Bonus Item of the Day: Part III! Really?!

Yes folks, one more absurd item of the day, any more and I am going to be really jaded. From the Washington AP:

Health and Human Services nominee Kathleen Sebelius recently corrected three years of tax returns and paid more than $7,000 in back taxes after finding "unintentional errors"—the latest tax troubles for an Obama administration nominee. The Kansas governor explained the changes to senators in a letter dated Tuesday that the administration released. She said they involved charitable contributions, the sale of a home and business expenses.

Another one bites the dust....

Absurd Item of the Day: Bonus Feature

It seems as if one post featuring an "absurd item of the day" will not quite do it. Today on NPR there was a report that the Obama Administration has released a webpage on mental health and the economic crisis. The Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration has recently published a site called "A Guide to Getting Through Tough Economic Times". While I am not a psychologist, I believe it was Albert Einstein who once said: “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Based on how the Treasury and Fed have been handling the current economic crisis, perhaps they should read SAMHSA's nifty guide. The same Keynesian policies the federal government is trying now, have been tried countless times before to no avail (read up on Japan's "Lost Decade" if you don't believe me). The bottom line: the government cannot create wealth by increasing federal spending and attempting to internally "buy back" its own debt.

Absurd Item of the Day: China to release "Punishment Van"

Here's a little bit of gallows humor to start off our Tuesday morning. USA Today reports that China found a way to execute prisoners on-the-go with its new "death van". Faced with increased space demands in the country's overcrowded prisons, the Chinese government decided that portable execution vehicles would be cheaper and more efficient. According to Amnesty International, China executes around 8,000 prisoners each year, four times the amount of all the other nations in the world combined. For comparison, the United States executed 60 prisoners last year. Pretty chilling stuff....

British MEP gives Gordon Brown a piece of his mind

Daniel Hannan is a young British Tory who represents southeast England in the European Parliament; he also writes for the conservative Daily Telegraph in London. During a meeting of the MEP leading up to the G20 summit, Hannan gave a rebuttal to Prime Minister Gordon Brown speech on the global financial crisis. Hannan concluded the speech by stating:

You are the devalued Prime Minsister of a devalued government

Brilliant...If you have an additional minute, check out Daniel's blog here.

(TP: Drudge Report)

The Pitfall of Questioning

In The Great Divorce, C.S. Lewis sets up a story in which a busload of people come from Hell to take a ride through Heaven. Throughout the book, several of the "ghosts" (those who are on the bus tour) are met by individuals they had known on earth who are now in Heaven--referred to as "Spirits." These latter are bright and beautiful, and more real--as is the land in which the bus has now brought those from Hell--than any of the ghosts. As they talk, the Spirits are seeking to show the ghosts the way to life and Heaven, and as the readers we can listen in on their conversations.

Though the whole book is powerful (and well worth the read), one conversation/interchange stood out to me more than the others, especially in light of the postmodern fascination with questions. Before I quote the passage below, I will say that I do see some value in certain postmodern concepts, and I do believe that it can be harmful to never be able to hold any questions in tension in this life. We are fallible, and we do not possess all truth; however, God in His grace has revealed truth to us, and it is this that is especially relevant in the following interchange between a ghost and a Spirit. Here, the ghost is responding to the Spirit, who just intimated that Heaven is a place of answers:

(Ghost) ‘Ah, but…The free wind of inquiry must always continue to blow through the mind, must it not? “Prove all things”…to travel hopefully is better than to arrive.’
(Spirit) ‘If that were true, and known to be true, how could anyone travel hopefully? There would be nothing to hope for.’
(Ghost) ‘But you must feel yourself that there is something stifling about the idea of finality? Stagnation, my dear boy, what is more soul-destroying than stagnation?’
(Spirit) ‘You think that, because hitherto you have experienced truth only with the abstract intellect. I will bring you where you can taste it like honey and be embraced by it as by a bridegroom. Your thirst shall be quenched.’
(Ghost) ‘Well, really, you know, I am not aware of a thirst for some ready-made truth which puts an end to intellectual activity in the way you seem to be describing. Will it leave me the free play of the Mind…?’
(Spirit) ‘Free, as a man is free to drink while he is drinking. He is not free still to be dry…Listen!...once you knew what inquiry was for. There was a time when you asked questions because you wanted answers, and were glad when you had found them. Become that child again: even now…Thirst was made for water; inquiry for truth. What you now call the free play of inquiry has neither more nor less to do with the ends for which intelligence was given than masturbation has to do with marriage.’ (C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce, 40-41)

When are we--perhaps caught up in the intellectual challenge of argument and discussion--avoiding actually accepting truth? It is far easier (and I know this because I do it too) to discuss and debate than to live and truly believe the truth. In saying this, I am not denigrating debate or discussion: they are often necessary for us to better understand the truth as we are challenged by others and not simply left to form our own personal worldviews (that we too easily shape in the image of our own fallen selves or our own sin). However, discussion and debate, when rightly applied, should not only result in a better understanding of truth, but then a better application and living out of this truth. I may know every text in Scripture that reveals Jesus as the Messiah, Savior of the world, but unless I truly live this truth out by trusting in Him and what His death accomplished, I am a fool.

Questions are good, but they ought to lead towards truth...towards God.

Why Does Al Gore Refuse to Debate Climate Change?

At a recent economic summit featuring Danish scientist Bjorn Lomberg, Al Gore refused an offer to debate the premises of his worldview on climate change with Mr. Lomberg because:

The scientific community has gone through this chapter and verse.

Lomberg supports Gore's belief that global warming is real and man made, but disagrees that regulating and eliminating CO2 emissions is the best way to help the environment. If global climate change really constitutes a global emergency worse than the war on terrorism, why won't the former vice president debate the validity of his viewpoint?

A Challenge from Brother Lawrence

In a letter in The Practice of the Presence of God, Brother Lawrence writes of someone's (who I believe may be himself) thoughts about seeking God:

He complains often of our blindness, constantly crying out that we are to be pitied for our willingness to be satisfied with so little. 'God,' he says 'has infinite treasures to give us and still we are satisfied with a brief passing moment of piety; that we are blind and by our blindness we restrain the hand of God and so stop the flow of the abundance of His graces. But when He finds a soul imbued with a living faith, He pours into it His graces in abundance. It is like a torrent forcibly diverted from its usual course which having found a passage pours through irresistibly in an overwhelming flood.'...Yes, often we restrain this torrent by ignoring it.

How true! All too often, I may find myself more truly worshipping God with joy, and yet I then consider that passing glimpse of relationship and fellowship with Him sufficient, and leave without seeking more. If "Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God" (Matthew 4:4; see also Deuteronomy 8:3), then how can I deceive myself into thinking that these "brief passing moment(s) of piety" are sufficient? Ought we not to seek God more, and not stop when He blesses us with some such moment?

O'Bama blunder on St. Patty's Day

During an address on St. Patrick's Day, President Obama commits yet another teleprompter blunder when he ended up reading Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen's speech instead of his own. Cowen started the proceedings by readings the President's speech, and when Obama took over to correct the error, the telepromter switch to Cowen's speech. President Obama read through the speech and ended up thanking himself for inviting everyone to the party...

No wonder the media is calling him the "telepromter" president.

Good apart from God?

Saint Augustine, in his Confessions, writes the following as he speaks to all those who are not seeking God (bear with the antiquated translation):

Stand with Him and you shall stand fast. Rest in Him, and you shall be at rest. Whither go ye in rugged paths?...The good that you love is from Him; and as it has respect unto Him it is both good and pleasant; and justly shall it be embittered, because whatsoever cometh from Him is unjustly loved if He be forsaken for it. Why, then, will ye wander farther and farther in these difficult and toilsome ways? There is no rest where ye seek it...Ye seek a blessed life in the land of death; it is not there. For could a blessed life be where life itself is not?" (Confessions, p. 74, emphasis added)

It seems that when we think about heaven and hell, life and death, we tend to make them states or places distinct from reference to God. In other words, we might argue that if someone is saved and goes to heaven, they have eternal life. They are with God, it is true, but we may think that the life they have is simply some separate reward (like a birthday present bought by the giver) that God bestows upon them. While it is true that believers are gifted with Christ's righteousness, I believe there is still more to unpack here. We often neglect to further see what this eternal life actually is. In the gospel of John, Jesus prays to God the Father:

"Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." (John 17:1-3; NIV)

Here we see more of what this life really is: rather than being (as I know I have though of it at times) something completely extraneous that God simply bestows upon believers, it seems here that it is to be understood as a relationship with God. Referring to Jesus, the apostle John writes that "In him was life, and that life was the light of men." (John 1:4; NIV)

This is where Augustine comes in. He reminds us--his readers--that ours is a futile quest if we seek 'the good life' anywhere apart from in God. Why? Because by definition, with God is life, and without God there is no life. If we then seek life anywhere apart from in Him, we can and will never find it. Death, in this understanding then, would not simply be an extra punishment for not following God; rather it is the state everything is in when turned away from God. Just as I am in the dark when I enter a room without any light, so am I dead if I deny the One in whom is life.

But God is gracious, and He is a seeker of the lost.

Episcopal priest preaching both Christianity and Islam?

USA Today reports that Anne Holmes Redding, an Episcopal priest out of Seattle, may be defrocked for preaching both Christianity and Islam from the pulpit. Redding, who will mark the 25th anniversary of her ordination later this month, believes she can practice both faiths simultaneously and refuses to recant her Islamic faith. Bishop Geralyn Wolf, who has authority over Redding, has told her that Redding's "conversion to Islam constitutes an abandonment of the Christian faith and she must recant by March 30 or lose her status as a priest."

Restoration, not Rehabilitation

As a sort of addendum to my previous post, I want to share a comment from one of my friends. We were discussing work and ministry in the mental health field, and how Christians can approach their work in this field in a distinct manner because of our beliefs. My friend then said, in effect, that "As Christians, our work is not about rehabilitation; it is about restoration."

In working with the down-and-out, the mentally ill, or those with behavioral issues, it is easy to accept one's purpose and goal as "rehabilitation" of those individuals to lead a normal life like the "rest of us." Thus, the patients in this field have characteristics that push them down below the average level of human functioning--below "par"--and as psychologists and nurses and doctors and counselors we are trying to rehabilitate them back to normal.

This ought not to be our goal as Christians. We do not believe that the "average" level of human functioning and "normal" human behavior is good; rather we believe that every single person is maladjusted, sick, erred, and sinful--and it is in this state of being we remain, except by the grace of God. Thus, though people were originally created good, we have chosen evil above God, and so made the "normal" level of human functioning a state of sinfulness.

The implications of this belief reach to our work in the mental health field and far beyond it. As Christians working with these people, we do not want to "rehabilitate" them to the level of normal human functioning; rather, we pray for God's gracious work of restoration in their lives. We hope that God will restore them to a right relationship with Him (and the only place where there is fullness of joy and life!).

And this does not only apply to certain select individuals we might label as "mentally ill" or "maladjusted"--this applies to us all. We are all sinful and in need of God's grace and restorative work in our hearts. The only difference may be found in who is more willing to accept their need for such a work in their lives. Jesus came for sinners, and by God's grace, may we all know ourselves as such, and thus accept His gracious work of restoration in our lives.

One final note: Scripture seems to talk about restoration as a future event still, as indicated in the passage below. I have used the term here to refer to the restoration of a relationship with God, and so I hope that is in agreement with Scripture: It seems that this work of restoration, which Christ accomplished and which seems to begin to take place in our lives now, will finally culminate when He comes again.

Peter, in a speech in Acts, says the following: "Now, brothers, I know that you acted in ignorance [in crucifying Jesus], as did your leaders. But this is how God fulfilled what he had foretold through all the prophets, saying that his Christ would suffer. Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord, and that he may send the Christ, who has been appointed for you--even Jesus. He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets." (Acts 3:17-21, NIV)

Should we not hope for so much more than simply "rehabilitation," when the state to which that alone would bring us is one of estrangement from God--and thus a state of death? I would rather be restored.

Sunday Night Stott

From John Stott's On Christ Our Foundation (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1979):

Not only has God made promises in his word, but he has pledged himself to his people by an everlasting covenant. This covenant he ratified by the blood of Christ, guarantees by his own 'steadfast love which endures for ever and ever', and renews to us each time we come to the Holy Communion, which is a solemn covenant sign. With these foundations for faith we really have no excuse for our faithlessness...

AEI's David Frum takes on Rush in Newsweek

Perhaps one of the more controversial articles published this week came out of Newsweek, which featured a cover story by former Bush speechwriter David Frum, pleading with fellow conservatives to not allow Rush Limbaugh to become the voice of the Conservative Movement in the 21st Century. Bravo! Here's a great quote:

Rush is to the Republicanism of the 2000s what Jesse Jackson was to the Democratic party in the 1980s. He plays an important role in our coalition, and of course he and his supporters have to be treated with respect. But he cannot be allowed to be the public face of the enterprise—and we have to find ways of assuring the public that he is just one Republican voice among many, and very far from the most important.

Ginberg hints at a possibe Supreme Court opening?

Today at the New England Law's annual "Law Day," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg hinted at the possibility of a new opening on the Supreme Court. The question is, who is leaving and who will fill the slot? Any takers?

Calvin makes a comeback

500 years after his birth, the Reformer John Calvin is making a comeback in a big way. TIME Magazine is labeling "The New Calvinism" as number 3 in its series "10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now."

As always, there are those inside of the Church who disagree with this new and dynamic trend in Evangelical Christianity. For one of the more popular critiques, check out Scott McKnight's thoughts on what he labels the "NeoReformed."

Big Ministry

I was reading "In the Name of Jesus" by Henri Nouwen today, and came across this passage. I find the sentiment he expresses (and the general observation) all too true in how I have approached my own interactions with others. I recently worked in a locked residential home for adolescents, and it was easy to seek to offer the residents empathy, and security, and encouragement, while forgetting that I am called to be an ambassador of grace and reconciliation to them. This may well involve showing them love in these aforementioned ways as well, but above all it means showing them the life that is found in God through Christ--not just how to cope with their problems in this world. Our mission is so much more important, and Nouwen highlights this in the passage below:

Most Christian leaders today raise psychological or sociological questions even though they frame them in scriptural terms. Real theological thinking, which is thinking with the mind of Christ, is hard to find in the practice of the ministry. Without solid theological reflection, future leaders will be little more than pseudo-psychologists, pseudo-sociologists, pseudo-social workers. They will think of themselves as enablers, facilitators, role models, father or mother figures, big brothers or big sisters, and so on, and thus join the countless men and women who make a living be trying to help their fellow human beings cope with the stresses and strains of everyday living.

But that has little to do with Christian leadership because the Christian leader thinks, speaks, and acts in the name of Jesus, who came to free humanity from the power of death and open the way to eternal life…

The task of future Christian leaders is not to make a little contribution to the solution of the pains and tribulations of their time, but to identify and announce the ways in which Jesus is leading God’s people out of slavery, through the desert to a new land of freedom. (Henri Nouwen, In the Name of Jesus, 86-87)

Krauthammer on Stem Cells and Obama

Last night Charles Krauthammer was on Fox News' Special Report with Bret Baer talking about why he denied President Obama's embroynic stem cell invitation. An interesting twist, considering Krauthammer supports certain forms of stem cell research.

Sowell on "Subsidizing Bad Decisions"

Thomas Sowell does it yet again.

The old and trite notion of "saving for a rainy day" is old and trite precisely because this has been a common experience for a very long time. What is new is the current notion of indulging people who refused to save for a rainy day or to live within their means. In politics, it is called "compassion"-- which comes in both the standard liberal version and "compassionate conservatism."