« May 2008 | Main | July 2008 »
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 30, 2008 | Permalink
Like many of the pictures from Scotland, this can be viewed in a larger format by clicking on the image.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 29, 2008 | Permalink
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 28, 2008 | Permalink
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 27, 2008 | Permalink
Scots, wha hae wi’ Wallace bled, Scots, wham Bruce has aften led, Welcome to your gory bed, Or to victorie. Now’s the day, and now’s the hour; See the front of battle lour; See approach proud Edward’s power Chains and slaverie!
It all began when my six-year-old decided he would go where no Phillips dared to go—into the culinary world of spiced “awful.” Not to be outdone by my brave young son I decided to join him for a dish of haggis. That was three days ago, and we have eaten haggis every day since then, including for various breakfasts, lunches, and dinners. Honestly, it taste great. The critical thing is that it is not best to think too hard about what you are eating, its presentation, or its smell.
The Scots are unique for many things, not the least of which is that they have a national dish that every true Scotsman loves and makes a regular part of his diet. And not just any dish, but one which truly reflects the moxie of a people known for their ferociously independent spirit. The dish is haggis, and the recipe speaks for itself:
Set of sheep’s heart, lungs, and liver (cleaned by a butcher) One beef bung 3 cups finely chopped suet One cup medium ground oatmeal Two medium onions, finely chopped One cup beef stock One teaspoon salt ½ teaspoon pepper One teaspoon nutmeg ½ teaspoon mace Method: Trim off any excess fat and sinew from the sheep’s intestine and, if present, discard the windpipe. Place in a large pan, cover with water and bring to the boil. Reduce the heat and simmer for an hour or possibly longer to ensure that they are all tender. Drain and cool.
Set of sheep’s heart, lungs, and liver (cleaned by a butcher) One beef bung 3 cups finely chopped suet One cup medium ground oatmeal Two medium onions, finely chopped One cup beef stock One teaspoon salt ½ teaspoon pepper One teaspoon nutmeg ½ teaspoon mace
Method: Trim off any excess fat and sinew from the sheep’s intestine and, if present, discard the windpipe. Place in a large pan, cover with water and bring to the boil. Reduce the heat and simmer for an hour or possibly longer to ensure that they are all tender. Drain and cool.
Here is Robert Burns’s address to a haggis:
Fair fa’ your honest, sonsie face, Great chieftain o the puddin’ race! Aboon them a’ ye tak your place, Painch, tripe, or thairm: Weel are ye wordy of a grace As lang’s my arm.... Ye Pow`rs, wha mak mankind your care, And dish them out their bill o fare, Auld Scotland wants nae skinking ware That jaups in luggies: But, If ye wish her gratefu prayer, Gie her a Haggis!
Fair fa’ your honest, sonsie face, Great chieftain o the puddin’ race! Aboon them a’ ye tak your place, Painch, tripe, or thairm: Weel are ye wordy of a grace As lang’s my arm....
Ye Pow`rs, wha mak mankind your care, And dish them out their bill o fare, Auld Scotland wants nae skinking ware That jaups in luggies: But, If ye wish her gratefu prayer, Gie her a Haggis!
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink
...which consists of a kingdom made up of two well-loved dolls and a patient cat which actually endures being dragged by the tail.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink
Jim Zes by the Palace of Holyrood.
Honor sits by the window of John Knox in his home pretending to be the great reformer of Scotland.
Dr. Joe Morecraft walks where both Cromwell and Covenanters once laid siege.
I shot this image of the original Thin Red Line which is kept in Edinburgh Castle. It is a highly evocative picture portraying the Scottish defense against the Russians during the 1850s.
To the glorious drone of the bagpipes being expertly played by a master piper, one hundred pilgrims—home educators and special guests from across the United States—entered our banquet hall in Edinburgh, Scotland to inaugurate the 2008 Scotland Faith and Freedom Tour.
We are so grateful to the Lord for this special opportunity to study the lives of great Reformers, and to delve deeply into the rich the history of a country which, more than any other modern nation, was responsible for the theological foundations of American independence. The Scotland Faith and Freedom Tour has been years in the making. It was a much anticipated event limited to under one hundred guests, and which filled up in approximately 70 hours of the formal announcement of the details.
For our opening banquet, guests were treated to really superior service and Scottish cuisine provided by our gracious hosts. The international wait staff provided the finest service and customer care I can remember experiencing.
Each guest was presented with a songbook containing hymns and songs of Scotland to be sung throughout the trip. Noted Scottish and Celtic balladeer, Mr. Charlie Zahm, will be traveling with us to each location and leading us in the historic songs from Scotland’s past. Even after a long journey to Edinburgh, Charlie was in prime form for this evening’s opening banquet.
Many of our guests are from Scottish and Scotch-Irish descent, and some, like historian Bill Potter, are direct descendants of the martyrs who died for “Christ’s Crown and Covenant” during the killing times.
Honor and I especially enjoyed listening to Charlie sing the Vision Forum Ministries theme song “Be Thou My Vision.”
To fire the opening salvo of the 2008 Scotland Faith and Freedom Tour, I presented a message entitled “Christianity and Great Britain: A 2000 Year Perspective in One Hour.” The message covered the history of the Church in the British Isles beginning with the coming of the Roman Empire, through Columba, to the Scottish Reformation, to the Scottish Enlightenment and beyond.
We are deeply honored to be joined by Dr. Joe Morecraft and his wonderful wife Becky. Joe is one of America’s leading experts on Reformation Church history. This will be his second trip to Scotland in 35 years.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 24, 2008 | Permalink
We biked to this part of the Royal Mile which was once called “The End of the World” beacuse it marked the edge of the city.
I shot this image earlier today. The view from the hill allows you to see a panoramic perspective on the ancient city of Edinburgh, from the Palace of Hollyrood—the home of Mary Queen of Scots, to the Royal Mile, to the Firth of Forth. And a careful examination of the many church steeples, buildings and roads reveals the architecture of various centuries side by side. One can see the influence of the Greeks and Romans in the enlightenment architecture, of the Roman Catholic church in the Gothic, as well as the unique style of the Reformation churches with their emphasis on worshiping God free of potential icons of mediatorial idolatry. Each style reflects the worldview priorities of the designers. In this sense, the diversity of architectural styles helps one to grasp the century long battles between various streams of theologies and philosophies which have blessed and sometimes plagued Scottish thinking. From the tremendous theological hope and precision of the Scottish Reformers like John Knox, to the chaos of enlightenment theorists like David Hume. The monuments and buildings of both are side by side in the Scottish capitol.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 23, 2008 | Permalink
...at least it was fun pretending.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink
First rang on May 31, 1859.
Read about him here.
Faith and Providence on the steps of Westminster Abbey.
Joshua preparing blogs from a London flat for www.Ballantynethebrave.com.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 20, 2008 | Permalink
Ramses II.
When I was a boy I used to wonder a great deal about what grand mysteries of the ancient world might be available to us had the Library of Alexandria survived. Today my dreams were rekindled as my family and I visited the British Museum in London where we saw one of the most significant collections of antiquities from the ancient world available on Earth.
Each exhibit—each treasure trove-filled room—is better than the last. The very design of the museum has a gloriously 19th century feel to it. One expects Phineas Fogg to make an appearance at any moment. Everywhere you look there are seemingly never-ending shelves filled with treasure, thousands of well-known first edition books from centuries past, business ledgers of King Nebuchadnezzer, and so much more—glorious!
The biggest problem with a trip to the British Museum is the sense of frustration and genuine panic you feel after a half day of viewing stunning, one-of-a-kind antiquities, you realize that you have covered less than 3% of the museum.
Modern museums lean upon high-tech displays designed to amuse people into paying attention to history. But not at the British Museum. Here the one-of-a kind artifacts need no computer simulation games or fancy graphic displays. More is said with less. The raw enormity of many items in the collections grabs the attention, and one can not help wondering about the men who documented their own lives in stone and marble, and whose creations (ranging from business ledgers to the idolatrous rocks of worship) have long out-survived their nations.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 19, 2008 | Permalink
The British Museum is simply massive, and with construction presently underway, it is not possible to get a full panoramic view of this treasure trove of knowledge and history. I had to cover a lot of ground before I realized the enormity of the property and its contents. Even then, it was not until I began researching everything the museum has to offer that I grasped the sheer scope of the building which covers 13.5 acres of exhibition space, let alone the diverse antiquities collections it houses. Since its establishment in 1753 the British Museum has undergone numerous changes and face-lifts. Today, you can see a visually pleasing combination of England’s grand neo-classical style side by side with the modern Great Court which was completed in 2000 as the largest covered court in Europe. Each of the 1,656 glass panes is individually shaped.
One of the beauties of the British Museum is the accessibility of the antiquities. Few of the big, impressive items of Assyria, Egypt, and Babylon are behind glass. Furthermore, they allow you to take non-flash photography which is how I was able to snap these images. Click on the image below to see a magnificently preserved relief of a lion hunt.
The interesting likely origin of the word “bad” — “effeminate man.” From the Oxford English Dictionary (OE = Old English, ME = Middle English):
Prof. Zupitza, with great probability, sees in bad-de (2 syll.) the ME. repr. of OE. bæddel ‘homo utriusque generis, hermaphrodita’ ... and the derivative bædling ‘effeminate fellow, womanish man ...’ applied contemptuously; assuming a later adjectival use, as in yrming, wrecca, and loss of final l as in mycel, muche, lytel, lyte, wencel, wench(e. This perfectly suits the ME. form and sense, and accounts satisfactorily for the want of early written examples. And it is free from the many historical and phonetic difficulties of the derivation proposed by Sarrazin [which ends up relating it to an OE. word meaning ‘forced, oppressed’] .... No other suggestion yet offered is of any importance; the Celtic words sometimes compared are out of the question.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 18, 2008 | Permalink
Jubilee returns from the Christian Home Educators of Colorado Conference.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 15, 2008 | Permalink
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 14, 2008 | Permalink
What a tremendous event to the glory of God! This year Christian Home Educators of Colorado brought one of the more encouraging and visionary home education conferences to date. From beginning to end, the messages focused on both the principled foundations of the home school mission, as well as the practical application. The event also included a one day track on entrepreneurship, and included groundbreaking announcements from CHEC concerning their work to create a database of opportunities for home educators interested in mentorship and apprenticeship-based approaches to higher education and vocational training. It was an honor to once again bring complementary messages with my good friends Dr. Voddie Baucham and Kevin Swanson, both of whom touched the hearts of the families in attendance with their courageous messages. Also pictured above are CHEC leaders Michael Cheney and Bill Roach, two of the notable men behind what has proven to be one of America’s larger and more successful home education events.
...with the wonderful Swanson girls.
“Approximately 65% of the wives in America work at least a 40 hour job outside the home. Their average take-home pay is $740 per month. After child care, transportation, work-related clothing and eating out, they net approximately $370. In net wages, they work for approximately $2.30 an hour.” How To Manage Your Money, Larry Burkett, May 15, 1988 (Issue 126)
“Approximately 65% of the wives in America work at least a 40 hour job outside the home. Their average take-home pay is $740 per month. After child care, transportation, work-related clothing and eating out, they net approximately $370. In net wages, they work for approximately $2.30 an hour.”
How To Manage Your Money, Larry Burkett, May 15, 1988 (Issue 126)
As quoted by Doug Phillips, in the message “Getting the Big Picture for Family Entrepreneurship,” CHEC Conference, June 12, 2008.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 13, 2008 | Permalink
Vision Forum is offering a really exceptional set of tapes from Dr. S.M. Davis for sale this week. The topics range from “The Influence of Older Children on Younger Children,” to “How to Keep Children from Becoming Bitter,” to “What to Expect From a Twelve-Year-Old.” Browse the entire set of S.M. Davis messages. Here are some experiences and thoughts from Beall on the subject:
One of the many benefits of spending the day with my children is helping them learn to work with all their siblings and iron out bumps along the way. Sometimes a big dose of perspective is needed. Last week, we listened to a very special CD: The Influence of Older Children on Younger Children. Actually, we listened to it twice. The first time was in the car. We had over an hour’s drive, and I had a captive audience. When the CD ended, there was prolonged silence in the car. I looked in the rear view mirror. They weren’t asleep. They were sober and contemplative. A few days later, I collected all the children again, including those who had been out of town for the first listening. This time, we all sat in the living room with notepad and pen. Yep, they took notes this time. There were more serious faces as they wrote down the ten points outlined by Dr. S.M. Davis. When it was over, we talked about the ten points, and then I asked the children to write down two questions and think and pray about them: 1. How might I have hurt my relationship with my younger brothers and sisters? 2. How can I repair those relationships using the principles outlined by Dr. Davis? Frankly, these are basic biblical principles the children have been taught since they were little. But it’s easy to forget them in the rush and flurry of daily life. The simple, straightforward reminder from Dr. Davis to brothers and sisters to say “I love you” to each other, to look for opportunities to encourage, to teach, and to befriend has been a powerful shot in the arm. Maybe we will listen to it again next week.
One of the many benefits of spending the day with my children is helping them learn to work with all their siblings and iron out bumps along the way. Sometimes a big dose of perspective is needed.
Last week, we listened to a very special CD: The Influence of Older Children on Younger Children. Actually, we listened to it twice. The first time was in the car. We had over an hour’s drive, and I had a captive audience. When the CD ended, there was prolonged silence in the car. I looked in the rear view mirror. They weren’t asleep. They were sober and contemplative. A few days later, I collected all the children again, including those who had been out of town for the first listening. This time, we all sat in the living room with notepad and pen. Yep, they took notes this time. There were more serious faces as they wrote down the ten points outlined by Dr. S.M. Davis.
When it was over, we talked about the ten points, and then I asked the children to write down two questions and think and pray about them: 1. How might I have hurt my relationship with my younger brothers and sisters? 2. How can I repair those relationships using the principles outlined by Dr. Davis?
Frankly, these are basic biblical principles the children have been taught since they were little. But it’s easy to forget them in the rush and flurry of daily life. The simple, straightforward reminder from Dr. Davis to brothers and sisters to say “I love you” to each other, to look for opportunities to encourage, to teach, and to befriend has been a powerful shot in the arm. Maybe we will listen to it again next week.
Posted by Doug Phillips on June 12, 2008 | Permalink
Dan Becker is one of the up-and-coming pro-life leaders in the nation. His work to battle for the life of the unborn as the president of the Georgia Right to Life, as a leader in the movement to restore biblical ethics to the pro-life cause, as a defender of the personhood of the unborn, and on the broader issues of biomedical ethics is noteworthy. Dan forwarded to me this article written by him on the importance of maintaining a 100% pro-life, anti-abortion position in all cases including rape, incest, and ectopic pregnancies. This is the formal position of Vision Forum, the Roman Catholic Church, and numerous leaders and organizations within the pro-life community. We all stand for the proposition that self-conscious, intentional abortion is never justified, and that both parents and the medical community must respect and honor the personhood of both the mother and the child. Intent is everything. We must never intend to abort the child. (Arguments which justify intentional abortion based on situation ethics and appeal to emotions are specious and contrary to Scripture—see A Declaration of Life.)
This means that Christians in crisis must look to the various options other than direct, willful killing of a baby as a solution to crisis. These might include good faith efforts to transplant the baby (notwithstanding the unlikelihood of success based on present technologies). These may also involve other actions which reflect a good faith effort to save the life of both the mother and child and recognizing the personhood of both, but where such good faith efforts may have an unintended, secondary consequence of the death of the child. Dan’s excellent article makes these points clearly. Professing Christians who have absorbed the emotional fear-mongering tactics of Planned Parenthood, with its appeal to misinformation, hatred, and utilitarian ethics to defend some abortions, even while professing to reject the larger objectives and goals of Planned Parenthood, will not like Dan’s conclusions. But, in my personal opinion, the problem is with their ethics, not Dan’s argument.
Is Innocent Human Life Ever Negotiable? by Dan Becker, President, Georgia Right to Life As we enter the 21st century, Georgia Right to Life finds itself in the middle of a raging debate regarding the future of the pro-life movement. As we face new and emerging medical technologies, many tough questions are raised. “Should we in the pro-life movement, accept that some classes of human life are expendable? For instance, should children conceived during the treatment of infertility, placed in a frozen state, and subsequently abandoned by their parents . . . be protected by law? Should we allow rape and incest exceptions that make it lawful to kill a child based on its manner of conception? What about a woman facing a life threatening ectopic pregnanc . . . what concerns, if any, should she address before seeking medical help? IMAGO DEI and the Pro-life Message in the 21st Century Genesis 1:27 says, “So God created man in His own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (ESV). This verse is the foundation of human dignity throughout Western history. “Imago Dei” is Latin for the “image of God.” To be created imago Dei means being endowed with an immortal spirit, a capacity to know and be known by God, a measure of autonomy and free will in the areas of thought and action, each of which separate us from the rest of creation. Because we bear the image of God, all mankind, and by extension, each and every human life, has a “specialness” and worth that demands respect. Each human life, from its earliest stage of development, is a unique Person which bears God’s likeness, and should have the same protection of law that is afforded other “persons” in our society. For this reason, all human life should be respected in law. This respect is due regardless of the manner of conception, whether through the marital act, fertilized “in vitro” (IVF), or through the “ex utero” process of Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT, otherwise know as cloning) . Our United States Constitution limits its protection to “born” persons. This limitation implicitly violates the doctrine of imago Dei, and has resulted in a branch of the pro-life movement now focusing its educational and legislative efforts on promoting “Personhood” as the answer to the emerging biotech issues facing us in the 21st century. IMAGO DEI: Hard Cases Make Bad Law “You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13). This biblical command seems very straightforward in its application. However, when applied to pro-life legislation, we are told that we must make exceptions to this command in order to be effective in the legislature. We respectfully disagree. A significant number of pro-life laws have been passed in Georgia since 1998, yet in NO case has a “rape and incest” exception been introduced into the law! Since 2000, we have consistently labored to refute this flawed logic by denying our endorsement to any politician who believes otherwise. By God’s grace, Georgia is currently ranked as the 14th most pro-life state in the nation. If we are successful in passing a “juridical personhood” bill (a bill that would protect human life conceived in vitro or ex utero) in 2009, we will advance into the top 5. We went from a 3% pro-life legislure in 2002 to a 53% legislature by 2006. Our insistence on the principle of protecting all human life has resulted in a consistent pro-life standard and message and has produced very pragmatic ends. We are told by many within the pro-life movement that we must do whatever is necessary “to save as many babies as we can” and on the surface this would appear prudent. The problem is that it requires that we materially participate with legislators who demand that we negotiate and permit the compromise of some human life. Their argument is that it assures that we achieve the highest level of justice that this culture will afford. We allege that if you “aim at nothing, you are sure to hit it!” Pope Benedict XVI has wisely said, “It is necessary to bear concrete witness to the fact that respect for life is the first form of justice that must be applied.” Our aim is to provide a concrete foundation in promoting justice for ALL innocent human life. We have refused to materially participate with any legislator or support his or her legislation if it calls for the destruction of innocent human life in any case other than to save the life of the mother. Is material participation immoral? We believe it is when it is unbiblical, freely accepts bad side effects, and establishes bad precedents. Mr. Clarke Forsyth, President, Americans United for Life says, “The first principle of morality is to pursue the good and avoid evil. We are to individually turn from evil and do good. This includes an injunction against calculating to do evil in order that good may come. We must also avoid participating in the evil actions of others . . . material cooperation can be morally wrong, just as it can be wrong freely to accept bad side effects. If material cooperation would be unfair or give bad example, or if one has a responsibility to testify to the truth by avoiding even this much association with evil then one should not cooperate materially.” We couldn’t agree more! Deuteronomy 24:16 states that “nor shall children be put to death for their parents; only for their own crimes may persons be put to death” (NRSV). If we posit that unborn children are “persons” then we can clearly see that God’s word forbids abortion in the cases of rape and incest. To allow our pro-life organizations and pro-life legislators to promote a compromise of this nature damages the very core argument of imago Dei and removes the very sure foundation that all innocent human life should be protected from fertilization until natural death. This is not only a bad example, but it materially cooperates with evil. We have rejected this compromise in Georgia since 2000 and have successfully promoted a culture of life that has been reflected in our laws. In 2006, our Board voted to focus all of our legislative energies on incrementally promoting Personhood (www.personhood.net) as opposed to seeking incremental gains that simply regulate abortion. IMAGO DEI: The Life of the Mother Exception We admit that a serious medical condition exists whenever a woman is diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy. In very rare cases, ectopic pregnancy has resulted in a live birth. Some respected publications put the odds at 60 million to 1. It is always life threatening whenever the embryo attaches to the fallopian tube. There is no medical record of a live birth of an ectopic tubal pregnancy. This diagnosis requires medical intervention in an attempt to successfully treat TWO patients . . . the mother AND the child, otherwise both will perish. To date our medical knowledge and technology is inadequate to save the child. It is estimated that we are just a few years away from the development of an ectogenic womb that may permit the successful treatment of this tragic case. Does this mean that all approaches to the treatment of an ectopic tubal pregnancy are in keeping with the biblical doctrine of imago Dei? Sadly, no. Many physicians administer the abortifacient drug called methotrexate to patients with early tubal ectopic pregnancies. The object is to avoid the more serious complications that can come from the invasive surgery which removes a section of the fallopian tube containing the dead or dying child and renders the associated ovary sterile. A problem exists when there are multiple fertilized embryos which have successfully implanted in the uterus and would be aborted in the attempt to promote spontaneous regression of the dead fetus. This is a well documented medical scenario. This would entail material participation in the death of innocent human life. The official position statement of the Association of Pro-life Physicians says this, “It is only ethical to remove the tubal pregnancy if spontaneous resolution does not occur after watchful waiting and if the physician is 100% certain that there are no twins. At this point, the embryo in the fallopian tube is likely to be dead and, even if not, the death is unavoidable and unintentional, and the procedure is necessary to save the life of the mother. **In conclusion, there are no occasions in which the intentional killing of the pre-born child is justified.” Divine law supports the scientific fact that life and personhood begin at fertilization or its equivalent. The 21st century challenges this fact in a host of new battlefields centered in emerging technologies and bio-tech science. If we are unsuccessful in combating the attack on the doctrine of imago Dei, then I fear that we will be inundated with a frankenscience straight from the pages of Huxley’s Brave New World. In the 20th century it was enough that we were pro-life, but in the words of evangelical bioethicist Nigel Cameron, “In the 21st century we must also be pro-human.”
Is Innocent Human Life Ever Negotiable? by Dan Becker, President, Georgia Right to Life
As we enter the 21st century, Georgia Right to Life finds itself in the middle of a raging debate regarding the future of the pro-life movement. As we face new and emerging medical technologies, many tough questions are raised. “Should we in the pro-life movement, accept that some classes of human life are expendable? For instance, should children conceived during the treatment of infertility, placed in a frozen state, and subsequently abandoned by their parents . . . be protected by law? Should we allow rape and incest exceptions that make it lawful to kill a child based on its manner of conception? What about a woman facing a life threatening ectopic pregnanc . . . what concerns, if any, should she address before seeking medical help?
IMAGO DEI and the Pro-life Message in the 21st Century
Genesis 1:27 says, “So God created man in His own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (ESV). This verse is the foundation of human dignity throughout Western history. “Imago Dei” is Latin for the “image of God.” To be created imago Dei means being endowed with an immortal spirit, a capacity to know and be known by God, a measure of autonomy and free will in the areas of thought and action, each of which separate us from the rest of creation.
Because we bear the image of God, all mankind, and by extension, each and every human life, has a “specialness” and worth that demands respect. Each human life, from its earliest stage of development, is a unique Person which bears God’s likeness, and should have the same protection of law that is afforded other “persons” in our society. For this reason, all human life should be respected in law. This respect is due regardless of the manner of conception, whether through the marital act, fertilized “in vitro” (IVF), or through the “ex utero” process of Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT, otherwise know as cloning) .
Our United States Constitution limits its protection to “born” persons. This limitation implicitly violates the doctrine of imago Dei, and has resulted in a branch of the pro-life movement now focusing its educational and legislative efforts on promoting “Personhood” as the answer to the emerging biotech issues facing us in the 21st century.
IMAGO DEI: Hard Cases Make Bad Law “You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13). This biblical command seems very straightforward in its application. However, when applied to pro-life legislation, we are told that we must make exceptions to this command in order to be effective in the legislature. We respectfully disagree.
A significant number of pro-life laws have been passed in Georgia since 1998, yet in NO case has a “rape and incest” exception been introduced into the law! Since 2000, we have consistently labored to refute this flawed logic by denying our endorsement to any politician who believes otherwise. By God’s grace, Georgia is currently ranked as the 14th most pro-life state in the nation. If we are successful in passing a “juridical personhood” bill (a bill that would protect human life conceived in vitro or ex utero) in 2009, we will advance into the top 5. We went from a 3% pro-life legislure in 2002 to a 53% legislature by 2006. Our insistence on the principle of protecting all human life has resulted in a consistent pro-life standard and message and has produced very pragmatic ends.
We are told by many within the pro-life movement that we must do whatever is necessary “to save as many babies as we can” and on the surface this would appear prudent. The problem is that it requires that we materially participate with legislators who demand that we negotiate and permit the compromise of some human life. Their argument is that it assures that we achieve the highest level of justice that this culture will afford. We allege that if you “aim at nothing, you are sure to hit it!” Pope Benedict XVI has wisely said, “It is necessary to bear concrete witness to the fact that respect for life is the first form of justice that must be applied.” Our aim is to provide a concrete foundation in promoting justice for ALL innocent human life. We have refused to materially participate with any legislator or support his or her legislation if it calls for the destruction of innocent human life in any case other than to save the life of the mother.
Is material participation immoral? We believe it is when it is unbiblical, freely accepts bad side effects, and establishes bad precedents. Mr. Clarke Forsyth, President, Americans United for Life says, “The first principle of morality is to pursue the good and avoid evil. We are to individually turn from evil and do good. This includes an injunction against calculating to do evil in order that good may come. We must also avoid participating in the evil actions of others . . . material cooperation can be morally wrong, just as it can be wrong freely to accept bad side effects. If material cooperation would be unfair or give bad example, or if one has a responsibility to testify to the truth by avoiding even this much association with evil then one should not cooperate materially.” We couldn’t agree more!
Deuteronomy 24:16 states that “nor shall children be put to death for their parents; only for their own crimes may persons be put to death” (NRSV). If we posit that unborn children are “persons” then we can clearly see that God’s word forbids abortion in the cases of rape and incest. To allow our pro-life organizations and pro-life legislators to promote a compromise of this nature damages the very core argument of imago Dei and removes the very sure foundation that all innocent human life should be protected from fertilization until natural death. This is not only a bad example, but it materially cooperates with evil. We have rejected this compromise in Georgia since 2000 and have successfully promoted a culture of life that has been reflected in our laws. In 2006, our Board voted to focus all of our legislative energies on incrementally promoting Personhood (www.personhood.net) as opposed to seeking incremental gains that simply regulate abortion.
IMAGO DEI: The Life of the Mother Exception We admit that a serious medical condition exists whenever a woman is diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy. In very rare cases, ectopic pregnancy has resulted in a live birth. Some respected publications put the odds at 60 million to 1. It is always life threatening whenever the embryo attaches to the fallopian tube. There is no medical record of a live birth of an ectopic tubal pregnancy. This diagnosis requires medical intervention in an attempt to successfully treat TWO patients . . . the mother AND the child, otherwise both will perish. To date our medical knowledge and technology is inadequate to save the child. It is estimated that we are just a few years away from the development of an ectogenic womb that may permit the successful treatment of this tragic case.
Does this mean that all approaches to the treatment of an ectopic tubal pregnancy are in keeping with the biblical doctrine of imago Dei? Sadly, no. Many physicians administer the abortifacient drug called methotrexate to patients with early tubal ectopic pregnancies. The object is to avoid the more serious complications that can come from the invasive surgery which removes a section of the fallopian tube containing the dead or dying child and renders the associated ovary sterile. A problem exists when there are multiple fertilized embryos which have successfully implanted in the uterus and would be aborted in the attempt to promote spontaneous regression of the dead fetus. This is a well documented medical scenario. This would entail material participation in the death of innocent human life. The official position statement of the Association of Pro-life Physicians says this, “It is only ethical to remove the tubal pregnancy if spontaneous resolution does not occur after watchful waiting and if the physician is 100% certain that there are no twins. At this point, the embryo in the fallopian tube is likely to be dead and, even if not, the death is unavoidable and unintentional, and the procedure is necessary to save the life of the mother. **In conclusion, there are no occasions in which the intentional killing of the pre-born child is justified.”
Divine law supports the scientific fact that life and personhood begin at fertilization or its equivalent. The 21st century challenges this fact in a host of new battlefields centered in emerging technologies and bio-tech science. If we are unsuccessful in combating the attack on the doctrine of imago Dei, then I fear that we will be inundated with a frankenscience straight from the pages of Huxley’s Brave New World. In the 20th century it was enough that we were pro-life, but in the words of evangelical bioethicist Nigel Cameron, “In the 21st century we must also be pro-human.”
At Vision Forum, we are passionate about life. That means being passionate about babies. We believe that the Bible should be taken seriously when it reminds us that children are a “reward” from God. We reject as unbiblical the spirit of selfishness which has contributed to government-subsidized, legalized abortion, and the contraceptive mentality, which often leads to non-clinical abortions from abortifacient contraceptives like the Pill. And to the extent that the Church has participated in either, we must acknowledge that we have blood on our hands. The consequences are far reaching.
One such consequence is our population crisis. And yes there is a big one. But its not an overpopulation crisis we are facing, but precisely the opposite. A growing number of think tanks are beginning to present the data of the demographic nightmare we are bequeathing to our children. Hoover is one such think tank. The February/March 2005 edition of their publication Policy Review, reveals the following:
Global fertility rates have fallen by half since 1972. For a modern nation to replace its population, experts explain, the average woman needs to have 2.1 children over the course of her lifetime. Not a single industrialized nation today has a fertility rate of 2.1, and most are well below replacement level. In Ben Franklin’s day, by contrast, America averaged eight births per woman. American birth rates today are the highest in the industrialized world — yet even those are nonetheless just below the replacement level of 2.1. Moreover, that figure is relatively high only because of America’s substantial immigrant population. Fertility rates among native born American women are now far below what they were even in the 1930s, when the Great Depression forced a sharp reduction in family size. Population decline is by no means restricted to the industrial world. Remarkably, the sharp rise in American fertility rates at the height of the baby boom — 3.8 children per woman — was substantially above Third World fertility rates today. From East Asia to the Middle East to Mexico, countries once fabled for their high fertility rates are now falling swiftly toward or below replacement levels. In 1970, a typical woman in the developing world bore six children. Today, that figure is about 2.7. In scale and rapidity, that sort of fertility decline is historically unprecedented. By 2002, fertility rates in 20 developing countries had fallen below replacement levels. 2002 also witnessed a dramatic reversal by demographic experts at the United Nations, who for the first time said that world population was ultimately headed down, not up. These decreases in human fertility cover nearly every region of the world, crossing all cultures, religions, and forms of government. Declining birth rates mean that societies everywhere will soon be aging to an unprecedented degree. Increasing life expectancy is also contributing to the aging of the world’s population. In 1900, American life expectancy at birth was 47 years. Today it is 76. By 2050, one out of five Americans will be over age 65, making the U.S. population as a whole markedly older than Florida’s population today. Striking as that demographic graying may be, it pales before projections for countries like Italy and Japan. The United Nations estimates that by 2050, 42 percent of all people in Italy and Japan will be aged 60 or older. In short, the West is beginning to experience significant demographic changes, with substantial cultural consequences. Historically, the aged have made up only a small portion of society, and the rearing of children has been the chief concern. Now children will become a small minority, and society’s central problem will be caring for the elderly. Yet even this assumes that societies consisting of elderly citizens at levels of 20, 30, even 40 or more percent can sustain themselves at all. That is not obvious. Population decline is also set to ramify geometrically. As population falls, the pool of potential mothers in each succeeding generation shrinks. So even if, well into the process, there comes a generation of women with a higher fertility rate than their mothers’, the momentum of population decline could still be locked in. Population decline may also be cemented into place by economics. To support the ever-growing numbers of elderly, governments may raise taxes on younger workers. That would make children even less affordable than they are today, decreasing the size of future generations still further. If worldwide fertility rates reach levels now common in the developing world (and that is where they seem headed), within a few centuries, the world’s population could shrink below the level of America’s today. Of course, it’s unlikely that mankind will simply cease to exist for failure to reproduce. But the critical point is that we cannot reverse that course unless something happens to substantially increase fertility rates. And whatever might raise fertility rates above replacement level will almost certainly require fundamental cultural change. Why does modern social life translate into the lower birth rates that spark all those wider implications? Urbanization is one major factor. In a traditional agricultural society, children are put to work early. They also inherit family land, using its fruits to care for aging parents. In a modern urban economy, on the other hand, children represent a tremendous expense, and one increasingly unlikely to be returned to parents in the form of wealth or care. With the growth of a consumer economy, potential parents are increasingly presented with a zero-sum choice between children and more consumer goods and services for themselves.
Global fertility rates have fallen by half since 1972. For a modern nation to replace its population, experts explain, the average woman needs to have 2.1 children over the course of her lifetime. Not a single industrialized nation today has a fertility rate of 2.1, and most are well below replacement level.
In Ben Franklin’s day, by contrast, America averaged eight births per woman. American birth rates today are the highest in the industrialized world — yet even those are nonetheless just below the replacement level of 2.1. Moreover, that figure is relatively high only because of America’s substantial immigrant population. Fertility rates among native born American women are now far below what they were even in the 1930s, when the Great Depression forced a sharp reduction in family size.
Population decline is by no means restricted to the industrial world. Remarkably, the sharp rise in American fertility rates at the height of the baby boom — 3.8 children per woman — was substantially above Third World fertility rates today. From East Asia to the Middle East to Mexico, countries once fabled for their high fertility rates are now falling swiftly toward or below replacement levels. In 1970, a typical woman in the developing world bore six children. Today, that figure is about 2.7. In scale and rapidity, that sort of fertility decline is historically unprecedented. By 2002, fertility rates in 20 developing countries had fallen below replacement levels. 2002 also witnessed a dramatic reversal by demographic experts at the United Nations, who for the first time said that world population was ultimately headed down, not up. These decreases in human fertility cover nearly every region of the world, crossing all cultures, religions, and forms of government.
Declining birth rates mean that societies everywhere will soon be aging to an unprecedented degree. Increasing life expectancy is also contributing to the aging of the world’s population. In 1900, American life expectancy at birth was 47 years. Today it is 76. By 2050, one out of five Americans will be over age 65, making the U.S. population as a whole markedly older than Florida’s population today. Striking as that demographic graying may be, it pales before projections for countries like Italy and Japan. The United Nations estimates that by 2050, 42 percent of all people in Italy and Japan will be aged 60 or older.
In short, the West is beginning to experience significant demographic changes, with substantial cultural consequences. Historically, the aged have made up only a small portion of society, and the rearing of children has been the chief concern. Now children will become a small minority, and society’s central problem will be caring for the elderly. Yet even this assumes that societies consisting of elderly citizens at levels of 20, 30, even 40 or more percent can sustain themselves at all. That is not obvious.
Population decline is also set to ramify geometrically. As population falls, the pool of potential mothers in each succeeding generation shrinks. So even if, well into the process, there comes a generation of women with a higher fertility rate than their mothers’, the momentum of population decline could still be locked in. Population decline may also be cemented into place by economics. To support the ever-growing numbers of elderly, governments may raise taxes on younger workers. That would make children even less affordable than they are today, decreasing the size of future generations still further.
If worldwide fertility rates reach levels now common in the developing world (and that is where they seem headed), within a few centuries, the world’s population could shrink below the level of America’s today. Of course, it’s unlikely that mankind will simply cease to exist for failure to reproduce. But the critical point is that we cannot reverse that course unless something happens to substantially increase fertility rates. And whatever might raise fertility rates above replacement level will almost certainly require fundamental cultural change.
Why does modern social life translate into the lower birth rates that spark all those wider implications? Urbanization is one major factor. In a traditional agricultural society, children are put to work early. They also inherit family land, using its fruits to care for aging parents. In a modern urban economy, on the other hand, children represent a tremendous expense, and one increasingly unlikely to be returned to parents in the form of wealth or care. With the growth of a consumer economy, potential parents are increasingly presented with a zero-sum choice between children and more consumer goods and services for themselves.
They came from nearly fifty states—four thousand men, women, and children. They came to celebrate the providential origins of our nation on the 400th birthday of the founding of Jamestown. They came to give America a birthday party dedicated to the glory of God. And from the opening ceremonies which involved the reenactment of the “First Landing” on Monday, June 11th, to the glorious closing fireworks on the evening of Saturday, June 16th, the Christian families in attendance prayed, played, feasted, and rejoiced. By God’s grace. the event was blessed from beginning to end, and the Lord alone recived the glory, honor, and praise.
The Jameston Quadricentennial: A Celebration of Our Providential History was the most significant and far reaching event in the history of Vision Forum Ministries. Designed to be a distinctively Christian birthday party which took the best of the great traditions of centennial celebrations past, the event exceeded all of our expectations for its beauty and power as a testimony of the mighty hand of God in history. May the Lord Jesus Christ be praised for His lovingkindness and His mercies.
The Jamestown Quadricentennial included events (often running concurrently) in five cities—Hampton, Charles City, Williamsburg, Yorktown, and Jamestown. Nearly a thousand celebrants travelled in hot air balloons. More than five thousand people participated in thirty-five, two-hour Faith and Freedom Tours that featured some of the great teachers and preachers of our day. Fifteen hundred people travelled down the James River on boat tours that presented history from a providential perspective. Just under one thousand boys and girls of all ages marched in costume, with the flags of fifty states waving and fifes and drummers playing in a grand and glorious parade on Friday. A similar number marched again on Saturday.
Over the course of the week celebrants dedicated an historic monument, attended more than twenty-five lectures and reenactments. They watched “The Marriage of Pocahontas,” met the grandson of the tenth president of the United States, shook hands with President Theodore Roosevelt, and dialogued with Princess Pocahontas. Some of them searched for answers to an historic mystery, and one of those treasure hunting sleuths became the “Fifth Trustee” and heir to a cache of four hundred gold coins. Celebrants listened to the blast of the cannons, the sounds of fifes and drums, and they gathered under the evening sky for a simply spectacular fireworks display.
But more than anything else, the families in attendance were able to take a week of their lives to stop, rejoice, give thanks to the Lord, and praise the name of Jesus Christ for his many mercies in the life of our God-blessed nation.
The Children’s Parade marches through Fort Pocahontas.
Cart
Help