Who would you guess is the pastor of the largest church in Europe? The rector of a soaring cathedral in England, the bishop of a historic diocese in Italy, or the pastor of a solid Lutheran church in Germany? None of the above. It is the Nigerian-born pastor of the independent charismatic God's Embassy in Kiev--with 25,000 members in the capital city and 100,000 members throughout Ukraine.
His name is Pastor Sunday Adelaja, and as he focuses on expansion in the U.S., he is the newest client of Rooftop MediaWorks.
Here's more information:
• Sunday Adaleja (pronounced add-Elijah) is using the one-year mark prior to the 2008 presidential elections to challenge the evangelical church in the U.S. into more enthusiastic involvement in the political process during this election cycle. He speaks from experience: No fewer than 600 parishioners from the membership of his Ukraine church ran for public office in the last elections. One is now the mayor of Kiev, a city of four million; another is chief justice of the Supreme Court of Ukraine.
• Adaleja’s church in the Ukraine was instrumental in national transformation by helping to spearhead a peaceful political and social revolution known as the “Orange Revolution” that changed the political landscape of Ukraine. In the 2004 Revolution, more than 4,000 Embassy of God members prayed and fasted in the 12-day standoff before the first presidential runoff was judged invalid. They also donated food, clothing, and tents to the thousands of demonstrators camped in Kiev's freezing Independence Square.
• In light of his involvement in confronting the corruption of the Russian-supported candidate in Ukraine and organizing his church in the Orange Revolution, Adelaja provides an expert perspective on the Russian election in December and on the machinations of President Putin.
• Church growth experts consider Adelaja’s Embassy of God to be one of the fastest-growing and most influential churches in the world. The local church in Kiev has 30,000 members, and there are some 600 affiliated churches in 30 countries, including the U.S.
Adaleja is announcing new endeavors in the U.S., including:
• God’s Embassy currently has 22 churches in the U.S., and is planning a major expansion next year.
• The Synergize! Pastors Conference on January 29-31, 2008 at Mount Paran Church in Atlanta will feature more than 35 renowned pastors and leaders, who will teach on strategies to build churches and reach unchurched people. The organizers say there are one billion Christians on earth today and have as their goal to bring the second billion to faith in Christ.
• A new book by Sunday Adelaja, Church Shift, will be released in the U.S. on February 8, 2008. This book is accompanied by a workbook that helps local churches affect society.
--Debbie Payton
29 Kasım 2007 Perşembe
19 Eylül 2007 Çarşamba
EVANGELICAL ENVIRONMENTALISTS AREN’T THREATENED BY SECULARISTS
Just before arriving at an environmental stewardship conference at the Boise Vineyard church, I read a column by Bryan Fischer, executive director of the Idaho Values Alliance, on the Renew America Website that purports to contrast the worldviews of the Judeo-Christian tradition and environmentalism. His goal is to show that evangelicals could not work on environmental issues without, eventually, being co-opted by the often-secular environmentalists.
In the process, Fischer demonstrates that he knows very little about many environmentalists and even less about evangelicals who see creation care as a part of their Christian stewardship.
Fischer is correct when he writes that there are profound differences between the worldviews of radical environmentalists and biblically faithful Christians. Where he is wrong is in his assumption that Christians who are concerned about the environment have a different worldview than other evangelicals. We agree with the fundamentals of Judeo-Christian tradition that Fischer lists; in fact, they form the heart of our contention for creation care.
• We must worship the Creator God, not the creation.
• We must protect the environment in obedience to God and for the good of His people, now and for generations to come.
• We are pro-family and we believe that God wants us to raise up thriving families, and to nurture children to become followers of Jesus. We don’t believe in any of the population control rhetoric of some on the left.
• We believe that God told man to tend His garden, to be good stewards, and to reconcile all creation to Himself.
Those of us who are evangelical in our convictions and worldview feel no pressure whatsoever to adjust our beliefs to match those of secular environmentalists. In fact, we’re challenging those who have strayed from God and sought solace in nature to recognize the Creator God, and to understand that environmental degradation is an offense to God and a great danger to His children.
We have a wonderful soapbox to call on the world to worship God, to protect the vulnerable people who will be most threatened by pollution and climate change, and to care for the whole of God’s magnificent Creation. When was the last time we had a chance to made that declaration in the New York Times and other national mainstream media?
Evangelical environmentalists stand astride a great divide between the secular environmentalists who have ignored the Creator and evangelical critics who have ignored His creation. We call for the church to “be still and know that [God] is God” and that “[He] will be exalted in the earth” (Ps. 46:10,12). He calls for us to put that truth into practice.
That is the message of the Tending the Garden conference this week in Boise, and it is a bold proclamation of the evangelical creation care movement, a movement that is growing in numbers and influence and is not at all in danger of being absorbed by secular environmentalists, whose worldview provides no hope and no future.
--Jim Jewell
In the process, Fischer demonstrates that he knows very little about many environmentalists and even less about evangelicals who see creation care as a part of their Christian stewardship.
Fischer is correct when he writes that there are profound differences between the worldviews of radical environmentalists and biblically faithful Christians. Where he is wrong is in his assumption that Christians who are concerned about the environment have a different worldview than other evangelicals. We agree with the fundamentals of Judeo-Christian tradition that Fischer lists; in fact, they form the heart of our contention for creation care.
• We must worship the Creator God, not the creation.
• We must protect the environment in obedience to God and for the good of His people, now and for generations to come.
• We are pro-family and we believe that God wants us to raise up thriving families, and to nurture children to become followers of Jesus. We don’t believe in any of the population control rhetoric of some on the left.
• We believe that God told man to tend His garden, to be good stewards, and to reconcile all creation to Himself.
Those of us who are evangelical in our convictions and worldview feel no pressure whatsoever to adjust our beliefs to match those of secular environmentalists. In fact, we’re challenging those who have strayed from God and sought solace in nature to recognize the Creator God, and to understand that environmental degradation is an offense to God and a great danger to His children.
We have a wonderful soapbox to call on the world to worship God, to protect the vulnerable people who will be most threatened by pollution and climate change, and to care for the whole of God’s magnificent Creation. When was the last time we had a chance to made that declaration in the New York Times and other national mainstream media?
Evangelical environmentalists stand astride a great divide between the secular environmentalists who have ignored the Creator and evangelical critics who have ignored His creation. We call for the church to “be still and know that [God] is God” and that “[He] will be exalted in the earth” (Ps. 46:10,12). He calls for us to put that truth into practice.
That is the message of the Tending the Garden conference this week in Boise, and it is a bold proclamation of the evangelical creation care movement, a movement that is growing in numbers and influence and is not at all in danger of being absorbed by secular environmentalists, whose worldview provides no hope and no future.
--Jim Jewell
14 Eylül 2007 Cuma
Early Thoughts on Election 2008
It’s after Labor Day, and I think every serious candidate who is going to get in is in; so it may be time to begin writing more about 2008. At least today.
As a conservative pragmatist, evangelical Christian, and an increasingly rare supporter of President Bush, what do I want in the next president?
I want sound conservative policy that seeks to limit the role of government, accentuates the value of personal accountability and responsibility, recognizes the values of the free market, and respects the role of spiritually infused moral character in the maintenance of a civil society--and in forging a balance between order and freedom.
One Nation, Speaking English
I want the president to seek to maintain the values and identity of America by addressing the central issue of domestic policy, the control of national borders, immigration—legal and illegal—and the return of the melting pot, not a cultural Balkanization that destroys nationhood. Making English the national language would be a nice touch, and important to this goal.
Keep Battling Jihadism
The new president must recognize that the central international issue is the isolation and discrediting of radical Islam and jihadism, and the defeat of the terrorists that emerge. My president should acknowledge that Iraq is a necessary part of that battle.
The president cannot shrink at the possibility that we must take solid, even military action, against Iran, which is clearly toxic and dangerous and the leading sponsor of international terrorism. We must show Iran strength; they think we are weak.
Total Life Ethic
I want the president to have a total life ethic. For me that starts with persuading people to stop choosing abortion. That is the most important priority, and it is separate from our need to reverse Roe v Wade, which I also believe needs to be done.
(Could just one national Democratic candidate mount a campaign to stop women from choosing abortions? The right to choose has to include the right to choose life. That would be a start; but no one has staked out that ground).
I believe part of a total life ethic is raising the standard for application of the death penalty. I like Romney’s standard of “no doubt” on death penalty, which I have written on.
We need to assure a healthy life for our children by reversing environmental degradation and resulting climate change. My favorite candidate will stop ignoring sound and widely accepted science--the overwhelming proof that human-induced global warming is a problem. Just what the solution should be can be debated; but to deny that it is a problem means the candidate is playing to what he thinks the based wants to hear; pure and simple. The Republicans need to talk more about climate; it is hard to discern their opinions, although from what I’ve seen, Guiliani and Huckabee seem the most open to finding solutions.
Marriage is the Sacred Union of a Man and Woman
I think the president should lead the nation to assure that marriage is protected as the sacred bonding of a man and woman, grounded in faith, history, tradition, all that we have known for all time.
But I also would support states’ rights to establish civil unions between any two consenting adults of any gender. If we give two homosexuals special rights in a civil union, however, we need to also provide them to two heterosexual men who establish households, or a man and woman who set up a household but don’t marry (perhaps aren’t even sleeping together). It provides some benefit to those who in some way establish a stable household.
Democrats Fail on Almost Every Measure
None of the Democrats qualify because they’ve all taken the wrong position on Iraq and on abortion.
On the Republicans
I don’t care if Romney is Mormon. I just want him to be more human. His reaction to the Larry Craig incident was heartless; he feels like a Dukakis automan at times. Is it the Massachusetts air? I like his business sense and his innovation. He just needs to loosen up and be real.
I was a supporter of John McCain in 2000 He is an American hero; I like his candor and passion; I know all of the conservative complaints. I just think he is too old. The presidency is too hard; it makes young men old; it makes old men senile.
There is something very attractive about Guiliani’s strength and honesty. I agree with him on far fewer issues than most of the others, but I feel like he’d be a good president.
Fred Thompson looks like the president of the United States, and I like that he has been in the D.C. trenches as counsel to the Watergate committee. I like that he’s shown partisan independence enough to make his own party mad, but that he’s got a great conservative voting record. I don’t think federalism is the answer to as many things as Fred thinks it is—but there are far worse things in a candidate. He’s formidable, and if he can let his personality come through on the stump, and during debates (remember Bob Dole, who couldn’t), he can beat Hillbama.
I like everything I’ve read about Huckabee, except that he comes from Hope, Arkansas, which is kind of weird, with Bill Clinton and all. His Christian faith resonates; I like his openness on the environment. He supports the Fair Tax, which would change America for the better. Anyone who can conquer obesity and stay thin, has shown great strength and courage. That means more than he’s being given credit for. I just don’t think he has enough gravitas to make it. As I’ve said, Romney or Guiliani should select him as VP—for regional balance and all that Huckabee is.
Maybe Brownback another year. He’s a good guy.
I think a lot of Newt Gingrich—he is smarter than all of the rest of them-- but I don’t he can overcome the baggage and I don’t think he’ll jump in.
--Jim Jewell
As a conservative pragmatist, evangelical Christian, and an increasingly rare supporter of President Bush, what do I want in the next president?
I want sound conservative policy that seeks to limit the role of government, accentuates the value of personal accountability and responsibility, recognizes the values of the free market, and respects the role of spiritually infused moral character in the maintenance of a civil society--and in forging a balance between order and freedom.
One Nation, Speaking English
I want the president to seek to maintain the values and identity of America by addressing the central issue of domestic policy, the control of national borders, immigration—legal and illegal—and the return of the melting pot, not a cultural Balkanization that destroys nationhood. Making English the national language would be a nice touch, and important to this goal.
Keep Battling Jihadism
The new president must recognize that the central international issue is the isolation and discrediting of radical Islam and jihadism, and the defeat of the terrorists that emerge. My president should acknowledge that Iraq is a necessary part of that battle.
The president cannot shrink at the possibility that we must take solid, even military action, against Iran, which is clearly toxic and dangerous and the leading sponsor of international terrorism. We must show Iran strength; they think we are weak.
Total Life Ethic
I want the president to have a total life ethic. For me that starts with persuading people to stop choosing abortion. That is the most important priority, and it is separate from our need to reverse Roe v Wade, which I also believe needs to be done.
(Could just one national Democratic candidate mount a campaign to stop women from choosing abortions? The right to choose has to include the right to choose life. That would be a start; but no one has staked out that ground).
I believe part of a total life ethic is raising the standard for application of the death penalty. I like Romney’s standard of “no doubt” on death penalty, which I have written on.
We need to assure a healthy life for our children by reversing environmental degradation and resulting climate change. My favorite candidate will stop ignoring sound and widely accepted science--the overwhelming proof that human-induced global warming is a problem. Just what the solution should be can be debated; but to deny that it is a problem means the candidate is playing to what he thinks the based wants to hear; pure and simple. The Republicans need to talk more about climate; it is hard to discern their opinions, although from what I’ve seen, Guiliani and Huckabee seem the most open to finding solutions.
Marriage is the Sacred Union of a Man and Woman
I think the president should lead the nation to assure that marriage is protected as the sacred bonding of a man and woman, grounded in faith, history, tradition, all that we have known for all time.
But I also would support states’ rights to establish civil unions between any two consenting adults of any gender. If we give two homosexuals special rights in a civil union, however, we need to also provide them to two heterosexual men who establish households, or a man and woman who set up a household but don’t marry (perhaps aren’t even sleeping together). It provides some benefit to those who in some way establish a stable household.
Democrats Fail on Almost Every Measure
None of the Democrats qualify because they’ve all taken the wrong position on Iraq and on abortion.
On the Republicans
I don’t care if Romney is Mormon. I just want him to be more human. His reaction to the Larry Craig incident was heartless; he feels like a Dukakis automan at times. Is it the Massachusetts air? I like his business sense and his innovation. He just needs to loosen up and be real.
I was a supporter of John McCain in 2000 He is an American hero; I like his candor and passion; I know all of the conservative complaints. I just think he is too old. The presidency is too hard; it makes young men old; it makes old men senile.
There is something very attractive about Guiliani’s strength and honesty. I agree with him on far fewer issues than most of the others, but I feel like he’d be a good president.
Fred Thompson looks like the president of the United States, and I like that he has been in the D.C. trenches as counsel to the Watergate committee. I like that he’s shown partisan independence enough to make his own party mad, but that he’s got a great conservative voting record. I don’t think federalism is the answer to as many things as Fred thinks it is—but there are far worse things in a candidate. He’s formidable, and if he can let his personality come through on the stump, and during debates (remember Bob Dole, who couldn’t), he can beat Hillbama.
I like everything I’ve read about Huckabee, except that he comes from Hope, Arkansas, which is kind of weird, with Bill Clinton and all. His Christian faith resonates; I like his openness on the environment. He supports the Fair Tax, which would change America for the better. Anyone who can conquer obesity and stay thin, has shown great strength and courage. That means more than he’s being given credit for. I just don’t think he has enough gravitas to make it. As I’ve said, Romney or Guiliani should select him as VP—for regional balance and all that Huckabee is.
Maybe Brownback another year. He’s a good guy.
I think a lot of Newt Gingrich—he is smarter than all of the rest of them-- but I don’t he can overcome the baggage and I don’t think he’ll jump in.
--Jim Jewell
5 Eylül 2007 Çarşamba
Today's Gem's from a Very Old Blogroll
As I near the third anniversary of The Rooftop Blog, I’ve decided to clean up the Blogroll. There are blogs on there I haven't visited in months; well, years. If they’re no longer interesting to me, off they go. At the same time, I’ll spend some time mentioning some interesting posts. Here we go:
I Wonder if it’s Superstition
21st Century Reformation, which has a nice mix of serious spirituality and pop interest, says Steve Wonder’s Superstition is the best ever, and points to a fun YouTube clip of a performance. Remind me to tell you sometime about the free concert Stevie Wonder did for me years ago at the Baltimore Penitentiary that cost me $25,000.
If It Was Only Flatulence
A Red Mind in a Blue State muses
That would make things a lot easier. But, alas, it’s us—which makes the club less desirable.
Blood and Fire
Adrian Warnock in the UK still appreciates great old hymns. Here’s one by William Booth, founder of The Salvation Army.
One stanza:
Diamond in the Rough
For some reason, this actually brings tears to your eyes.
The Miracle of Grace, in Washington
Beyond the Rim cites Peggy Noonan’s call for grace in response to the Sept. Iraq report.
It will take something that miraculous to keep it from becoming just another political football.
--Jim Jewell
I Wonder if it’s Superstition
21st Century Reformation, which has a nice mix of serious spirituality and pop interest, says Steve Wonder’s Superstition is the best ever, and points to a fun YouTube clip of a performance. Remind me to tell you sometime about the free concert Stevie Wonder did for me years ago at the Baltimore Penitentiary that cost me $25,000.
If It Was Only Flatulence
A Red Mind in a Blue State muses
“Hearing all this green talk lately, Live Earth, etc. How delicious would it be if we eventually found out that global warming is caused by the flatulence of whales, manatees and baby seals, and that the only sure way to save the Earth is with a club?...”
That would make things a lot easier. But, alas, it’s us—which makes the club less desirable.
Blood and Fire
Adrian Warnock in the UK still appreciates great old hymns. Here’s one by William Booth, founder of The Salvation Army.
One stanza:
To make our weak hearts strong and brave:
Send the fire!
To live, a dying world to save:
Send the fire today!
Oh, see us on Your altar lay,
We give our lives to you today,
So crown the offering now we pray:
Send the fire today!
Send the fire today!
Send the fire today!
Diamond in the Rough
For some reason, this actually brings tears to your eyes.
The Miracle of Grace, in Washington
Beyond the Rim cites Peggy Noonan’s call for grace in response to the Sept. Iraq report.
It will take something that miraculous to keep it from becoming just another political football.
--Jim Jewell
30 Ağustos 2007 Perşembe
Green Evangelicals No One's Political Patsy: My Op-ed in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Those of you who have read my material over the last year know that our Rooftop MediaWorks has been handling communications for the national Evangelical Climate Initiative. And during the last six months, I have been serving as Campaign Director for the ECI.
In that role, I wrote an op-ed on how mainstream media and Democratic pundits have been wrongly assuming that green evangelicals have become liberal Democrats.
The op-ed is appearing on August 31 in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (ECI is headquartered in the Atlanta area).
The piece reads in part:
--Jim Jewell
In that role, I wrote an op-ed on how mainstream media and Democratic pundits have been wrongly assuming that green evangelicals have become liberal Democrats.
The op-ed is appearing on August 31 in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (ECI is headquartered in the Atlanta area).
The piece reads in part:
The clearest way to explain the majority of American evangelicals, including the new — often young — evangelicals is that they are increasingly embracing a total life ethic.
This new ethic still calls for protection of the unborn and of the unwanted through policies against abortion and euthanasia. But it also strives to protect the climate, and to help the poor and disadvantaged in the U.S. and in the vulnerable places of the world, such as Africa. The total life ethic seeks to protect the incubator and divinely designed cradle of human life, the family; but it also calls for human rights, freedom and the rewards of hard work. New evangelicals are reaching into new areas, but they don't stop preaching and demonstrating that fullness of life comes only through lives surrendered to and transformed by Jesus Christ.
--Jim Jewell
28 Ağustos 2007 Salı
Another Take on the Aguilera Pro-Life Story
A commenter from The Lurking Canary has taken a closer look at the story of Aguilera versus Amnesty's pro-abortion position.
--JWJ
--JWJ
27 Ağustos 2007 Pazartesi
Unexpected Pro-Life Activism: Artists Slam Amnesty's Abortion Shift
The last place I’d expect pro-life activism is among musicians outside of the Christian music world. But this article discusses the disgust of two singers, Christina Aguilera and Avril Lavigne over Amnesty International’s decision to support women’s access to abortion. Both singers have made statements against abortion, but are among contributors to an Amnesty CD released to raise money for survivors of the atrocities in Darfur.
--Jim Jewell
Aguilera, 26, is a devout American Catholic. She is reportedly expecting her first child and has taken part in a television show in which she interviewed a teenager who had kept her baby rather than have an abortion.
Lavigne, 22, is a French-Canadian from a tight-knit Christian family. Her song Keep Holding On is the backing track to a pro-life video on YouTube that declares “abortion is murder”.
--Jim Jewell
22 Ağustos 2007 Çarşamba
Inspiring Speeches: Washington, Bush, Colson, and Cuomo
I love soaring, poetic speeches, and I particularly appreciate beautifully written short speeches that inspire. I blogged on inspiring short speeches in November 2004
I’m thinking today of great speeches I’ve witnessed in person.
The Enduring Revolution
First, a speech by Charles Colson on September 2, 1993 after he was awarded the $1 million Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion, which he donated to the ministry of Prison Fellowship. Now defunct Moody magazine described (Nov. 8, 1993) the setting:
An excerpt:
Read the full speech, especially the masterful description of the Four Horsemen of the Modern Apocalypse.
A personal note: Jonathan Aitken related in his biography Charles Colson: A Life Redeemed, how I—as Colson’s executive assistant—employed some harmless yet somewhat Colsonian means to fill the Rockefeller Chapel for Chuck’s speech.
The Second Inaugural
The second speech on today’s list is George W. Bush’s 2nd Inaugural Address. My wife and I were on the Capitol lawn, close enough to be part of the event and see the participants, but honestly not close enough to see facial expressions, except on the big screen.
It was, I believe, every bit as masterful and soaring as Kennedy’s famous inaugural. Once people are done hating Bush, his second inaugural will be listed as one of the greatest presidential inaugurals in American history:
Excerpt:
Notice how Bush tapped Lincoln’s second inaugural for some language.
(Other than the fact that I heard both of these speeches in person, what do these two speeches have in common? This answer to this question is at the end of the post.)
Edwards/Cuomo
There’s been a lot of talk about the strength of John Edwards' Two Americas speech (regardless of what you think of encouraging class warfare) But notice how he tapped what many see as one of the finest political speeches of our era, Mario Cuomo’s Two Cities speech at the 1984 Democratic convention.
Excerpt:
The Most Important Forgotten Words of George Washington
The first George W. saved a young nation with the power of his words and his presence prior to the signing of the peace treaty of 1783. Restless American troops, unhappy with Congress, were scheming a military coup. Washington heard the rumors and surprised a room full of gathered officers, striding to the front of the room and speaking to them. The speech was evidently unremarkable, but what happened next was not:
American Rhetoric has its ranking of the Top 100 American speeches
Answer to the earlier question about Colson’s Templeton Address and Bush’s Second Inaugural: Both speeches were drafted by speechwriter Michael Gerson, who began his career as a writer for Colson immediately following his graduation from Wheaton College, and went on to write for the president. Any question about who wrote much of the tremendous, spiritually rich prose for Bush will be put to rest if you read The Enduring Revolution.
--Jim Jewell
I’m thinking today of great speeches I’ve witnessed in person.
The Enduring Revolution
First, a speech by Charles Colson on September 2, 1993 after he was awarded the $1 million Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion, which he donated to the ministry of Prison Fellowship. Now defunct Moody magazine described (Nov. 8, 1993) the setting:
“Prison Fellowship chairman Charles Colson faced a situation that mirrors what the church as a whole faces. People of several faiths, many of whom were attending the Parliament of the World's Religions, gathered at Rockefeller Chapel on the campus of the University of Chicago to hear an address on religious liberty. What do evangelicals have to say in a pluralistic setting? How do we talk about the cultural role of religion with those who worship other gods? As the winner of the 1993 Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion, Mr. Colson had earned the right to stand on the platform. The speech, titled The Enduring Revolution, is what he said when he got there."
An excerpt:
We stand at a pivotal moment in history, when nations around the world are looking westward. In the past five years, the balance of world power shifted dramatically. Suddenly, remarkably, almost inexplicably, one of history's most sustained assaults on freedom
collapsed before our eyes.
The world was changed, not through the militant dialectic of communism, but through the power of unarmed truth. It found revolution in the highest hopes of common men. Love of liberty steeled under the weight of tyranny; the path of the future was charted in prison cells.
This revolution's symbolic moment was May Day 1990. Protesters followed the tanks, missiles, and troops rumbling across Red Square. One, a bearded Orthodox monk, darted under the reviewing stand where Gorbachev and other Soviet leaders stood. He thrust a huge crucifix into the air, shouting above the crowd, "Mikhail Sergeyevich! Christ is risen!"
Gorbachev turned and walked off the platform.
Across a continent the signal went. In defiant hope a spell was broken. The lies of decades were exposed. Fear and terror fled. And millions awoke as from a long nightmare.
Their waking dream is a world revolution. Almost overnight the western model of economic, political, and social liberty has captured the imagination of reformers and given hope to the oppressed. We saw it at Tiananmen Square, where a replica of the Statue of Liberty, an icon of western freedom, became a symbol of Chinese hope. We saw it in Czechoslovakia when a worker stood before a desolate factory and read to a crowd, with tears in his eyes, the American Declaration of Independence.
This is one of history's defining moments. The faults of the West are evident -- but equally evident are the extraordinary gifts it has to offer the world. The gift of markets that increase living standards and choices. The gift of political institutions where power flows from the consent of the governed, not the barrel of a gun. The gift of social beliefs that encourage tolerance and individual autonomy.
Free markets. Free governments. Free minds.
Read the full speech, especially the masterful description of the Four Horsemen of the Modern Apocalypse.
A personal note: Jonathan Aitken related in his biography Charles Colson: A Life Redeemed, how I—as Colson’s executive assistant—employed some harmless yet somewhat Colsonian means to fill the Rockefeller Chapel for Chuck’s speech.
The Second Inaugural
The second speech on today’s list is George W. Bush’s 2nd Inaugural Address. My wife and I were on the Capitol lawn, close enough to be part of the event and see the participants, but honestly not close enough to see facial expressions, except on the big screen.
It was, I believe, every bit as masterful and soaring as Kennedy’s famous inaugural. Once people are done hating Bush, his second inaugural will be listed as one of the greatest presidential inaugurals in American history:
Excerpt:
We go forward with complete confidence in the eventual triumph of freedom. Not because history runs on the wheels of inevitability; it is human choices that move events. Not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation; God moves and chooses as He wills. We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind, the hunger in dark places, the longing of the soul. When our Founders declared a new order of the ages; when soldiers died in wave upon wave for a union based on liberty; when citizens marched in peaceful outrage under the banner "Freedom Now" - they were acting on an ancient hope that is meant to be fulfilled. History has an ebb and flow of justice, but history also has a visible direction, set by liberty and the Author of Liberty.
Notice how Bush tapped Lincoln’s second inaugural for some language.
(Other than the fact that I heard both of these speeches in person, what do these two speeches have in common? This answer to this question is at the end of the post.)
Edwards/Cuomo
There’s been a lot of talk about the strength of John Edwards' Two Americas speech (regardless of what you think of encouraging class warfare) But notice how he tapped what many see as one of the finest political speeches of our era, Mario Cuomo’s Two Cities speech at the 1984 Democratic convention.
Excerpt:
Ten days ago, President Reagan admitted that although some people in this country seemed to be doing well nowadays, others were unhappy, even worried, about themselves, their families, and their futures. The President said that he didn't understand that fear. He said, "Why, this country is a shining city on a hill." And the President is right. In many ways we are a shining city on a hill.
But the hard truth is that not everyone is sharing in this city's splendor and glory. A shining city is perhaps all the President sees from the portico of the White House and the veranda of his ranch, where everyone seems to be doing well. But there's another city; there's another part to the shining the city; the part where some people can't pay their mortgages, and most young people can't afford one; where students can't afford the education they need, and middle-class parents watch the dreams they hold for their children evaporate.
In this part of the city there are more poor than ever, more families in trouble, more and more people who need help but can't find it. Even worse: There are elderly people who tremble in the basements of the houses there. And there are people who sleep in the city streets, in the gutter, where the glitter doesn't show. There are ghettos where thousands of young people, without a job or an education, give their lives away to drug dealers every day. There is despair, Mr. President, in the faces that you don't see, in the places that you don't visit in your shining city.
In fact, Mr. President, this is a nation -- Mr. President you ought to know that this nation is more a "Tale of Two Cities" than it is just a "Shining City on a Hill."
The Most Important Forgotten Words of George Washington
The first George W. saved a young nation with the power of his words and his presence prior to the signing of the peace treaty of 1783. Restless American troops, unhappy with Congress, were scheming a military coup. Washington heard the rumors and surprised a room full of gathered officers, striding to the front of the room and speaking to them. The speech was evidently unremarkable, but what happened next was not:
Following his address Washington studied the faces of his audience. He could see that they were still confused, uncertain, not quite appreciating or comprehending what he had tried to impart in his speech. With a sigh, he removed from his pocket a letter and announced it was from a member of Congress, and that he now wished to read it to them. He produced the letter, gazed upon it, manipulated it without speaking. What was wrong, some of the men wondered. Why did he delay? Washington now reached into a pocket and brought out a pair of new reading glasses. Only those nearest to him knew he lately required them, and he had never worn them in public. Then he spoke: "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 act and statement by their venerated commander, coupled with remembrances of battles and privations shared together with him, and their sense of shame at their present approach to the threshold of treason, was more effective than the most eloquent oratory. As he read the letter to their unlistening ears, many were in tears from the recollections and emotions which flooded their memories. As Maj. Samuel Shaw, who was present, put it in his journal, " There was something so natural, so unaffected in this appeal as rendered it superior to the most studied oratory. It forced its way to the heart, and you might see sensibility moisten every eye."
Finishing, Washington carefully and deliberately folded the letter, took off his glasses, and exited briskly from the hall. Immediately, Knox and others faithful to Washington offered resolutions affirming their appreciation for their commander in chief, and pledging their patriotism and loyalty to the Congress, deploring and regretting those threats and actions which had been uttered and suggested. What support Gates and his group may have enjoyed at the outset of the meeting now completely disintegrated, and the Newburgh conspiracy collapsed.
American Rhetoric has its ranking of the Top 100 American speeches
Answer to the earlier question about Colson’s Templeton Address and Bush’s Second Inaugural: Both speeches were drafted by speechwriter Michael Gerson, who began his career as a writer for Colson immediately following his graduation from Wheaton College, and went on to write for the president. Any question about who wrote much of the tremendous, spiritually rich prose for Bush will be put to rest if you read The Enduring Revolution.
--Jim Jewell
Use Vick Case Visibility to Stop the Dogfighting Blood Sport
I can't think of much of anything more disgusting than organized dogfighting, except for humans being forced to kill or be killed as gladiators (or in modern day, as child soldiers).
I'm not a big animal rights guy, but senseless cruelty to animals is despicable and often a precursor to further violence.
So it's hard to feel a lot of compassion for multimillionaire Michael Vick who has squandered his career and reputation for a cruel blood sport. Even as an Atlantan, I've never been much of a Vick fan anyway. He has never demonstrated either class or character, even before the dogfighting debacle.
However, I've seen a lot of coverage that singles Vick out as a rare perpetrator of a weird and vicious crime. Unfortunately, as this article explains, dogfighting is widespread and as deeply rooted historically as it is troubling and nauseating.
The best outcome of this case would be a fresh focus on dogfighting and real enforcement of the laws against it. I'm not much on prison time for something like this, by the way. I'd like to see a more creative sanction for Vick, perhaps scooping dog poop at the pound for a year or two.
--Jim Jewell
I'm not a big animal rights guy, but senseless cruelty to animals is despicable and often a precursor to further violence.
So it's hard to feel a lot of compassion for multimillionaire Michael Vick who has squandered his career and reputation for a cruel blood sport. Even as an Atlantan, I've never been much of a Vick fan anyway. He has never demonstrated either class or character, even before the dogfighting debacle.
However, I've seen a lot of coverage that singles Vick out as a rare perpetrator of a weird and vicious crime. Unfortunately, as this article explains, dogfighting is widespread and as deeply rooted historically as it is troubling and nauseating.
The best outcome of this case would be a fresh focus on dogfighting and real enforcement of the laws against it. I'm not much on prison time for something like this, by the way. I'd like to see a more creative sanction for Vick, perhaps scooping dog poop at the pound for a year or two.
--Jim Jewell
20 Ağustos 2007 Pazartesi
Arctic Tale: The Icy Handiwork of God
Here's a review of the new film Arctic Tale by Rusty Pritchard, who I work with on creation care issues. He makes it clear in his review that this kid-friendly film is not an environmentalist screed, and that:
--JWJ
this is a documentary without the usual constant droning about the "work of evolution" (as though such inspiring ecologies could arise by accident). At the start of the film is a comment about the way these creatures are "designed" for their habitat, but the film doesn't make a big deal about that either.
If you have kids whose appreciation for Creation has not been diluted yet, you'll probably want the DVD when it comes out. But see it in the theater to fully appreciate the grandeur of the icy handiwork of God.
--JWJ
16 Ağustos 2007 Perşembe
A Republican Woman for 2008 Vice President
The two Democratic frontrunners for President and the four Republican frontrunners all have traits or histories that would have made them untenable in elections past: A former first lady, a Kenyan-American novice, a thrice married mayor, a Mormon, a septuagenarian, and a playboy actor. If Huckabee continues to ascend--a candidate for The Biggest Loser. Interesting times.
On the Republican side, there is one thing we know the candidate will be: a white male. From the standpoint of governing, the Republican running mate needs to be the best qualified public servant available. Of course, politics comes before governing—you have to get elected to have a chance to govern. So it is possible if not likely that the Republicans will need to balance their ticket to compete against a Dem ticket that is likely to be Hillary, or perhaps even Hillary and Obama.
Regional balance is one thing, and as I’ve said before, I’d love to see Rudy or Mitt select Mike Huckabee as VP. I like Huckabee very much, and the northeasterns need a southerner.
But do the Republicans need a woman, a black, or a black woman to balance Hillbama? If there was a clear selection among Republican women, “yes” would be an easy answer.
The first name on many tongues is Condoleezza Rice; first for president, which she apparently is not interested in; and now for VP, in which she probably is less interested
So where do the Republicans turn? Here are three possibilities:
Elizabeth Dole
Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Also here.
Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska. And here.
What women would you recommend as a Republican vice presidential candidate?
--JWJ
On the Republican side, there is one thing we know the candidate will be: a white male. From the standpoint of governing, the Republican running mate needs to be the best qualified public servant available. Of course, politics comes before governing—you have to get elected to have a chance to govern. So it is possible if not likely that the Republicans will need to balance their ticket to compete against a Dem ticket that is likely to be Hillary, or perhaps even Hillary and Obama.
Regional balance is one thing, and as I’ve said before, I’d love to see Rudy or Mitt select Mike Huckabee as VP. I like Huckabee very much, and the northeasterns need a southerner.
But do the Republicans need a woman, a black, or a black woman to balance Hillbama? If there was a clear selection among Republican women, “yes” would be an easy answer.
The first name on many tongues is Condoleezza Rice; first for president, which she apparently is not interested in; and now for VP, in which she probably is less interested
So where do the Republicans turn? Here are three possibilities:
Elizabeth Dole
Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Also here.
Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska. And here.
What women would you recommend as a Republican vice presidential candidate?
--JWJ
Democrats Stumbling on Faith; Candidates Trying God Talk
White House hopeful Joe Biden said that Democrats lost the last two presidential elections in part because they let themselves be portrayed as anti-God, FoxNews reports.
This was discussed on Hardball by Chris Matthews and Time magazine's Michael Duffy.
An important distinction is between political efforts to be seen as responsive to God's leading and respectful to people of genuine faith, and actually having those attributes. In this year's presidential debates and discussions, you can tell the candidates who have actively sought a relationship with God and those who have had a conversion--not on the way to Damascus, but on the way to Des Moines (as one candidate quipped).
Among those I've heard, Huckabee, Brownback, Romney and Obama (and maybe Edwards) are the only candidates who seem comfortable discussing spiritual matters. Great awkwardness from most other frontrunners: Clinton, Guiliani, Thompson, McCain.
--Jim Jewell
"Democrats have been too afraid to talk about faith, Biden said at a Rotary Club luncheon. But what voters really want to know is whether a president believes in something bigger than themselves and whether he or she respects the faith of others," he said.
This was discussed on Hardball by Chris Matthews and Time magazine's Michael Duffy.
MATTHEWS: Joe Biden, who tends to be very honest, whatever you think of him as the next president, although I think he‘s a fine guy, he very clearly said the other day, yesterday, that the people like Al Gore and John Kerry, the last two Democratic candidate for president, said—created an image that they were somehow—we‘re looking at it right now—that if they were—as he put it, when they‘re sitting next to the pew, that maybe he really doesn‘t respect your view.
In other words, they are not really religious people. They don‘t share your evangelical views and your deeply religious views. They are too secular.
DUFFY: Yes. Well, I think, for the last 25 years, Democrats have done everything they can to alienate religious voters, faith-minded voters. And the...
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: Not a smart move politically.
DUFFY: Oh, no. And it seemed to be part of the program. They did it to woo a secular left that they thought didn‘t want to have anything to do with that.
MATTHEWS: Was turned off by the religious people, yeah.
DUFFY: Starting with Jimmy Carter and...
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: I hear it.
DUFFY: Yes.
MATTHEWS: I have heard it years of...
DUFFY: Right. Absolutely.
MATTHEWS: ... people making fun of Jimmy—or Jerry Falwell and people like that. But you knew it was a broader brush than that.
DUFFY: Of course.
MATTHEWS: They were really making fun of the people in the churches, in the tents, in the mega-churches.
DUFFY: Right. It was a really stupid thing to do. And they have begun to realize that.
An important distinction is between political efforts to be seen as responsive to God's leading and respectful to people of genuine faith, and actually having those attributes. In this year's presidential debates and discussions, you can tell the candidates who have actively sought a relationship with God and those who have had a conversion--not on the way to Damascus, but on the way to Des Moines (as one candidate quipped).
Among those I've heard, Huckabee, Brownback, Romney and Obama (and maybe Edwards) are the only candidates who seem comfortable discussing spiritual matters. Great awkwardness from most other frontrunners: Clinton, Guiliani, Thompson, McCain.
--Jim Jewell
14 Ağustos 2007 Salı
Michael Gerson Both a Great Writer and a Man of Stellar Character
I know former Bush chief speech writer Michael Gerson well. He was on my staff (I was the chairman's chief of staff at Prison Fellowship when we hired Gerson out of Wheaton to write for Chuck Colson), and his exquisite writing skill is surpassed only by his intellect, strength of moral character, and devotion to God.
I don't believe any of Matthew Scully's complaints about Gerson; perhaps he wanted the Washington Post job Gerson got.
Reading this I remember how Colson would explain that when you work in the White House you're very careful to move along the hallways with your back to the wall--so your apparent friends and political allies don't stab you in the back.
Mike has figured out that the back stabbing can continue after you leave the White House.
--Jim Jewell
I don't believe any of Matthew Scully's complaints about Gerson; perhaps he wanted the Washington Post job Gerson got.
Reading this I remember how Colson would explain that when you work in the White House you're very careful to move along the hallways with your back to the wall--so your apparent friends and political allies don't stab you in the back.
Mike has figured out that the back stabbing can continue after you leave the White House.
--Jim Jewell
13 Ağustos 2007 Pazartesi
Are Hispanics the New Republicans?
Democrats hold an edge with Hispanics in national elections, but Latinos' growing tendency to register as independents and split their vote between parties is buoying Republican prospects for 2008, according to Fox News.
This is a nightmare for Democrats, but it is likely that Hispanics will move toward conservatism as they grow older, own property, and raise children. So if the Republicans don’t alienate the entire demographic group with careless rhetoric in the immigration debate, they will benefit. Don’t forget that the strongest foe of illegal immigration is a legal immigrant, so those trying to control the influx of illegals won’t lose Hispanic immigrants if they aren’t abusive and vindictive.
I'm finishing The Right Nation, by two Brits, John Micklethwait and Adrian Woodridge (2004). This related paragraph:
Could be a good trend for Republicans...
Or Republicans could be dead right on all aspects of the illegal immigrant debate, and perhaps even win on many fronts--and end up giving the Democrats a New Deal type lock on an entire segment of the population, and being out of power for the next couple of generations.
Something to think about.
--Jim Jewell
This is a nightmare for Democrats, but it is likely that Hispanics will move toward conservatism as they grow older, own property, and raise children. So if the Republicans don’t alienate the entire demographic group with careless rhetoric in the immigration debate, they will benefit. Don’t forget that the strongest foe of illegal immigration is a legal immigrant, so those trying to control the influx of illegals won’t lose Hispanic immigrants if they aren’t abusive and vindictive.
I'm finishing The Right Nation, by two Brits, John Micklethwait and Adrian Woodridge (2004). This related paragraph:
"[Republican optimists say] that Latinos are worthy strivers--hard working, God-fearing, family-oriented and upwardly mobile. They have the highest male workforce participation rate of any measured group--and one of the lowest incidences of trade union membership and welfare dependency (only 17 percent of immigrant Latinos in poverty collect welfare and 65 percent of poor blacks). Latinos are arguably the most family-oriented ethnic group in American society. They also have a marked propensity to start their own businesses and buy their own homes--both incubators of Republicanism."
Could be a good trend for Republicans...
Or Republicans could be dead right on all aspects of the illegal immigrant debate, and perhaps even win on many fronts--and end up giving the Democrats a New Deal type lock on an entire segment of the population, and being out of power for the next couple of generations.
Something to think about.
--Jim Jewell
Can Guiliani Find Middle Ground in Abortion Debate?
The Brody File has CBN video of Rudy Guiliani at an Iowa diner waxing on his NYC program to increase adoptions, and postulating that advancing adoption is fertile middle ground for abortion opponents and abortion proponents. As a father of two adopted children, I’m a fan of adoption, and I think it should be advanced, promoted and make a priority for people of all political stripes. Can a president advance adoption, beyond the bully pulpit? On the other hand, can a president stop abortions, beyond Supreme Court appointments?
I’m not sure there is middle ground in the abortion debate. Do enough Republicans think there is to give Guiliani a foothold here?
--Jim Jewell
I’m not sure there is middle ground in the abortion debate. Do enough Republicans think there is to give Guiliani a foothold here?
--Jim Jewell
11 Ağustos 2007 Cumartesi
Actions are Better than Offsets
In the category Walk the Talk, or Actions are Bettter than Offsets, or Politicians Make Bad Crusaders, or as Snopes titles it: Glass Houses (h/t: Dad Payton). Also here.
HOUSE # 1
House #1 A 20 room mansion ( not including 8 bathrooms ) heated by
natural gas. Add on a pool ( and a pool house) and a separate guest
house, all heated by gas. In one month this residence consumes more
energy than the average American household does in a year. The
average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2400. In
natural gas alone, this property consumes more than 20 times the
national average for an American home. This house is not situated
in a Northern or Midwester n 'snow belt' area. It's in the South.
HOUSE # 2
House #2 Designed by an architecture professor at a
leading national university. This house incorporates every
'green' feature current home construction can provide. The house is
4,000 square feet ( 4 bedrooms ) and is nestled on a high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat-pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F. ) heats the house in the winter and cools it in the summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas and it consumes one-quarter electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Surrounding flowers and shrubs native to the area enable the property to blend into the surrounding rural landscape.
Now the interesting payoff:
House #1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore. House #2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as "the Texas White House," it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.
The lesson: clean up your act before becoming a international spokesman for a cause to avoid the appearance of hyprocisy. Also: simplify, then buy offsets (and don't talk about it).
HOUSE # 1
House #1 A 20 room mansion ( not including 8 bathrooms ) heated by
natural gas. Add on a pool ( and a pool house) and a separate guest
house, all heated by gas. In one month this residence consumes more
energy than the average American household does in a year. The
average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2400. In
natural gas alone, this property consumes more than 20 times the
national average for an American home. This house is not situated
in a Northern or Midwester n 'snow belt' area. It's in the South.
HOUSE # 2
House #2 Designed by an architecture professor at a
leading national university. This house incorporates every
'green' feature current home construction can provide. The house is
4,000 square feet ( 4 bedrooms ) and is nestled on a high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat-pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F. ) heats the house in the winter and cools it in the summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas and it consumes one-quarter electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Surrounding flowers and shrubs native to the area enable the property to blend into the surrounding rural landscape.
Now the interesting payoff:
House #1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore. House #2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as "the Texas White House," it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.
The lesson: clean up your act before becoming a international spokesman for a cause to avoid the appearance of hyprocisy. Also: simplify, then buy offsets (and don't talk about it).
10 Ağustos 2007 Cuma
Washington Post Understates Evangelical Movement on Climate
An article titled "Warming Draws Evangelicals Into Environmental Fold" by Juliet Eilperin in the Aug. 8 Washington Post is a welcome look at Rev. Joel Hunter and his role in the growing consensus among evangelicals that Christian faithfulness must include responsible stewardship and protection of God's creation. But Eilperin's effort to tell a compelling story and to outline evangelical creation care quickly, leaves the impression that Rev. Hunter is walking this road alone, and that he's followig only British religious leaders.
In fact, Hunter became involved in climate policy as a signatory of the Evangelical Climate Initiative, a group of now 106 senior evangelical leaders who as a result of their commitment to Jesus Christ are calling for sound climate policy that will express a concern for the health and well being of our families today and for many generations. Here is the ECI statement that has captured this sentiment and was signed by 106 leaders.
(The public relations firm I head, Rooftop MediaWorks, is a partner with the Evangelical Climate Initiative and has handled the group's communications campaign.)
I regret that the article did not mention that the signatories of the ECI included perhaps the best known evangelical pastor in America, Rick Warren (Saddleback), as well as megachurch pastor Bill Hybels (Willowcreek), the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, Leith Anderson, the presidents of many Christian colleges and evangelical relief and development organizations, and several denominational leaders (here is a complete list of ECI Signatories).
Because the article is anecdotal, I've already seen blog responses that call this an indication of thin evangelical support for Christian action on climate and creation care. That impression is wrong. A national Ellison Research poll of evangelicals to be released next month (the top line results of which were part of a testimony by Jim Ball, president of the Evangelical Environmental Network, before the Senate Energy and Public Works Committee in June), showed that 70% of the evangelical population believes global warming will pose a serious threat to future generations, and 64% believe action should be taken immediately to curb global warming.
The Washington Post's coverage of evangelical movement on environmental issues may reveal its sympathy for the cause. But the Juliet Eilperin article actually understated the extent and momentum of evangelical action on climate and creation care. Today, evangelical leaders and the community are embracing biblically based creation care without abandoning their worldview and speaking on environmental issues with a unique evangelical voice.
--Jim Jewell
In fact, Hunter became involved in climate policy as a signatory of the Evangelical Climate Initiative, a group of now 106 senior evangelical leaders who as a result of their commitment to Jesus Christ are calling for sound climate policy that will express a concern for the health and well being of our families today and for many generations. Here is the ECI statement that has captured this sentiment and was signed by 106 leaders.
(The public relations firm I head, Rooftop MediaWorks, is a partner with the Evangelical Climate Initiative and has handled the group's communications campaign.)
I regret that the article did not mention that the signatories of the ECI included perhaps the best known evangelical pastor in America, Rick Warren (Saddleback), as well as megachurch pastor Bill Hybels (Willowcreek), the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, Leith Anderson, the presidents of many Christian colleges and evangelical relief and development organizations, and several denominational leaders (here is a complete list of ECI Signatories).
Because the article is anecdotal, I've already seen blog responses that call this an indication of thin evangelical support for Christian action on climate and creation care. That impression is wrong. A national Ellison Research poll of evangelicals to be released next month (the top line results of which were part of a testimony by Jim Ball, president of the Evangelical Environmental Network, before the Senate Energy and Public Works Committee in June), showed that 70% of the evangelical population believes global warming will pose a serious threat to future generations, and 64% believe action should be taken immediately to curb global warming.
The Washington Post's coverage of evangelical movement on environmental issues may reveal its sympathy for the cause. But the Juliet Eilperin article actually understated the extent and momentum of evangelical action on climate and creation care. Today, evangelical leaders and the community are embracing biblically based creation care without abandoning their worldview and speaking on environmental issues with a unique evangelical voice.
--Jim Jewell
9 Ağustos 2007 Perşembe
From WaPo: Sunni Fighters Seeking Alliances with U.S. Troops
Another news report--in the Washington Post-- with good news from Iraq, where Sunni fighters are recognizing the self interest in cooperating with U.S. troops and working toward influence in the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government.
--JWJ
--JWJ
8 Ağustos 2007 Çarşamba
A Summertime Brookings Bombshell on Iraq
I spent the last two weeks vacationing in the Finger Lakes region of upstate New York and on the Ohio shore of Lake Erie, doing all I could to keep my body in the sand, my face in a book, and my mind away from the worries of the workaday world.
So I'm just catching up with some of the news, and amazed by the source and content of the New York Times op-ed piece "A War We Just Might Win" on July 30 by Michael E. O'Hanlon and Kenneth M. Pollack of Brookings Institution.
(Much of my professional history was working with Prison Fellowship chairman Chuck Colson, who was accused by other Watergate defendants of conspiring or considering the bombing of Brookings Instition as a solution to its criticism of Nixon--or something like that. Colson is famous for quips that get him in trouble. I'm sure the Brookings comments was one of these. Today, I'm sure he's pleased by the report from Brookings).
The O'Hanlon and Pollack report is wonderful news, and it has great credibility because it comes from a think tank that leans left and from writers who have been critical of the war effort.
It would be fabulous for America and the world if they are right, and if the positive military news in Iraq continues. It is inconvenient for politicians and presidential candidates who have based their campaigns on bad war news and the call for withdrawal.
For me, the potential that the good news in Iraq could be enduring is far more important then the political embarassment for the (mostly) Democrats who are relying on failure in the Middle East.
Almost worth returning from vacation to see this good report. Almost.
--Jim Jewell
So I'm just catching up with some of the news, and amazed by the source and content of the New York Times op-ed piece "A War We Just Might Win" on July 30 by Michael E. O'Hanlon and Kenneth M. Pollack of Brookings Institution.
(Much of my professional history was working with Prison Fellowship chairman Chuck Colson, who was accused by other Watergate defendants of conspiring or considering the bombing of Brookings Instition as a solution to its criticism of Nixon--or something like that. Colson is famous for quips that get him in trouble. I'm sure the Brookings comments was one of these. Today, I'm sure he's pleased by the report from Brookings).
The O'Hanlon and Pollack report is wonderful news, and it has great credibility because it comes from a think tank that leans left and from writers who have been critical of the war effort.
It would be fabulous for America and the world if they are right, and if the positive military news in Iraq continues. It is inconvenient for politicians and presidential candidates who have based their campaigns on bad war news and the call for withdrawal.
For me, the potential that the good news in Iraq could be enduring is far more important then the political embarassment for the (mostly) Democrats who are relying on failure in the Middle East.
Almost worth returning from vacation to see this good report. Almost.
--Jim Jewell
7 Ağustos 2007 Salı
Olympics One Year Out: More on Pressuring China
More, in the Washington Post, on efforts to pressure China as the Beijing Olympics create a world stage.
6 Ağustos 2007 Pazartesi
Calling for an Evangelical Voice at Beijing Olympics
The Beijing Olympics may provide a prime target for protest for evangelical Christians, according to the International Herald Tribune. Three issues should be high on the Christian grievance agenda when athletes gather in a revitalized and polished Beijing in 2008.
--China must end its state sponsored persecution of Christian and grant total religious liberty if it is to be respected member of the international community.
--China should use its oil-buying leverage to pressure Sudan to end its sponsoring of bloodshed in Darfur.
--China must restrict its emission of CO2, which is contributing to global warming. China is now the leader CO2 polluter (the U.S. is 2nd).
--Jim Jewell
--China must end its state sponsored persecution of Christian and grant total religious liberty if it is to be respected member of the international community.
--China should use its oil-buying leverage to pressure Sudan to end its sponsoring of bloodshed in Darfur.
--China must restrict its emission of CO2, which is contributing to global warming. China is now the leader CO2 polluter (the U.S. is 2nd).
--Jim Jewell
19 Temmuz 2007 Perşembe
Compassionate Common Sense on Immigration
In a recent post about the broadening of the evangelical agenda I listed a number of legitimate concerns that have come to new prominence among evangelicals, including climate change, international aid, human rights and compassionate common sense in immigration.
It was that last one that got a response. (I’ve learned through my work with the Evangelical Climate Initiative it is usually climate change that stirs the pot). But immigration is one of the issues where the ideological purity police are prepared to attack if the exact formulation of concern is not expressed.
I cannot believe how badly the politicians and bureaucrats have allowed de facto open immigration to change our nation. I cannot be strong enough in my view that our borders should be the most secure in the world. If we are to continue to be the most generous world citizens (by far), our nation must be economically strong and safe from attack. Those who purposefully look the other way because they believe we owe charity to our poorer neighbors have lost sight of the fact that without strong and secure foundations we will become more vulnerable in every way, and our provision of aid and protection to much of the world will be in jeopardy.
Just do whatever is necessary to stop illegal immigration. Everyone knows it can be done; only some have the will to make it happen,
I do not believe it is reasonable, however, to send every illegal alien home; that is an unworkable solution. We have to recognize that a massive new “trail of tears” to Mexico will not happen and would be a tragedy of monumental proportions.
Yes, I am in favor of some path to permanence, even citizenship, for the illegals in our country. Many should be sent to their home countries because they are a menace to our nation. But most are hardworking, industrious and law-abiding. (I know, being here illegally is not legal; but we are a nation of law-breakers, and we all know it. (Oh, you drive 55?)
We do need to focus on both humanity and nationality. To do so is Christian, and for politicians it is also wise. As Michael Gerson wrote in the Washington Post, nativism will not win elections.
It’s a mess that has no ideal solutions. Seal the borders and keep them that way, or nothing else makes sense. With serious security in place, we can be free to show compassion and common sense.
--Jim Jewell
It was that last one that got a response. (I’ve learned through my work with the Evangelical Climate Initiative it is usually climate change that stirs the pot). But immigration is one of the issues where the ideological purity police are prepared to attack if the exact formulation of concern is not expressed.
I cannot believe how badly the politicians and bureaucrats have allowed de facto open immigration to change our nation. I cannot be strong enough in my view that our borders should be the most secure in the world. If we are to continue to be the most generous world citizens (by far), our nation must be economically strong and safe from attack. Those who purposefully look the other way because they believe we owe charity to our poorer neighbors have lost sight of the fact that without strong and secure foundations we will become more vulnerable in every way, and our provision of aid and protection to much of the world will be in jeopardy.
Just do whatever is necessary to stop illegal immigration. Everyone knows it can be done; only some have the will to make it happen,
I do not believe it is reasonable, however, to send every illegal alien home; that is an unworkable solution. We have to recognize that a massive new “trail of tears” to Mexico will not happen and would be a tragedy of monumental proportions.
Yes, I am in favor of some path to permanence, even citizenship, for the illegals in our country. Many should be sent to their home countries because they are a menace to our nation. But most are hardworking, industrious and law-abiding. (I know, being here illegally is not legal; but we are a nation of law-breakers, and we all know it. (Oh, you drive 55?)
We do need to focus on both humanity and nationality. To do so is Christian, and for politicians it is also wise. As Michael Gerson wrote in the Washington Post, nativism will not win elections.
It’s a mess that has no ideal solutions. Seal the borders and keep them that way, or nothing else makes sense. With serious security in place, we can be free to show compassion and common sense.
--Jim Jewell
17 Temmuz 2007 Salı
Evangelicals at a Crossroads?
David Brody at The Brody File is thinking about the passions and political influence of evangelicals. He writes:
I'm working with a number of the leaders who are what the New York Times called recently "the new breed of evangelicals," and I do not believe that this new breed is any less passionate about the strong issues of the last 25 years--abortion and traditional marriage. They are now also passionate about new issues--such as the environment and international aid--that broaden the agenda. But it is wrong to assume that their new interests in any way change their passion on abortion and family. That's like saying that a new baby in the family lessens a parent's love for the other children.
However, there are very few evangelicals who are going to vote for a pro-abortion candidate because of of his or her stance on climate or action on Darfur. Simple as that. There are some, but not enough to make a political difference.
But candidates who are pro-life and protect the traditional family, and are concerned about climate change, genocide in Africa, and compassionate common sense on immigration and other issues--they can count on the passionate support of a whole new breed of evangelicals. And it is a breed that is growing, including the next generation of voters.
--Jim Jewell
The bread and butter issues of abortion and traditional marriage have started to become watered down. Now, all indications are that Evangelicals are becoming passionate about other issues too. Immigration, the environment and maybe, most of all terrorism.
I'm working with a number of the leaders who are what the New York Times called recently "the new breed of evangelicals," and I do not believe that this new breed is any less passionate about the strong issues of the last 25 years--abortion and traditional marriage. They are now also passionate about new issues--such as the environment and international aid--that broaden the agenda. But it is wrong to assume that their new interests in any way change their passion on abortion and family. That's like saying that a new baby in the family lessens a parent's love for the other children.
However, there are very few evangelicals who are going to vote for a pro-abortion candidate because of of his or her stance on climate or action on Darfur. Simple as that. There are some, but not enough to make a political difference.
But candidates who are pro-life and protect the traditional family, and are concerned about climate change, genocide in Africa, and compassionate common sense on immigration and other issues--they can count on the passionate support of a whole new breed of evangelicals. And it is a breed that is growing, including the next generation of voters.
--Jim Jewell
16 Temmuz 2007 Pazartesi
Tell North Korea to Free Son Jong Nam, A Christian Marked for Death Because He Shared His Faith
International inspectors reported this weekend that North Korea has shut down a key nuclear reactor, making it eligible for international economic aid. But the world should insist that the North Koreans show progress in another area--religious liberty. Voice of the Martyrs, a ministry on behalf of persecuted Christians, is publicizing the case of Son Jong Nam, a North Korean who faces possible execution for sharing his faith. (h/t: FRC) Last week, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) joined Mr. Son's brother at a press conference at the National Press Club here in Washington to draw attention to the case. (News release here). In 1998, Mr. Son defected from North Korea to China, where he became a Christian after meeting a South Korean missionary. But in 2001 the Chinese deported him back to North Korea because of his evangelistic work. He was imprisoned and tortured for three years, paroled in 2004, but then re-arrested in January 2006. Mr. Son has reportedly been sentenced to public execution as an example to the North Korean people.
--Jim Jewell
--Jim Jewell
15 Temmuz 2007 Pazar
Ideas for Breaking Iraq Deadlock, Not Heard from Democratic Candidates
The United States isn’t going to withdraw from Iraq. We be there for generations, just as we still have troops in Germany, Japan, and Korea. Vietnam was an exception, and only Ted Kennedy’s crowd wants to see a repeat of the horror of post-war Vietnam.
Unless we end up with an irresponsible Democratic administration that will bail at any cost, we will define our ongoing national interests in Iraq and adjust troop levels to accomplish them.
There are only about 20 Senators, all Democrats—including Clinton, Obama—who want to get out of Iraq as quickly as the trucks can roll. Actually, there are more Democratic candidates for president who support immediate withdrawal at any cost than there are Senators who are not presidential candidates .
This says something about the choice presented with the 15 Democratic wannabes line up for one of their endless debates. No reasonable choice for a constructive plan in Iraq.
David Brooks July column in the New York Times (subscription only, but you can read it here) describes the deadlock in the Senate on Iraq policy:
“Is there a middle way? Brooks asks. Is there a way that will protect U.S. interests with a solution that can be maintained for as long as necessary—as we have done in most previous conflicts.
Brooks suggests:
That’s not something you’ll hear in a Democratic presidential debate, but it may be close to where we need to be.
--Jim Jewell
Unless we end up with an irresponsible Democratic administration that will bail at any cost, we will define our ongoing national interests in Iraq and adjust troop levels to accomplish them.
There are only about 20 Senators, all Democrats—including Clinton, Obama—who want to get out of Iraq as quickly as the trucks can roll. Actually, there are more Democratic candidates for president who support immediate withdrawal at any cost than there are Senators who are not presidential candidates .
This says something about the choice presented with the 15 Democratic wannabes line up for one of their endless debates. No reasonable choice for a constructive plan in Iraq.
David Brooks July column in the New York Times (subscription only, but you can read it here) describes the deadlock in the Senate on Iraq policy:
To simplify a bit, roughly 20 senators, led by John McCain and Joe Lieberman, believe in Gen. David Petraeus and the surge. There are roughly 30 Republicans, led by Dick Lugar, John Warner and Lamar Alexander, who believe that the U.S. should scale back its mission and adopt the Iraq Study Group’s recommendations. There are roughly 30 Democrats, led by Carl Levin and Jack Reed, who also want to scale back and adopt the study group’s approach. And finally, there are roughly 20 Democrats, led by Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold, who just want to get out as quickly as possible.
In theory, it should be possible to get the 30 Republicans and the 30 Democrats who support the study group’s framework together to embrace a common plan. But Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, is doing everything he can to prevent a bipartisan consensus. It’s much better politically for the Democrats to stay united and force the Republicans to vote with the president.
“Is there a middle way? Brooks asks. Is there a way that will protect U.S. interests with a solution that can be maintained for as long as necessary—as we have done in most previous conflicts.
Brooks suggests:
The U.S. will still have vital interests in Iraq, like preventing a terror state and stopping an Iranian takeover. Military planners believe a reduced force is viable: 20,000 troops to protect the Iraqi government, 10,000 to train and advise, 10,000 in headquarters and a smaller number of special forces to chase terrorists.
That’s not something you’ll hear in a Democratic presidential debate, but it may be close to where we need to be.
--Jim Jewell
13 Temmuz 2007 Cuma
Democrats Find God(Talk)
The Time magazine article Leveling the Praying Field is both encouraging—because of its recognition of the importance of faith and the discussion of faith in the public square—and frightening—because there are plenty of people dull enough to be excited just because a politician is throwing in the word God from time to time like a newfound adjective.
Note this paragraph:
I’m heartened that the evangelical community is broadening its agenda and my firm has clients that are in the middle of this transformation. But I’m not impressed with Democrats who hire consultants to learn how to say things Christianly. Its not about the right image; its about the right action
I agree with Tony Perkins here:
--Jim Jewell
Note this paragraph:
The revival comes at a time when the entire religious-political landscape is changing shape. A new generation of evangelical leaders is rejecting old labels; now an alliance of religious activists that runs from the crunchy left across to the National Association of Evangelicals has called for action to address global warming, citing the biblical imperative of caring for creation. Mainline, evangelical and Roman Catholic organizations have united to push for immigration reform. The possibility that there is common ground to be colonized by those willing to look for it offers a tantalizing prospect of alliances to come, but only if Democrats can overcome concerns within their party. "One-third gets it," says a Democratic values pioneer, talking about the rank and file. "A second third understands that this can help us win. And another third is positively terrified."
I’m heartened that the evangelical community is broadening its agenda and my firm has clients that are in the middle of this transformation. But I’m not impressed with Democrats who hire consultants to learn how to say things Christianly. Its not about the right image; its about the right action
I agree with Tony Perkins here:
"It's a positive thing that Democrats are willing to talk about faith and values," says Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. "But they are aligned with organizations that sue to stop kids from praying and block the Ten Commandments." Only when the policies evolve, he argues, as opposed to the rhetoric, will the party have a chance to make real gains with Evangelicals."
--Jim Jewell
12 Temmuz 2007 Perşembe
The Deficit is Shrinking, Thanks to Bush
Look what is happening to the federal deficit. As unpopular as this is today, how about a little credit to President Bush? Can anyone spell t-a-x c-u-t.
Preparation for Bejieng Games Should Include Religious Freedom, Pollution Control
Just after executing the former head of the government food and drug administration for corruption, the Chinese government “announced steps to safeguard food at next summer’s Olympic Games.” Hurray for them. If you’ve visited Beijing recently, or have been following things, China is creating a showcase city for the world to see when it visits Beijing for the 2008 Games, or watch it on the tube.
At the same time, there a troubling development: the government clean-up includes foreign Christian missionaries. According to China Aid Association, from April to June China expelled more than 100 suspected foreign missionaries to prevent evangelistic efforts at the Olympics (Assist News).
It should also be troubling to Christians that the Chinese are now the worst CO2 polluters in the world. China’s output of greenhouse gasses surpassed those of the U.S. last month. Business is booming at the expenses of the global climate.
Nothing would upset the Chinese more than suggestions that the world consider Beijing games to be anything less than in total success. They are pouring everything into making the Olympics a Chinese public relations wonder. That means the world has some bargaining power now. It would be a good time to suggest that Chinese preparation include human rights, religious liberty, and limitation of toxic emissions.
Protecting the food is fine, too.
--Jim Jewell
At the same time, there a troubling development: the government clean-up includes foreign Christian missionaries. According to China Aid Association, from April to June China expelled more than 100 suspected foreign missionaries to prevent evangelistic efforts at the Olympics (Assist News).
It should also be troubling to Christians that the Chinese are now the worst CO2 polluters in the world. China’s output of greenhouse gasses surpassed those of the U.S. last month. Business is booming at the expenses of the global climate.
Nothing would upset the Chinese more than suggestions that the world consider Beijing games to be anything less than in total success. They are pouring everything into making the Olympics a Chinese public relations wonder. That means the world has some bargaining power now. It would be a good time to suggest that Chinese preparation include human rights, religious liberty, and limitation of toxic emissions.
Protecting the food is fine, too.
--Jim Jewell
11 Temmuz 2007 Çarşamba
Biking for Dollars (for a very important ministry)
In the category of really good and important stuff, please check out the innovative fundraising effort to assist the former child soldiers of northern Uganda. ChildVoice International, which is developing strong long-range and Christ-centered program for these kids in Uganda (we were part of an exploratory team last July in Uganda), has brought three former child soldiers to participate in the terrific RAGBRAI--Register’s Annual Great Bicycle Ride Across Iowa--later this month.
Check out the Campaign Website It's www.3-7-1.com--three riders, seven days, one million dollars--which gives you the chance to participate.
--Jim Jewell
Check out the Campaign Website It's www.3-7-1.com--three riders, seven days, one million dollars--which gives you the chance to participate.
--Jim Jewell
The One True Church? Guess Who the Pope Chooses
I’m a generally an evangelical enthusiast of the Vatican, which since the reign of John Paul II has been a bulwark against cultural, moral, and theological freefall, and a friend of conservative Christians of all stripes. I really can’t envision JP issuing the document released by Benedict yesterday, reaffirming that the Roman Catholic Church is the One True Church. I really had no thought that the head of the Catholic Church would be mixed on this question, but no one seems sure why the edict was released, and why now. I’m having lunch tomorrow with a friend and business associate who has spent he career with the U.S. Catholic Bishops office. I can’t wait to chide him about eating with this apostate. And the bit about other Christian groups not having the “means of salvation.” That’s the One True Jesus, the last time I checked. Honestly, the other Christian denominations aren’t the enemy of the Catholic church or of Christianity. How about saving the stronger words for radical Islam and surging secularism?
--Jim Jewell
--Jim Jewell
Fred Thompson: Lean, Tanned and (Apparently) Ready for the Long Distance Run
Because we’re active in the Republican Party in Georgia, my wife and I have had the opportunity to see the most likely Republican contenders—Rudy, Mitt, and Fred—up close and personal. The latest was last night at a meet-and-greet with Fred Thompson at the Gwinnett County Chamber of Commerce. He demonstrated all the southern charm, dignified presence, and conservative common sense that will make him formidable when he joins the race. He told the activists at the reception to “be patient” but to “keep your powder dry.” Barring a scandal or medical bombshell, he is undoubtedly in. It’s just a question of how many Law and Order episodes he’s promised to allow before they have to be pulled.
Thompson looked tall, tanned, and far thinner than he looks on television. Or maybe he’s dropped some weight for the long distance run.
In photo below, the writer is peering admiringly from the far right.
.jpg)
--Jim Jewell
Thompson looked tall, tanned, and far thinner than he looks on television. Or maybe he’s dropped some weight for the long distance run.
In photo below, the writer is peering admiringly from the far right.
.jpg)
--Jim Jewell
10 Temmuz 2007 Salı
Don't Miss Southern Baptist Trending on Global Warming
Despite the usual sound of the Southern Baptist Convention's resolution on global warming last month, there are clear indications that Southern Baptists in the pew--including many of the messengers to the San Antonio convention--recognize the need for stronger action on climate change.
As Rusty Pritchard notes at The Earth is the Lord's:
Rusty cites other evidences that the rank and file Baptists are moving as readily as other evangelicals on environmental issues.
That's good news for the evangelical community and for our nation.
--Jim Jewell
As Rusty Pritchard notes at The Earth is the Lord's:
We ought to note that the Southern Baptist resolution as originally introduced included much stronger language, and noted the need for urgent government action on global warming. When some proposed weakening the resolution by removing the stronger language on global warming, 40 percent of the messengers voted to keep the original version! That shows much stronger support for action on global warming than some Southern Baptist leaders are willing to admit.
Rusty cites other evidences that the rank and file Baptists are moving as readily as other evangelicals on environmental issues.
That's good news for the evangelical community and for our nation.
--Jim Jewell
9 Temmuz 2007 Pazartesi
Huckabee for Vice President?
While I don’t think Mick Huckabee will be able generate enough national support to rise to the top tier of Republican candidates, I haven’t read or seen him say anything I disagree with. His faith seems genuine, and his convictions sound. There’s an interesting column on Huckabee by Terry Mattingly. Huckabee says:
"I sometimes marvel when people running for office are asked about faith and their answer is, 'Oh, I don't get into that. I keep that completely separate. My faith is completely immaterial to how I think and how I govern,' " he said. "To me, that is really tantamount to saying that one's faith is so marginal, so insignificant and so inconsequential that it really doesn't impact the way one lives. I would consider it an extraordinarily shallow faith that does not really impact the way we think about other human beings and the way we respond to them."
If a northeasterner such as Romney or Guiliani gets the nomination, Huckabee would provide wonderful regional balance as a running mate. And a clearer understanding of the blending of faith and policy than any of the other candidates.
--Jim Jewell
"I sometimes marvel when people running for office are asked about faith and their answer is, 'Oh, I don't get into that. I keep that completely separate. My faith is completely immaterial to how I think and how I govern,' " he said. "To me, that is really tantamount to saying that one's faith is so marginal, so insignificant and so inconsequential that it really doesn't impact the way one lives. I would consider it an extraordinarily shallow faith that does not really impact the way we think about other human beings and the way we respond to them."
If a northeasterner such as Romney or Guiliani gets the nomination, Huckabee would provide wonderful regional balance as a running mate. And a clearer understanding of the blending of faith and policy than any of the other candidates.
--Jim Jewell
8 Temmuz 2007 Pazar
Evangelicals and Moslems Together?
It would be good if a relationship would flourish between evangelical Christians and moderate Arabs, something that would seem unlikely in the current atmosphere. A remarkable meeting occurred at the Egyptian embassy in Washington last month, with a number of evangelical leaders and the ambassadors from several Arab nations.
Jonathan Falwell wrote in WorldNetDaily
And I received this in personal correspondence from Richard Cizik at NAE:
The most interesting person there? None other than Hinn, who I found to be extremely gracious. He was born in Egypt, and is part Jordanian, etc., and helped organize the event. He wanted to know if we'd help him organize successive events. No harm, as I see it, and could do a lot of good, that is, if they could get general agreement by certain leaders who have exclaimed, for example, "50 million Muslims want to kill us," that this language endangers evangelical missionaries and relief workers around the world. It also fosters the impression that evangelical Christians want to provoke a religious war with Muslims, something everyone at the luncheon disputed.
It was a positive event, with real potential for good. I spoke of the need to make sure Samuel Huntington's "Conflict of Civilizations" doesn't occur, and that the NAE had issued a call to "respect" and "dialogue" a number of years ago, followed up by our "Islam Initiative" calling for humanitarian missions in the name of Jesus, as well as dialogue here and abroad. I lauded our friendship with Amb. Aziz Mekouar and the Moroccans, and said that we all need some "moral imagination" to see our way through the current difficulties, saying it "could well be the most important thing we set our minds to at this time in history."
--Jim Jewell
Jonathan Falwell wrote in WorldNetDaily
On Monday, July 2, I attended what I can only pray may become a historic meeting. Several weeks ago, I received a call about attending a meeting at the Egyptian Embassy in Washington, D.C. I was told this meeting would be hosted by the ambassador from Egypt and might be attended by representatives of other Arab nations, as well as by 10-15 pastors, evangelists and Christian media representatives.
My interest stirred, I agreed to attend the meeting even though I was not quite sure of its purpose. I asked Dr. Ron Godwin, Liberty University's executive vice president, to attend with me. When we arrived at the Embassy, we were greeted by Evangelist Benny Hinn and introduced to several other pastors, evangelists, Christian TV producers and representatives of Christian organizations. Among them were Gordon Robertson of the 700 Club, Paul Crouch Jr. of Trinity Broadcasting Network, Christian lobbyist Ralph Reed, Richard Cizik of the National Association of Evangelicals, Vernon Brewer of WorldHelp and several others.
Within a period of no more than 10 minutes, the ambassadors from Algeria, Morocco, Libya, Kuwait, Yemen, Iraq, Bahrain and the ambassador from the Arab League of Nations all arrived. I now realized that this meeting was far more than a social gathering. Soon thereafter, we sat down at a large table – evangelicals all on one side and Arab representatives on the other, about 24 of us – for lunch.
And I received this in personal correspondence from Richard Cizik at NAE:
The most interesting person there? None other than Hinn, who I found to be extremely gracious. He was born in Egypt, and is part Jordanian, etc., and helped organize the event. He wanted to know if we'd help him organize successive events. No harm, as I see it, and could do a lot of good, that is, if they could get general agreement by certain leaders who have exclaimed, for example, "50 million Muslims want to kill us," that this language endangers evangelical missionaries and relief workers around the world. It also fosters the impression that evangelical Christians want to provoke a religious war with Muslims, something everyone at the luncheon disputed.
It was a positive event, with real potential for good. I spoke of the need to make sure Samuel Huntington's "Conflict of Civilizations" doesn't occur, and that the NAE had issued a call to "respect" and "dialogue" a number of years ago, followed up by our "Islam Initiative" calling for humanitarian missions in the name of Jesus, as well as dialogue here and abroad. I lauded our friendship with Amb. Aziz Mekouar and the Moroccans, and said that we all need some "moral imagination" to see our way through the current difficulties, saying it "could well be the most important thing we set our minds to at this time in history."
--Jim Jewell
23 Mayıs 2007 Çarşamba
Evangelical Leaders Issue Global Warming Policy Principles
Evangelicals Contend That Traditional, Conservative Perspectives Are Vital to Sound Policy
WASHINGTON, D.C., May 23, 2007—Leaders with the Evangelical Climate Initiative called on public officials today to draw on traditional, conservative perspectives to address the challenge of climate change facing the United States and the world. Federal policy must maximize the free market, care for the most vulnerable, assure national security, and protect personal freedom, evangelical leaders said in a document of principles that “should guide government officials as they establish policies at the federal level to begin to solve global warming.”
In the paper released today and announced in print ads that will run Thursday in the
Washington Times and Roll Call, the Evangelical Climate Initiative outlined 10 principles for policymakers, including a call for the “scope of the free market to be maximized to allow innovation, ingenuity, and entrepreneurship to generate climate solutions, and to ensure that U.S. businesses can compete internationally in clean technologies.”
See the full document: Principles for Federal Policy on Climate Change
The principles document reads: “We are in favor of climate policies that reduce our
dependence on foreign oil (e.g. increasing fuel economy) and thereby enhance our energy security and our advocacy of religious freedom and human rights.”
Since the launch of the Evangelical Climate Initiative last year, there has been great interest in a broader discussion of the solutions and how they should be applied, and public officials have expressed a desire for more information on evangelical positions on these issues,” said the Rev. Jim Ball, national spokesperson for the Evangelical Climate Initiative. “This document is an
effort to begin addressing these questions and to offer policymakers guidance on how global warming policies should be created.”
The 10 principles read in part:
1. The Problem is Real, the Objective Clear
We believe that human-induced global warming is real and, based on nearly universal agreement in the scientific community, we encourage policy-makers to accept this fact.
2. Maximize Freedom in Solving the Problem
When government deals with global warming, a proper policy framework will establish the “rules of the road” and what businesses call “regulatory certainty,” which can enhance freedom by allowing us to begin to solve a problem whose impacts will severely limit that freedom in the future if not addressed.
3. Maximize Protection from Harm from Generation to Generation
A primary function of government is to protect all of its citizens from undue harm, be it from foreign invaders, criminals, or pollution that impacts human health.
4. Take Special Care to Protect the Most Vulnerable
The most important way that federal government policy can protect the poor here and around the world from the impacts of global warming is to begin to solve the problem by reducing CO2 emissions 80 percent by 2050.
5. Enhance National and Energy Security, International Religious Freedom, & Rural Economic Development
American reliance on foreign oil also undermines our national security, and makes us
dependent on undemocratic, despotic foreign regimes that restrict the religious liberty of their peoples, and threaten the stability of democratic allies such as Israel.
6. Disburse Decision-making Authority to the Lowest Possible Level
A robust response to the threat of global warming will involve individuals, families, churches, businesses, and governments at multiple levels. In particular, we believe in states’ rights and responsibilities as the laboratories of democracy.
7. Solve the Problem through the Free Market and Protection of Property Rights
To help ensure competitiveness, climate policy should provide: (1) a stable, long-term, substantial research and development program; (2) long-term regulatory certainty, and; (3) a robust price signal that reflects the true social cost of greenhouse gas pollution.
8. Start Now and Solve the Problem in the Most Cost-Effective, Least-Disruptive Way Possible
Significant reductions in global warming pollution should start sooner rather than later in order to minimize disruption to the economy, and to avoid the necessity of drastic, steep reductions in the future.
9. Lead by Example
Regardless of whether all nations agree to be part of the solution, America must do the right thing.
10. Learn from the Future
Our understanding will continue to grow, and we may find that we must accelerate steps that address climate change.
(The Evangelical Climate Initiative, by the way, is a group of more than 100 evangelical leaders who are—-as a result of their commitment to Jesus Christ and concern for His creation—-encouraging action by evangelical Christians and all Americans to make life changes necessary to help solve the global warming crisis and to advance public policy that will limit global warming pollution, while respecting economic and business concerns.)
--Jim Jewell
WASHINGTON, D.C., May 23, 2007—Leaders with the Evangelical Climate Initiative called on public officials today to draw on traditional, conservative perspectives to address the challenge of climate change facing the United States and the world. Federal policy must maximize the free market, care for the most vulnerable, assure national security, and protect personal freedom, evangelical leaders said in a document of principles that “should guide government officials as they establish policies at the federal level to begin to solve global warming.”
In the paper released today and announced in print ads that will run Thursday in the
Washington Times and Roll Call, the Evangelical Climate Initiative outlined 10 principles for policymakers, including a call for the “scope of the free market to be maximized to allow innovation, ingenuity, and entrepreneurship to generate climate solutions, and to ensure that U.S. businesses can compete internationally in clean technologies.”
See the full document: Principles for Federal Policy on Climate Change
The principles document reads: “We are in favor of climate policies that reduce our
dependence on foreign oil (e.g. increasing fuel economy) and thereby enhance our energy security and our advocacy of religious freedom and human rights.”
Since the launch of the Evangelical Climate Initiative last year, there has been great interest in a broader discussion of the solutions and how they should be applied, and public officials have expressed a desire for more information on evangelical positions on these issues,” said the Rev. Jim Ball, national spokesperson for the Evangelical Climate Initiative. “This document is an
effort to begin addressing these questions and to offer policymakers guidance on how global warming policies should be created.”
The 10 principles read in part:
1. The Problem is Real, the Objective Clear
We believe that human-induced global warming is real and, based on nearly universal agreement in the scientific community, we encourage policy-makers to accept this fact.
2. Maximize Freedom in Solving the Problem
When government deals with global warming, a proper policy framework will establish the “rules of the road” and what businesses call “regulatory certainty,” which can enhance freedom by allowing us to begin to solve a problem whose impacts will severely limit that freedom in the future if not addressed.
3. Maximize Protection from Harm from Generation to Generation
A primary function of government is to protect all of its citizens from undue harm, be it from foreign invaders, criminals, or pollution that impacts human health.
4. Take Special Care to Protect the Most Vulnerable
The most important way that federal government policy can protect the poor here and around the world from the impacts of global warming is to begin to solve the problem by reducing CO2 emissions 80 percent by 2050.
5. Enhance National and Energy Security, International Religious Freedom, & Rural Economic Development
American reliance on foreign oil also undermines our national security, and makes us
dependent on undemocratic, despotic foreign regimes that restrict the religious liberty of their peoples, and threaten the stability of democratic allies such as Israel.
6. Disburse Decision-making Authority to the Lowest Possible Level
A robust response to the threat of global warming will involve individuals, families, churches, businesses, and governments at multiple levels. In particular, we believe in states’ rights and responsibilities as the laboratories of democracy.
7. Solve the Problem through the Free Market and Protection of Property Rights
To help ensure competitiveness, climate policy should provide: (1) a stable, long-term, substantial research and development program; (2) long-term regulatory certainty, and; (3) a robust price signal that reflects the true social cost of greenhouse gas pollution.
8. Start Now and Solve the Problem in the Most Cost-Effective, Least-Disruptive Way Possible
Significant reductions in global warming pollution should start sooner rather than later in order to minimize disruption to the economy, and to avoid the necessity of drastic, steep reductions in the future.
9. Lead by Example
Regardless of whether all nations agree to be part of the solution, America must do the right thing.
10. Learn from the Future
Our understanding will continue to grow, and we may find that we must accelerate steps that address climate change.
(The Evangelical Climate Initiative, by the way, is a group of more than 100 evangelical leaders who are—-as a result of their commitment to Jesus Christ and concern for His creation—-encouraging action by evangelical Christians and all Americans to make life changes necessary to help solve the global warming crisis and to advance public policy that will limit global warming pollution, while respecting economic and business concerns.)
--Jim Jewell
15 Mayıs 2007 Salı
Remembering Jerry Falwell
Jerry Falwell lived life large and he dies well-loved by many and much-maligned by most. Unlike the many who feel free to mock him even as his friends and family are in the hours of their immediate grief, I knew Rev. Falwell. I served as one of his public relations counselors during some of his best and worst moments. I choose to remember him fondly and to honor his faithfulness, even as I recognize—more than most—the flaws that taint his memory and embolden his critics to dishonor the dead.
Falwell’s greatest accomplishment was his leadership of a large and expansive church, Thomas Road Baptist Church, where many are saved and served. The church’s outreach extends to many, such as unwed mothers and the down and out; many that those who saw the familiar visage of fundamentalists only on talk shows would never believe he had any care for at all.
His message of unwavering fundamentalism became unpopular and easily criticized in modern America, but Falwell never changed. That served him well as a bellwether of the right. His downfall was his more than occasional public carelessness, and his inability to stay away from a microphone or a camera when he could do no good for himself, his cause, or the God he served.
Unfortunately, by the late 1990s it was nearly impossible for any moderation or substance to penetrate his caricature as a southern, overstuffed, intolerant buffoon.
I’ll remember Rev. Falwell as a kind and generous man with an easy laugh and a better vision for America than the nation seemed to have for itself. I was never his primary counselor or a close friend, but I was nearby and involved when media relished reports in one of his publications on Tinky Winky, the gay Teletubbie (blown out of context, but he deserved the firestorm because he refused our counsel to ignore media requests for comment).
And I helped him write his late apology for his callous comments following the attacks of 9/11, when he failed to see that it was time for a pastor’s voice, not a prophet’s rage.
I remember his willingness to reach out to Mel White, his former ghostwriter who began an organization to extend the voice of gay Christians. It was hard for him to stretch toward this natural adversary, but he did so when many others would not.
I disagreed with the reverend on many things, but I appreciated his faithful engagement and the substance behind the bluster. He was an American original and an important voice in our times. I extend my sympathies to his family, and the many families of Thomas Road, Liberty University and beyond that lived happily in his shadow and flourished because of his inspiration.
--Jim Jewell
Falwell’s greatest accomplishment was his leadership of a large and expansive church, Thomas Road Baptist Church, where many are saved and served. The church’s outreach extends to many, such as unwed mothers and the down and out; many that those who saw the familiar visage of fundamentalists only on talk shows would never believe he had any care for at all.
His message of unwavering fundamentalism became unpopular and easily criticized in modern America, but Falwell never changed. That served him well as a bellwether of the right. His downfall was his more than occasional public carelessness, and his inability to stay away from a microphone or a camera when he could do no good for himself, his cause, or the God he served.
Unfortunately, by the late 1990s it was nearly impossible for any moderation or substance to penetrate his caricature as a southern, overstuffed, intolerant buffoon.
I’ll remember Rev. Falwell as a kind and generous man with an easy laugh and a better vision for America than the nation seemed to have for itself. I was never his primary counselor or a close friend, but I was nearby and involved when media relished reports in one of his publications on Tinky Winky, the gay Teletubbie (blown out of context, but he deserved the firestorm because he refused our counsel to ignore media requests for comment).
And I helped him write his late apology for his callous comments following the attacks of 9/11, when he failed to see that it was time for a pastor’s voice, not a prophet’s rage.
I remember his willingness to reach out to Mel White, his former ghostwriter who began an organization to extend the voice of gay Christians. It was hard for him to stretch toward this natural adversary, but he did so when many others would not.
I disagreed with the reverend on many things, but I appreciated his faithful engagement and the substance behind the bluster. He was an American original and an important voice in our times. I extend my sympathies to his family, and the many families of Thomas Road, Liberty University and beyond that lived happily in his shadow and flourished because of his inspiration.
--Jim Jewell
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)