Filtering by Category: Creation Care,Pro Life: In the Womb

  •   Pro Life: In the Womb   •  

Becoming Completely Pro Life

My goal is to lead Christians in becoming completely pro-life (John 10:10), protecting the vulnerable inside and outside the womb and sharing eternal life with them. We must protect the vulnerable from harm, starting with the baby in the womb (Matthew 18:10). To do this, we must offer a full range of approaches: from personal to legal, from prevention of unintended pregnancies to medical, financial, personal and spiritual support, including options for adoptions in our support for pregnant women. Our ultimate goal encompasses both the eventual elimination of abortion and the demonstration of Christ’s love through our care for mothers and babies (Psalm 127:3). We must also work to protect the vulnerable outside the womb, protecting the most vulnerable (the poor and least insulated) by reducing the disease, displacement and death that comes from pollution (Psalm 72:13). Christians are, also, given the charge of caring for the sick and promoting the full range of healing in this world (John 14:12). From epidemics such as AIDS, to individual sicknesses, to physical, mental, emotional and spiritual disabilities, we are to be agents of His healing and love.

Furthermore, our treatment of all people must take into consideration that they are made in the image of God. Therefore they are to be treated with respect and dignity. Jesus summarized this in what we now refer to as the “Golden Rule” (Matthew 7:12). We should not use or oppress anyone (Luke 4:18). All people are created equal and can choose their religion (Joshua 24:15), and the way they will live their lives. We must work for human rights and religious freedom for all people.

Because God loves justice, and because we are commanded to live a simple lifestyle of doing justice (Micah 6:8), we must stand against different forms of exploitation, systems of advantage for only particular groups, and discrimination based upon circumstances beyond one’s control. We are blessed in order to help the disadvantaged to advance to the place where they help others (Luke 12:48b).

We are to give to those who cannot help themselves as a matter of immediate compassion and eternal reward (Luke 16:19-25).

As we expand the agenda into other areas of moral importance—caring for vulnerable people outside the womb as well as inside it—we will motivate and mobilize many, like never before. More importantly, we will be obeying God's Word and putting it into practice.

View Post

  •   Creation Care   •  

Irreversible, Irreplaceable—Wildlife in a Warming World

This educational mini-documentary reveals how faith, science, art, and conservation voices are joining together to discuss the threat of climate change to wildlife and talk about hope for the future. It features several Christian leaders including Northland's senior pastor, Dr. Joel C. Hunter.

View Post

  •   Creation Care   •  

The Greening of Jesus

Dialogue, by Mark I. Pinsky, Harvard Divinity Bulletin Riding the train down to London last summer, after a two-week fellowship on science and religion at the University of Cambridge, I noticed an article in the Independent newspaper about a new book which reinforced that notion of an increasingly irreligious Europe. It is true that outward signs of faith-apart from biblical passages emblazoned on London's famed red double-decker buses by jesussaid.org-are difficult to come by.

But I found deeply felt Christianity alive and well in an unlikely setting: the academy's scientific community. To many, this may seem counterintuitive. The evangelical theologian Alister McGrath told us he once believed that "science was the ally of atheism." Yet among our other lecturers at the Templeton-Cambridge program were major figures in science, from cosmologists to biologists to particle physicists, who pronounced themselves believers. Of course, given the interests of the late Sir John Templeton, who endowed the fellowships, in the relationship between science and religion, this should not have been surprising.

Still, these towering figures-Simon Conway Morris, John Polkinghorne, Sir Brian Heap, Sir John Houghton-characterized themselves as evangelicals as well. Polkinghorne, author of Science and Theology, preaches at a Cambridge church on weekends. To be sure, these are evangelicals of a particular sort. By and large, they reject creationism and intelligent design, embracing the concept of "theistic evolution," a God-created, billions-years-old universe. None numbered themselves among any of the apocalyptic American evangelical tribes of arrogant dominionists or fanciful premillennial dispensationalists of the "Left Behind" stripe.

Much of the modern dialogue between science and religion deals with the origin of the universe and the development of life on earth-surrogate discussions over the existence of God and the divine role in life. In my relatively brief time at Cambridge, a day did not pass without some mention of Charles Darwin-an alumnus-and Richard Dawkins, the best-selling Oxford atheist. Yet to me, these exchanges have become tiresome, repetitive, and unenlightening.

There have been similar debates among scientists of faith over the morality of stem cell research and end-of-life issues. But a more recent (and intriguing, to me) subset of the science and religion dialogue has emerged among evangelical scientists over climate change. Books arguing the religious case for curbing global warming seem to appear every week with titles like A New Climate for Theology: God, the World, and Global Warming and Jesus Brand Spirituality: He Wants His Religion Back, which asks, "Was Jesus Green?" In A Moral Climate: The Ethics of Global Warming, Michael Northcott asserts that "Christ is present among those suffering already from climate change."

This discussion among Christian researchers raises a host of larger issues, as does another new book, Descartes' Bones: A Skeletal History of the Conflict Between Faith and Reason by Russell Shorto. That is, how does-or should-religious faith motivate, influence, or inform scientific research and its application? Is there a religious foundation for science? Should science glorify God? Can it even be a ministry? Should scientists use their research and that of their colleagues to become activists in causes like global warming? Is it possible for evangelical researchers to reconcile their religious faith and the scientific method?

Increasingly, well-educated, middle-class suburban evangelicals from the Sun Belt are embracing what many Christians call, in a brilliant semantic stroke, "creation care"-a more politically palatable label than "environmentalism." This activist approach to climate change emphasizes biblical stewardship of the earth. There is, to be sure, resistance to this view from evangelical theologians and scientists who argue that global warming does not exist, or that it is part of a natural cycle and in no way the result of human activity and abuse of the earth. Some even argue that the world will soon end with Jesus' return, so don't worry. Thus, Christians are under no obligation to support measures, like the Kyoto Protocols, to drastically limit greenhouse gas emissions. Their scientific advocates are researchers like Calvin Beisner, who has appeared before the Vatican's Pontifical Council on Climate Change and Development. They have organized their own groups, like the Interfaith Council for Environmental Stewardship. Theologically, these opponents agree with the late ultraconservative theologian R. J. Rushdoony, that science must first serve religion: "If Jesus Christ is Lord of the family, he is also Lord of the laboratory."

Yet increasingly, the fundamentalist view of climate change is losing force and is being challenged by other scientists who are equally devout in their evangelical beliefs. At Cambridge the renowned reproductive biologist and ethicist Sir Brian Heap, a self-described "open-minded evangelical," is a leading advocate of addressing climate change. He said he had no difficulty reconciling his personal faith and scientific discovery and advocacy. "When doing my own bench research, it was clear that personal faith influenced decisions about the wisdom of carrying out certain experimentation." He continued, "The religious foundation comes from the Christian motivation to seek the best for others...for the world we too easily damage."

Researchers like Heap have glittering academic credentials, and to bolster their influence, they have joined in groups like Christians in Science in Great Britain. There are prominent American counterparts, like Francis Collins, until recently head of the U.S. Genome Project. The Au Sable Institute of Environmental Studies in the U.S. was founded by a group of evangelicals, including Calvin DeWitt, professor of environmental studies at the University of Wisconsin. Similar groups of evangelical scientists, like the American Scientific Affiliation, began in the late 1960s.

"I'm excited and passionate about understanding the world, its biosphere and ecosystems, and our human place and vocation in creation, to the honor and praise of its Creator," said DeWitt. "It's because of my religious foundation that I've chosen to be a scientist," he continued. "And for all of us in science it is either this, or the inspiration we get from creation, or both that has brought us into this wonderful vocation." DeWitt acknowledges that his lectures sometimes sound like sermons: "Scientific inquiry in some settings can even be a form of worship, I believe-a kind of singing a living psalm to the Lord of creation....My faith inspires my scientific research in helping me to move with passion to discover how the world works, and to do so with integrity."

What happens in the minds of evangelical researchers who may find their religious faith and the scientific method in conflict? Some, like John Polkinghorne, a particle physicist, dismiss the question, saying, where research is concerned, there is no connection between his science and his faith. "I can't tell the difference in research in physics done by a religious believer and that done by an atheist." But he added, "If you see the world as a divine creation, that's a further motive to explore its order."

"Science and theology offer complementary perspectives," said Fraser Watts, professor of theology at Cambridge, a weekend preacher, and editor of Science Meets Faith. "Science tells us how, religion tells us why." Robert White, professor of geophysics at Cambridge, and co-author of Christianity, Climate Change and Sustainable Living, as well as a contributor to Real Scientists, Real Faith, agreed. "Our work, the attitudes we bring to it and the way we do it should be as much part of our worship of God as is the hour or two we spend in church on a Sunday," he said. "Science is a secular activity insofar as its very strength is in not appealing to any external causes-such as divine activity."

Sir John Houghton, in his former capacity as chief executive of England's Meteorological Office, said that in his groundbreaking research he was acting "absolutely as a scientist looking for the truth." He said he didn't approach his scientific research on the issue "from an ethical or moral side," and his religion had no influence on his findings. Once he reached his conclusion, however, he acknowledges pursuing the cause as a "missionary." "I believe the problem we're facing is not just a technical and scientific one," Houghton said, "but a moral and spiritual one."

"The impact of global warming is such that I have no doubt in describing it as a weapon of mass destruction," Houghton told a meeting of British Baptists. The scientist is credited with influencing the climate change debate beyond his own country to the United States, where some evangelical groups, like the Southern Baptist Convention, are deeply divided on global climate change.

Houghton has personally influenced American religious leaders like the Rev. Richard Cizik, head of the 30-million-member National Association of Evangelicals. Cizik's 2002 Oxford "conversion" on the issue-which has been compared to the Apostle Paul's on the road to Damascus-led to charges by fundamentalists that he was advocating "his own political opinions as scientific fact." This led to a concerted effort by conservative leaders like James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and Richard Lamb to get him fired.

Nonetheless, support for an activist role in dealing with climate change has become a major tenet among a cohort of younger, mega-church pastors now bidding to assume national leadership of the evangelical movement. (However, the debate over climate change among American believers is not solely sectarian-or scientific. It is also generational, and is even being used as a classic wedge issue.)

In Central Florida, the Rev. Joel Hunter, of Northland, a Church Distributed, has become a major proponent of creation care, and a member of this cohort. Hunter has met with Houghton three times, for several hours at a time, in various conferences around the world. His congregation has gone "green" with a vengeance, recycling just about everything they use and educating themselves on the larger issue of climate change. The church has also hosted national conferences featuring DeWitt in person and Houghton through video.

Support on the global climate change issue from believing researchers like Houghton is very important, said Hunter. "American evangelicals respect good, peer-reviewed science done by respected and recognized scientists," even more so when they are also committed Christians. This is especially true given the influential role evangelicals exercise on America's political dynamic.

Many believe that ideally science and religion should be inseparable. As Houghton put it, "We are integrated people. Theology was once called the 'Queen of the sciences.' "

Mark I. Pinsky, former religion writer for The Orlando Sentinel, is author of A Jew Among the Evangelicals: A Guide for the Perplexed (Westminster John Knox Press, 2006).

Find this article at: http://www.hds.harvard.edu/news/bulletin_mag/articles/37-1/pinsky.html

View Post

  •   Pro Life: In the Womb   •  

Faith-Based Office To Expand Its Reach: Goals Will Include Reducing Abortion

By Michelle Boorstein and Kimberly Kindy, Washington Post Staff Writers Friday, February 6, 2009 - President Obama yesterday announced the creation of his faith-based outreach office, expanding its agenda beyond funding social programs to work on policies aimed at strengthening family life and reducing abortion.

Obama's office leaves in place rules that allow faith-based groups receiving federal funding to hire only people of their own faith, but White House aides said the hiring rules would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis when there are complaints and that the Justice Department will provide legal assistance.

Obama's move more fully formalizes the partnerships between the federal government and faith groups that first began under President Bill Clinton and was expanded by President George W. Bush. But where Bush used the faith office primarily for funding programs -- drawing criticism that he was mainly assisting his political supporters -- Obama said he wants to use the office for policy guidance, as well.

Speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast at the Hilton Washington yesterday, Obama said the goal of the initiative "will not be to favor one religious group over another -- or even religious groups over secular groups. It will simply be to work on behalf of those organizations that want to work on behalf of our communities, and to do so without blurring the line our Founders wisely drew between church and state."

The president created a 25-member advisory council and named 15 of its members yesterday, including several high-profile evangelicals -- the Rev. Joel C. Hunter, senior pastor of a Florida megachurch, and the Rev. Frank S. Page, president emeritus of the Southern Baptist Convention -- as well as representatives from secular nonprofits, which largely had little association with Bush's faith-based initiative. The council members are to advise the faith office on policy but will not play a direct role in allocating federal grants. The office will be headed by Joshua DuBois, a 26-year-old Pentecostal who worked on religious issues for Obama's campaign.

The office will be more involved in policy planning than it was during the Bush years, White House aides said. They said the top priorities for the office will be interfaith relations, strengthening the role of fathers in society and reducing poverty. The office also will help develop policies aimed at reducing the number of abortions, though no specifics were offered.

Obama kept in place, however, much of the legal structure for the office created through executive orders by Bush. The 11 faith-based offices Bush established in different agencies and a faith liaison in the public outreach office will continue. Paul Monteiro will be the religious liaison in the Office of Public Liaison, the White House said yesterday.

DuBois said the faith-based office will employ about 50 people. Despite speaking on the campaign trail against the Bush administration's approach -- including on hiring and proselytizing -- Obama wants "to create a process to look at this in a way that can withstand scrutiny and takes into account views on all sides," DuBois said in an interview yesterday.

Three members of the advisory council -- Page, the Rev. Jim Wallis and World Vision President Richard Stearns -- have heightened concerns among church-state separatists. The Southern Baptist Convention, which Page led, says that it is discriminatory for the government to prevent its members from sharing their faith with others. And Stearns's organization received funding in the Bush years while saying it should not be forced to hire non-Christians.

Faith-based nonprofits received federal grants totaling more than $10.6 billion during the Bush administration, said members of the former White House staff.

Some religious groups argued at the time that they could use taxpayer-funded program to help people out of poverty and addiction by teaching them about God and salvation. And yesterday, some advocates of church-state separation said Obama should not have left the Bush legal structure in place.

"He is expanding the Bush administration's faith-based initiative without putting the most important safeguards in place. The president has created a more powerful office with a greater ability to shovel federal taxpayer dollars to religious groups, but civil rights protections are being deferred for later study and decisions," said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Ira C. Lupu, a George Washington University law professor who has written on White House faith-based initiatives, said it was wise for Obama not to move too fast. As a candidate, Obama "hadn't looked at the issue carefully," Lupu said. "I think as a first move, handing it to lawyers is good. But it doesn't avoid that he'll have to deal with this eventually."

Staff writer Jacqueline L. Salmon contributed to this report.

Find this article at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/05/AR2009020500834.html?sub=AR

View Post