Couldn't Help Noticing

Calvin: DOB 5/11/04

I just read a fantastic article which appeared in last weekend's Daily Telegraph. The story simultaneously provokes feelings of joy and terror. Joy, for the parents of baby Calvin, who are so grateful to God for the birth of a healthy baby boy. Terror, at the attitude of many people working in the medical industry towards abortion. Read the article and you'll see what I mean.

I have personal knowledge of three separate instances where couples in the early stages of pregnancy have been advised that there may be complications with the baby. But they have not simply been presented with abortion as one of a few possible options: they've actually been pressured, fairly heavily, to abort the baby (prior to any test results being available). And in more than one instance, the baby has been born without any health problems.

Is that not absolutely terrifying?

Clever Joseph

Has anyone seen the picture in Monday's Sydney Morning Herald of the ‘Posh and Becks’ nativity scene at Madame Tussauds? You can't help noticing the two massive jewel-encrusted crosses around Joseph's neck (for a better shot, click here). A friend of mine pointed out the prescience of said crosses (given the fact that Jesus had only just been born, and had not yet died on the cross).

Prescience: knowledge of things before they exist or happen; foreknowledge; foresight.

How humility can win you a hearing

One of the many ‘image’ problems Christians face in the wider media is that so many who pop up as our representatives are not at all representative of who we are and what we believe. Sometimes it's the Bishop who makes no sense at all, or worse, who does make sense, but it's'burn-em-at-the-stake heresy). And sometimes its the shrill, argumentative brother who comes over as uncaring and deeply bigoted.

Three cheers therefore, for a New York Times Columnist who, sick to death of the latter kind of American believer who constantly fills their airwaves, did a little research and came up with a remarkable piece singing the praises of... wait for it ... John Stott! Here is a telling extract.

This is why so many people are so misinformed about evangelical Christians. There is a world of difference between real-life people of faith and the made-for-TV, Elmer Gantry-style blowhards who are selected to represent them. Falwell and Pat Robertson are held up as spokesmen for evangelicals, which is ridiculous. Meanwhile people like John Stott, who are actually important, get ignored.

It could be that you have never heard of John Stott. I don't blame you. As far as I can tell, Stott has never appeared on an important American news program. A computer search suggests that Stott's name hasn't appeared in this newspaper since April 10, 1956, and it's never appeared in many other important publications.

Yet, as Michael Cromartie of the Ethics and Public Policy Center notes, if evangelicals could elect a pope, Stott is the person they would likely choose. He was the framer of the Lausanne Covenant, a crucial organizing document for modern evangelicalism. He is the author of more than 40 books, which have been translated into over 72 languages and have sold in the millions.

When you read Stott, you encounter first a tone of voice. It is a voice that is friendly, courteous and natural. It is humble and self-critical, but also confident, joyful and optimistic. Stott's mission is to pierce through all the encrustations and share direct contact with Jesus. Stott says that the central message of the gospel is not the teachings of Jesus, but Jesus himself, the human/divine figure. He is always bringing people back to the concrete reality of Jesus' life and sacrifice.

There's been a lot of twaddle written recently about the supposed opposition between faith and reason. To read Stott is to see someone practicing ‘thoughtful allegiance’ to scripture. For him, Christianity means probing the mysteries of Christ. He is always exploring paradoxes. Jesus teaches humility, so why does he talk about himself so much? What does it mean to gain power through weakness, or freedom through obedience? In many cases the truth is not found in the middle of apparent opposites, but on both extremes simultaneously.

Stott is so embracing it's always a bit of a shock—especially if you're a Jew like me—when you come across something on which he will not compromise. He does not accept homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle, and of course he believes in evangelizing among nonbelievers. He is pro-life and pro-death penalty, even though he is not a political conservative on most issues.

Politicians, especially Democrats, are now trying harder to appeal to people of faith. But people of faith are not just another interest group. You have to begin by understanding the faith. And you can't understand this rising global movement if you don't meet its authentic representatives.

Not Falwell, but Stott.

For the full article, click here.

Sent to us from Tim Thornborough (UK).

An open mind

A couple of weeks ago I read the following quote, on page 4 of the guide (SMH):

And people will have their own perceptions. They'll all look at it and say, “That's what I thought [then]; this is what I think now,” ... It's what we do in life. We make a decision on this, until we get more input, and then we change it. It's the people who don't look at all the information who are the narrow-minded ones.

What a superbly accurate observation. I only wish this was said by someone trying to convince people to look at the evidence for the reliability of the Bible. It's the perfect thing to say!

In fact, it was said by Lindy Chamberlain-Creighton, in relation to the new miniseries Through My Eyes, about the disappearance of her daughter Azaria in 1980.

Merry Blankmas

I can't quite believe it. Somewhere in the world this letter was published (that is, apart from here).

Still, let's not start pulling bon-bons yet. It was rejected from The Australian, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Canberra Times and The Illawarra Mercury.

Dear editor,

I am always impressed by the various annual attempts to bland out Christmas by removing any reference to Christ. Sure, let the scoffers write it off as another example of multiculturalism eating itself. I say, why not go further and call it “Blankmas—fill in your deity here”? I have started already and am getting lots of blank looks, which I take as proof of what a good idea it is.