Good News for Iraq and the President

It was a triumphant day in Iraq. How did American and world media view the first exercise of democracy in Iraq in 50 years? It is difficult to imagine a more positive day of news for President Bush and for the advance of freedom. Here are selected headlines and leads (note that the only news outlet to lead with the violence is the New York Times):



New York Times:



Attacks Kill 35; Turnout Heavy Among Shiites and Kurds



BAGHDAD, Iraq, Jan. 30 - Defying death threats, mortars and suicide bombers, Iraqis turned out in great numbers on Sunday to vote in this country's first free elections in 50 years, offering a powerful, if uneven, endorsement of democratic rule 22 months after Saddam Hussein was overthrown.



Bush Hails Iraqi Vote, but Warns of More Fighting Ahead



WASHINGTON, Jan. 30 - Just short of two years after engineering the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, President Bush on Sunday celebrated a comparatively peaceful day of voting in Iraq, declaring it a triumphant moment in his effort to spur democratic movements throughout the Middle East.

"The people of Iraq have spoken to the world, and the world is hearing the voice of freedom from the center of the Middle East," Mr. Bush said in a four-minute televised statement at 1 p.m. from the entry hall of the White House residence, after the polls closed in Iraq.



Washington Post



Iraqis Defy Threats as Millions Vote



Mood Is Festive; Turnout Appears Strong Despite Deadly Attacks

BAGHDAD, Jan. 30 -- Millions of Iraqis turned out Sunday to cast ballots in the country's first free elections in a half-century, the ranks of voters surging as attacks by insurgents proved less ferocious than feared and enthusiasm spilled over into largely Sunni Arab regions where hardly a campaign poster had appeared.



Fox News



Allawi: Election Proves Terrorists Can't Win



BAGHDAD, Iraq — Iraq's interim leader called on his countrymen to set aside their differences Monday while jubilant Iraqis sifted through ballots, tallying the results of a vote that millions hoped would restore democracy for the first time in a half-century and lead to the departure of 150,000 American troops



CNN



Iraq: Time for unity, says Allawi

Bush, other world leaders hail Iraq election



BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi Interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi has urged Iraqis to unite after a national election hailed worldwide which he said had defeated those seeking power through violence.



Los Angeles Times



Iraqi Turnout Trumps Violence

Millions Vote Despite Deadly Attacks and Threats; Bush Hails Outcome as 'Resounding Success'



BAGHDAD — Millions of Iraqis defied violence, calls for a boycott and a legacy of despotism to cast ballots Sunday in the nation's first multiparty elections in half a century.



Arab Media

Overwhelmingly, Arab channels and newspapers Arab channels and newspapers greeted the elections as a critical event with major implications for the region, and many put significant resources into reporting on the voting, providing blanket coverage throughout the country that started about a week ago. Newspapers kept wide swaths of their pages open, and the satellite channels dedicated most of the day to coverage of the polls.



Agence France-Presse.



Iraqis defy attacks to make strong turnout in landmark election



(31/01/2005)

BAGHDAD (AFP) Voters turned out in surprisingly high numbers for Iraq's first free election in half a century, defying insurgents who unleashed suicide bombers and mortar attacks that killed at least 37 people.US President George W. Bush, who ordered the controversial war to topple Saddam Hussein 22 months ago, congratulated the people of Iraq on "this great and historic achievement" but cautioned more hard work remains to turn the war-weary state into a democracy.



BBC



World leaders praise Iraqi poll



World leaders have praised the conduct of Iraq's first multi-party elections for more than 50 years.



President Bush and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair - the leaders of the two nations which led the invasion of Iraq - hailed them as a resounding success. And UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Iraqis should be encouraged to take control of their own future. After what officials said was a higher turnout than expected, the next few days will be spent counting votes.



China Daily (Beijing)



Millions of Iraqis vote; attacks kill 35



(Agencies)Updated: 2005-01-31 09:17

Millions of Iraqis flocked to vote in a historic election on Sunday, defying insurgents who killed 35 people in a bloody assault on the poll. Voters, some ululating with joy, others hiding their faces in fear, cast ballots in higher-than-expected numbers in Iraq's first multi-party election in half a century.



Moscow Times



Elections in Iraq are 'positive event' - Putin



Monday, Jan. 31, 2005, 2:06 PM Moscow Time

MOSCOW. Jan 31 (Interfax) - President Vladimir Putin has welcomed the parliamentary elections in Iraq. "This is a step in the right direction. This is a positive event," Putin said at a Monday government meeting. Putin instructed "all Russian departments to assist normalization inside and outside Iraq and to protect Russian interests in that country."



Elections in Iraq profanation - Gorbachev



Monday, Jan. 31, 2005, 2:06 PM Moscow Time

MOSCOW. Jan 31 (Interfax) - Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev said the Iraqi parliamentary elections cannot be viewed as legitimate. "What we were observing in Iraq on Sunday, as well as preparations preceding the elections, is very far from what true elections are. And even though I am a supporter of elections and of the transfer of power to the people of Iraq, these elections were fake," Gorbachev told Interfax on Monday. "I don't think these elections will be of any use. They may even have a negative impact on the country. Democracy cannot be imposed or strengthened with guns and tanks," the former Soviet leader said







--James Jewell

Iraqi Freedom Beyond the Skepticism

There is an odd questioning among liberal ideologues of President Bush’s sincerity when he fanned freedom’s ferment in his second inaugural. It is odd because, whether or not you agree with the Administration’s foreign or domestic policies, four years have certainly taught that George W. Bush is sincere and resolute. Many doubters have rued the day of their unbelief.



I heard this tone of skepticism in questions posed at The Political Question concerning the Iraqi election this weekend. The questions: Would the Bush/Cheney administration allow someone who would demand the immediate withdrawl of American troops to run in the election? If elected, would the United States allow them to take office?



While it is healthy to consider scenarios, these are less that that; they are hypothetical questions that brush close to the realm of reality only in the coffee shops of blue America, not the bazaars of Basra.



The questioners make the wrongheaded assumption that the President or anyone in his Administration wants a single American soldier walking the streets of Baghdad, exposed like bobbing ducks in a carnival shooting range. Republicans and Democrats alike desire the withdrawal of American troops.



But withdrawal at what price?



There are no candidates in the Iraq election calling for the immediate withdrawal of American troops because they are interested in long-term freedom more than the short-term satisfaction of ousting foreign forces.



The only potential candidates who would see the timetable as more important than stability don’t have widespread support throughout the country. They’ve been too busy cutting the heads off relief workers to campaign beyond the Sunni triangle.



The hypothetical questions, then, are without basis, but in the world created by them, the U.S. would neither interfere with the candidacies of those who sought immediate withdrawal, nor with the seating of such a winner. To do so would unnecessarily undermine the process.



President Bush said in an interview yesterday: "It seems like most of the leadership there understands that there will be a need for coalition troops at least until Iraqis are able to fight." But he added that “as a matter of principle, the United States would pull out of Iraq at the request of a new government.”



I don’t believe the troops would or should be withdrawn until it is prudent and until the new democracy can stand against terror. To do otherwise would be a mockery to the sacrifice paid by hundreds of Americans to free Iraq from tyranny and reduce its threat to the world.



It is a blue myth that Iraqis have an aversion to the democratic process before them, or even that they will stay away from the polls this weekend because of the danger.



The Arabic newspaper Alsharq Alausat published a poll of 33,313 Iraqis (in all of Iraq) 18 and older that was conducted by the Iraqi ministry of planning regarding Iraqi participation in the elections. The results, which appeared in the paper’s January 26 edition, included the following:



72.4 % of all of those polled said they would participate in the elections.



97% of Iraqis in Kurdistan said they would participate in the elections.



96% of Iraqis in the southern provinces (mainly Shiite areas) said they would participate in the elections.



33% of Iraqis in the central provinces (Sunni Area) said they would participate in the elections.



62.1% of those polled said that the elections will be neutral and free.



66% said that the elections must take place under current circumstances.

53.3% said the security is good in their area.21.7% said that security was average in their area.25% said that security was bad in their area."



The appeal of freedom is strong, but the price is often high. As Robert at Let's Try Freedom said:



"Iraq is finishing one chapter and beginning a new one in the days to come. We do not yet know what the new chapter will look like. We do know what the last chapter looks like - it is written in blood. The men and women who have joined the Iraqi army, police, and security forces have made a huge sacrifice. All of them are volunteers. All are modestly-paid, held in suspicion by many friends and neighbors. Many of them have been killed."



Pray for the millions of Iraqis who on Sunday will be risking their lives to have a chance to elect their government.





--James Jewell

Evangelicals and Conservatism

Why don’t evangelicals participate more regularly in the intellectual defense of conservatism? asks Matt at MattCrash. It’s a good question and a good post. I suspect that the strain of anti-intellectualism that still permeates many parts of the evangelical, fundamentalist, and charismatic church has something to do with this.



--James Jewell

Damascus Road Experience

How nice of Guy at Damascus Road to introduce me on his blog this weekend as part of the Joe Carter inspired “Meet Your Neighbor” series. Thanks!



--James Jewell

SpongeBob Phobia

The phones were ringing off the hook one morning at the public relations firm where I worked several years ago. The Associated Press had just filed a story that Jerry Falwell, our client, had “outed” Tinkie Winkie, the purple Telletubbie.



Falwell’s Liberty Journal had run a seemingly harmless news item about major mainstream dailies that had over the years acknowledged that the homosexual community had embraced the purple character that carried a purse as its own. AP had interpreted this as Falwell outing the Telletubbie.



This is the kind of story that you simply laugh about, perhaps issue a statement, and let it go away. Don’t give it another day of air. That’s the advice we gave, but Jerry has never met an interview he can walk away from, so he appeared on the Today Show and other major programs to explain how he hadn’t really said Twinkie Winkie was gay, etc. etc.



You may remember the cartoons and much laughter that followed. Actually, I still laugh about it.



So now it is James Dobson’s turn. Last week at an inaugural week event in Washington he picked up the refrain started by Don Wildmon’s American Family Association about a new video to be distributed to 61,000 schools across the nation in which AFA says homosexual activists are using popular children's TV characters such as SpongeBob SquarePants and Barney the dinosaur to surreptitiously indoctrinate young children into their lifestyle.



The headlines are Twinkie Winkie-like. “It takes a sponge to brainwash a child,” a NY Times columnist chided.



Welcome to Washington, Dr. Dobson. It is probably wise for evangelical leaders to stay away from children’s characters, particularly if they intend to be politically active. Politics is mean and ugly. If Dobson had made the same comments a few months ago, before he began issuing political ultimatums, it would have gone unnoticed. He is now finding what Jerry Falwell has experienced for years: a conservative evangelical who becomes a political player is open season.



Maybe Dobson should have stayed out of politics, the Wesley Blog says.



Sonspot suggests that the Dobson vs. Squarepants pairing could have been avoided. He writes:



“Why bring up the cartoon at all since it's only the vehicle for the message that is at issue. This only makes Christians look like a bunch of paranoid fuddy-duddys.



What needs to be answered is This: How can we protect our children from being presented with a view that homosexuality is a normal variation in man like skin color or height? Answer: We can't. That particular train has left the station. Our children are going to get presented that message somehow, somewhere. What do we do then? Approach this the same way you approach the teaching of evolution, drugs, sex etc. Give the children a solid knowledge of the Bible and pray, a lot."



The We Are Family Foundation (from the song We Are Family) is trying to start a We Are Family Day, on March 11. Here’s more on the We Are Family CD that will be sent to the schools, which involves SpongeBob and many other characters. Evidently something in the school lesson plan will direct participants to this online Tolerance Pledge.



It reads:



Tolerance is a personal decision that comes from a belief that every person is a treasure. I believe that America's diversity is its strength. I also recognize that ignorance, insensitivity and bigotry can turn that diversity into a source of prejudice and discrimination.



To help keep diversity a wellspring of strength and make America a better place for all, I pledge to have respect for people whose abilities, beliefs, culture, race, sexual identity or other characteristics are different from my own.



AFA says the objective of the school program is to get children to the foundation's website, "and there they're given the full pitch about homosexuality.” Here's the Website. I don’t see any pitch for homosexuality.



All in all, I’d rather my kids would spend the time working on their reading comprehension. But I haven’t seen anything yet that would make me worry about SpongeBob and his cohorts. Perhaps AFA has more evidence, or they may be over-reacting.



And once again, with Dobson now in the lead, we just look like a bunch of “krabby patties.”





--James Jewell

Mongolia: One Place Where Freedom is Struggling for a Foothold

My article in Christianity Today on the church in Mongolia and the ministry of LifeQwest and others in that frozen land is now online. For more on this topic, see the January 4 post titled A Mongolia night. It provides more on the children--



For thousands of Mongolian children, the struggle is intense and deadly. Stop along the streets of the city and look into the stairwells, sewers, and open markets and you will see the heartbreak of Mongolia—its abandoned street children. There are an estimated 3,000 children living on the streets of the Mongolian capital, the victims of an economy in crisis and a society adrift. The harshness of the north Asian night puts them at risk. If they fail to find shelter through the long winter night, they will freeze to death. Their daily existence is a life and death battle against the four horsemen of the Mongolian apocalypse: cold, hunger, abuse, and hopelessness.





--James Jewell

Observing the Inauguration from the Capitol Grounds

The day began gray and blustery, with an inch or two of snow remaining on the Capitol grounds. Most of what is Washington, D.C. to tourists—nearly all of the Mall and everything between the Capitol and 18th--was closed and barricaded, with no vehicles or pedestrian traffic allowed.



We picked up our ceremony tickets from Congressman John Linder’s office in the Longworth House Office Building, with the lines into the building short for a typical metal detector search. The only hassle was that we, along with everyone else, were bundled against the cold, and we had to pull the outer layers off for the security check.



We were buoyed by the location of our “seats,” which were standing tickets in the middle of the Capitol grounds. The Congressman’s assistant said that 95% of their tickets were down on the Mall, so ours were “the good tickets.” Don’t know if she was exaggerating, but the place we ended up was quite nice, for which we are grateful to the Congressman and his staff.



We waited for more than an hour and a half in a long line down Independence Avenue for the next security check to get onto the Capitol grounds. It was still in the 20s at this point and windy, so this was the coldest part of the day. This security point was an individual hand check. The line was divided at the end into male and female and we had to open our coats for a security person, who patted us down and looked us in the eyes.



As the ceremony began, at 11:30, the clouds thinned and the sun began to shine, which I know sounds corny, but it’s true. The Capitol building looks fabulous in the red, white, and blue dressings and flags, and in the bright sun it was a sight to behold.



The news commentators said the crowd was largely Republican, which is a logical assumption, but by no means something a journalist could know because no one was doing “entrance polls.”



The low point, early on, was when Christopher Dodd introduced the Vice Presidential oath of office, some of the crowd booed the Democrat, which we found in extremely poor taste at the bi-partisan event. It also happened when Nancy Pelosi was introduced.



The most poignant moment was when Chief Justice Rheinquist was introduced and brought in mid-ceremony so he wouldn’t have to be out in the cold so long. I’m sure it took all of his available strength and courage to hobble down the steps, with a Marine at his elbow.



The high point was the Inaugural Address. I was stunned by the sheer power of a 20-minute presentation of vision presented in poetic and inspiring prose, which I believe sets one of the most ambitious and uplifting agendas in American history. What great confidence and courage it took not to try to push all of the political buttons, not to lay out the state of the union in an inaugural, and not to advance programmatic details. (I’ll write more about this when I’m not on the run).



Bundled in the cold, the reception of the President by the gathered crowd was warm and enthusiastic, although the frequent applause from the masses was the padded thumping of gloved hands, which was quite humorous.



Eschewing the parade, we retreated to a wonderful Chinese restaurant at 21st and M to reflect on a great day for America, and I believe, for the world.



--James Jewell

Inauguration and the Nature of Man

James Thomas Flexner wrote in George Washington: In the American Revolution of what may be considered the most important unknown moment in American history. On March 15, 1783 in Newburgh, New York, General George Washington resisted the perennial revolutionary temptation advocated by some of his officers to address their frustrations by taking power as king. Although the troops gathered in a large hall were not deterred by Washington’s rhetoric, the atmosphere changed when he began to read a letter to the group and, as Flexner writes, “he pulled out something that only his intimates had seen him wear. A pair of glasses. With infinite sweetness and melancholy, he explained: ‘Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country.’”



This simple statement exposed his humility and his humanity, and the revolutionary temptation passed. As a result of that, many other decisions by men, and the providence of God, on Thursday we will observe an inauguration and not a coronation.



Every four years, inauguration is a solemn and celebratory passage for the republic. It marks the peaceful transition of administration, and although not a transfer of power this year (gratefully), it is a symbol of the strength and continuity of our representative democracy.



It is the day every four years when partisanship is at is lowest ebb. Although there’s a taste of it at every State of the Union gathering, the inauguration is the event most closely resembling the common patriotism that was felt so fervently in the days following 9/11. Short-lived though it may be, it is our nation at its best.



The inauguration is a very real function of transferring power and it is a symbol of two of the pillars of American stability—representative democracy and the rule of (constitutional) law. A third would be the independent judiciary. These pillars have remained because the founders and our ancestors understood the nature of man. They built into the Constitution protections against the inclination of human beings to grasp at power and to work for personal rather than common good.



They knew that people are depraved. This theological truth was obvious to enough of the founders to assure safeguards against it.



“The total depravity of man,” said G.K. Chesterton, “is the one doctrine empirically validated by 4,000 years of human history.” But we have lost sight of this in modern society, which endangers the republic.



“The most common myth of [our time] is that people are good. We aren’t,” wrote Charles Colson, who after a career in cut-throat politics and 20 years in prison and prison ministry knows of what he speaks.



The most valuable American export is the strength of its democratic model. In two weeks we will see—undoubtedly amid death and carnage—a new phase in Iraq in which that nation will continue building freedom and stability through free elections. We know that this will be a step forward for Iraq. But why? Why are we sure representative democracy is so good for Iraq, or Afghanistan, or for the Palestinian people? For the world?



It is not that we want to export all things American. To find the answer, follow freedom. Where does it blossom? In the nations where the people have a voice, freedom is growing, the weak and the minorities are better protected, economies are improving, and civil institutions are thriving. On the other hand, the concentration of power in a small number of people always ends badly.



Abraham Lincoln said: “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.”



The Lord through Samuel warned the nation of Israel of the consequences of a being ruled by a king. “When that day comes, you will cry out because of the king you’ve chosen for yourselves” (I Samuel 8:18). Israel endured hardships because of their choice, and throughout history, nations have suffered from the tyranny of concentrated power.



But this week, we celebrate American stability and we inaugurate the second term of a President who has recognized the importance of exporting freedom to the world, and protecting freedom at home. For that, all of America can be grateful.





--James Jewell

Newt Gingrich’s Character Problem

Listening to Newt Gingrich talk about his new book on Sean Hannity and elsewhere, I’m reminded how much I like his mind, his energy, and his ideas. Problems in his personal life may prevent him from becoming a serious candidate for President. (I bet his negatives are as high as Hilary’s, too).

I am not ready to write him off because of his personal problems, although it would be good to hear more from him about these issues. However, La Shawn Barber has written a piece on why she would not support Newt Gingrich as the Republican presidential nominee. She feels his character flaws, especially infidelity, disqualify him for elected office. Dory at Wittenberg Gate says that as much as she likes Newt in other respects, she tends to agree.



Newt will have to deal with the character issue openly and honestly. But ladies, don’t politicians get second chances, too?

--James Jewell

Barricades

We’re driving to Washington for the inauguration. Although I lived there for 14 years, I still get a rush when I turn the corner onto the Roosevelt Bridge and see the Washington Monument, Lincoln Memorial, and the Mall straight ahead. Security barriers are making travel and sightseeing more difficult. With the inauguration, it’s going to be really tough.



Colby at Words moans as the barricades around the Jefferson Memorial are becoming permanent, and adds: “I want to be able to visit the Washington Monument without squeezing through a barricade and slipping past guards with high-powered rifles. America does have to work hard in a post-9/11 world to make sure that we are not "open" but at some point the questions have to be raised about what is suitable for us to live with. How much of our access do we limit in order to protect? Wouldn't these barricades be better served on the border with Mexico? It's a bit like putting up a fence directly around your house rather than around your yard.”

--James Jewell

Reading Martin Luther King, Jr.: Letter from a Birmingham Jail

A good way to understand Martin Luther King, Jr. on this day that honors him is to read some of his letters and speeches. It is a better way than listening to those who interpret him 30 years later. King was a Christian minister whose cry against injustice was deeply informed by his faith. His words contrast the political agenda of those who feign to represent the black community today.



Letter from a Birmingham Jail, written on April 16, 1963, is a powerful example. A response to a published statement of eight fellow clergymen from Alabama, it was begun on the margins of the newspaper in which the statement appeared. The letter was continued on scraps of writing paper supplied by a black prison workers, and concluded on a pad King’s attorneys were eventually permitted to leave.



A few excerpts:



Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds.

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct-action campaign that was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant 'Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied."

______________

I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

_______________

In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn't this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn't this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace in which they made him drink hemlock? Isn't this like condemning Jesus because his unique God-consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to God's will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber.

--James Jewell

The Words of MLK Help An Immigrant

Mark Sides writing at Stones Cry Out points to a moving column (free registration required) at the Wall Street Journal online by an Iranian Immigrant, who began to be reconciled with her new home through the words of Dr. King:



“To tell the story of the Civil Rights Movement is to tell the story of how arrogance was made to give way to justice by none other than a man who advocated peace. Against the grim and infallible image that is painted of America, this will be a truer portrait: colorful and human.”

Safire on Bloggers and Media

Here’s what William Safire says today about the challenge to MSM from bloggers:



"On the challenge from bloggers: The "platform" - print, TV, Internet, telepathy, whatever - will change, but the public hunger for reliable information will grow. Blogs will compete with op-ed columns for "views you can use," and the best will morph out of the pajama game to deliver serious analysis and fresh information, someday prospering with ads and subscriptions. The prospect of profit will bring bloggers in from the meanstream to the mainstream center of comment and local news coverage."



On national or global events, however, the news consumer needs trained reporters on the scene to transmit facts and trustworthy editors to judge significance. In crises, large media gathering-places are needed to respond to a need for national community.



Here’s the the whole column on why the MSM will survive.

Journalist Looking for Work

One of the nation’s prolific journalists has a new address and is looking for work.



In Lake Charles, Louisiana., award-winning black journalist Wilbert Rideau, convicted of murder three times by all-white juries in the 1961 death of a bank teller, was set free after a racially-mixed jury found him guilty of manslaughter rather than murder. A confessed killer who gained fame for exposes of harsh Louisiana prison life at the vast Angola complex, Rideau won his release Saturday after nearly 44 years in state prisons. A manslaughter conviction allowed his release for time already served. Here is the report.

Who Is the Most Influential Evangelical in America?

There’s a question of "who is the most influential evangelical" being bantered about by many blogs.



Joe Carter at The Evangelical Outpost is still trying to convince people that Rick Warren is the most influential person in America by highlighting the statistic that the average number of copies sold per week of Rick Warren’s The Purpose-Driven® Life is 193,700



Drew at Darn Floor says there's a reason why Rick Warren's book has sold so many copies. It's because whole churches commit to doing his 40-day study, and therefore entire congregations will purchase the book. You can't buy a marketing gimmick like that. Nevertheless, he says, I stand by my earlier assertion. (Drew grudgingly concedes that it’s probably James Dobson).



The answer rests on what is meant by influence, which is something different than popularity or statistics. It has something to do with changing hearts and minds and moving people to action.



While Dobson has a huge radio audience, his reach is greatly limited because he communicates mostly through Christian radio, with some entrees into mainstream radio. He may be having a significant influence on evangelical political action, although I wrote on January 5 , I wish he’s stick to the Focus on the Family mission.



Rick Warren is currently on a popularity trip based on his book and its derivatives. But this will be fleeting (does anyone reading this know where Bruce Wilkinson is today [ministering in South Africa]. A few years ago he was riding Prayer of Jabez to fame). Warren’s impact will be longer lasting than Wilkinson’s, though, because he’s making a real impact on local churches.



But both are, indeed, evangelicals who are having a major impact today on evangelicals. Here are some other categories:



· What evangelical leader do Christian members of Congress go to for advice on applying their faith to life and public policy. Not James Dobson. More likely Chuck Colson.



· The most influential evangelical in America: George W. Bush



· The most effective evangelist of the last year: Mel Gibson



· The most influential cultural conservative in the world is Pope John Paul II



· Having the most political influence on evangelicals: Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity

· The most powerful evangelical in government other than Bush: Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (graduate of Wheaton College)



· Most influential on church worship in our time: Bill Hybels



· The most well-known evangelical: Billy Graham, of course



· The most powerful in Christian media: Stu Epperson at Salem Communications and Harold Myra at Christianity Today Inc.

--James Jewell

Design Contest for Stones Cry Out

Be watching for major changes at the Stones Cry Out blog. In anticipation of that, SCO is conducting a contest for a new design idea for the header. Look at one that is being considered at SCO. Rick is hosting the contest to try to come up with the best possible header. E-mail your ideas and a design to rick at alohalee dot com. Entries will be posted with recognition for the contestants. If your design is selected for the new site, you will get the proper credit (and some cookies will be mailed to the winner.) Hey that’s better than a lot of blog contests!

--James Jewell

Listen to the Blog Future

To experience what the future of blogging is going to look like, or rather sound like, check out the streaming audio blogging at Homespun Bloggers Radio. This terrific effort is being spearheaded by my blogger-in law Doug Payton. Great idea, and it is very well done.



This week’s program includes:



--The second half of the "audio fisking" by Doug (Considerettes) of John Kerry's farewell speech to his supporters.



--Paulie (The Commons at Paulieworld) reads a letter from the front lines.



--Mike (Bunker Mulligan) gives us an engineer's look at earthquakes and tsunamis, as well as predictions of them in the Atlantic Ocean.

Listen to this. You will really enjoy it, and you’ll get a glimpse of the future.

--James Jewell

Federal Judge Allows Clergy to Pray at Inaugural

A federal judge yesterday rejected California atheist Michael Newdow’s attempt to bar President Bush from having ministers say prayers at the inauguration, saying the harm was not grave enough to issue such a dramatic emergency order, The Washington Post reported.



U.S. District Judge John D. Bates said: "There is a strong argument that, at this late date, the public interest would best be served by allowing the 2005 Inauguration ceremony to proceed … as planned. That would be consistent with the inclusion of religious prayer or reference in every inauguration commencing with the first inauguration of President Washington in 1789. To do otherwise, moreover, would at this eleventh hour cause considerable disruption in a significant, carefully-planned, national event, requiring program and other adjustments."



Good news, but the Post ran the story on A8, and the NY Times didn’t see it is as a top story either. Also, because the judge cited the eleventh hour as part of the rationale the door is open for other challenges, it seems to me (I am not an attorney).

--James Jewell

Prince Harry, Jerry Springer, Bill Cosby, and More

Defending Prince Harry: The cacophony of criticism of Prince Harry for his Nazi uniform is overblown and unnecessary. The reports on Prince Harry are missing a major element in the story—I heard it from a royal spokesperson, I believe—that at least in my view puts the whole affair in a different light. Prince Harry wore the Nazi uniform to a type of costume party called a “bad taste party,” with the guests wearing costumes that were in bad taste. No one would argue that Harry’s costuming was not brilliantly in keeping with the theme. There isn't any uproar about the general theme of this bad taste party itself--natives and colonials. No protests in the streets of Nairobi.



Wearing a Nazi uniform to the party did not glamorize the Nazis or condone their genocide. Nonsense. I guess the British don’t have any sense of humor, either, when some might be offended.



Same-Sex Lutherans: The Lutherans are looking for safe ground on same-sex unions. A report today that “a task force of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America recommended yesterday that it retain its policy against blessing same-sex unions and ordaining gays, but suggested that sanctions could be avoided for pastors and congregations that chose to do so.”



This is their approach to the issue that has caused in the church "deep, pervasive" disagreement about the role and treatment of gay men and lesbians. Some clergy members said that by giving local churches and synods wiggle room, the task force had found a way to preserve the unity of the church.



Two problems: First, where in scripture is the church called to find unity at the expense of clarity and truth? Second, it won’t work. Try that approach to maintaining order at home or the workplace. Denominations have to be the most dysfunctional organisms in our society.



Christian Critics of Springer in England: The Christian Herald newspaper in England has backed comments from the religious think tank Ekklesia, which suggested that Christians had been too hasty in rushing to condemn 'Jerry Springer - The Opera.' Their editorial published yesterday suggests that Christian campaigners against the show made a 'classic mistake' and that "shouting ‘blasphemy’ devoid of cohesive argument will only serve to reinforce stereotypes". "Sadly, far too few campaigners actually viewed the piece – the classic mistake for would-be apologists debating morality in the arts."



The editorial reads: "In one sweep our loud accusations seem ill-informed, unbalanced and, at worst, vacuous to the onlooker. Jonathan Bartley, director of Ekklesia, despairs that Christians have missed a 'golden opportunity for moral and ethical debate' by not giving 'meaningful explanation' to their accusers." "With faith being amputated from much of the arts, shouting ‘blasphemy’ devoid of cohesive argument will only serve to reinforce stereotypes, discouraging artisans from further exploring faith. Unless we treat others as we’d like to be treated, we have no grounds to complain when reactionary secularists attempt Christian censorship without proper reasoning."



Bill Cosby on Education: I’ve been a Bill Cosby fan since listening to his comedy records as a child. But his recent courageous analysis of social problem has increased my respect tremendously. Here's a piece worth reading. (Hat tip: Release the Hounds). Cosby writes this on education:



"Parent power! Proper education has to begin at home. We must demand that our youth have an understanding of spoken and written English, math and science. We must transform our communities with a renewed commitment to our children, and that means parents must show that they value education. We don't need another federal commission to study the problem.

What we need now is parents sitting down with children, overseeing homework, sending children off to school in the morning well fed, clothed, rested and ready to learn. "



No Florida Same-Sex Adoption: Is there any way that we could award territory to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, consistently the most conservative bench in the country. The Supreme Court just refused to review the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling last year that Florida’s ban on same-sex adoption is constitutional (see Liberty Counsel's news release for more on this).



The Eleventh Circuit held that the Florida legislature properly made a policy judgment that it is not in the best interests of its displaced children to be adopted by individuals who engage in current, voluntary homosexual activity. The Eleventh Circuit stated that, “[W]e have found nothing in the Constitution that forbids this policy judgment. Thus, any argument that the Florida legislature was misguided in its decision is one of legislative policy, not constitutional law. The legislature is the proper forum for this debate, and we do not sit as a superlegislature to award by judicial decree what was not achievable by political consensus.”



Vlog: From the 2005 Consumer Electronics Show, a report on a product that may signal one direction for blogs. Video blogs, or vlogs.



“Vlog It, a new video-creation software program, helps people create a video blog or "vlog" with TV-quality graphics, transitions and titles. Users type in text, picking from pre-designed templates and then talk away in front of their computer or laptop, looking directly at a Web cam attached their monitor. The software records them, compresses and formats the video, and then automatically arranges fancy overlays and transitions. When done, bloggers upload their resulting video file to a blogging Web site.”



Journalism and Fundamentalism: GetReligion points us to an article written by Laurie Goodstein in the New York Times about what really constitutes religious "fundamentalism."



Goodstein writes:



"After the American presidential election in November, some liberal commentators warned that the nation was on the verge of a takeover by Christian "fundamentalists."



But in the United States today, most of the Protestants who make up what some call the Christian right are not fundamentalists, who are more prone to create separatist enclaves, but evangelicals, who engage the culture and share their faith. Professor [Martin] Marty defines fundamentalism as essentially a backlash against secularism and modernity.



For example, at the fundamentalist Bob Jones University, in Greenville, S.C., students are not allowed to listen to contemporary music of any kind, even Christian rock or rap. But at Wheaton College in Illinois, a leading evangelical school, contemporary Christian music is regular fare for many students.



Christian fundamentalism emerged in the United States in the 1920's, but was already in decline by the 1960's. By then, it had been superceded by evangelicalism, with its Billy Graham-style revival meetings, radio stations and seminaries.



The word "fundamentalist" itself has fallen out of favor among conservative Christians in the United States, not least because it has come to be associated with extremism and violence overseas."

--James Jewell

Do Not Pass Go: End of the Media Monopoly

While the mainstream media will not collapse because of Rathergate, it will change because the scandal brought to light what has been happening in the last few years. The monolithic control of information by the large liberal outlets has been broken. While the big three networks and a few major publications still determine much of the national conversation, they have lost their iron grip, and the grip is slipping every day.



Peggy Noonan writes wonderfully (as usual) on this.



The Rathergate Report is a watershed event in American journalism not because it changes things on its own but because it makes unavoidably clear a change that has already occurred. And that is that the mainstream media's monopoly on information is over. That is, the monopoly enjoyed by three big networks, a half dozen big newspapers and a handful of weekly magazines from roughly 1950 to 2000 is done and gone, and something else is taking its place. That would be a media cacophony. But a cacophony in which the truth has a greater chance of making itself clearly heard.



She adds:



What broke it? We all know. Rush Limbaugh did, cable news did, the antimonolith journalists who rose with Reagan did, the internet did, technology did, talk radio did, Fox News did, the Washington Times did. When the people of America got options, they took them. Conservative arguments rose, and liberal hegemony fell.



All this has been said before but this can't be said enough: The biggest improvement in the flow of information in America in our lifetimes is that no single group controls the news anymore.



And this about bloggers:



Is there a difference between the bloggers and the MSM journalists? Yes. But it is not that they are untrained eccentrics home in their pajamas. (Half the writers for the Sunday New York Times are eccentrics home in their pajamas.) It is that they are independent and allowed to think their own thoughts. It is that they have autonomy and can assign themselves stories, and determine on their own the length and placement of stories. And it is that they are by and large as individuals more interesting than most MSM reporters.



Howard Fineman picks up this refrain, although from the whiney side the aisle. It is always refreshing when a member of the MSM is candid about bias. Fineman writes:



A political party is dying before our eyes - and I don't mean the Democrats. I'm talking about the "mainstream media," which is being destroyed by the opposition (or worse, the casual disdain) of George Bush's Republican Party; by competition from other news outlets (led by the internet and Fox's canny Roger Ailes); and by its own fraying journalistic standards.



He adds:



The crusades of Vietnam and Watergate seemed like a good idea at the time, even a noble one, not only to the press but perhaps to a majority of Americans. The problem was that, once the AMMP declared its existence by taking sides, there was no going back. A party was born.



In the world of information, the 00’s will be seen as a time of sea change, perhaps even the decade of the blog. But freedom available on the new platform, and new-found power that comes with recognition won’t create longterm credibility. That will come the old-fashioned way. We have to earn it. There are many voices now. How will new and growing audiences decide what they can believe in the blogosphere?





--James Jewell

The Challenge to Inaugural Prayer

There is a hearing today in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on California atheist Michael Newdow’s Dec. 17 motion to restrain Christian ministers from praying publicly at the inauguration. Newdow, a doctor, lawyer and licensed minister of atheism (an advocate of nothing?), says it violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment.



At President Bush's 2001 inauguration, two ministers, the Rev. Franklin Graham and the Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, delivered Christian invocations. The Washington Times reports that “inauguration organizers have yet to announce who will pray this year, but confirmed there will be an invocation and a benediction by ministers chosen by the president.”



After the 2001 inaugural the complaints were not that Christian ministers prayed, but that they had the audacity to pray like followers of Christ. In other words, they invoked the name of Jesus Christ in their prayers.



Graham prayed, in part:



O Lord, as we come together on this historic and solemn occasion, to inaugurate once again a president and a vice president, teach us afresh that power, wisdom, and salvation come only from your hands...



Now, O Lord, we dedicate this Presidential inaugural ceremony to you. May this be the beginning of a new dawn for America, as we humble ourselves before you and acknowledge You, alone, as our Lord, our Savior, and our Redeemer.

We pray this in the Name of the Father, and of the Son the Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.



Here’s the full text of Franklin Graham's 2001 inaugural prayer.



I remember this well because at the time I was writing and editing some of Franklin Graham’s speeches and articles, including some of his thoughts in the prayer and at the inaugural worship service at the Washington Cathedral (although I can’t say he was my most committed client. He routinely deviated from my best material!).



The Newdow lawsuit states: "It is an offense of the highest magnitude that the leader of our nation, while swearing to uphold the Constitution, publicly violates that very document upon taking his oath of office."



The legal argument in favor of clergy at the inauguration is based on the establishment of chaplains in Congress at its inception, even before the Bill of Rights was passed. When the presence of chaplains in the Nebraska Legislature was legally challenged in 1983 by Ernest Chambers, a Nebraska lawmaker, the Supreme Court ruled against him, saying the practice had a "special nook" because it was a long-standing tradition to have government-paid chaplains.



"The Supreme Court has given its constitutional blessing, so to speak," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, a conservative public-interest law firm. "We should not lose our history and the religious underpinnings it is founded on."



Indeed. Look no further than George Washington's 1789 inaugural address. Here’s a portion:



“No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.



And in the important revolution just accomplished, in the system of their United government, the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities, from which the event has resulted, can not be compared with the means by which most governments have been established, without some return of pious gratitude, along with an humble anticipation of the future blessings which the past seem to presage.”



It is unlikely that the District Court will rule to prohibit the participation of clergy or their prayers in the Inaugural ceremonies. And because of the boldness of President Bush’s personal Christian faith (witness yesterday's Washington Times interview), those who pray may actually name the One before whom “every knee shall bow” Philippians 2:10-11 at a future ceremony on a much grander stage.

--James Jewell

When Bloggers Are Fired

As the newspaper editor at a college in the Twin Cities some years ago, I wrote an editorial criticizing the administration for valuing its lucrative banquet business more than its students. This resulted in a visit to the president’s office, not to wax on the merits of my argument, but for a verbal “woodshed” experience. Although it wasn’t my first visit there, I was allowed to continue in my post.



Later, as a senior executive of a professional firm, I championed the plight of employees who had come to me with their grievances, which resulted in others in leadership questioning my loyalty to management.



If there had been blogs, I probably would have been in far more trouble through the years. So I understand the predicament of the self-described "famous fired flight attendant," who is waging a campaign on behalf of bloggers. The online CBS Marketwatch reports that “Ellen Simonetti is threatening ‘blogophobic’ companies with being blacklisted by Webloggers if they don't warm up to the online diarists.”



Simonetti left Delta Airlines after eight years because, she claims, her online "Diary of a Flight Attendant" offended management. Also known as the "Queen of Sky," she has continued to blog and now has posted "The International Bloggers' Bill of Rights." It provides that Webloggers have the "freedom to blog, freedom from persecution and retaliation because of our blogs." About 30 Webloggers have signed on, supporting the call for employers to "establish clear-cut blogging policies." Simonetti has lists of rights, signers, and companies that she claims are "blogophobic," and have "fired, threatened, disciplined, fined or not hired people because of their blogs."



I’m not totally comfortable with this effort because, while I understand and sympathize with the desire to speak freely, employment by a company requires some loyalty. However, the loyalty should be reciprocal, fostering understanding by employers. Enlightened companies will allow free-spirited bloggers to speak their mind and will welcome open dialogue about their policies, strengths, and weaknesses.



Check out the site and see what you think.



Futurists try to fathom the Internet

Also from Marketwatch: Almost 1,200 technology specialists, scholars, and industry leaders were asked by the Pew Internet & American Life Project for their opinions about the future of the Internet. About 40 percent said they think civic involvement will increase because people can easily use the Net to participate in discussions and join organizations.

They believe the dawning of the blog era will bring radical change to the news and publishing industry. They expect online classes to become a common part of formal education. And they think file swapping and music-file sharing over anonymous, free, peer-to-peer networks will still be easy to perform a decade from now. Download a PDF version of the Pew report.

--James Jewell

Crumbling Institutions

Columnist and commentator Armstrong Williams badly violated our trust by posing as a newsman while receiving money to be a spokesperson. Because Mr. Williams is a black conservative, he will be crucified by axis of the elite, and because he was paid by the Bush administration, the matter will be investigated by Democratic members of Congress.



Williams said he deeply regrets his actions and acknowledges that this hurts his credibility. It is doubtful he will be able to work (or pose) as a journalist again. But Williams will find gainful employment, and the racial attacks and government handwringing will all dissolve.



It is harder to repair trust, and the last thing our public institutions needed was another incident that erodes public trust. The Williams affair comes at the same time as the release of the CBS report on RatherGate. CBS investigative panel said a "myopic zeal" to be the first news organization to broadcast a groundbreaking story about Mr. Bush's National Guard service was a key factor in explaining why CBS News had produced a story that was neither fair nor accurate and did not meet the organization's internal standards.



The Four Estates

God established three institutions: the church, to advance worship and morality; the family, to propagate and to train the young; and government, to maintain order. Modern society has added media, which although not established by divine writ (as some may want you to think), were seen by the founders as vital to our democratic republic.



When institutions no longer adhere to cultural mores and their own ethical codes, they lose public trust and are subjected to legal challenges. The four estates have successfully coexisted because of ethics, not law. When the relationships of the estates are legally regulated they become something less than relationships. The dependence is no longer covenantal. It becomes contractural.



We expect media commentators to express independent views about their subject, including government. We expect media reports to be unbiased and politically independent. We expect church leaders to be obey the law and demonstrate moral purity. We expect families to be a stabilizing force in our culture



When they fail, we lose confidence in them, and they lose moral authority and their role in society is diminished. Public confidence institutions has been eroding for some time. A recent Gallup poll shows little enthusiasm for these institutions. Asked to rate their confidence in a number of different institutions, the percentage of respondents who had a great deal of confidence was as follows:

The military-- 36

The police-- 24

The church-- 26

Banks-- 17

The presidency-- 23

U.S. Supreme Court-- 16

The medical system--15

The public schools-- 16

Criminal justice system-- 10

Organized labor-- 12

Congress-- 11

Television news-- 11

Newspapers-- 9

Big business-- 7

HMOs-- 6



How do we repair the breach of public trust? We cannot pass laws that will change people’s hearts. Trust must be built by consistent character. There is a strong role for the Christian church. As followers of Christ we must be people of character, demonstrate and teach ethical behavior, and call to account those who undermine the institutions God has established.

--James Jewell

Puritanism and America

America is unpopular around the world because its national soul is too Puritan, claims David Gelernter in a article in Commentary. Anti-Americanism around the world is a reaction to American arrogance grounded in a religion called Americanism, which has replaced Puritanism, he writes.



My critique of this article begins with the first word. I don’t agree with the premise of broad anti-Americanism. Although there are “lesions of hatred” toward America, as Gelernter calls them, I believe this is largely official hatred toward America, not popular sentiment. (I’ve traveled to dozens of foreign countries and I have been surprised by the warmth with which I have been welcomed). Except those who get riled up in the Muslim world and liberal Europeans, the people of the world do not hate the American people. It is important to ask why there are those who do hate us, but we suffer when our leaders pursue a co-dependent foreign policy based on making sure people like us.



(It may be that we simply help other nations too much. “Why do you hate me?” the Chinese proverb goes. “I didn’t give you anything.” Moral debt can create animosity).



Although he tries hard to support his premise that Puritanism has become Americanism, and that Americanism is the new religion, the arguments are porous. The most important statement in the article, which must be heeded by those who seek to obliterate religious influence from the public square, reads:



"The Bible is not merely the fertile soil that brought Americanism forth. It is the energy source that makes it live and that thrive and that makes believing Americans willing to prescribe freedom, equality, and democracy even for a place like Afghanistan, once regarded as perhaps the remotest region on the face of the globe. If you undertake to remove Americanism from its native biblical soil, you had better connect it to some other energy source potent enough to keep its principles alive and blooming."



Religious faith has influenced American leaders at every juncture, and even leaders of marginal personal faith have used the religious imagery that has become a part of the lexicon of American politics. Gelernter cites many instances of these expressions of civil religion. While this is often reassuring to believers, it no more defines the true devotion of national opinionmakers than other rhetoric that is designed to capture the hearts of special interest groups.



Certainly the whole of biblical teachings, Old and New Testament, were an important part of the lives of our founders and of some of our leaders over the centuries. Christianity has had a profound impact on every institution. But our problem today is not that we are too much like the Puritans; it is that we are not enough like them.



Puritan thought is captured by the father of American congregationalism, John Cotton (1584-1652), whose writing on purposeful living was later secularized and distorted in such themes as “manifest destiny” and “the American dream.” He wrote:



"Even then when he serves man, he serves the Lord; he doth the work set before him, and he doth it sincerely and faithfully so as he may give account for it; and he doth it heavenly and spiritually. He uses the world as if he used it not. This is not the thing his heart is set upon; he looks at the world as at heaven. And therefore—that which follows upon this—he doth all comfortably, though he meet with little encouragements from man, though the more faithful service he doth, the less he is accepted; whereas an unbelieving heart would be discontented that he can find no acceptance, but all he doth is taken in the worst part.”



It is a word of encouragement for the Christian believer who in serving others is rejected by them. It is a directive to live for the Audience of One. And as America reaches out to the world, even today extendng hands of comfort to Muslims in Indonesia who tomorrow may wave fists of hate toward us, it is a good Puritan word to the nation.

--James Jewell

Blog Symposium at EO

It’s not too late to jump into a blog symposium that Joe Carter of the evangelical outpost is running. He hopes to make it a quarterly event. Joe is soliciting bloggers to write about an article in Commentary magazine that claims Americanism is the successor of Puritanism. (Joe also has a follow-up post.) It is a provocative article and worth writing about. Entries must be submitted before Tuesday, 11:59 PM CST. I’m working on something. Hope you will too.

--James Jewell

The Case for Judeo Christian Values

The most serious wars being fought in the world today don’t involve military hardware. In the battles that will shape the course of human history the weapons are ideas. The combatants are aligned by worldview, not geography or nationality. These epic contests will determine what value system humanity will embrace.



California-based radio talk show host Dennis Prager, one of the truly thoughtful conservative radio commentators, says there are essentially three competitors in this battle for men’s hearts and minds: European secularism, American Judeo-Christianity, and Islam. To that list I would add a fourth—Eastern Mysticism. (Having spent some time last year in Beijing, I learned that as the communists have sought to minimize religion, traditional spiritism and superstition are rampant. It has the people in virtual spiritual and emotional bondage).



Prager, a Jew, is beginning a series in his weekly column that will seek to make the case for Judeo-Christian values. Prager says in the first column in the series: “I believe [biblical values] are the finest set of values to guide the lives of both individuals and societies. Unfortunately, they are rarely rationally explained - even among Jewish and Christian believers, let alone to nonbelievers and members of other faiths."



In the January 4 column, Prager begins by citing the civilizing effect of Christianity. He writes:



Chesterton was right. The collapse of Christianity in Europe led to the horrors of Nazism and communism. And to the moral confusions of the present - such as the moral equation of the free United States with the totalitarian Soviet Union, or of life-loving Israel with its death-loving enemies.



The oft-cited charge that religion has led to more wars and evil than anything else is a widely believed lie. Secular successors to Christianity have slaughtered and enslaved more people than all religions in history (though significant elements within a non-Judeo-Christian religion - Islam - slaughter and enslave today, and if not stopped in Sudan and elsewhere could match Nazism or communism).



It will be worthwhile to follow the series. Those of us in the Christian community can lose site of the contributions and historic accomplishments of those whose lives have been guided by the teachings of Jesus and by the record of God’s dealings with His people, Israel.



On the Apostle Paul’s first visit to Europe, his opponents feared “these men who have turned the world upside down” (Acts 17:6). Throughout history, the followers of Christ have been world changing, but although feared even to this day, it has been a transformation of immense, and often unrecognized, value.

--James Jewell

God and the Tsunami: Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?

Where was God when the worst single-day natural disaster in history devastated the Indian Ocean rim, with horrific human consequences?



I believe the right answer is that God was on his throne, God was everywhere, God was available to the villager struggling for life, opening his arms to the dying child, and in the midst of the horror, God was in tears.



The questions are understandable because the power was so overwhelming only God could be seen in the waves. But where were the critics every day when the world was a beautiful place, when a child is born, when love is real, when life is good, when there is peace in the land? God is there, too, in the victories, the joys, and the everyday order of life. But our world often sees Him only in the fury.



Sound Familiar?

Why did God allow the tsunami to be so destructive and deadly? A Muslim cleric in the hardest-hit part of Indonesia thinks he knows. In this article, he says:



"God is angry with Aceh people, because most of them do not do what is written in the Koran and the Hadith," the collected sayings and actions of the prophet Muhammad, explained Cut Bukhaini, 35, an imam. "I hope this will lead all Muslims in Aceh to do what is in the Koran and its teachings. If we do so, God will be merciful and compassionate."



Pardon the comparison, but it sounds like Jerry Falwell blaming 9/11 on America’s moral decay.



A World Governed by Physical Laws

I found great wisdom in a post on the subject Where Was God? at Viewpoint. Stay with this one—it’s the best thing I’ve read this week on this subject:



Before going further, we should stipulate that although we hold that God is powerful enough to create universes, we do not hold that His power is unbounded. God's capabilities are constrained by, inter alia, His own nature, and one aspect of that nature is that it is rational and logical. God cannot act irrationally or illogically since to do so would be to put Himself in conflict with Himself. Thus God's power is such that He can do anything that is logically possible to do, i.e. God can do anything that does not entail a contradiction or a logically inconceivable state of affairs. For example, it is not within God's power to create a world in which it would be true to say that God did not create it. Nor is it within God's power today to create a state of affairs in which it would be true to say that the reader of these words never existed.



Perhaps one way to answer the question, then, is to suggest that it may not be possible, even for God, to create a world governed by physical laws in which there is no potential for harm. For example, any world governed by gravity and the law of momentum is going to contain within it the potential for people to fall and suffer injury. Thus the laws of gravity and momentum are not compossible with a world free of the potential for injury. Once God decided to create a world governed by laws, those laws entailed the possibility of harm.



Christian theology says that God created a world regulated by the laws of physics and indwelt that world with man, [God’s] presence suppressing or negating any harmful effects the expression of those laws may have had. Although the potential for harm existed, there was no disease, suffering, accident, or even death.



At some point, however, man betrayed the idyllic relationship that existed between himself and God. In an act of cosmic infidelity, man chose to use his freedom in a way, the only way, apparently, that God had forbidden in order to assert his autonomy and independence from God.



It was as if a good and faithful husband returned home to discover the love of his life in bed with his worst enemy.



From time to time that estrangement has terrible consequences. Usually those consequences are drawn out over months or years, like famines or epidemics of influenza or plague. Once in a while, though, they are compressed into relatively brief intervals of time, and it is human to wonder at such moments, where is God? Perhaps God is right at hand, weeping for a world which rejects and excludes Him one moment while blaming Him for not intervening to prevent our suffering the next.



Things I Do Not Understand

Drew in a Darn Floor piece finds a dearth of answers and takes a hard turn to faith. He writes:



I don't care for the notion that the tsunamis were God's vengeance, though the comparison above is certainly one worth thinking about. But I must not let myself leave God completely out of the picture.The elephant in my mind's living room is this: "Why does God allow these things to happen?" I can't give an answer. In fact, I'd be skeptical about any answer that didn't boil down to Job's response to God. Any response I could make would be speaking of things I do not understand. But I have to believe that God is still in control; that he is not powerless.



A great book if you're in the mood to ponder these things is Philip Yancey's Disappointment With God, in which Yancey delves into the questions raised by the story of Job. Yancey writes that Job is not really a book about suffering, but a book about faith in its starkest form. (It was through reading this book that Job became my favorite book of the Bible.)



Faith is easy in easy times. But faith isn't for the easy times. Faith is for those difficult times when our mere human reasoning throws down the gauntlet and demands answers. I think my only answer is that God is God and I am not. I cannot explain why he allowed this to happen. I cannnot explain why he allows pain and suffering of any kind. Flannery O'Connor once wrote that a God we understood would be less than ourselves. But I know that in this crisis, we are called to be God's hands and feet to the world.



I think that’s right. God will provide his own defense and, in a time of great anquish and suffering, our greatest contribution to the Kingdom is to provide help in his name.

--James Jewell

Evangelicals and Political Seduction

For leaders in the arenas of faith, the seduction of political power is among the strongest and most insidious of the temptations. This is particularly true for evangelical leaders, who for many years have believed that conservative values and concerns were not taken seriously by those in power. The suggestion that evangelical voters were central to the presidential election has the brethren pumped up and ready to call the shots.



In my predictions for 2005, I suggested that evangelicals would overplay their hand and, as a result, lose ground politically. I couldn’t envision that the first news story I’d read in the New Year, Evangelical Leader Threatens to Use His Political Muscle Against Some Democrats, would report on James Dobson’s appeal letter to Focus on the Family supporters, in which he promises "a battle of enormous proportions from sea to shining sea if President Bush fails to appoint strict constructionist jurists or if Democrats filibuster to block conservative nominees.”

Dobson wags his figure at the president, names six Senate Democrats from red states and threatens to unseat them, as Tom Daschle was tossed out.



The only people who should be unnerved by this are evangelical Christians, for the only likely damage will be to the church and its voice in a pluralistic culture. While I have not seen the Focus on the Family appeal letter, if the New York Times story is somewhat accurate, there are several concerns.



Not Special Interest Group

When the church presents its concerns as a laundry list of demands, we become a special interest group, and our price has been set. We lose our moral authority. Pay our price and we will be yours. Chuck Colson warned his brethren in "an open letter to the Christian church" last month against listing demands of the president or other elected officials. “To think that way demeans the Christian movement," Colson wrote. "We are not anybody's special interest group."



Blurred Focus

I know James Dobson. I’ve spent time with him, and I have admiration for much he has done to help families. Focus on the Family (which by the way is one of the great organization names, because the name states the mission) is a powerhouse advocate for the family. The radio program and Dobson’s books have helped millions of parents raise their families.



To the criticism that strong-arm politics demeans the church’s message, Dobson may claim that he is a psychologist and organizational leader, not a church leader. That’s not the way media portray Dobson, however. He’s seen as evangelical’s most influential leader. But if, indeed, he’s just speaking for his organization, then why has he become a political heavy? Is the American family in good shape? Have strong willed children been corralled? Are American marriages thriving? Is the nation saturated with biblical models of marriage and family?



If James Dobson wants to head another political action group, he should resign from Focus on the Family and allow the organization to return to its roots. He built his mailing list providing family counsel. To use it for political strong-arming is a bait and switch that hurts Focus, and the image of the Christian organizations generally.



Lousy Politics

If the purpose of the Dobson’s letter (and evidently it was leaked or given to media in advance of its mailing) was to frighten the named Democratic senators, the strategy is wrongheaded. The correlation of the million people on the Dobson mailing list and the people who voted for Democratic Senators would not be, as they say in academia, statistically significant. The Dobson evangelicals are already in the Republican tent. Is anyone else going to join them? Belligerence will fire up the zealots, but it won’t attract potentially sympathetic fence-sitters.



Most evangelical leaders who have made political pronouncements since the election fail to recognize that the swing voting bloc was a values collation, not an evangelical majority. Evangelicals need to find common cause with the rest of the coalition to maintain their voice.



Sleeping with the Handmaiden

An evangelical leader tells privately of his days as a hardnosed political operative, prior to his conversion, when he had a plaque over his bar that read: “When you have them by the (male genitalia), their hearts and minds will follow.” While he was not espousing that philosophy for the church, in the early days of the New Year, it seems to be the Dobson strategy.



Evangelicals are dissatisfied and impatient with the spiritual direction of the nation, as they should be. As Christians, we are called to preach, and bear witness, and pray, and work for change. But we must guard against the error of Abraham, who when impatient with progress on God’s promise of an heir, slept with Hagar, the handmaiden. We struggle with the sons of Ishmael today.



As Christians, we have responsibility to remain active in the political process. But cultural change will come from the inside, by the truth being spoken in love, by the transformation of hearts and minds. Our Christian leaders must resist the handmaiden of political seduction.

--James Jewell

A Mongolian Night

As the temperatures drops and the snow flies I think back one year, when we traveled literally to the other side of the world, to the nation of Mongolia. We went to observe the work of LifeQwest, the most active and effective Christian ministry in Mongolia. Based in Dallas, LifeQwest is a hands-on, incarnational ministry that is a source of hope in what had previously appeared to be a God-forsaken land.



My report on the church in Mongolia appears in the January 2005 edition of Christianity Today. I can share here my reflections on one night when we visited the children of Mongolia:



It is a uniquely Mongolian night. As a huge red-ball sun sets through the brown haze shrouding the frozen Mongolian capital of Ulaan Bataar (UB), the sprawling city ringed by majestic snow covered mountains prepares for a winter night. Many of the nearly one million people crowd into crumbling Soviet-era apartment buildings, heated by two immense power plants that belch smoke into the valley. Others huddle into small hovels that climb the hills on the outskirts of the city, burning coal and wood fires to ward off the deadly onslaught of temperatures that will sink below negative 30 F.



Four Horsemen

The proud central Asian descendents of Genghis Khan are struggling to rise above centuries of nomadic existence marked by warfare and superstition, and 70 years of Soviet domination, brutality, and neglect. The democracy movement that was massacred on the bricks of Tiananmen Square 15 years ago last summer made its way to Beijing via Mongolia, where 70 years of communism was replaced by democracy the year before.



For thousands of Mongolian children, the struggle is intense and deadly. Stop along the streets of the city and look into the stairwells, sewers, and open markets and you will see the heartbreak of Mongolia—its abandoned street children. There are an estimated 3,000 children living on the streets of the Mongolian capital, the victims of an economy in crisis and a society adrift. The harshness of the north Asian night puts them at risk. If they fail to find shelter through the long winter night, they will freeze to death. Their daily existence is a life and death battle against the four horsemen of the Mongolian apocalypse: cold, hunger, abuse, and hopelessness.



Mongolian children have a natural exuberance. They are polite and friendly, and they smile easily. But look into the eyes of abandoned Mongolia children and you will see a chill that penetrates deep into their souls.



Visiting the Dump

As dusk turns to early dark, garbage trucks race up a winding, gutted dirt road through neighborhoods of small, dilapidated homes barely visible through the smoky air. At the top of the hill is the city dump and a surreal, apocalyptic vision of street urchins huddling around open fires, sorting through trash heaps strewn across a barren landscape. The boys throw themselves at the passing trash lorries, hanging on to anything they can grasp to ride to the area where the new trash is being dumped. This gives the boys who have successfully hitched a ride first dibs on the newly arrived booty. They are searching for pieces of metal, glass bottles, cans, or anything else that can be resold.



Even with the temperature descending from rigidly cold to insanely glacial, the children are not bundled as Western visitors are—in polar jackets, thermal underwear, fur-lined boats and thinsulate gloves. The kids have an extra layer of ragged clothing or at best a light winter coat, thin gloves, and some with tennis shoes. It seems impossible that they could withstand the cold as they wait for the next trash truck and stand sorting through the refuse that contains their dubious booty.



These are street children and the children of the neighborhood down the hill who are scrapping for a few extra cents for themselves or their families. A police officer talks with the children about the child identification center and how they can get out of the cold. Members of a church group invite one of the boys to have dinner with them, but he refuses. It is difficult to know why he would turn down a free, warm meal. He may be afraid of people from outside his neighborhood. It seemed right to ask.



Midnight Visit to the Underground Children

When winter temperatures drop to unbearable levels, the underground system of hot water pipes provides a subterranean labyrinth of survival throughout the frozen city. After 10 p.m., a former street kid led a group to several underground pipe junctions where children spend the night. In one, eight children—seven boys and one girl, all under 16—were tucked into openings and crevices over, under, and around the huge water pipes. After spending the day in the open markets, these underground children find a warm place to sleep in the junction sewers. Underground, the stench of sewage fills your nostrils and clings to your clothes. The children are dirty, their filthy hair tucked under stocking caps. (Some with the Nike swoosh, which has made it to the UB underground).



A Response by the Church in Mongolia

As Mongolia lurched from the dreary certainties of communism to the risks of capitalism in the early 1990s, its children suffered. As government subsidies dried up, the “vodka culture” left by the Soviets kicked in—adding a rise in domestic violence to the country’s array of social ills. With the barely visible social service structure unable to provide much help to the kids of the streets, Christian organizations and the fledgling national church started programs in the major cities.



“As we began planting churches in 1996, we kept discovering the desperate needs of these children and the lack of lifesaving services of any kind,” said Jerry Smith, head of LifeQwest, which rescues children and assists families in the Mongolian cities of Darkhan and UB.



Finding New Hope on a Gray Canvas

There are brilliant strands of hope breaking through the gray despair of a nation struggling to find its way without destroying its children. Fifteen youngsters swarm visitors to an apartment home in Darkhan as a newly rescued child is brought to join their family of orphans and abandoned children. The bounding children are animated and healthy, and they practice their English on anyone who will listen. They are the residents of one of five children’s homes run by LifeQwest. Although officially full, they never turn away a child that has been swept off the streets.



Their new sister is a four-year-old girl with closely cropped hair and an earnest, anticipatory look. She didn’t know her name, so she was given the name Shanea, which means “new.” Shanea was found with a group of children in the market, an open-air series of fruit and sundry stands in an area that is greasy and cluttered like the back lot of a factory. She was abandoned by her mother, left to fend with the band of children skulking in the cold.



Fortunately, this group of Mongolia Christians swept her up and brought her to a new place where she will be cared for, nurtured, and loved. There are huge societal ills to cure, but in the lives of rescued children and the efforts of a young national church, the journey to a Mongolian morning is beginning.

--James Jewell