FP | Missing Links: The Hypocrisy Audit

“The official position of the United States is that Europe should allow Turkey to join the European Union. Turkey’s entry would give its citizens the right to travel freely to any other EU member state. This prodding to Europeans to embrace Turkey comes from the same country that is building a 700-mile-long wall along its border with Mexico.

When the South Korean government bailed out Hyundai Electronics Industries in 2001, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution urging the Bush administration “to assure that the unlawful bailout by the Republic of Korea is stopped.” This July, the U.S. Congress approved a far larger bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two mortgage giants. The U.S. government has often pressured poor African countries ravaged by HIV/AIDS into not buying the cheaper generic drugs offered by manufacturers in Brazil or India. Yet, when the United States faced a potential health crisis during the anthrax attacks in 2001, Tommy Thompson, then the secretary of Health and Human Services, announced that the United States was ready to buy generic versions of Cipro, an anti-anthrax drug owned by Bayer, from manufacturers in India if the German drug company refused to drop its price.”

So true. Turkey has a lower GDP per capita than Mexico does, and Europe already has a very high immigration rate. Interference in the free market is fine for America (and for Europe), but China’s currency policy is “trade distortion.”  Cuba’s regime needs to be brought down, but everything we own is “Made in Vietnam.” Fun times.

NYTimes | Moving Targets

Biking has been great. I love that I drove into work today, and one of my coworkers asked “what, your bike is broken or something?” It’s fun to feel energized and healthy. It’s great to see a few pounds fall off more or less effortlessly. It’s nice to spend less on gas, though I think it hasn’t quite balanced with the bicycle spending yet.

But then, there’s Rockville Pike.

Just three miles of my fifteen mile-long ride to work, and easily the most annoying stretch. The nine or twelve miles of Rock Creek Park (depending on if I’m going north or south) is really nice, and cars tend to accommodate cyclists pretty well. There’s always the rude Maryland driver (it’s always the Maryland driver) who passes me way too closely or who honks at my twenty miles per hour (GASP!) in a twenty-five mile per hour zone. This of course happens in the District, and not in the driver’s home jurisdiction.

But Rockville Pike is another story. I gave up riding on the actual road northbound, because I am about thirty miles per hour slower than traffic. More than just annoyed, people don’t really see me, so I ride on the sidewalk. I got yelled at by a pedestrian the other day, but that’s just the price I pay. Southbound, I brave the road, but I can keep up reasonably well with traffic, because of the really nice downhills. I do get honked at, waved angrily at, and generally derided by drivers, but I ignore them. On 14th Street NW in DC, the buses are the biggest culprits. You would think these public employees would be of all drivers least in a hurry and most likely to obey the law, but certainly not.

Anyway, I can sympathize with the bicyclists in the article. Drivers do seem to feel a sense of ownership over the roads, and my own feelings as a driver have changed since I started riding. Because I drive a lot too, I feel compelled to actually obey traffic laws on my bike. What a novel thought for many District cyclists! I stop at traffic lights. I do a rolling stop at stop signs, thereby balancing safety with a need to keep the momentum going. I encourage more cyclists to actually obey the laws. You don’t get to disobey traffic laws out of some misguided sense of superiority and environmental altruism.

And finally, a note to that one cyclist on Georgia Avenue: I nearly hit you in my car the other night, as I almost have done several times. You ride down the middle of the road, or you ride against traffic, and you do so late at night. You wear all dark clothes. You have no reflectors or lights. And while I aspire to the best kind of colorblind and tolerant society, you’re black. Which, incidentally, means you really should wear light clothes at night, because your skin isn’t helping you out with visibility. If you don’t make some changes, one of these days you’re going to end up on the losing side of some car’s grille, and I just hope it’s not mine.

American Conservative | Food for Thought

If you think the organic, locally-grown, community-supported eating and agriculture movement is just for liberals, then you should read this article. Written by a conservative Ph.D student and Harvey Fellow at Berkeley (they apparently exist), the article argues that the things promoted by this agriculture movement — grassroots and civic-minded work, entrepreneurship, ingenuity, creativity, family-focused meals — are things conservatives should embrace. Furthermore, the reasons prepackaged food and a nonstop lifestyle flourish, such as big farm subsidies and the breakdown of the nuclear family, aren’t exactly promoted by traditional conservatives.

I like the tie between good, healthy food and the functioning of the republic. Nice.

LifeSiteNews | 95% of Spanish Down’s Syndrome Children Aborted

In Spain, where the vast majority of folks identify as Roman Catholic, 95% of children identified using a prenatal Down’s Syndrome as having the disease are aborted. In Canada, 80-90% of Down’s kids are aborted from the womb.

I wonder if it wouldn’t make a huge difference if parents actually met someone with Down’s before they decided to abort. It might be more difficult to decide that their child is unworthy of life once they see the incredibly full life many people with Down’s Syndrome lead.

NYTimes.com | Single, Childless, and Downright Terrified

The fear of being alone in this world, without a friend to call on, shouldn’t be a fear anyone has in this world. When we advocate for laws protecting life from conception to natural death, we must realize that we have to step in and meet needs that exist from conception to natural death. The Church must counter the terror these people have with the love of Jesus Christ and His Gospel.

This situation — single, childless, and aging — should be a relative rarity. Society was designed to have marriage and children (traditional family) as the central societal structure, with the Church stepping in to care for those in non-normative situations. The fact that this situation is increasing shows the disjointed and rudderless nature of today’s society. Regardless of the whims and extreme shifts in society, we have to step up and care for our neighbors.

Salvo Magazine | GIRLY MEN: The Media’s Attack on Masculinity

The article points out, in a somewhat abrasive fashion, the fact that men get a bad rap these days. On one side, we see the hyper-masculine “man’s man” who ignores the needs of those less powerful than he while seeking professional and personal victories in the form of sexual conquests and clawing his way up the career ladder. On another side, we see hyper-sensitive “fluffy men” who place relationships and feelings above any practical need in both the public and private spheres of life, eschewing all competition and recognition of difference in favor of a radical equality. This radical equality, where all people are viewed as equally competent to engage in all aspects of life, often works out to be a radical mediocrity. Areas where differences can’t be exorcised, such as competitive sports, are downplayed or eliminated.

Furthermore, our society socializes our boys toward the former or the latter, though it seems usually to be the latter. We either want to emasculate our boys or make them hyper-masculine. Why can’t we try to make our boys into what they really should become? Why has our society swung so far to the extremes of ideal masculinity?

In Biblical terms, the ideal man:

– Is bold and assertive, but seeks counsel and is not rash.
– Makes promises and covenants (such as marriage), and is faithful to keep them.
– Uses his strength to defend the weak and defenseless.
– Provides for his family before providing for himself, and puts their needs before his.
– Views leadership (in the church and home) through the servant leadership model of Jesus Christ, who suffered and died for His church.
– Respects women and serves them (especially his wife), rather than objectifying them or placing them on a lower stratum of life.
– Seeks after wisdom and prizes knowledge.
– Fights for his God, wife, children, country, and the things that he believes in.

Once again, the Bible provides a counter-cultural path for us to walk. Anywhere you go, these ideals will conflict with the larger culture. In (stereotypical) Oklahoma, Biblical masculinity will seem soft and intellectual. In our 20-something group of friends here in DC, Biblical masculinity will seem aggressive and backwards. In Jesus’ day, it was the same. Everyone was offended by the warrior-king who spent time with society’s lowest members (women and children). May we likewise be offensive today.

2:25 PM: Post detailing participating Restaurant Week restaurants goes up on DCFoodies.

3:02 PM: Reservation for two made at Cafe Atlantico in DC for Friday, August 15, at 7:45 PM.

Christina really wanted to go to Hook, but they are only participating in Restaurant Week at lunch. Maybe next time. Also — $35.08? What’s with the extra $5?
I’ll admit, I chose Cafe Atlantico partially because we saw the restaurant on Giada’s Weekend Getaways. I’m big enough to admit a celebrity hook.

In other news, we found out Ceiba has happy hours, including $5 mojitos and free appetizers on Mondays. Christina and I have a new standing date night.

WashTimes | Lean, green and interning

I’m glad I’m (slightly) past this lifestyle.

At first, I thought the article would be about green living or eco-conscious interns. What was I thinking? The article quotes interns at the Heritage Foundation, Jubilee Campaign USA (not to be confused with the debt cancellation group), and a Republican congressman. Staffers from the Institute for Religion and Democracy and a Hill staffer from Patrick Henry College were also quoted. All very conservative entities. I’m left wondering if the author even knows anyone left of center.

This is my wife. Seriously. She would have no problem admitting it.

This article describes well the disconnect between the “West” and the “Global South” with regard to Christianity. It is written in the context of the upcoming Lambeth gathering, but it applies to much of evangelicalism as well. We seem fond of the exportation of our sense of cultural superiority when we try to “help” those who we could stand to learn a good bit from.

Nearly six hundred purple-shirted Anglican bishops will gather this week in England for the Lambeth Conference, the decennial meeting of all the bishops in the global Anglican Communion. Of course, there would have been well over eight hundred, but for the fact that the bishops of five national Anglican provinces—about a quarter of Anglican bishops overall—decided to stay home.

That’s a sadness, for the average Anglican today (as Gregory Cameron has pointed out), is a black woman in Africa, under the age of thirty, who supports three children on a salary of two dollars a day and finds the story of her life written in the pages of the Old Testament. The average Anglican represented at Lambeth is more likely a white man from New Jersey with a three-car garage who supposes that the world in which he lives is described quite well by the pages of the New York Times.

I just can’t stop linking those First Things blog posts.

Here are some pics from Costa Rica — all over that darned country. The set is here.

First glance of Costa Rica — Hampton Inn and Denny’s.

Our first night — our little cabina.

Visiting a coffee plantation, with a traditional oxcart.

View from the porch of our room at the beach.

Wildlife at our hotel.

OK, you DC folks, we have these in our city!

Costa Rican street life, from our rear view mirror.

Arenal, from the road to our hotel.

Arenal, another view.

Lago Arenal, from our hotel. Fluorescent lights at night in the pool, whoo! (kidding)

My wife hates pancakes. I think they’re great. So she’s off working at her new gig (pastry cook, yeah!) today, so I decided I would make some pancakes for breakfast. I couldn’t find baking powder, so I made a variation of this recipe from Gourmet.

Yogurt Pancakes

Ingredients:

1 1/2 cups flour
2 tsp baking soda
3/4 tsp salt
1/2 cup milk
1 cup plain yogurt
2 tbsp vegetable oil
2 large eggs, lightly beaten
1 cup nuts, chocolate chips, dried fruit, or anything else you want.

Directions:

Whisk all ingredients (except fruit/chips/nuts) together until just combined. Sprinkle nuts on pancakes (about 1/3 cup mix) after they’re put on griddle.

They came out light, fluffy, and a little tangy (because of the yogurt). I used chocolate chips.

From Richard John Neuhaus’ closing speech at the National Right to Life Convention:

“…We contend, and we contend relentlessly, for the dignity of the human person, of every human person, created in the image and likeness of God, destined from eternity for eternity—every human person, no matter how weak or how strong, no matter how young or how old, no matter how productive or how burdensome, no matter how welcome or how inconvenient. Nobody is a nobody; nobody is unwanted. All are wanted by God, and therefore to be respected, protected, and cherished by us.

We shall not weary, we shall not rest, until every unborn child is protected in law and welcomed in life. We shall not weary, we shall not rest, until all the elderly who have run life’s course are protected against despair and abandonment, protected by the rule of law and the bonds of love. We shall not weary, we shall not rest, until every young woman is given the help she needs to recognize the problem of pregnancy as the gift of life. We shall not weary, we shall not rest, as we stand guard at the entrance gates and the exit gates of life, and at every step along way of life, bearing witness in word and deed to the dignity of the human person—of every human person.

Against the encroaching shadows of the culture of death, against forces commanding immense power and wealth, against the perverse doctrine that a woman’s dignity depends upon her right to destroy her child, against what St. Paul calls the principalities and powers of the present time, this convention renews our resolve that we shall not weary, we shall not rest, until the culture of life is reflected in the rule of law and lived in the law of love.

…

We do not know, we do not need to know, how the battle for the dignity of the human person will be resolved. God knows, and that is enough. As Mother Teresa of Calcutta and saints beyond numbering have taught us, our task is not to be successful but to be faithful. Yet in that faithfulness is the lively hope of success. We are the stronger because we are unburdened by delusions. We know that in a sinful world, far short of the promised Kingdom of God, there will always be great evils. The principalities and powers will continue to rage, but they will not prevail.

In the midst of the encroaching darkness of the culture of death, we have heard the voice of him who said, “In the world you will have trouble. But fear not, I have overcome the world.” Because he has overcome, we shall overcome. We do not know when; we do not know how. God knows, and that is enough. We know the justice of our cause, we trust in the faithfulness of his promise, and therefore we shall not weary, we shall not rest.”

There’s a lot I left out. Well worth your time — read it here.

The New York Times conducted an interview with Enrique Peñalosa, the former mayor of Bogoá, Colombia. I’ve always had an interest in urban spaces, and why certain designs make one feel one way as opposed to another. For instance, why does driving around Dallas feel so different from driving around Washington, DC? What makes Seattle so different from Tampa?

The whole idea is that a city can be designed to encourage or discourage various behaviors. Wide sidewalks and dense neighborhoods encourage walking. Bike lanes encourage, well, biking. Parking restrictions or high meter fees encourage use of mass transit, especially when that transit is reliable and inexpensive. Building eighteen-lane highways from downtown to all the major suburbs encourages driving. HOV lanes (or HOV interstates) encourage carpooling. Sandwiching commercial zoning in a residential neighborhood encourages community businesses. Zoning miles of residential eighth-acre lots encourages driving-only subdivisions. And the like.

Peñalosa is a politician who gave up socialism as a “failed economic system” (rightly so) but retained the idea that cities can be created to encourage community cohesion and a sense of equality among residents.  In developing countries, Peñalosa says, most citizens don’t have cars, so good sidewalks are “symbols of equality.” I would say that in a city with a big disparity between rich and poor, where many citizens don’t have cars, good sidewalks are symbols of equality. This is probably more prominent in Washington’s suburbs, which are more likely to be car-centric. In these suburbs (especially the Virginia ones, to be openly and unabashedly hating on Virginia), many suburbs lack sidewalks, which Peñalosa says “is a very bad sign of a lack of respect for human dignity,” because it creates two tiers of citizens, the ones who can drive, and the ones who must walk in the patches of dirt created by other poor people who walk. This mirrors an article in ByFaith (the link went bad, but here’s my summary from four years ago (!)), which noted that the creation of public spaces where both the Mayor and the poorest resident can sit on public benches in equality is a mercy that a community affords all of its residents, especially the poorer ones.

In another biography at the Project for Public Spaces, Enrique shares his perspective on the ability for urban spaces to change civic attitudes and perceptions. He is quoted  as saying “Public space is for living, doing business, kissing [Tom: Oh so latinoamérica], and playing. Its value can’t be measured with economics or mathematics; it must be felt with the soul.” Peñalosa created bike paths, pedestrian walkways (peatonales in Spanish), a new transit system, and was famously known for riding his own bike to work. When asked in a 2005 interview about the place of “happiness” in urban planning, he says “I think the Declaration of Independence is very beautiful because it makes a very powerful reference to happiness. However, when you got down to making the constitution, you left happiness out. Maybe lawyers got in the way. But that idea of the pursuit of happiness is very beautiful. We all run the risk of forgetting that the material possessions we accumulate are meaningless, and that happiness is what matters, even though it is difficult to measure.”

While I know nothing of Peñalosa’s spiritual background, he touches on an important theological note. Human dignity, aesthetics, beauty, and creativity are firmly supported by Christianity. If we believe that Jesus is Lord of everything, including our cities, then we can push to include these non-quantifiable and non-commercial concepts as factors in the planning of our cities, towns, and neighborhoods. Interesting implications for urban Christians.

The Great Debate (From First Things — On The Square)
By R.S. Gwynn

I say we must have change.
Our changes will consist
Of things you may find strange.
I have a little list
Of things we plan to change.

I too say we should change,
Change but not too much.
We’ll simply rearrange
Some agencies and such,
Which means we will have change.

Of course by “change” I mean
(And, please, make no mistake)
Not a sweep that’s clean,
Not change for change’s sake,
When I mean “change,” I mean.

I’m glad that we agree
That changes should be few,
No more than two or three—
Changes by me, not you.
It’s nice that we agree.

You’re twisting what I said.
You’re mangling what I meant.
The polls say I’m ahead.
I should be President.
You’re mangling what I said.
You’re twisting what I meant.

This was a sad year for evangelicals in the PC(USA), with few issues being decided in a way that is faithful to the witness of Scripture and hundreds of years of Reformed history. Here is a breakdown of the 2008 GA’s decisions, issue-by-issue:

Heidelberg Catechism:

The GA decided to change the historic catechism and to remove the words “those guilty of homosexual perversion” from Question 87’s response. Though the majority was right in saying it wasn’t in the original version of the catechism, the words are found in 1 Corinthians 6 where the catechism directs its attention. Many translations added it to ensure that the original meaning of the answer (which is based on Scripture) was maintained.

Link: The Layman Online

Link: PCUSA

It is interesting how into the “original meaning” of things the PCUSA gets when they aren’t Scripture and seem to favor them. When an issue of morality in Scripture is presented, suddenly Scripture is turned into a “guide” and “witness” and nothing authoritative.

Interfaith Relations:

The GA narrowly avoided affirming that Christians, Jews, and Muslims all “worship the same God,” but instead affirmed that we are “all children of this loving God” and called for Christians to set aside times to celebrate Jewish and Muslim religious holidays and to worship with each other.

Link: The Layman Online

Link: GA Action

Link: PCUSA

I find a significant leap between Judaism and Islam. Jewish holidays were celebrated by Jesus, and are a partial revelation of God’s work in the world. But Islam is another story altogether.

Sex Ed:

The GA approved the creation of a new CE curriculum for sexual education, but gave the (probably liberal) authors significant latitude to write what they want. An amendment was proposed to limit the curriculum to endorsing the idea that sexual behavior is to be limited to marriage between a man and a woman, but was soundly defeated. A theological adviser said that limiting the curriculum to “heterosexual monogamy” would “suffocate” the authors.

Link: The Layman Online

Link: PCUSA

I suppose Scripture is pretty suffocating as well.

Leadership:

Bruce Reyes-Chow was elected as moderator of the GA. Here are some excerpts from an interview:

How do you feel about the allegations leveled at the EPC regarding departing PCUSA congregations?
I am not convinced this is a good use of our energies. (good!)

Please comment on an issue or initiative of your choice.
When it comes to the core issue of same-sex relationships, I believe homosexuality is not sinful by nature and should not be an excluding factor for ordination or marriage.

Link: The Layman Online

Link: PCUSA

Gradye Parsons, best described as a moderate church politico who has been involved with presbytery bureaucracy, was elected Stated Clerk of the GA, replacing Clifton Kirkpatrick (who I went to Cuba with).

When asked about the authority of the Bible, he stated, “Scripture is God’s great word to us. It is the Word unparalleled.” … It is “our starting place, my starting place when I’m trying to discern God’s word to me.” Then he added, “It is a book that is not easy to read because it is always reading us.”

Translation: “I’m way too political and savvy to lean hard one way or the other on this issue,” as if one could lean too hard on Biblical authority.

Link: Presbyterian Outlook

Link: PCUSA

Gay Ordination:

Here’s the clincher. The GA voted to remove the G-6.0106b “fidelity and chastity” ordination standard, though it will have to be approved by the presbyteries. With the departure of conservative churches from many presbyteries, this is more likely than ever to pass. What is possibly worse, the GA removed the “authoritative interpretation” of the BOA that states that homosexual sex is sin, leaving the door open for presbyteries to approve candidates who have a “scruple” with that issue. In other words, a presbytery can ordain whoever they want, and it makes it harder for conservative presbyteries to reject already-ordained candidates because homosexuality is no longer a valid reason to object to a candidate.

Link: More Light Presbyterians

Link: The Layman Online

Link: PCUSA

Link: IRD

Churches Leaving the PC(USA):

GA voted to approve a $2 million fund to fight churches leaving the PC(USA) for the EPC. Where will the money come from? An increased per-capita assessment on churches. The GA doesn’t have money to fund world missions, evangelism, or new church development, but they want to spend $2 million to fight brothers and sisters who just can’t take any more.

Link: The Layman Online

Link: IRD (scroll down)

I didn’t get to all of the issues, though some were encouraging. GA decided NOT to approve gay marriage, though a committee expressed the desire that Presbyterians will find ways to “honor alternative covenants between two people.” Israel-Palestine issues went well. See The Layman or IRD or other sites for more info on those decisions.

Living in the city can be so random sometimes.

We had a packed day yesterday — brunch at our place with friends who are moving, the powwow at AU, a barbecue with an already-moved friend who is back in town for the weekend, and then drinks at another friend’s house. In between the brunch and the powwow, we were trying to get out the door, and we heard this booming bass sound. We thought one of our neighbors was having a mid-morning dance party. So we walk outside, only to find huge crowds of people and a parade on Georgia Avenue (next to our building)! Caribbean Day 2008. The picture quality is pretty terrible, but it was a camera phone with tons of folks in the street.

We only stayed for a couple of minutes before heading to drop some leftover cinnamon rolls off at one of our neighbor’s house, who said they would be partying it up on Georgia Avenue until late in the afternoon.

Scott — this one’s for you. The latest General Board of Church and Society sign, on the Hill. I found this on my phone when I was uploading the others. From early in June.

Our community group from Grace DC is gathering at our place in Petworth next Wednesday for a prayer time, and I was looking for something on the subject to send out to our group members to encourage them before we all head off to our weekend stuff. I ran across Abraham Kuyper’s Work of the Holy Spirit, which is available online in full text at the Christian Classics Ethereal Library. I got caught up in reading the chapter on “Prayer For and With Each Other,” and thought I would post the portions I found most important.

“Confess your faults one to another and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual, fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” - James v. 16.

…

Christ prays for us, but the Bride must also pray for her heavenly Bridegroom. David’s prayer for Solomon points beyond Solomon to the Messiah: “Give the King Thy judgments, O God”. In the Twentieth and Sixty-first Psalms the same thought is expressed. However, this is not a prayer for His Person (for as such He is glorified already), but for the coming of His Kingdom, for the extending of His Name to the ends of the earth, for the gathering in of the souls of His elect.

…

And what is the work of the Holy Spirit in the prayer of intercession?

It is necessary here, for a clear understanding, to distinguish between a twofold intercession: (1) there is a prayer for the things that pertain to the body of Christ; and (2) another for the things that do not belong to that body, according to our impression and conception of the matter.

Prayer for kings, and for all that are in authority, does not concern the things that pertain to the body of Christ; neither does the prayer for our enemies, nor that for the place of our habitation, for country, army, and navy, for a bountiful harvest, for deliverance from pestilence, for trade and commerce, etc. All these pertain to the natural life, and to persons, whether saints or sinners, in their relation to the life of creation, and not to the Kingdom of Grace. But our prayer does concern the body of Christ, when we pray for the coming of the Lord, for a fresh anointing of the priests of God, for their being clothed upon with salvation, for success in the work of missions, for a baptism of the Holy Spirit, for strength in conflict, for forgiveness of sin, for the salvation of our loved ones, for the effectual conversion of the baptized seed of the Church. The first intercession has reference to the realm of nature, the second to the Kingdom of Grace. Hence in each of these two we must look for the bond of fellowship from which springs our prayer of intercession.

…

With reference to the intercession in the realm of nature, the ground of this fellowship is naturally found in the fact that we are created of one blood. Humanity is one. The nations form an organic whole. It is a mighty trunk with leafy crown; the nations and peoples are the branches thereof, successive generations the boughs, and each of us is a fluttering leaf. Belonging together, living together upon the same root of our human nature, it is one flesh and one blood, which from Adam to the last-born child covers every skeleton and runs through every man’s veins. Hence the desire for universal philanthropy; the claim that nothing be alien to us that is human; the necessity of loving our enemy and of praying for him, for he also is of our flesh and of our bones.

If we were like grains in a heap of sand, each grain might possibly send forth a sigh; but the mutual prayer of intercession would be out of the question. Being leaves, however, of the same tree of life, there is, apart from the groaning of every leaf, also a prayer for one another, a mutual prayer of the entire human life; “the whole creation groaneth.”

But in the Kingdom of Grace the fellowship of love is much stronger, firmer, and more intimate. There is here also an organic whole, even the body of Christ under Him the Head. It is not one converted person independent of another, and the two united by a mere outward tie of sympathy; nay, but a multitude of branches all springing from the same root of Jesse; growing from the one vine; all organically one; saved and redeemed by the same ransom of His blood; proceeding from the one act of election; born again by the self-same regeneration; brought nigh by the same faith; breaking one bread and drinking from one cup.

And let us notice it well, this unity is doubly strong; for it is not independent of the fellowship of nature, but added to it. They who become members of the body of Christ are with us created from the one blood of Adam, and with us they are redeemed by the one blood of Christ. Hence there is here double root of fellowship. Flesh of our flesh, bones of our bones. Moreover, born from one decree; sealed by one baptism; joined together in one body; included in one promise; by and by sharers with us of the same inheritance.

…

In the realm of nature, our vital power is from the Father, our human kinship through the Son, and the conception of that kinship from the Holy Ghost. Hence in the ordinary manifestations of benevolence, such as helpfulness in distress, friendliness in daily life, and the desire for social intercourse, it is the work of the Holy Spirit to keep alive in us the conception of our human kinship. It is true that sin has terribly disturbed this conception. Yet the Holy Spirit has not forsaken His work; but, when a man seeing a strange child drowning, and, without considering his own life, jumps into the water and saves him, then it is the constraining power of the Holy Spirit that must be honored in this heroic act of philanthropy.

But much more apparent is the work of the Holy Spirit in the prayer of intercession which belongs to the domain of grace. For with reference to the fellowship of the body of Christ, it is again the Father from whom proceeds our redemption, the Son in whom we are united, and the Holy Spirit who imparts to us the conception and consciousness of this unity and holy fellowship. The mere fact of being chosen by the Father and redeemed by the Son does not constrain us to love; it is the act of the Holy Spirit, who, revealing to our conception and consciousness this wonderful gift of grace, opening our eyes for the beauty of being joined to the body of Christ, kindles in us the spark of the love for Christ and for His people. And when this double work of the Holy Spirit effectually operates in us, causing our hearts to be drawn to all that belong to us by virtue of our human kinship, and much more strongly to the people of God by virtue of our kinship in the Son, then there awakes in us the love of which the apostle says that it is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost.

…

From which it is evident that there must be a connecting link between love and the prayer born of love. As soon as love begins to pray it is joined to faith; and by this union prayer becomes active. Love alone is not yet prayer. And the mere prayer of intercession is not the evidence of love. Then alone is there real intercession, when love, being joined to faith, constrains us to carry the object of love before the throne of grace.

…

This shows clearly what is the additional work of the Holy Spirit in this respect: not merely that He quicken in us general faith, nor that He fan in us the flames of brotherly love; but that He also cause faith to join love in holy wedlock, directing them thus united to the brother for whom we are to pray. This is the object of St. Paul, when he desires that there shall be a fellowship of saints, not only in the gift of God, but also in the prayer of thanksgiving; not only for our sakes, but “That the abounding grace might through the thanksgiving of many rebound to the glory of God”

Just as in a drawing-room whose walls are lined with crystal mirrors the light of the chandelier is reflected not only by every mirror, but also from mirror to mirror, so that there is an endless reflection of the light, so also is it with reference to the prayer of intercession and thanksgiving in the body of Christ. In this chamber of glory Christ is the Light which is reflected in the mirror of the soul. But it is not sufficient that every soul-mirror receive the light, and reflect it in thanksgiving; but from mirror to mirror this glory of the Son must be reflected here or there until there is an never-ending scintillation of increasing brightness; and everything is baptized in the overflowing luster in which the Son glorifies Himself.

And this leads us to speak of mutual prayer.

Mutual prayer is intercession of the richest sort; for its value is enhanced by the consciousness of its being mutual. In ordinary intercession, one prays for another not knowing whether the other also prays for him, but in the mutual prayer, “I “ is turned into “we,” as in the Lord’s Prayer. It is no longer one wrestling before the throne of grace, but all together, thus giving expression to the unity and fellowship of the body of Christ. They cry from one distress; they bless Him for the same grace; they plead the same promise; they look forward to the same glory; they come to the same Father in the name of the one Mediator, leaning upon the same atoning blood. Then it is that the work of the Holy Spirit attains its highest glory. Then He joins faith and love, not in one heart, but in many; then He opens the hearts and unites the souls of the saints; then He causes them to meet together in the audience-chamber of the Lord God, one people, a multitude of believers, who in their spiritual kinship reflect the unity of the body of Christ.

…

Surely if the Holy Spirit left us to ourselves, every activity of faith, love, and prayer would soon be paralyzed. But, blessed be God! He knows our infirmity, and with divine pity He looks upon our painful helplessness. He is and remains the Comforter; His work is never ended. When we slept, having no oil in our lamps, He watched over our souls. When our love failed, He loved us just the same. When our faith became dull and faint, and prayer became dumb upon our lips, He prayed for us with groanings that can not be uttered.

And this is His work continually. It is He that is the divine Bearer of every higher conception and holier consciousness in the children of men; He, the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, that exhibits all the riches of the Mediator to the Bride, making her eager to possess them; He that quickens the treasures of the Word by the spark of His holy fire, bringing them to the consciousness of the inward man.

Blessed is the man to whom has been given a taste of the work of the Holy Spirit in his own experience. Blessed is the Church which in its service has proved the inworking of the Spirit of grace and of supplication. Blessed is he who, constrained to love by the love of the Holy Spirit, has opened his heart in thanks, praise, and adoration, not only to the Father who from eternity has chosen and called him, and to the Son who has bought and redeemed him, but also to the Third Person in the Holy Trinity, who has kindled in him the light and keeps it burning in the inward darkness; to whom, therefore, with the Father and the Son, belongs forever the sacrifice of love and devotion of all the Church of God.

That last line may well be the best short description of the believer’s devotional relationship to God — Father, Son, and Holy Spirit — that I have ever read.

Abraham Kuyper was a theologian as well as a Dutch statesmen, eventually serving as Prime Minister of the Netherlands. I wish our statesmen today spent this much time reflecting on God and on the role of faith in all of life. I should make campaign signs — “VOTE FOR ABRAHAM KUYPER,” instead of promoting McCain or Obama.

Here’s one thing that we can decisively say would not have happened if John Kerry had been elected. For better or worse, depending on your particular views on the subject.

The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, overturned the District of Columbia’s ban on gun ownership. I scanned (for a while, actually) the written opinions, which were all thoughtfully and well-written, as befits a decision of this Constitutional magnitude. I do find the impassioned tone of all the opinions somewhat surprising, as opinions delivered on even controversial topics tend to be somewhat aloof and disengaged.

Kudos also to Scalia, Stevens, and Breyer, for largely considering the merits of the case based on the actual intentions of the framers of the Constitution, rather than out of a desire to create some previously nonexistent right out of thin air.

A final note before a summary/analysis of each opinion, though the analyses are limited by time and not guaranteed to be entirely accurate. The District’s handgun ban is really stupid. We (existing as we do in somewhere around 60 square miles) are surrounded by jurisdictions where gun ownership and sales are legal. In Virginia, it is ridiculously (seriously, ridiculously) easy to buy a handgun and drive back across the river. The person doing so would be violating the law, but criminal types hardly care about that, do they? The result is the classic argument that the only citizens in the District with guns are the criminals. If Texas banned guns, it would be somewhat more difficult for criminals in San Antonio to get guns with a five hour drive to the nearest jurisdiction. In DC? Criminals are never more than a ten minute drive or train ride from the nearest gun-legal jurisdiction.

Majority Opinion (Scalia): A plain reading of the clause itself (”the people”) lends itself to an individual right to keep and bear arms (for any legal purpose). This is compared to other uses of “the people” in the Constitution. Scalia notes the framers meant to codify the right as one that was already in existence at the time the Constitution was written. He looks to previous laws and codes and proposed amendments (from the States) to discern the shape of the extant right to bear arms, and concludes that the right includes an individual right to bear arms for self-defense. There are limitations on the right, as Scalia notes:

Thus, we do not read the Second Amendment to protect the right of citizens to carry arms for any sort of confrontation, just as we do not read the First Amendment to protect the right of citizens to speak for any purpose.

Scalia argues that “militia” as used in the clause was generally understood to be the existent militia that consisted of every able-bodied man, and not the force that the Constitution elsewhere gives Congress the power to access (”armies and navies”). The founding generation was generally known to question the need for a standing army, as elsewhere the right of individuals to bear arms had been restricted, leaving the power signified (and actualized) by arms to a militia controlled by the government which could squash the will of an unarmed people. It therefore follows that the framers of the Constitution meant to ensure that every able-bodied man retained the ability to bear arms.

Several states followed the adoption of the Constitution with analogous amendments to their own state Constitutions, four of which can reasonably be interpreted to have enshrined an individual’s right to bear arms. This means that those who argue the Constitution does not protect an individual right must treat the Federal Constitution as an outlier or anomaly in its day. Scalia writes:

The historical narrative that petitioners must endorse would thus treat the Federal Second Amendment as an odd outlier, protecting a right unknown in state constitutions or at English common law, based on little more than an overreading of the prefatory clause.

Scalia concludes with a lengthy discussion of how the Second Amendment was viewed throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, with an eye toward an individual’s right to bear arms. Futhermore, he notes, nothing in current precedent serves as a barrier to the Court’s adoption of the original intent of the framers to enshrine the individual right to bear arms. He qualifies the holding with:

Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

And the closer, which is a great line:

Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.

Go, Scalia. Quotable for centuries to come. Here’s a favorite example of how Scalia pretty much just rocks at writing opinions:

The amici also dismiss examples such as “ ‘bear arms . . . for the purpose of killing game’ ” because those uses are “expressly qualified.” (JUSTICE STEVENS uses the same excuse for dismissing the state constitutional provisions analogous to the Second Amendment that identify private-use purposes for which the individual right can be asserted.) That analysis is faulty. A purposive qualifying phrase that contradicts the word or phrase it modifies is unknown this side of the looking glass (except, apparently, in some courses on Linguistics). If “bear arms” means, as we think, simply the carrying of arms, a modifier can limit the purpose of the carriage (“for the purpose of selfdefense” or “to make war against the King”). But if “bear arms” means, as the petitioners and the dissent think, the 16 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER Opinion of the Court carrying of arms only for military purposes, one simply cannot add “for the purpose of killing game.” The right “to carry arms in the militia for the purpose of killing game” is worthy of the mad hatter. Thus, these purposive qualifying phrases positively establish that “to bear arms” is not limited to military use.

Primary Dissent (Stevens): To be added when I have more time.

Dissent (Breyer): To be added when I have more time.

There’s a snarky (yet Constitutional) note in Justice Breyers’ dissent (p. 13) about the District’s status in the Federal/State/Local hierarchy. Good thing it’s not controlling precedent, though there are plenty of other precedents to fall back on.

This Court has final authority (albeit not often used) to definitively interpret District law, which is, after all, simply a species of federal law.

Thus, I’m doubly a ward of the Federal government. First, as an Indian, and second, as a citizen of the District of Columbia. Shouldn’t I get some huge welfare check to compensate for my inability to exercise the same rights and responsibilities as any other citizen?

• BaylyBlog: PCA General Assembly votes not to move in the direction of women deacons…
  PCA denies request for study committee on women deacons.
  (tags: pca women diaconate christianity church)
• Foreign Policy: The List: Top Tourist Spots Americans Can’t Visit
  Take a look at these great places you can’t go visit.
  (tags: tourism burma cuba northkorea iran somalia)
• Ma baloney haz a furst name…I Can Has Cheezburger?
  Evil looking cat.
  (tags: ICHC funny cats baloney)
• DCist: Tim Russert Dies of Heart Attack
  Sad. He was young, and his son just graduated from college.
  (tags: timrussert dcist sad)
• D.C. mayor gets ‘Smart’ - WTOP
  Mayor Fenty bought a Smart convertible. I hear they’re crap.
  (tags: smartcar dc fenty environment)
• The Chicago Spire.
  2000 ft tall condo building going up in Chicago. Bet that’s a pretty decent investment. HT: BrownPau
  (tags: chicago condos realestate tall skyscraper)