Tag Archives: evangelical

Bitter-sweet

Moved
by the Spirit to Govern

BRASILIA, Brazil � Most of the books on Adelor Vieira’s desk are what you’d expect
for a congressman busy with the machinery of state: a copy of the civil code, a
handy reference guide to laws on local governance. But tucked to one side, within
easy reach, lies the book that, for Vieira, trumps all the others: the Bible.

[…]

In countries throughout Latin America, evangelicals such as Vieira are stepping out from the shelter of their churches to enter the fractious world of secular politics. These Protestant Christians are increasingly speaking out, teaming up and getting elected in a region that remains overwhelmingly Roman Catholic.

[…]

[W]ith some estimates projecting that Brazil could be 50% Protestant by 2050, the influence of evangelicals in the political realm is likely to increase.

I’d rather someone be a faithful Evangelical than an apathetic Catholic. Still,
a faithful Catholic would be better.

That Evangelical Protestants are proselytizing in Catholic strongholds is disturbing
for two reasons. First, there is fertile ground for conversion in the first place.
Second, sheep stealing is an ugly and unkind act. However, I’ll give the missionaries
the benefit of the doubt that they restricted their outreach to apathetic Catholics
or atheists. Also, I’m upset by some of the misunderstandings associated with this
story.

Witness this quote from the article linked above:

Many are attracted by dynamic worship services and the emphasis on a personal
relationship with God.

For many here, faith remains a private affair, their devotion playing out at church
and at home. But others are heeding what they believe is a divine calling to shine
the light of Christian truth on “works of darkness,” which encompass perceived
evils as varied as abortion and the corruption rampant in Brazilian politics.”

Anyone who says Catholicism doesn’t involve a personal relationship with God is
grossly misinformed. Furthermore, faith should never be merely a private affair
and the Church, particularly through the current pontiff, has always advocated Christ’s
teachings as calls to social change.

Silly Vegetarians

New Bible-based diets preach healthful eating

SHELBY, N.C. – The Rev. George Malkmus often preaches about how he believes the
world of proper eating began.

This diet isn’t just quackery, it’s bad theology.

The next day, as they were on their journey and coming near the city, Peter went up on the housetop to pray, about the sixth hour. And he became hungry and desired something to eat; but while they were preparing it, he fell into a trance and saw the heaven opened, and something descending, like a great sheet, let down by four corners upon the earth. In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air. And there came a voice to him, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” But Peter said, “No, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.” And the voice came to him again a second time, “What God has cleansed, you must not call common.” This happened three times, and the thing was taken up at once to heaven.” – Acts 10:9-16 (RSV)

Saved

I forgot to mention something yesterday. Marty Minto‘s been on a bit of an anti-Catholic tirade for the last week. One of his listeners wrote in to ask if anyone who truly loved Jesus could go to Hell, even Catholics. I sent the following as part of an email to him during his broadcast.

“I was saved when Christ died for man’s sins.

I am being saved as I attempt carry my cross daily.

I hope to be saved when I face final judgment.

I love Jesus. He is my Lord and Savior. I know you feel the same way. We should work with each other, not against each other.”

He responded by saying he doesn’t think I’m saved! He said that those who are truly born again in the Spirit have assurance of salvation and to think otherwise suggests a lack of rebirth. I sent the following as a rebuttal, but he didn’t respond to all of it on-air.

Paul spoke of running a race (1 Cor 9:24), working out salvation with fear trembling (Phil 2:12), and completing what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions (Col 1:24). Obviously, endurance is called for.

When I say that I was saved, I mean that Christ’s sacrificial act redeemed mankind. Through baptism by the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we are buried with Christ and are entitled to rise with Him. Salvation is a gift. In order to be saved, however, we must actively accept that gift. Furthermore, that gift is not irrevocable. If we accept Christ one day and reject Him the next, we cannot possibly expect to be saved.

When I say that I am being saved, I mean that every day is a struggle and I know I can be led astray, lose hope, and lose faith.

When I say that I hope to be saved at the last judgment, I mean that I hope to persevere in Christ until the day I die. I pray that I will be counted among the sheep, rather than the goats. Not all who say “Lord, Lord” shall be allowed into the wedding banquet of Heaven.” I pray to be one who is.

Do I have any Evangelical Protestant readers who’d like to comment on this exchange? Anybody of any denomination want to chime in? What part of what I said is incompatible with “mere” Christianity (c.f. C.S. Lewis)?

The Horror!

Some naive soul in College
Christian Fellowship
posted this:

“Hey guys, what do you think of this website?”

“Do you think this is Biblical, or are the scriptures being taken out of context?”

http://christiansagainstbush.bravehost.com

This question is representative of the evangelical mindset I’ve been encountering
a lot of lately. To be Christian is to support Bush. To suggest otherwise to them is
scandalous. *sigh* I can name plenty of good Christians who don’t support George
“War is Peace” Bush – and I don’t mean the wishy-washy kind that think
gay marriage, abortion, cloning, embryonic stem cell research, and euthanasia are
good ideas.

The Great Divide

The
Politics of Partisan Neutrality

Louis Bolce and Gerald De Maio
Copyright (c) 2004 First Things 143 (May 2004): 9-12.

“Americans who want to understand conflicts between Democrats and Republicans
during the election season have received precious little help from the media. While
reporters usually recognize that there is some sort of problem about ‘values’ and
about ‘faith-based’ principles, and that the Democrats and Republicans are often
on opposite sides, writers and editors tend to publish news and analysis as if the
situation were as follows: The Christian right, having infiltrated the Republican
Party, is importing its divisive religious ideas into our public life, whereas the
Democratic Party is the neutral camp of tolerant and pluralistic Americans.”

This gives me some insight into what’s happened to the Democratic Party. I was raised
by staunch Democrats and I voted as a Democrat for 7 years. Now I’m independent
and I register either Republican or Democrat depending on which primary is more
crucial to my beliefs (such as the Toomy vs. Specter race). I used to the think
Republican party was just a bunch of redneck Evangelical yahoos. I’m starting to
understand why so many of my Christian brethren vote Republican. The party still
does things that disgust me, so I won’t declare myself a Republican anytime soon,
but I’m more open to their point of view.