was  inspired to write, “He who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.  If there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’  Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.  The whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’  Bear one another’s burdens, and thereby fulfill the law of Christ” (Romans 13:8-10; Galatians 5:14; 6:2).

Haggard begs the question of us all: Can we hear and believe God’s commandment to love our neighbor and still maintain passivity on abortion?  “The sober reality,” Haggard writes, “is that ‘he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen” (1 John 4:20).  Modern technology allows us to see inside the womb.  Having seen, can we un-see?  Are we not compelled to speak of what we have seen?

It’s possible, Haggard writes, that our error in not speaking has been an honest one.  “Perhaps our embrace of the letter rather than the spirit of the law has been unwitting.  Perhaps.  This much is certain: ‘When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken, or cease to be honest.’” (Note: This quote is often attributed to Abraham Lincoln).

Have those of us who call ourselves “Christ followers” heard the truth?  Knowing the truth, how do we respond?  When we see babies (woven together in the womb by God’s own hands – Psalm 139:3-16) being denied their God-given right to life, how do we respond?  When we know that the majority of abortions are done for convenience (not the life and health of the mother), how do we respond?  When we know that abortion says “no” to a new generation of creativity and hope, how do we respond?

(My appreciation to Rolley Haggard, “Brilliant Darkness,” www.breakpoint.org 1/23/2013)

Read Full Post »

Bedroom Perplexities

Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Culture Shifts, Life issues, tagged , , , , , , on January 15, 2013| 1 Comment »

make abortion legal rallyI’m perplexed.  Can you help?

When I speak up against abortion and for the rights of unborn children and the well-being of women, I’m told: “What happens in the privacy of a bedroom is none of your business.”

Well, if that’s true, then why should I be forced to pay for what happens there?

Read Full Post »

The Royals Are Having a Baby!

Posted in Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Identity, Life issues, tagged , , , , , , , , on December 23, 2012| Leave a Comment »

preborn baby 4-D“The battle over human dignity,” writes Eric Metaxas, “is waged not just at the local abortion clinic or crisis pregnancy center, nor merely in the halls of Congress or the Supreme Court.  It is also carried out in our choice of words.”

Metaxas points out that “the war on the sanctity of human life relies on bullets of deception and warheads of untruth – in short, on what George Orwell called ‘political language,’ which he said ‘is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.’”

Metaxas explains that those who support the legal killing of unborn human beings in the womb “have used political language for decades, cloaking their morally indefensible position in innocuous-sounding terms such as ‘choice’ and ‘women’s health’ – hoping the rest of us will forget about the status and rights of the other person directly affected in the abortion transaction – namely the fetus.”

Planned Parenthood folks typically deny the humanity or personhood of the baby in the womb by calling it a “lump of tissue,” “product of conception,” or “potential person.”  But, writes Metaxas, “it’s hard to keep up the verbal sleight of hand all the time.  A case in point is the considerable elation over the news that Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge, is carrying a child. That’s right, a child, not a ‘product of conception.’  We are told that her ‘baby’ will be third in line to the throne, behind only Prince William and Prince Charles.”

At this point, the pro-life Christian has opportunity to reveal “verbal sleight of hand” and also ask questions that help others think.  The Duchess is in her first trimester.  Is this a baby or not?  Is this a child with a destiny or not?  Is this child special or just like the other non-persons who have been aborted from wombs in Britain, the U.S., and all over the world?  As Christians, we are compelled to answer all questions from God’s perspective, not our own.

As Metaxas (and others) point out, “the language we use matters.  Is the life in the womb a ‘product of conception’ or a person, maybe even a prince in waiting?”

In a response to Metaxas’ commentary, someone named Kevin posted, “Try to imagine even the most staunch abortion advocate being present at a childbirth and, when the head is coming out, saying, ‘Look!  It’s turning into a human!’”  Bearing this in mind, the Christian is compelled to do what philosopher Peter Kreeft suggests.  We need to see the personhood of the fetus as the defining issue for abortion, “for if the fetus is not a person, abortion is not the deliberate killing of an innocent person.”  The Christian does well to know God’s Word on this matter of human dignity, life and death.

As we reflect on the first coming of Jesus, the Creator and Redeemer of all human life, let us draw near to His Word about life: Job 10:8-12; Psalm 8:4-5; 119:73; 139:13-16; Ecclesiastes 11:5; Isaiah 44:24; Luke 1:15; 1:41-44; John 16:21; Galatians 1:15-16.

Apprection to Eric Metaxas for “The Royal Fetus”  www.breakpoint.org
and The Unaborted Socrates by Peter Kreeft

Read Full Post »

A Time to Mourn, A Time to Speak and Act

Posted in Culture Shifts, Faith & Practice, Life issues, Parenting & Education, tagged , , , , , , , , on December 23, 2012| Leave a Comment »

sandy hook school shootingThe Apostle Paul was inspired by God to write, “Mourn with those who mourn.”  Following the loss of human life in schools like Newtown, CT., we as fellow citizens and especially as Christians are called to mourn with the families of those who died.  We do well to mourn with few rather than more words.

However, as John Stonestreet brought to my attention, it becomes tempting in this fast-paced, technologically-driven society to Facebook or Twitter our thoughts.  It appears that both Christians and non-Christians took advantage of their “freedom of speech” to make public political or moral comments on the situation.  Many of the comments, it seems, were made with little thought of the families that simply need time to grieve.  As Christians, we are always called upon to respect our fellow human beings.  We are called to a higher standard.  A standard of thoughtful behavior that is reflective of our holiness in Christ.

On Christmas, we celebrate the Incarnation.  God became Man.  The very Creator and Redeemer of all human life came into our messy, depraved, and broken world.  He did more than hand us a book or tell us a story.  He came in the flesh.  He offered Himself.  He sacrificed all that He had… for us.

Evil exists in our world because of sin.  Our sinful flesh becomes a willing instrument of destruction in the hands of Satan.  But, in Jesus Christ, we become new every morning.  This means that we are given opportunity to reflect the God who made us rather than ourselves.  We are equipped to make choices that help others rather than hurt them.  As new people in Christ, we are called to act in a more holy way, wait on the Holy Spirit for His discernment and, when the time is right, speak the Truth in love.

There is a time to speak.  The Christian is not called to silently allow non-believers and those who oppose the Biblical worldview to rule the day.  We are to be well informed and ready to defend the faith.  But, in times of tragedy, we are called first to mourn.  Offer care and compassion.  If given opportunity, we are to serve those who are facing adversity and trial in their lives.   When possible, we can help carry a burden. Then, in whatever conversations crop up, we can help ourselves and others contrast the things of God with the things of this world.  Good and evil are real.  God and Satan daily do battle for our very souls.

It is for this reason that Jesus Christ came to live among us.  He entered into the lives of sinful, broken and hurting people. Everything He said and did directed people away from self to God; away from despair to hope; away from evil to good.  He knew when to speak and, when He did, He spoke The Word.  He also knew when to grieve with those who mourned.

We might learn a valuable lesson from Job’s three friends.  “Now when Job’s three friends heard of all this evil that had come upon him, they came each from his own place . . . to show him sympathy and comfort him . . . they raised their voices and wept, and they tore their robes and sprinkled dust on their heads toward heaven.  And they sat with him on the ground seven days and seven nights, and no one spoke a word to him, for they saw that his suffering was very great” (Job 2:11-13).

Suffering will be great in this world.  But, Job’s friends did harm when they pontificated on what Job had done wrong to cause such suffering.  We, too, do wrong when we place blame or fail to remember that God works in the midst of trouble to lead us to Him or refine our faith.  When we are perplexed in affliction, may we – through the eyes of faith – see Christ, whose affliction saved us from sin and eternal despair.  May we be silenced by the awe of such sacrifice.

But, when asked how to prepare for such evil as a school shooting, may we speak up with the answer:  Tell your children and grandchildren about Jesus.

Only in Christ the Savior can any child — of any age — know victory over evil, suffering or even death.

Read Full Post »

A Daughter Learns of Her Mother’s Abortion… and His Mercy for Generations

Posted in Faith & Practice, Identity, Life issues, Parenting & Education, tagged , , , , , , , , , on December 23, 2012| Leave a Comment »

African American grandmother, mom & daughterThe phone rang.  Almost out the door, I turned to answer.  It was Lauren, the daughter of my friend Jane.  “I’m so glad you’re home.  This call is completely out of the blue, but I wanted you to know that my mom told me.”  There was a pause, then, “She said you would understand.”

I did.  I knew immediately that Jane, after thirty-some years, had decided to confess her abortion to her only living child.

Did Jane have to confess this sin to Lauren?  No.  Did mother risk a changed relationship with her daughter?  Yes.  But, as Lauren talked with me, I sensed she was genuinely relieved to know the truth.  “Suddenly everything makes more sense,” Lauren said.  “Certain attitudes and behaviors of my mom now have new meaning to me.”

Lauren continued, “I often wondered why mom seemed, well, heavy with life”.

“Do you mean melancholy?” I asked.

“Yes,” Lauren replied.  “That’s it.  Melancholy.  And, you know, she doesn’t really want to discuss the tough things out there in the world.”

Lauren explained that birthdays “have often been difficult for my mom.”  There was something else.  “Mom apologized a lot,” Lauren said, “as if she didn’t think she was a good mom.  That made no sense to me because she is a good mom.”

Lauren continued. “She’s a good grandmother, too.  She gives an extraordinary amount of herself — her time and energy — to my children.”  Lauren was expressing what I knew to be true.  My friend provides daycare for her grandchildren during the week.  She returns home tired, but she tells me over and over again how privileged she feels to be a grandmother and how precious the time is with her grandchildren.  This is not unusual for most of us grandmothers.  Lauren agreed, but added that now she sees her mother’s relationship with her grandchildren “in a new light.”

It does not surprise me that it took so long for Jane to confide in Lauren.  It took many years for Jane to tell me her story in bits and pieces.  Only as she learned to trust me did Jane share details of the choices that made abortion thinkable.  But, telling her daughter was different.  Jane was afraid.  The harmony with her daughter mattered too much.  She did not want to lose it.

The phone call from Lauren to me was significant.  It was evidence of God’s work.  He had been strengthening the bond between this mother and child.

“We had our difficult days when I was in high school,” Lauren told me.  She assumed it was the usual stress between moms and daughters made more challenging by single motherhood.  “But, you know what?  I’ve always known the blessing of two parents who love me.”

Lauren supposed that her mother tended to be melancholy about life, in large part, because of the divorce.  But, with Lauren’s knowledge of the abortion came new understanding and opportunity to process certain memories and experiences.  It seemed that Lauren was responding to the surprise of her mother’s abortion in much the same way I had.  Neither of us turned away from Jane.  Instead, the Holy Spirit cultivated a greater love.

Listening to Lauren, I wondered.  With her carefully guarded secret now exposed, would Jane’s energy be better used?  In knowing her mother’s restlessness, doubt, and unfaithfulness in marriage before the decision of abortion, would Lauren better avoid temptations?

“My marriage is a struggle,” Lauren told me.  “I was nearly tempted away from my husband.”  But, her mother recognized the signs.

Oh, what a difference is made when one generation mentors another!  When a mother is not afraid to act her age or revisit the mistakes of her past, she becomes an invaluable teacher.  She can steer the younger woman away from foolishness and despair.   Jane identified her daughter’s marital frustration and impatience.  She knew the consequences of doubting God and determining for herself the way life ought to be.  She had searched for a more preferable love.  She allowed herself to be wooed by another man.  And, to “fix” the resulting “problem,” she scheduled an abortion.

Jane knows the generational effects of her abortion.  That decision influenced the way she sees her own mother.  Her daughter.  Her grandchildren.

I’m sure that, on occasion, Lauren will ponder her mother’s seemingly strange apologies, but she will also know wisdom gained through her mother’s experience.  There is every reason to believe that, from now on, both mother and daughter can bear witness to one another of the divine order and amazing grace of their heavenly Father.  In this, there is hope for generations to come.

Lauren was at ease during our phone conversation.  She had only one question.  “Did the abortion happen before or after me?”

“It was after you were born,” I told her.  “But, please believe me when I say that the decision had nothing – absolutely nothing – to do with you.  Your mother loved you before you were born and she loves you now.  One of her greatest fears, I think, was that she could never be the kind of mother to you that her mother was to her.  The love, however, that your mom has always had for you is as real as the love God has for you both.”

Lauren had not shed a tear to this point, but now she gave way to emotion.  Between sobs, she whispered, “Thank you.  I needed to hear that.”

Can a daughter find comfort in her mother’s failures?  I believe so.  It was helpful for Lauren to realize that her mother had struggled with a marital frustration and impatience similar to her own.  It was instructive for Lauren to know that doubting God and putting ourselves in His place leads to danger.  It was protective of Lauren when her mother chose to remember the sins of her past.  When she did not resist using lessons learned the hard way, mother was equipped to lead daughter and grandchildren away from harm.

Lauren has been granted a new perspective… one that will serve her family well.  But, just as time was needed for Jane to trust me – little by little – with her story, time was also needed for mother to trust daughter.  Jane and I talk often about God’s faithfulness in her life.  I believe it is that faithfulness on the rocky road of life that nurtured trust between mother and daughter.

A long time ago, Jane gave me permission to share her story with women wherever I speak.  “I can’t tell my story,” Jane said to me.  “But you can.  So, please.  Tell young women not to do what I did.  And tell older women that Jesus loves them no matter what the sins of their past might be.  The forgiveness of Jesus is real.”

I have done what my friend asked.  And, in doing so, many women have approached me privately with confessions of their own.  Christian women in every family and congregation are carrying heavy burdens of disappointment and guilt.  They see the Cross.  They know what Jesus did for them.  They may even trust His forgiveness.  But, like Jane, they are unable or unwilling to forgive themselves.

It is my prayer that Lauren will help her mother forgive herself.  God is the God of relationships… and of the healing that comes through tenderheartedness.  He uses parents and children, friends and even strangers to bring us closer to Him.

Perhaps this Christmas will bear a gift never before found under my friend’s tree.  As Jane looks into the eyes of her daughter and grandchildren, may she find confidence in her confession of Christ.  Confidence that emboldens her to proclaim:

He who is mighty has done great things for me.  Holy is His name.  His mercy is for those who trust Him… from generation to generation.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »