October 2003 Archives

Okay, so here is the deal.... Bear cub #6 had never had a haircut. In Daddy’s opinion, it just does not work to have a karate-chop executing, manly little toddler with the name of “Howard Honor Phillips,” running around, looking like a girlie-boy. To the precious ladies in his life who reverence the out-of-control golden locks as a living remembrance to perpetual babyhood, the idea of placing the blade to his hair was embraced with tear felt reluctance, but as a necessary rite of passage.

After much discussion, I announced to the entire bear clan my theory that the little boy’s behavior (actually, he is very sweet) would immediately improve after the haircut. After all, everyone knows that long hair fosters bad behavior. My children reminded me of all my long-haired Founding Father friends, so I quickly shifted the argument. Nevertheless, recognizing that enough is enough, and that there will be no little hippie boys in the Phillips family, I announced the date of the hair execution. Thus, Saturday, October 25, was set aside for “the shearing of the bear.”

We drove the unwitting, happy little bear to the appointed place where the deed was to be done.

Above is the evidence.

The victim awaits the hair execution.

It begins.

“Trust me, little boy, just trust me,” says the blade-toting Barber of San Antonio.

In the end, order is returned to our peaceful community. Though the process was emotionally taxing, the cub emerged unscathed. Most importantly, as the final golden lock of rebellion fell to the ground, a new, brighter, happier bear emerged. All is well with the world.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 27, 2003 | Permalink

Dear Friends of the Family and Lovers of Freedom:

The Lord has a wonderful way of vindicating the just and exposing those who persecute the just. Today, Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor, a man who has actively persecuted Chief Justice Roy Moore for his righteous stand, and who seeks to have him removed from office, has been exposed as a man with a double standard and a gargantuan conflict of interests.

After years of silence in the press, former Governor Fob James has come out of retirement from public life to file affidavits urging the Court of the Judiciary to remove Bill Pryor from his role as prosecutor against Chief Justice Roy Moore in the up-and-coming suspension trial because of gross conflict of interest by Mr. Pryor. Governor James has gone on record indicating that at the time of his consideration of Mr. Pryor for the position of Attorney General, Bill Pryor specifically indicated his heartfelt support for Governor James position that a federal order to remove the Ten Commandments would be inappropriate and must be considered invalid. According to Governor James, Bill Pryor explicitly indicated he would not obey a federal order to remove the Ten Commandments. It was upon this testimony of Bill Pryor, that Governor James agreed to appoint him to the position of Attorney General replacing the departing Sessions.

It is my understanding that the Governor was so concerned about the hypocrisy and dishonesty on the subject by Bill Pryor, that he has decided to go public and break his years of silence. I can also say for a certainty that the former Governor was not approached by any member of the Moore team for this testimony or affidavit. It is the providence of God in exposing the double standard on the part of this man who has worked so hard publicly and behind the scenes to have Chief Justice removed from office. In effect, he is prosecuting the Chief Justice for doing something he promised to do himself if appointed to his job.

If ever there was a doubt in the mind of Christians that Mr. Pryor should be rejected for federal judge, that issue should be now resolved.

Below are the statements of Governor Fob James.

Affidavit of Forrest H. “Fob” James Jr.

1. I am a citizen of the United States and the State of Alabama. I had the privilege of serving as Governor of Alabama twice.

2. One of the primary reasons I ran for Governor in 1994 was a forty-year pattern of illegal acts by the U.S. Supreme Court. Forbidding pre-game prayer by young athletes, the removal of the 10 commandments from the schools, and the ever-expanding grab for power by the courts, especially the federal courts, concerned me. I repeatedly spoke on these matters throughout my campaign. The so-called “equity funding” case in Alabama was an example of judicial arrogance on the home front that I also vigorously opposed as a candidate for Governor in 1994.

3. In my second term I had the good fortune to have Jeff Sessions as Attorney-General for a time. After he was elected to the U.S. Senate, he recommended to me a young man from Mobile named Bill Pryor to replace him. I remember talking with Bill about Judge Brevard Hand, a federal judge also from Mobile. Bill spoke highly of Judge Hand and if I remember correctly, a decision the Judge had made in the Jaffree school prayer case in Mobile during my first term as Governor. Judge Hand had ruled in that case that the U.S. Supreme Court was misusing the legal system to achieve its own social agenda, while usurping authority granted only to the legislative branches of government. As Judge Hand wrote, “We must give no future generation an excuse to use the same tactic to further their ends which they think proper under the then political climate as for instance did Adolph Hitler when he used the court system to further his goals.” I later asked the Judge to swear me in as Governor for a second term in 1995, which he graciously did. The main part of my inauguration in January, 1995, was an historical festival with actors playing the parts of historical figures like George Washington warning of “change by usurpation” in our government.

4. I paid more attention to what Washington and Jefferson and Jackson and Lincoln said about the checks and balances in our legal system, especially as it relates to checking the power of the judiciary, than to ambitious and dishonest judges we saw in the 20th century. I talked with Bill Pryor about all this when I was considering him for the job of Alabama Attorney-General. He impressed me with his knowledge of these things and provided me with some legal papers on “nonacquiescence” that he was responsible for while at the Tulane Law School. I told Bill about my view that constitutional officials needed to challenge the Supreme Court. For instance, for twenty years my view has been that a Governor should refuse to allow enforcement of a patently unconstitutional court order, and force the president to take action one way or the other on the issue. I don’t mean that we should fight anyone with troops. I do mean that we should use our constitutional authority to force the great issue of the day into the provinces of all branches of the federal government, not just a judiciary that like to sweep everything under its own rug where it has nearly exclusive control. Bill Pryor was aware of my views when I appointed him, because we discussed these things. Bill had indicated nothing, but his wholehearted support of my position and these issues at the time.

5. I have now heard that Bill Pryor is prosecuting Roy Moore before the Court of the Judiciary for refusing to obey a federal court order to remove the Ten Commandments from the State Judicial Building. If this is true, Bill’s action today are utterly contrary to the political and legal convictions he expressed to me. Had he expressed his present view, I would not have found him qualified to be Attorney-General of Alabama. The main reason Pryor was appointed was his understanding, and the ability to express that understanding, well, that a public official’s highest duty was to the Constitution of the United States and not to the Supreme Court or any other entity.

Affidavit of Forrest H. “Fob” James III (Son of the Governor)

1. I am a lawyer in Birmingham and have been a member of the State Bar of Alabama since 1982. Yesterday I became aware of a “MOTION FOR RECUSAL/DISQUALIFICATION OF ATTORNEY GENERAL BILL PRYOR AND HIS OFFICE” filed before the COURT OF THE JUDICIARY OF ALABAMA in the matter of ROY S. MOORE, CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA; CASE NO. 33. Since I have personal knowledge of some factual issues raised by the Motion, I may well have an ethical duty as a member of the Alabama Bar to come forward with testimony on these issues.

2. My father, Forrest H. “Fob” James Jr., served as governor of Alabama from 1979-1983 and from 1995-1999. In late 1996, when Governor James was consider whether to appoint Bill Pryor as Attorney General of Alabama, the Governor met with Senator Jeff Sessions in the Governor’s office in Montgomery. Senator Sessions was strongly encouraging the Governor to appoint Pryor to be his replacement. During their meeting I entered the room and joined Governor James and Senator Sessions. No one else was present to my recollection.

3. I raised the issue with Governor James and Senator Sessions of whether Pryor would support Governor James in contempt-of-court situations if the Governor, as he had stated in his campaign and on many occasions to me personally, refused to enforce or prevented enforcement of certain federal or state court orders, especially in the church-state arena. At the time I had made the Governor aware of an Alabama circuit court in Montgomery that had recently issued an order prohibiting then circuit court Judge Roy Moore in Gadsen from having public prayer in his courtroom. Judge Moore had publicly indicated he would not obey the other circuit court’s order. The Montgomery circuit court, which had issued the order prohibiting courtroom prayer, also had before it a “Motion to Reconsider” by the ACLU aimed at having the Ten Commandments removed from Judge Moore’s courtroom as well (which the Montgomery circuit court had initially declined to do).

4. In response to my question about defying court orders and contempt-of-court situations, Senator Sessions, with great emphasis, said words to the effect that the Governor could find no one who would stand with him more strongly in such situations than Bill Pryor. After Senator Sessions left, or soon thereafter, I counseled the Governor to sit down with Pryor himself and specifically discuss this matter with him, and also to discuss the same thing with the other candidate under consideration for the Attorney-General’s job, State Senator John Amari. The Governor told me he would talk with them about it.

5. Within a short time thereafter, no more than a few days, the Governor told me he had discussed this matter with Amari, who agreed that the judges were “out of control.” The Governor said Amari did not offer commentary beyond that on the subject. The Governor also told me that he discussed the same matter with Pryor, and that Pryor indicated his support of the Governor. The Governor also said that Pryor supplied him with material from the Tulane Law Review, of which Pryor had been editor-in-chief, on the subject of “non-acquiescence” to orders of the U.S. Supreme Court. A senior advisor to the Governor, Champ Lyons, indicated to me at the time, it was “fortuitous” for Pryor that he had been able to supply such cogent material to the Governor on the issue of central importance to him. The Governor informed me that he was going to appoint Pryor, which he did in early 1997.

6. Thereafter, in about February, 1997, the Montgomery circuit court (referenced above in paragraph 3) ordered then Gadsen circuit Judge Roy Moore to remove the Ten Commandments from his courtroom. In response Governor James publicly stated that the order to remove the Commandments would not be carried out in Alabama without “force of arms,” that is, without the President of the United States federalizing the national guard or otherwise taking control of the situation. Within the next several weeks, the Governor hosted a conference in his offices for attorneys involved in the litigation, including the Governor’s attorneys, Pryor and his staff attorneys, Judge Moore and others. At the conference, I raised the question of what legal position would be taken, if after all appeals were exhausted, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against us, and the Governor refused to obey the Supreme Court’s order. Bill Pryor said in response, “I will be with him.” This is the last time that I personally know, or was told by the Governor, that Pryor was willing to stand with Governor James in disobeying a U.S. Supreme Court order.

7. I also want to say that at the conference hosted by the Governor, Bill Pryor was in this room in the capacity of an attorney defending Judge Roy Moore, and Pryor was privy to all of the analysis of the legal issues by Judge Moore and the other lawyers in the room. At the time Judge Moore had already publicly stated that he would never obey a court order to remove the Ten Commandments from his courtroom. Judge Moore spoke candidly about his belief in the issue, and the attorneys present discussed the legal strategies that would be used to defend Judge Moore. Every attorney in the room, so far as I could tell, expressed nothing but admiration for Judge Moore for the stand that he had taken. And as I have said, the discussion included the issue, raised by me, of what legal position would be taken if the Governor chose, as he said he intended, to prevent routine enforcement of any court order requiring removal of the Ten Commandments from the courtroom.

8. During a break at the conference, I personally asked Judge Moore if he was willing to lose all that owned, or to go to jail, or both, over this issue, He told me that he was.

9. Mindful of my duty to give as accurate an account as possible of the facts of which I have personal knowledge, I must also testify that by the end of Governor’s James last term, Mr. Pryor’s posture on the matters above had changed substantially. To inform the Court of the Judiciary of the context for Governor James’ position during these events, which I pertinent to issues raised in the Motion For Recusal, I attach hereto as Exhibit “A” a short Brief filled in the Alabama Supreme Court by Governor’s office in September, 1997. The Brief was written by then lawyer Champ Lyon’s and myself, and sent out under the signature of the Governor’s legal adviser. It concludes:

The preeminent duty of “judges in every state” is to be bound by “this Constitution,” that is the Constitution as written and as legally amended under the authority of the “people of the United States” alone, U.S. Constitution, Article VI. All other judicial duties and judicial precedents are subordinate to this mandate, on which the whole American structure rests. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 174-177, 179-180. The U.S. Supreme Court’s church-state decisions purposely reject this mandate. If other courts saw to do have the will to uphold it, this mandate will be lost, and the nation will be given over to lawlessness. If the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court wish to install themselves as a super-legislature to oversee this country’s social policies on every conceivable subject, with no limit to their power, and no fidelity to their oath of office, then they should be left to enforce their own decisions without the involvement or assistance of constitutional officers who faithfully discharge their duties of loyalty to the Constitution as required by their oaths of office. . . .Although I would like to claim authorship of the language emphasized in the quote above, I must attribute these incisive and seasoned words to a lawyer who is now an Associate Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, Champ Lyons.

1. The last conversation I recall with Bill Pryor occurred late in Governor’s James’ last term after the Governor signed Alabama’s “partial birth” abortion law. When the law passed, Mr. Pryor instructed Alabama district attorneys not to enforce the law as to pre-viable fetuses. In my view, this gutted the law and defeated its very purpose. An equivalent to Pryor’s actions would be for U.S. Attorney-General John Ashcroft to instruct U.S. attorneys not to enforce the Act of Congress on partial Birth Abortion that Congress passed only yesterday, and the President is due to sign shortly, as to “pre-viable fetuses.” I can say with confidence that by the time of this conversation with Pryor, Pryor’s legal and political views had undergone a total reversal from the views he expressed for the first few months after his appointment as Attorney-General. I also know that at some point after my last conversation with Mr. Pryor, he said , as a matter of public record, that his ultimate career goal was to gain for himself a federal appellate judgeship, I will be glad to supplement the testimony on any of the matters above if the court of the Judiciary so desires.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 23, 2003 | Permalink

Nurses claim that Terri would cry, “Help me.” One nurse recalls her husband Schiavo asking, “When is that _ gonna die?”

Click here to read the article.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 23, 2003 | Permalink

We have received a boat load of letters on the court ordered execution by starvation of Terri Schindler-Schiavo which was ended when Governor Jeb Bush ordered her feeding tubes reinserted. The following is a sample negative letter with my response.

Dear Vision Forum

I don’t understand what you are saying that Terri needs to stay here on earth for 10 years in a vegetable state. She told her husband she didn’t want this. Just because she didn’t tell her parents shouldn’t matter. She is no good to anyone right now. She can’t tell her husband & parents she loves them. She can’t worship our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Why can’t her parents let her go to be with the Creator? They will see her again in the time to come. I just can’t see why they are letting her hurt this way. It is more abusive and cruel than letting her go. I don’t like the idea of removing the feeding tube. But trying to keep her alive because she didn’t tell them her choice. Do they really think that her husband is that cruel that he wants to kill her? I think he just wants her to be in peace and pain free. And she isn’t getting that right now. Shana

Dear Shana:

Thank you for your pointed letter. The following comments are offered in a spirit of Christian charity, but are equally pointed. In my view, your comment that Terri “is no good to anyone right now,” is ignorant, cruel and misguided. It is ignorant because it does not show a respect for the family who loves Terri, interacts with her, gives her love and receives love back from her through smiles, limited responses and her very presence. It is cruel, because it pronounces judgment on her worth as a human being based on her current limitations. In effect, your statement coincides with the sentiments of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger who declared that women like Terri are little more than “human waste.” Finally, it is misguided because it is based on your own private ethic rather than biblical reasoning. God’s Word alone sets the standard for when we may take the life of another. Starving a spouse to death because she is incapacitated is murder. God will take her when He wants to take her without her husband denying her food and water. What you propose is murder. In my view, we should not blow her brains out with a gun, poison her, electrocute her, or starve her to death. She is guilty of no crime except being inconvenient to her adulterous husband and expensive to the system.

As to her ability to worship God, speak to her parents or tell another person she loves them, you have described exactly the state of a “fetus” (i.e. baby) in the womb, a newborn, and an infant up to the six month of life. Such are completely dependent and highly limited in their interactive abilities. Are their lives also meaningless? Do they lack value? In point of fact, however, children, even unborn babies can respond to the holy spirit (as with John the Baptist responding to Christ in the womb). How can we know what God is doing with them or what they are fully receiving? How can we know what God is doing with Terri? It is interesting to note that in the Bible God required all babies and nursing infants to be present for worship and the reading of the word of God, even though they could not understand words or speak. By the way, what happens if it is God’s will for Terri to come out of this state of mental limitations next year, or in ten years? What if science finds a cure? But does any of these possibilities really matter? She is alive today and thriving physically, just not mentally, as far as we can ascertain.

Concerning her husband, the following reports have surfaced: (1) He is an adulterer who has had one child out of wedlock and is about to have a second through his mistress; (2) Evidence has surfaced that Terri’s so-called “coma” may have been violence induced. The family believes that Terri’s husband assaulted her and wants her dead and cremated to avoid being held accountable; (3) For many years Terri was fed out of a spoon. She was able to swallow on her own. At that time she received physical therapy and full-time attention from skilled nurses as part of a rehabilitation program for her. Her husband chose to discontinue the therapy and move her to a much cheaper hospice system where she has languished tethered to a feeding tube;(4) As of this week, the husband has denied TerriÂ’s parents access to visit Terri which means no one who loves her is allowed to be near her; (5) Terri’s husband only called for her execution by starvation after learning of his right to a medical trust fund upon her demise.

Thank you for considering this “food for thought.” I realize these are emotionally charged issues, which is my argument for forsaking the thinking of the world, and adopting careful biblical reasoning.

God Bless Terri,

Doug Phillips

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 22, 2003 | Permalink

Late this afternoon, Governor Jeb Bush signed into law a bill which authorized him to take steps to prevent the forced starvation and deyhdration of Terri Schindler-Schiavo. We thank the Lord that Terri’s execution is halted, at least for the present. For the first time in seven days, Terri will be able to eat and drink. A recent report we heard on the radio indicated Terri’s mother told her daughter that soon she would be getting a milkshake, and Terri responded with a big smile. Thanks be to God!

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 22, 2003 | Permalink

Note from Doug: As we seek to stand for life, let us remember to pray for the tens of thousands of medical personnel around our nation who must live and work within the current eugenics-influenced system. Many of them are godly men and women faced with difficult situations. They need courage and wisdom to stand for truth. Others who have forgotten Christian principles of ethics, need to be reminded of their medical oaths which binds them to preserving life, not taking it. My grandfather was an important physician in Massachusetts who always stood for life, so I know that it can be done. I was deeply, deeply touched by the following courageous letter. This is one to read to your family!

Dear Vision Forum,

Please pray that I will have courage that I never have had before to stand as a witness to Gods perfect will in a sometimes very dark place. I don’t know how that will play out but then it has to be in His hands and with His words and at His appointed time doesn’t it? P.L.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 22, 2003 | Permalink

Vision Forum Ministries aspires to serve the Lord by addressing with a vision of victory and a message of hope, the most fundamental issues of our age. Our desire is to encourage the rebuilding of the Christian family, and to see its restoration as a bedrock of the life of the church, and the land. The following 14 point mission statement is taken from the www.visionforum.org website:

Preserving Our Covenant With God Through Biblical Patriarchy and Multigenerational Faithfulness.

1. Turning the Hearts of Fathers to Their Families

2. Proclaiming the Nobility and Glory of Motherhood

3. Reviving the Doctrine of “Women and Children First”

4. Embracing the Blessing of Children and the Sanctity of Human Life

5. Building a Culture of Virtuous Boyhood and Girlhood

6. Reinforcing Godly Masculinity and Femininity

7. Understanding Family Culture as Religion Externalized

8. Teaching History as the Providence of God

9. Developing Biblical Worldview Through Presuppositional Thinking

10. Training Character by Hebrew Discipleship and Home Education

11. Communicating the Applicability of the Law of God

12. Addressing the Ethical Issues of the 21st Century

13. Preparing Men to Stand in the Gates

14. Encouraging Unity Between Church and Home

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 22, 2003 | Permalink

Some of you may remember our good friend Matt Chancey whose outstanding wife Jennie helped us establish the Beautiful Girlhood Collection. Matt sent the following letter to Governor Jeb Bush. This bold letter reflects the hearts of many who pray the Governor will act in the next 24 hours, before it is too late.

Dear Governor,

Matt Chancey
Bridgewater, VA

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 21, 2003 | Permalink

At a recent gathering of distinguished Christian and political leaders, my father, Howard Phillips, made the following introductory comments:

Well, this is a day of victory for us and let’s celebrate it. Alabama’s state motto is, ” We dare defend our rights.” Judge Roy Moore who was elected by an overwhelming majority to be chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama is the living emblem of that motto. Contrary to what some have asserted, Roy Moore has neither advocated nor engaged in civil disobedience. Instead, he has dared to defend his oath of office against judges who have disregarded their oaths to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Alabama as those fundamental laws are written, not as they have been misinterpreted to conform to the constitutionally unfounded doctrine of incorporation and the Lemon test which arbitrarily asserts that religious expression by civil government is valid only if it has a secular purpose. In every action he has taken and in every word he has uttered, Chief Justice Moore has upheld the rule of law against those who wrongly redefine what the rule of law is and how it is to be upheld. The first amendment forbids Congress from making any law concerning an establishment of religion, but it does not forbid the state of Alabama or its chief justice from acknowledging God by placing the Ten Commandments Monument in the rotunda of Alabama’s state judicial building. Article V of the U. S. Constitution spells out ways in which that organic document may be amended. Judicial opinions are not among those ways. Article VI makes clear that every federal and state judge is under the Constitution, not over it. The Tenth Amendment reserves to the states and the people powers not delegated to the federal government and enumerated in the Constitution and not prohibited to the states. Judge Moore has, by his solitary courage, placed at risk his judicial office, his income, and his status not only as a judge, but also as a lawyer. Even as he has gained the obloquy of those peer conscious pragmatists who have either failed to discern the true meaning of the issues at stake or who have decided to conform their stances to what the bar establishment has deemed acceptable.

A graduate of West Point, a decorated Vietnam veteran, a faithful husband and father, and a devout Christian, Judge Roy Moore has set a standard for judicial integrity, which merits emulation. He has given us the opportunity to challenge the anti-Christian forces in our culture and in our government. Let us not fail to seize the moment. Let us not fail to support Judge Roy Moore. Let us not fail to embrace him, to encourage him, to approve him, and to advance his cause which is without doubt our cause. Condemned by a liberal media, sued by leftist lawyers who seek enrichment for more than a million dollars in tax subsidized legal fees, prosecuted by one who supposedly shares his principles, suspended by lesser men, but lifted up by the prayers of millions of Christians throughout the United States, Roy Moore each day risks his life and his fortune, but never his sacred honor. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Alabama’s most faithful and popular public servant, God’s man for these times, the elected chief justice of the state of Alabama, the honorable Roy Moore.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 21, 2003 | Permalink

This weekend approximately four hundred people attended Vision Forum Ministries’ Regional Conference to Unite Church and Family. Keynotes included Scott Brown, Phil Lancaster, and myself. The conference, which was held at the Character Inn in Flint Michigan, was artfully organized by Chuck DeLadurantey and his wife and family of eleven children. Attending the conference were church leaders, prospective church leaders, individuals and families in search of local churches that understand the biblical relationship between the family and the local church. Topics addressed the nature of the current crisis between church and home, the true meaning of a family friendly church, qualifications for church leadership, practical do’s and don’ts in building and establishing local churches, and much more.

My darling Liberty was her Daddy’s helper on this trip to Michigan. Here we are in the airport on Friday morning.

My plane was late in arriving so Phil Lancaster opened the 2003 Regional Conference to Unite Church and Family with an outstanding talk on the true meaning of a Christ-centered, family-friendly local church.

Liberty and her friend Jeanine Erber take a break between sessions. Jeanine’s father Roger is the shepherd of a house assembly in Illinois and one of the leaders of the Illinois Christian Home Educators Organization. The Erbers are five year veterans of the Vision Forum Ministries Faith and Freedom Tour.

Styles Watson (standing) of North Carolina is a member of the same assembly with our keynote speaker, Scott Brown. They are helping these two gentlemen (seated) establish a church plant in Georgia.

Joshua Erber is part of a new breed of home schooled entrepreneurs who are distinguishing themselves at an early age for business acumen and skill. He runs a conference tape duplication service and provides excellent quality at a reasonable price.

Here I bid farewell to by close friend and fellow speaker, Scott Brown.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 20, 2003 | Permalink

Regional Conference
October 17-18, 2003
Flint, Michigan

Friday October 17, 2003

5:00 p.m. — Registration
7:15-8:15p.m. — God’s Message for this Generation: Unity Between Church and Family, Doug Phillips
8:15p.m. — Seeking the Family-Integrated New Testament Church, Phil Lancaster
9:00p.m. — Networking

Saturday October 18, 2003

8:15a.m. — Welcome and Opening Remarks
8:30a.m. — Home as the Factory for Church Leaders, Scott Brown
9:30a.m. — Wisdom Cries: The Practical Do’s and Don’ts of Building Family Friendly Churches. Doug Phillips
10:30 Break
11:00 Don’t Neglect God’s House, Phil Lancaster
12:00 Lunch
1:30p.m. Panel Discussion
2:30p.m. How God Grows His Church, Scott Brown
3:30p.m. Closing Remarks

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 17, 2003 | Permalink

Terri Schindler-Schiavo is alive. She breathes on her own. She may or may not be comatose. Despite this fact, Terri’s husband Michael Schiavo, U.S. District Judge Richard A. Lazzara and Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Court Judge George Greer have acted to condemn her to a tortuous death by starvation.

Her crime: She is inconvenient and expensive. She is what Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood and mastermind of modern birth control, abortion and eugenics policy described as “human waste.”

Remarkably, videotaped evidence has surfaced that Terri has actually responded to information that she will be killed. Her grief stricken father, Robert Schindler, distributing a video which showed that Terri tried to get out of her chair when told that she might be killed. By releasing the video her father violated a court order.

At 2:00 yesterday the feeding tube was removed. Unless Florida Governor Bush intervenes, she will now starve to death over the next 10 to 14 days.

When Terri dies, this will be a case of murder. The clear culprits are the husband, his lawyers, the federal judge and the actual physicians and nurses who are wrongfully carrying out the order. All of these individuals are party to a murder. It is no different than if a mother locked her dependent infant in a room for two weeks without food or water. And when it comes to murder, no one can claim “I was just following orders.” All who have participated are responsible.

We must pray that Terri is rescued from this evil act, and that those responsible will be thwarted from evil, either through their repentance and restitution for the crime they have committed, or through God’s righteous judgment as declared by the Psalms for all who destroy the innocent. Either way, it is not in human hands to see such a result, but in God’s hands. “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord.”

Constitutional Scholar Herb Titus Explains Why Governor Bush Has A Constitutional Duty to Prohibit the Execution of Terri:

In response to a request, this memorandum is submitted addressing whether the governor of the State of Florida has the constitutional power to stop a Florida court order conferring upon the husband of Terri Schindler-Schiavo the sole discretionary power to disconnect his brain-disabled wife’s feeding tube. Not only does the governor have such power, but the governor has a constitutional duty to prevent any action taken pursuant to such a court order, because such action would violate Ms. Schindler-Shiavo’s constitutionally guaranteed “inalienable right to enjoy and defend life” regardless of her “physical disability” as secured by Article I, Section 2 of the Florida State Constitution.

According to Article I, Section 2, “[a]ll natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law, and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life ....” Additionally, Article I, Section 2 provides that “no person shall be deprived of any right [including the right to enjoy life] because of ... physical disability.” According to Article IV, Section 1, “the supreme executive power” of the state of Florida is vested in the “governor ... who shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Thus, the governor has the power, indeed the duty, to ensure that this constitutional guarantee of the “inalienable right ... to enjoy and defend life,” regardless of physical disability, is preserved.

In the exercise of this his “take care” powers, the governor is not bound by a court order, such as the one in the Schindler-Schiavo case, when that court order is inconsistent with the actual constitutional guarantee. As President Andrew Jackson once observed, judicial “precedent is a dangerous source of authority, and should not be regarded as deciding questions of constitutional power.” This observation is especially significant in determining the scope of the constitutional powers of the office of governor, a separate and independent branch from the judiciary. Again, as President Jackson put it, the chief executive officer of a government is bound by his oath of office to decide matters of constitutional right and power according to the executive’s interpretation of the constitution, not according to the judiciary’s interpretation. Therefore, if the governor believes that Ms. Schindler-Schiavo has the constitutional right to “enjoy life” regardless of her present disability, as he has stated in filings submitted to the courts, then the governor is duty bound to stop any action taken pursuant to that unconstitutional order that would result in the deprivation of Ms. Schindler-Shiavo’s constitutional right to life.

Such executive intervention into the judicial processes does not violate the separation of powers. To the contrary, as Alexander Hamilton stated in Federalist No. 78, the exercise of judicial power is subject to the check and balance of the executive branch which, alone, has the power to enforce a judicial order. Thus, if a court order is contrary to the law of the inalienable right to life — as the order in the Schindler-Schiavo case surely is — then according to Article IV, Section 1 of the Florida Constitution, the governor, vested with the “supreme executive power,” should intervene to stop any action taken pursuant to that court order. After all, as the great English legal authority — Sir William Blackstone stated — a court opinion or order and the law are not the same thing, in that a court opinion or order may be contrary to law, and therefore, not law at all. I W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 71 (Univ. Chi. Facs. Ed: 1765). If the governor allows a court order granting discretion to one person to decide for another person whether the latter person lives or dies to go unchallenged, then he would fail to “take care” that the “law” of the equal right to life, as secured by Article I, Section 2 of the Florida Constitution even for the physically “disabled,” is “faithfully executed.”

Contact the Governor and Appeal to Him to Exercise His Constitutional Duty to Preserve Innocent Life

Governor Bush’s contact information is as follows:

E-mail:
Governor Jeb Bush
jeb.bush@myflorida.com

Write:
PL 05 The Capitol
400 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001

Telephone:
850/488-4441
Fax: 850/487-0801

Web Site

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 16, 2003 | Permalink

Chief Justice Roy Moore is scheduled to stand trial on November 12 for honoring his oath of office contrary to a federal court order which ordered him to remove the Ten Commandment monuments because a federal judge found it to be illegal for the Chief Justice or the State of Alabama to acknowledge God.

In order to secure a fair trial and to satisfy legitimate due process concerns, attorneys for Chief Justice Roy Moore petitioned the Court of the Judiciary to allow him to question panel members who will be deciding his case about possible bias. Given the possible involvement of a number of people on the panel in activities related to the case, but adverse to the Chief Justice, a real possibility exists that several members of the panel should recuse themselves. Today the panel announced that it refused to answer any questions about possible bias.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 16, 2003 | Permalink

The following are excerpts from one of the greatest speeches I have ever heard, delivered by Alan Keyes earlier this month. For a complete transcript of the speech, click here:

The establishment clause, the famous clause in the Constitution, cited by the ACLU and everybody else to tell us that somehow or another, especially if you do a little shenanigans with the 14th amendment, the federal judges get to dictate what can take place with respect to religion at every level in this nation’s life. Throughout my adult life, since I first came to appreciate the real meaning of those words, I have marveled at the fact that they get away with this because it’s one of those cases (it’s not a case even like Roe v. Wade where they had to make something up). No, this is a case where the Constitution reads one way and what they’re doing simply violates what it says, and we let them get away with it.

Now, let’s do simple, step by step logic here. The Constitution not only does not give the federal government any power to address issues of establishment, it explicitly forbids it to do so. And nowhere in the document is there a word that could be constructed as in any way prohibiting the states in this regard. And in fact, the history of the country bears this out because most of the states at the time that the amendment was passed still had established churches of one kind or another. They were not only not touched, but they were protected by the force of this amendment and those famous words about the wall of separation, in that letter Thomas Jefferson was explaining that very fact. Federal government can’t touch you. In his own inaugural address he said the same thing: “I left these matters where the Constitution found them, in the hands of the states and the people.” That’s what he said.

Keys Calls for More Moores’

First step in that, in my opinion, is we must proliferate “Roy Moores” all over America. We must have “Roy Moores” in the county courthouses, we must have “Roy Moores” on the boards of education, we must have “Roy Moores”, if we can find them, in the governors’ houses, we must have American citizens standing up on the ground of the Constitution, saying “no” to the unlawful judgments of abusive courts. And we must do so without trepidation, without the “Oh, we’re destroying law and order.” No, my friends, if they tear down the supreme law of this land, they have destroyed the very foundation of all law, they have destroyed the meaning of order in America. That is what they have done for decades.

Rallying around these brave individuals, we must then organize a grass roots movement. Literally. In state after state there must be rallies in their support, demanding that the representatives of the people defend the right of the people to honor God according to the Constitution of the United States.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 15, 2003 | Permalink

In a brilliant move to keep the scheduled November 12 prosecution of Chief Justice Roy Moore by Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor before the Alabama Court of the Judiciary, from becoming a “star chamber” proceeding, attorneys for the Chief Justice have filed a motion to allow the entire proceedings to be televised. With the bulk of public opinion so squarely behind the Chief Justice, with what increasingly appears to be a behind-the scenes effort to run the Chief Justice out of town, and with the compelling nature of the case for the Chief Justice, it is not only appropriate, but in the best interest of justice that the highest elected judicial officer in Alabama be given the opportunity to be tried before the people who elected him and gave him the mandate to honor God through a public display of the Ten Commandments.

Up to now, the Attorney General has been in consultation with other Alabama officials to strip the Chief Justice of his lawful authority prior to the trial, including his administrative duties (which under Alabama law are not to be affected by the up-and-coming trial). The behind the scenes attacks and efforts to undermine the Chief Justice have been numerous. Incredibly, without consultation or notice to the Chief Justice, Senior Associate Justice Gorman Houston, having counseled with Bill Pryor, fired or relocated key members of the Chief Justice’s staff, and asked remaining members to sign loyalty oaths to himself. Although he cited budget cuts for firing Moore’s staffers, he gave another member of his staff a $10,000 pay raise during the same time period. Houston also sent a letter to judges across the state accusing the Chief Justice of setting himself over the law, and of placing the monument “under cover of darkness.”

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 15, 2003 | Permalink

From its infancy, the American vision was a family vision. Governor William Bradford tells us that our first founding fathers were motivated to establish the American colony, lifestyle and system of government for their children and children’s children. Our founding fathers dreamed mighty dreams for their family, dreams which they knew would be destroyed if their children were allowed ungodly patterns of socialization and influence. Bradford writes:

As necessity was a taskmaster over them, so they were forced to be such, not only to their servants (but in a sort) to their dearest children; the which as it did not a little wound the tender hearts of many a loving father and mother, so it produced likewise sundry sad and sorrowful effects. For many of their children that were of best dispositions and gracious inclinations (having learned to bear the yoke in their youth) and willing to bear part of their parents burden, were (often times) so oppressed with their heavy labors, that though their minds were free and willing, yet their bodies bowed under the weight of the same, and became decrepit in their early youth, the vigor of nature being consumed in the very bud as it were. But that which was more lamentable, and of all sorrows most heavy to be borne, was that of their children, by these occasions, and the great licentiousness of youth in that country, and the manifold temptations of the place, were drawn away by evil examples into extravagant and dangerous courses, getting the reins off their necks and departing from their parents. Some became soldiers, others took upon them far voyages by sea, and others some worse courses, tending to dissoluteness and the danger of their souls, to the great grief of their parents and dishonor of God. So that they saw their posterity would be in danger to degenerate and be corrupted. Lastly, (and which was not least) a great hope, and inward zeal they had of laying some good foundation, (or at least to make some way thereunto) for the propagating and advancing the gospel of the kingdom of Christ in those remote parts of the world; yea, though they should be but even as stepping-stones unto others for the performing of so great a work.

A half-century later, the great New England preacher and vice-president of Harvard, Samuel Willard (1639/40-1707), appealed to the youth of his generation to remember

The main errand which brought your fathers into this Wilderness was not only that they might themselves enjoy, but that they might settle for their children, and leave them in full possession of the free, pure, and uncorrupted liberties of the Covenant of Grace. They have made this profession openly to the world. Yea, let reason speak and say what else was there which could have tempted them to come into a land which was not sown, leaving the pleasant enjoyments of a good land, and of which many of them had a good share, running through so many hazards, wrestling with so many hardships, not expecting (and it would have seemed vain and presumptuous to have expected) any worldly advantage, or likelihood of any other compensation for such expenses as they were at, and difficulties they broke through, but only this? And if this were the portion they thought worth so much that they might have it to leave them, it concerns you to mind and regard it. It was their love to your souls that embarked them in this design, and it will be horrible ingratitude in you to slight it. You cannot neglect God’s Covenant, but you do withal cast reflections upon, and greatly undervalue, yea, and despise that work, which will be New England’s glory, and was so signally owned and abetted by God’s providence in the day of it; and will be unworthy heirs of your father’s estates, if you do not prosecute their begun designs.

Samuel Willard, Covenant-Keeping the Way to Blessedness (Boston, 1682), pp. 117-118

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 14, 2003 | Permalink

In an age of big church debt and big church programs that tend to divide parents and children and invest the hearts of our youth more with their peers than their families, what’s a family to do? In an age of uncommitted families and rabid individualism, what’s a local church to do? How do we rescue our children from the youth group culture and build family-friendly local churches? These issues and more are the subject of Vision Forum Ministries’ first regional Uniting Church and Family Conference. A follow-up on the 2002 National Conference to Unite Church and Home, this regional conference sponsored by the Five Lakes Fellowship, will be held this year on October 17-18 in Flint, Michigan and will feature myself, Scott Brown, and Phil Lancaster as keynotes. For more information, please visit http://www.fivelakesfellowship.org.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 14, 2003 | Permalink

Last week I had the privilege of visiting Chief Justice Roy Moore at his home in Alabama and accompanying him on some speaking events in Florida. Three episodes occurred either during or immediately preceding my visit which left a profound impression on me. First, the Chief Justice explained how he just purchased some new sneakers for one of his sons, only to discover that his son had given them away to a poor boy who lived near them. Second, a young girl in their community whose mother was in jail, woke up to find her father dead. Another one of the Chief Justice’s children immediately went over to minister to the girl. Third, while we were flying back from Florida, we received word from the Chief Justice’s wife that a young boy they did not know had broken his neck playing football during a game for the local Christian school. The family of the boy was more than two hours away. Mrs. Moore and her daughter made a bee-line to be with this boy at the hospital until the parents arrived.

Drawing from these experiences, I exhorted our church congregation today, specifically addressing the children, to consider the state of their soul and to live for Christ. I then applied this thought to an overview of Jonathan Edwards’ perspective on (1) practical Christianity, (2) on the brevity of life and (3) the absolute necessity of being right with Christ. This was followed by a reading of Edwards’ masterpiece “Sinners in the hands of An Angry God.” To read a copy of this sermon, go to http://www.visionforumministries.org/sections/hotcon/daycon.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 12, 2003 | Permalink

On the occasion of the death and funeral of the great 20th century theologian Dr. R.J. Rushdooney, I carried a personal message to California from my father (who was recovering from an accident and could not come) to Dorothy Rushdoony, his widow. The delivery of the message was crucial for me because Dr. Rushdoony was personally instrumental in my father’s salvation. I will never forget Mrs. Rushdoony’s words to me at her her husband’s grave site: “Pray for me. My husband was my life. I don’t know what I will do now.” I have just received word that Mrs. Rushdoony is very ill. Now in the twilight of her life, Mrs. Rushdoony awaits the call of the Lord to bring her to her heavenly Father where she will join her husband in Glory. Please pray for this godly woman and faithful wife, as well as the Rushdoony family.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 11, 2003 | Permalink

I am a pastor in Round Rock, Texas. I just wanted to zap a note of thanks to Doug Phillips for his recent article entitled “A Time for Maturity”. This truly is the balance or the other side of the coin that so many homeschooling families need to hear. Doug Phillips is being used to bring much needed reform to the Church in America, and Chrisian homeschoolers have been bringing much of that reform through the “alternative” way they live their lives. But this tendency on the part of many Christian homeschoolers to effectively give up or withhold themselves from the local chuches of our land, is hurting those same churches, just when we need to understand each other and work together more than ever. Many churches, like the one I help pastor in Round Rock, are in transition. We are “hybrid” churches if you will. Many of the values of Vision Forum, with some of the “traditional” ministries still operating (SS, Youth group, etc.) But we are not evil or Ichabod! We are trying to be faithful to what the Lord is showing us in these days without writing off as apostate precious co-servants in the Lord! This article helps greatly beause it is a needed corrective to the homeschool community. I pray many will read it and take it to heart. Sincerly in Christ, teaching elder and Sr.Pastor, J.B.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 10, 2003 | Permalink

I first met my wife when she was seventeen years old. We are now in our twelfth year of marriage. With God as my witness, I can testify that she is the most persevering and content woman I have ever met. Throughout all of the time of our marriage I can honestly say that I have no recollection of my wife complaining. This remarkable character quality is only matched by her loyalty and support to her husband and family. This year we celebrated her birthday (October 6), not only with cake and ice cream, but with a lengthy reading about the life of Sarah Edwards (wife to J. Edwards — whose three hundredth anniversary was the day before), a woman who, like my own bride, was indefatigable in her service to God, husband, and family. All who know me know that there would be no work of Vision Forum apart from Beall who is my personal editor, counselor, help-meet in all things, and best friend. Happy birthday, Beall.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 7, 2003 | Permalink

Yesterday, October 5, 2003 marked the 300th anniversary of the birthday of one of the most significant Bible scholars in church history, Jonathan Edwards. His impact on American life, culture and theology was simply staggering. Recently, I was asked to write some comments for the new release of the classic biography: Marriage to a Difficult Man: The Uncommon Union of Jonathan and Sarah Edwards, by Elisabeth D. Dodds, foreword by John and Noël Piper. My remarks are below:

When one lives in a cynical world that has forgotten the beauty and power of a truly purposeful Christian marriage, it is crucial to step back in time and walk with generations of Christians for whom such a truth was not merely an ideal to be pursued, but a living reality. From page one to the end, Marriage to a Difficult Man grips the reader and refreshes the soul by allowing him to intimately peer into one of the greatest recorded unions of a man and woman. After reading Marriage to a Difficult Man, I walked away not only rejoicing in the marriage of Jonathan and Sarah, but loving my own wife all the more.

Perhaps no other couple in American history has produced so many generations of illustrious leaders as did Jonathan and Sarah Edwards. Their direct descendants included thirteen college presidents, sixty-five professors, one-hundred lawyers, a law school dean, a medical school dean, thirty judges, sixty-six physicians, eighty holders of public office, three United States senators, three state governors, a vice-president of the United States, and scores of ministers and missionaries.

One is impressed by the blessings of multi-generational faithfulness the Lord showered upon the Edwards family, but it is the spiritual oneness of the marriage of this extraordinary couple which leaves the reader numb with the happy realization that God has placed within even the most fallible and simple of couples the potential for genuine marital bliss. The re-release of this classic volume on the three-hundredth anniversary of Jonathan Edwards’ birth includes a brilliantly insightful essay by John and Noël Piper, an important biographical introduction by John Hannah, numerous appendices of important Edwardsian manuscripts, and an epilogue by Dwight Edwards (one of Edwards’ living descendants). This is our pick for best biography of the year.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 6, 2003 | Permalink

More than a year ago Vision Forum Ministries launched the National Center for Family Integrated Churches and sponsored our first national conference for Uniting Church and Family. The results were phenomenal. Several things were accomplished: First, a confessional statement was submitted as a summary of the issues and a platform for building unity between church and home. It was widely accepted and met with approbation. Second, hundreds of church leaders committed to working within their local churches for a more Christ-centered, family friendly model of worship and church life. Third, since the conference, scores of church plants have begun with the goal of establishing biblically constituted local churches that complement, rather than undermine, the Christian household.

But once a vision is cast, the real work begins. It is one thing to dream great dreams for Christ; it is another to make ourselves willing vessels of the Lord to accomplish these goals. Vision requires hard work, long-term commitment, and a persevering spirit. Along the way mistakes will be made. The godly man stumbles six times, but rises seven. So too, we must not quit because attempts to unite church and home are imperfect. Nor do we have the luxury of allowing every personal preference which is not appeased to be the basis for severing our relationship with those who stand with us in this great cause. There are ten thousand road obstacles to accomplishing a godly vision, but true leadership requires an indefatigueable willingness to work for a righteous cause to the end.

Having said this, I am amazed at the number of people who quickly give up on a vision when the first micro controversy arises, or when their feelings get hurt over issues of personal preference. Some actually masque a spirit of rebellion under theological verbiage aimed at justifying their unwillingness to commit themselves to others or to be personally accountable within a local body. In fact, many dear believers would rather wander in the valley of indecision and unaccountability for years at a time than risk the challenges associated with commitment.

In my view, we can no longer afford to act and think as children. The need of the day is for maturity. This means making tough choices, and acting on them. It means working through problems, not simply quitting every time a problem arises. It means being a problem solver, not just a complainer. It means recognizing that the grass is not always greener elsewhere.

Three Things Which Happen To Your Children When You Refuse to Yoke Yourselves to a Local Church and Attend its Weekly Meeting

We must acknowledge that there are times and seasons in which godly people find themselves in a genuine wilderness with no visible witness of the Church of Jesus Christ in terms of a doctrinally sound, biblically constituted, faithful assembly. In such cases there are two options: Move to a place where there is such a church or start a church work. Not an option is to remain indefinitely in a state of unaccountability and limbo. Meeting in your home with your family over an extended period of time with no intent to establish a biblically constituted church with government, discipline, sacraments, and exposition of the Word does not count as an attempt to start a church. It does not constitute obedience to the command to “not forsake the assembling of yourselves together.”

While I recognize that there will always be unusual exceptions to this rule (stuck on a desert island, medical crisis situation, overseas in a Muslim land, etc.), we must assume that there is something unruly and disobedient about believers who simply forsake the assembling of themselves together with some local church for months at a time. Nor is it acceptable to refuse all accountability, where there is a faithful assemblage of believers in your proximity, merely because you fine tune issues differently from them. You have a choice—-join, move, or form. Like the local church, none of these choices is perfect. Each carries elements of challenge and danger. Moreover, the best choices usually require the most work, commitment, and flexibility on your part. Whatever you do, there will be a price to pay. Everything great comes at a price. But what must be firmly and categorically emphasized is that God has not given Christians the option of not yoking to a church, of not attending the meeting of the local church, and of not having accountability within the context of a biblical body.

We must count the cost of disobedience. Sometimes the same ability to critically evaluate truth leaves Christians with a critical spirit. Such believers often find that no one is holy enough or “right” enough to justify joining in fellowship. I oppose the many errors of doctrinal ecumenism, but I equally oppose the isolationism of doctrinal absolutists. Apart from the fact that this attitude shows an historic ignorance for the trials and tribulations of the New Testament church itself, the attitude is just plain rebellious.

Home educators especially must be honest with themselves: If, in their godly and biblical desire to have family friendly churches, they reject for months at a time the meeting of the local church while waiting for God to “solve their problem,” or if they simply refuse for years at a time to formally yoke themselves to an imperfect but godly local assembly, they are teaching their children at least three serious errors:

1. Such parents teach their children that the law of God is optional. It must be obeyed only when the circumstances are convenient.
   2. Such parents teach their children to have a low view of the local church specifically, and question legitimate authority in general, because of their lackadaisical or openly hostile perspective towards the local church.
   3. To the extent that such parents hop from circumstance to circumstance, they are teaching their children to be quitters and preparing them for a pattern of discontentedness.

All of this to make a simple point: Press on for the cause of Christ. Don’t be a quitter. Take your commitment to building godly local churches seriously. Be willing to work hard so that your grandchildren will benefit from the sacrifices you are making today. Do not simply criticize your brothers in the cause, provide viable solutions and then work to implement them. Be patient with your brothers. Love the brethren. Don’t ask what your local church can do for you, but what you can do for your local church

Afterword:
For more information on unity between church and home, please consider attending our fall Regional Conference for Uniting Church and Family on October 17, in Michigan. Visit www.visionforum.org

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 3, 2003 | Permalink

Home education is the premier educational program of the past, and it is the wave of the future. It is the model for education which most closely patterns the principles and objectives of biblical discipleship and training. It is covenantal and character and multi-generational in methodology. Whenever Christian home education is on the rise, so too is Christian family revival. The two go hand-in-hand.

We thank God, therefore, for the burgeoning international home school movement. It has been my pleasure to travel to Canada and Japan to facilitate the rising home school movement, and to interact with home educators in a half dozen other nations. Because home education is first and foremost biblical in nature, it transcends national boundaries, languages, and cultural idiosyncrasies.

Last month we were pleased to have in our home for a few days Craig Smith, the leader of the New Zealand home education movement. Together with his wife and children, this outstanding brother has raised a no-compromise flag for family revival and educational freedom in his nation. A man of sound, reformed doctrinal heritage, Craig is one of the founding fathers of his nation’s home education movement. He needs our prayers and support.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 2, 2003 | Permalink

Karl Rove, the President’s chief political strategist, is currently under investigation for his involvement in revealing the identity of a CIA operative, contrary to federal law. The White House has denied the charges. Rove managed the campaign of the candidate who ran against Roy Moore for Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. Sources indicate that Rove has remained close with Attorney General Bill Pryor, the man leading the charge to have Chief Justice Moore removed from office. The full extent of Rove’s counsel and direction to the Bill Pryor on how to proceed against the Chief Justice is unknown.

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 2, 2003 | Permalink

The following remarkable testimony was shared by Rebekah Zes at the 2003 Vision Forum Mininstries Father and Daughter Retreat. Please download this and read it to your family tonight:

In considering what to speak on this morning, I was greatly challenged, because the Lord has been working on my life in so many areas. But He impressed upon me to speak to one particular area, and that is strength in femininity.

“Thus the Americans do not think that man and woman have either the duty or the right to perform the same offices, but they show an equal regard for both their respective parts; and though their lot is different, they consider both of them as being of equal value. They do not give to the courage of woman the same form or the same direction as to that of man, but they never doubt her courage; and if they hold that man and his partner ought not always to exercise their intellect and understanding in the same manner, they at least believe the understanding of the one to be as sound as that of the other, and her intellect to be as clear. Thus, then, while they have allowed the social inferiority of woman to continue, they have done all they could to raise her morally and intellectually to the level of man; and in this respect they appear to me to have excellently understood the true principle of democratic improvement.

“As for myself, I do not hesitate to avow that although the women of the United States are confined within the narrow circle of domestic life, and their situation is in some respects one of extreme dependence, I have nowhere seen woman occupying a loftier position; and if I were asked, now that I am drawing to the close of this work, in which I have spoken of so many important things done by the Americans, to what the singular prosperity and growing strength of that people ought mainly to be attributed, I should reply: To the superiority of their women.”

But even though their women were at home, in the sphere that God had ordained for them, yet they were superior because of that. That true, strong women are not masculine, but they are firm in decision, and character, and action, and have all the softness that does not imply weakness in the wrong way. Firmness that does not exclude delicacy. They are loving toward family and others; they are helpful whenever they can be; they are trusting of their fathers, and of the Lord. And that they are feminine.

As girls, we have duties and responsibilities that are given to us to fulfill, and we have to be responsible to do those in order for our fathers to be able to carry out the mission that God has given to them. And I want to challenge all of you girls, and all of you young ladies, to make your aim to realize in your character all the possibilities of womanhood, and to do the work that the Lord has assigned for you to do. To accept being a girl, and to delight in it. To be strong enough in your femininity, and brave enough, to always be loyal to Biblical womanhood and Biblical girlhood. But to do this, you must always make sure that your heart is in the right place. Keep your heart yielded and submissive to God and to your father, because everything depends on where your heart is. Psalm 46:13 says, “The king’s daughter is all glorious within, her clothing is wrought gold.” She is glorious within, and therefore her clothing, her outward adornment, is wrought with gold. Your inner self affects how your life is going to be, how you are going to live your life, and what you are going to do, because a dark heart is never going to produce a shining life, and a selfish heart is never going to produce an unselfish life. A sad heart will never make a glad life, and a discontented heart will never yield a content life. Be careful to guard your heart, and to keep it stayed on Christ, for He will make you strong to do your duty. And to exemplify Biblical womanhood you have train your mind, and this is something that I am continually having to do: is rid out all the influence of the world, and train your mind to think in terms of Biblical womanhood. We should follow the guidelines that God has set out for us in His Word. Set your ideal before you: a strong, beautiful, Biblical womanhood and girlhood, and bend all of your energies to attain this.

Sarah, Rebekah, Hannah

Posted by Doug Phillips on October 1, 2003 | Permalink