Got 15 Minutes or So . . . ?

If so, give a listen to the commencement speech given by Dr. Robert George at Patrick Henry College this year. If you don't know of him, he is a well-respected scholar of Christian Ethics and Natural Law. He's written with others about many of the social ills in our country today. His address starts at about the 21 minute mark.

Here's the link:  https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8QZhxSUPUuw 

Been a While . . .

Yes, I'm still here. :-)  It's been a while since I posted. The "to do" list is long, keeps getting longer, and "blog" always gets pushed down the list of priorities. So, how about just a couple of random thoughts . . .

. . . Happy Birthday to my wife! We celebrated a couple of weeks ago. Last year, a big surprise party. This year, a quieter celebration.

. . . Happy Birthday to my daughter! She turned 21. We could not be with her as she is away at school, but proud of her.

. . . Abortion - how our country is divided! The March for Life is great, but New York passes a law allowing abortion at any time, the Virginia governor speaks of infanticide just because the baby isn't wanted (sounds like ancient Rome), and yet Missouri just passed the most restrictive abortion law of all the states! What's the answer? Change hearts, not laws.

. . . Speaking of the Virginia governor . . . Blackface in a 35 year old picture? Resign! Support for infanticide? Crickets.

. . . Speaking of Virginia politics . . . Governor with blackface? Resign! Lieutenant Governor accused of sexual misconduct? Resign! Attorney General with blackface? Resign! Oh wait. The next guy in line for Governor is a Republican? Never mind. Really?

. . . Death. Of a beloved professor at Patrick Henry College, where I do campus ministry. Unexpected in the night. Rough. Always be ready. You never know.

. . . Politics. When Republicans run the House, they act all civil and proper and the Democrats attacks them. When Democrats run the House, they act all civil and proper and the Republicans attack them. Can't they see the hypocrisy? Crazy. And some of the things being said? Crazier.

. . . Long, scraggly, unkempt beards. I just don't get it.

Politics, Part 1

I very rarely post about politics, but I heard an interesting theory the other day as to why the political left seems to fight much harder and better than the political right. Yes, I know they both fight, but why does it seem that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi get their way more, or fight better, than Mitch McConnell and John Boehner? 

It’s because for the left (according to this theorist), government is the answer. Government is the solution to the problems that plague us. So they need to be in power in order to do the good they want to do. And so it is a much more important fight for them than for the right which see things in a much broader and multi-faceted perspective, and where private industry and small business is as much a part of the solution as government. And so a small government, politically right-leaning representative will not see the fight as critical as a left-leaning, big government advocate. And so won’t fight as hard.

That’s an interesting proposition. I’m sure it’s not the only answer, but I think there’s some merit to it. And I don’t say any of this (left or right) pejoratively - it’s just a different way of thinking and philiosophy.

Politics, Part 2

One things that bugs me is the seeming inability or unwillingness of some to clearly differentiate positions on some issues. Two examples:

1. Stem cell research. There are two different strands of this research going on: one using “adult” stem cells, which are available from any person, and the second using “embryonic” stem cells which come from the destruction of a baby boy or girl to use these cells that are harvested. If a person expresses concern or objection to embryonic stem cell research, that person is painted as “against stem cell research.” No! Just that one kind. Why is it so hard to make that distinction? Why does such a broad brush need to be used?

2. Immigration. This is a big issue right now, but why does everything have to be: you are either for or against immigration? Why can’t the argument be more nuanced, so that you can be for legal immigration, but against illegal immigration? Why is it all one or all the other?

Yes, I know perhaps some will do this for political reasons, but I think it’s bigger than that. Are we just that intellectually lazy?

Church or State?

Just something to think about . . .

There are some who are calling the state to get out of the marriage business and leave it to the religious institutions to define and regulate.

At the time of the Reformation, it was the opposite: Luther was calling on the Church to stop regulating marriage and let the state do it. Why? The Roman Church was regulating marriage and had so many restrictions on it.

I'm not saying we should follow Luther and I'm not saying which is better. Just pointing out how greatly things have changed . . .

It's NOT Your House

This is embarrassing. President Obama shows himself not to be a president for all people (as he so famously said when he campaigned) but only for those who agree with him.

A couple days ago, when heckled in the White House, the president said to his heckler, "You're in my house." No, Mr. President, no. It's not your house, it's the people's house. All the people. All the presidents before you knew that. It's not yours to do with what you want.

A sad and embarrassing day.

A Few Things . . .

Not really having a good week . . . tired, hard to focus, but pushin' through.  :-)  Some items:

(1.) + Klemet Preus +  Rest in peace, my friend.

(2.) Laurie and Robbie have left for Western New England University for his orientation. So I have to hold down the fort for the next three days.  :-(

(3.) The Senate Harry Reid is already introducing legislation to counteract the Supreme Court ruling in the Hobby Lobby case. Here's the story. Boy, Harry, that didn't take long. "Do nothing Harry" can act fast when he wants to!

Thursday Morning Thoughts

#1: Due to the generosity and kindness of some members of my congregation, my family and I got to go see my Phillies put a whuppin' on Steven Strasburg and the Nationals on Tuesday night, 8-0. Included in the feast was Juan Pierre stealing second, then stealing third a pitch or two later, an error on the throw and an easy walk home. Pitcher Cliff Lee stealing second and then scoring on Jimmy Rollins inside-the-park homerun. While at the park, also made sure I tried a Ben's Chili Bowl half smoke chili dog. Ben's is a Washington landmark, so I wanted to try it. Result? Eh. Nuthin' special in my opinion.

#2: Glad the Chick-Fil-A appreciation day went so well yesterday. I wanted to eat there, but already had a lunch meeting scheduled in a town which didn't have one. I'll go soon. So tired of the intolerance of the "tolerant" . . .

#3: In the TDP reading for today, David is sent to fight Goliath. What struck me today is the faith and courage King Saul showed - not in the Lord, but in David. Earlier, Goliath's challenge had been a one-on-one fight with the result being that the loser's country would enter into servitude. So it was not only the life of the combatant that was on the line, but the fate of the nation. That King Saul would agree to let this young man go and fight with all that on the line . . . ? Saul's last words to David: "Go, and the Lord be with you." Striking in contrast to the words that Samuel had not too long ago spoken to Saul, that the Lord had rejected him and was not with him. Just found this interesting this morning . . .

Good Quotes

Thanks Esgetology for posting these quotes. Go read them - you will not be sorry.

A Measured and Deliberate Attack on Religion's Moral Influence

A New Kind of Paganism

Friday Morning Coffee

Some reading and thoughts for you:

(1.) A good editorial about the death of Steve Jobs by Pastor William Cwirla. He's a great writer. Go read this because it's not really about Steve Jobs.

(2.) I have great sadness over the sale of University Lutheran Chapel (ULC) at the University of Minnesota by the Minnesota South district. I have never been to ULC, but know its current pastor, its previous pastor, and many pastors who were students and members there. The loss of this building will not stop the ministry there, but will make it much harder. (I know - we are trying to do campus ministry without a building!) What a prime location they had! I hope it can still be saved, but am not optimistic.

But what bothers me most of all is this line in the notification of the sale: "The Mission Committee's strategy also provides opportunities for additional LCMS congregations to conduct campus ministry on the U of M campus . . ." That - it seems to me - gives some insight into the motive for the sale. I know motives are hard to judge, and it is dangerous to do so, but it is difficult for me to put a good construction on that sentence. Read the whole document here, which includes Pastor Kind's commentary.

(3.) The Supreme Court case that involves an LCMS congregation was heard on Wednesday. I read the transcript and it seemed to me that the lawyers on both sides of the issue were having trouble explaining and defining their positions. I think the justices were too, and were searching for a place to stand for their decision! Then I read this summary of the case, which seems to agree with my observations! At this point, it seems to me unlikely that the court would rule against the church, but I'm no lawyer! We'll see.

Now What?

A very worthwhile article by John Piper in World Magazine on the aftermath of the election. Go and read it here.

What Would King Think?

One of the interesting things about the election of Mr. Obama is the media's proclaiming this the "fulfillment" of Martin Luther King's dream. While I do not doubt the significance of this election, one of the better comments I heard this morning disavowed this the fulfillment of the dream. For Dr. King's dream was that all people be judged not on the basis of the color of their skin - but far too many people these past fews days proudly stated that they voted for Mr. Obama because he is black. Is this what Dr. King would have wanted?