Here’s what Cardinal John Henry Newman had to say about the conduct of a gentleman in the mid 19th Century:

The gentleman has his eyes on all his company; he is tender towards the bashful, gentle towards the distant, and merciful towards the absurd; he can recollect to whom he is speaking; he guards against unseasonable allusions, or topics which may irritate; he is seldom prominent in conversation, and never wearisome… He never speaks of himself except when compelled, never defends himself by a mere retort, he has no ears for slander or gossip, is scrupulous in imputing motives to those who interfere with him, and interprets everything for the best. He is never mean or little in his disputes, never takes unfair advantage, never mistakes personalities or sharp sayings for arguments, or insinuates evil which he dare not say out. From a longsighted prudence, he observes the maxim of the ancient sage, that we should ever conduct ourselves towards our enemy as if he were one day to be our friend. He has too much good sense to be affronted at insults, he is too well employed to remember injuries, and too indolent to bear malice… If he engages in controversy of any kind, his disciplined intellect preserves him from the blundering discourtesy of better, perhaps, but less educated minds, who, like blunt weapons, tear and hack instead of cutting clean, who mistake the point in argument, waste their strength on trifles, misconceive their adversary, and leave the question more involved than they find it. He may be right or wrong in his opinion, but he is too clear-headed to be unjust; he is as simple as he is forcible, and as brief as he is decisive. Nowhere shall we find greater candour, consideration, indulgence: he throws himself into the minds of his opponents, he accounts for their mistakes. He knows the weakness of human reason as well as its strength, its province and its limits.

This is from Cardinal Newman’s collection of lectures entitled The Idea of A University, published in 1858 and quoted in Mark Coppenger’s recent book Moral Apologetics for Contemporary Christians. A century and a half later, I find his thoughts to be both edifying and convicting. I certainly fall far short of this standard, but it is a standard worthy of aspiration!

Ideas have consequences, and so do national policies. Ten years after our invasion of Iraq, many Americans remain largely unaware of the negative consequences of the interventionist foreign policy shared by our current President and his predecessor. Not least among these consequences is the increased persecution of Christians in Arab nations.

Andrew Noran’s recent article from The American Conservative, entitled How the Iraq War Became a War on Christians, shines much needed light on this particular fruit of American intervention overseas:

[O]n March 19, 2003, Operation Iraqi Freedom commenced. Shortly after combat operations concluded on May 1, the real conflict began. Amid the chaos and sectarian violence that followed, Iraq’s Christians suffered severe persecution. Neither the military nor the State Department took action to protect them. In October 2003, human rights expert Nina Shea noted that religious freedom and a pluralistic Iraq were not high priorities for the administration, concluding that its “diffidence on religious freedom suggests Washington’s relative indifference to this basic human right.” Shea added, “Washington’s refusal to insist on guarantees of religious freedom threatens to undermine its already difficult task of securing a fully democratic government in Iraq”—more prescience that would be likewise disregarded.

The article goes on to show how the democratic governments we installed in the Middle East have been, for the most part, worse than the regimes they replaced. And how our country—during Republican as well as Democratic administrations—has refused to acknowledge the plight of Arab Christians as religious persecution, even as we continue to pursue a course of action in Syria that is resulting in the same consequences there.

For the record, I don’t believe that there has been malicious intent toward Middle Eastern Christians from either President Bush or President Obama, nor from the many American citizens who also support an interventionist foreign policy. Rather, I believe that the persecution being faced by our brothers and sisters in places like Iraq and Egypt is truly an unintended consequence. But there’s a difference between unintended and unforeseen. There were those who predicted such consequences prior to the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and have been consistently warning us about where such policies will lead us.

The question is, will we ever learn?

The state of Indiana recently passed into law the nation’s first (but probably not last) bill pushing back against the “Common Core” educational standards adopted by 46 American states. In an encouraging tale of how ordinary citizens can still bring about real, positive change in the face of overwhelming odds, this bill is largely the result of the efforts of two concerned moms who were willing to do whatever it took to fight back against destructive influences on their children’s education. Maggie Gallagher has the story on National Review Online.

As these moms learned, Common Core—far from being beneficial, despite wide bipartisan political support—actually lowers education standards at most schools. Rather than preparing students to excel, Common Core conforms students to the lowest level (which is the only way to achieve “equality” among students):

These standards are designed not to produce well-educated citizens but to prepare students to enter community colleges and lower-level jobs. All students, not just non-college-material students, are going to be taught to this lower standard.

And as with most things relating to public education, the ulterior motive has little to do with what’s best for children, and much to do with what’s best for the all-consuming State:

One major objection to the Common Core standards is that they are not evidence-based. Their effect on academic achievement is simply unknown, because they have not been field-tested anywhere in the world. But moms have a more elemental objection: The whole operation is a federal power grab over their children’s education. Once a state adopts Common Core, its curriculum goals and assessments are effectively nationalized. And the national standards are effectively privatized, because they are written, owned, and copyrighted by two private trade organizations.

Read the rest of the article here.

It’s no secret that I’m not a fan of government schooling, but as long as I’m being forced to pay for it, I’d like to see control of the schools localized, with the Board of each school system accountable to its local constituents. That’s impossible with a federally-mandated set of standards and standardized testing which forces public school teachers to dumb down their methods and teach to the test. Furthermore, I care deeply about the children in the public schools (though you’ll never see mine there) and have no desire to see them handicapped by an educational system designed to foster dependence on the State (see Luke 6:40). I pray that my state will follow in the path of the state in which I was born and raised.

P.S. — Last week I had the privilege of delivering the annual report for Highland Rim Academy, the local private school which I serve as President of the Board. During that address, I reasserted our Board’s commitment to refuse to accept vouchers, should the school voucher bill proposed by Governor Bill Haslam ever make it through our state legislature. The primary reason we are so opposed to receiving vouchers—which, on the surface, might seem a good way to bring new students into the school—is that accepting tax funding would force us to also accept state standards, which are far too low to allow us to accomplish our vision for the school. This is exactly what happened at the private school mentioned in the article posted above! Public money never comes without strings attached…

[Image Credit]

This film won Best Comedy in the Experience Studios Short Film Contest. More importantly, it stars my good friend Charity Spencer, who is another step closer to her big break!

This afternoon I was listening to a panel discussion on for-profit education, as part of some research I’m doing for offering Kindermusik classes at the School of Performing Arts. While much of it probably won’t interest most readers of this blog, one thing did stick out at me as particularly thought-provoking.

One of the panelists spoke about the ability of the private sector to educate far more efficiently and effectively than the public sector—a truth with which I couldn’t agree more strongly!—making reference to Say’s Law, which states that “supply creates its own demand.” His point was that innovative people create things which no one has yet “needed” (e.g., fax machines and cell phones), and this in turn creates demand for that good or service. In this case, educational entrepreneurs develop educational products (e.g., Kindermusik) which are proven effective over time, becoming both beneficial to society and profitable for the entrepreneur.

What I found most fascinating, though, was when he went on to describe public schools as “necessarily conservative”—in the sense that they “must not be subject to the vicissitudes and fads of the moment”—whereas education, to be successful, requires “the entrepreneurship of people with new ideas, flexibility, agility, imagination, energy, the willingness to run risks, and also a desire to make a little money.”

I’ll admit that when I think of public schooling, the word “conservative” typically does not come to mind. But as I thought about it, I realized the panelist was correct in his assessment. With an increasing push for standardization of student outcomes and the emphasis on a “common core” in government schools, the options for teachers and parents are quite limited in public education. This really is a conservative mindset, albeit a mind set on conserving values more commonly labeled “Liberal.”

Private and home schools, meanwhile, are at liberty to pursue whichever methods are best in a given context, giving parents and teachers the freedom to choose whichever educational options are best for their students. As the supply of excellent educational choices increases, it will create its own demand among those who haven’t yet realized what they are missing. This truth is what makes me so excited about my work at the music school and at Highland Rim Academy!

So what do you think? Are public schools “necessarily conservative”? Is school choice the key to better education for all? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments section.

*BONUS MATERIAL*

In the same discussion, Kindermusik CEO Michael Dougherty also stated that his “driving mission” was to prevent music from becoming “the next Latin,” something vital to a child’s education which has been “snuffed down in the lives of children.” As a huge fan of classical education, I thought that was a pretty cool connection to make!

Yesterday, we were studying the book of Daniel with the college class at church. During the lesson, our college pastor, John Aaron Matthew, referred several times to a sermon by Charles Haddon Spurgeon called “Dare to Be a Daniel.” The sermon was delivered on January 15, 1893, and can be found here.

The sermon takes its title from a popular song written by Philip P. Bliss (who also composed “Man of Sorrows, What a Name,” which was sung in our morning worship service yesterday), and quotes the song’s chorus:

Dare to be a Daniel! Dare to stand alone! Dare to have a purpose firm! Dare to make it known!

Incidentally, this was Spurgeon’s second sermon which made reference to this song (the first, “Daniel’s Band”, can be found here), which Bliss composed as a teaching tool for a children’s Sunday School class he was teaching. Almost 150 years later, it remains an instructional tune, which I learned as a child, and which my kids have in their music collection at home:

A few things that stand out upon reflection on the lesson, and after reading those two Spurgeon sermons:

1. I love that Spurgeon preached so often from the Old Testament. It seems we have a tendency to treat the Old Testament as a compilation of “stories” that we teach our kids in Sunday School, and spend most of our adult lives studying the New Testament. But the truth is that the gospel is found in both testaments, and we need to be fed a steady diet of Old and New if we are to understand any of it in its proper context. It’s one reason I’m so fond of The Gospel Project (the curriculum from which our lesson in Daniel was taken), and so glad that our pastor alternates teaching Old and New Testament books in his sermons.
2. Spurgeon compares Daniel to John the Apostle, speaking of them as counterparts. In fact, in the second of the sermons listed above, he teaches on the life of Daniel while expositing 1 John 4:9-21. If there ever was an Old Testament saint whose love for God cast out all fear, it was surely Daniel!
3. It seems that Philip Bliss took his Sunday School lesson to heart, exhibiting the love of Christ and the bravery of Daniel in his death. Just three years after composing “Dare to Be a Daniel,” Bliss and his wife were travelling via train through Ohio, when a bridge they were crossing collapsed near Ashtabula, Ohio, sending the train plummeting into a ravine. Bliss escaped the wreckage alive, but climbed back into a burning carriage trying to save his wife. Both were among the 92 people who died in the Ashtabula River Railroad Disaster. Among the wreckage, Bliss’ trunk was recovered undamaged. Inside it were found the lyrics to a new hymn he had just composed: “I Will Sing of My Redeemer.”

And because you really can never have too much Spurgeon, there’s one more resource you should check out. I told the college students in my small group yesterday that they should all read Spurgeon’s “Lectures To My Students” at their earliest convenience. It’s incredibly helpful, and not the least bit outdated, though it was written more than a century ago. You can get it for FREE as a PDF, or for under a dollar for Kindle, so there’s no reason not to!

Image Credit: This painting is by the 17th Century Flemish painter Sir Peter Paul Reubens, and is on display at the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C.

Great video from Abort73:

This morning, our pastor said he believes that the Kermit Gosnell trial has the potential to be the “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” of our generation, bringing the focus of our nation on the horrors of the slaughter of children. I pray he is right, and that God—who can use ANY situation, even the reprehensible actions of “Dr.” Gosnell, to bring about good—will soon bring about the end of abortion in America. If not, I shudder at the judgment that awaits us…

Here’s the text of the video:

Last week, Katie Stockton was sentenced to 50 years in prison for throwing her newborn daughter out with the trash. In light of all the alternatives available to her, Judge John Truitt called Stockton’s CHOICE: “incomprehensible.”

When it comes to newborn babies, the law is not pro-choice. Or is it?

While Katie Stockton was on trial in Illinois, the “Infants Born Alive Act” was being debated in Florida. The proposed law would prohibit abortion clinics from abandoning or killing babies who survive abortion—something that happens more than 1,200 times a year in the U.S.

Planned Parenthood opposes the bill.

Their lobbyist argued that the fate of any baby who survives an abortion should be left up to the mother and the abortionist. In other words, Planned Parenthood sees no difference between killing a human child before birth and after birth.

And they are right.

There is no ethical difference between abortion and infanticide. But if abandoning a baby daughter is reprehensible (as Katie Stockton did), and if snipping the spinal cords of babies who survived an abortion is reprehensible (as Kermit Gosnell did), how is it less reprehensible to rip an unborn baby apart (as Planned Parenthood does close to a thousand times each day)?

To be morally consistent, infanticide must be lawful or abortion must be unlawful.

Planned Parenthood recognizes this fact.

Do you?

“Stop Asking Jesus Into Your Heart: How to Know for Sure You Are Saved” by J.D. Greear

How many times have you asked Jesus into your heart?

If you’re anything like Pastor J.D. Greear and countless others, it could be thousands of times. “Am I really saved?” is a question that haunts Christians, causing them to live plagued with fear and doubt, rather than joy and peace. While I don’t know that my own count reached into the thousands, I can distinctly remember  praying the “sinner’s prayer” every single time I heard it in a worship service, youth camp, or revival meeting growing up. “Just in case,” I told myself.

It wasn’t until I was in my 20′s that I finally realized I didn’t have to constantly panic over the state of my soul. The assurance that I was truly and eternally saved came through the counsel of a godly man, who taught me things very much like what Greear has written in this little book.

There are two prevalent problems associated with the doctrine of assurance: true Christians who doubt their own salvation, and unregenerate people who have a false assurance that they are saved. Greear seeks to tackle both of these problems.

In the book, false assurance is primarily chalked up to the common teaching that if someone “prays a prayer” they are saved. When this false teaching is accompanied by the true teaching that salvation cannot be lost, it is a recipe for disaster! The solution is to hold fast to the doctrine of justification by faith alone (stressed to a greater extent in one of the book’s appendices), so that people realize that there is nothing magical about any particular set of words which grants us a new heart. The faith that saves is a faith that is accompanied by a changed heart, a renewed mind, and an obedient spirit.

These same truths are also the solution to the problem of doubt. If a Christian is worried about his “status” as a believer, he need only examine his life for the evidence of salvation. Greear urges believers to focus not on determining precisely when their walk with God began , but rather on whether they are walking with God now. The presence of this evidence, particularly love for other believers, ought to set a Christian’s mind at ease.

Greear also addresses some of the common arguments raised against the idea that Christians can know they are saved in a chapter titled, “If ‘once saved always saved,’ why does the Bible seem to warn us so often about losing our salvation?” These are questions that must be answered, and they are answered very well here. Hopefully every reader will come away more convinced than ever in the perseverance of the saints.

This is a book that I know I’ll be handing out to believers struggling with assurance. It would have greatly benefited me a decade ago! I pray that the Lord will use it to aid many Christians to rest assured in the power of the gospel. If you struggle with doubt about your salvation, or know someone who does, get Stop Asking Jesus Into Your Heart here.

A quick note about the audio book, which I received free for reviewing purposes from christianaudio.com: I think it’s the first book I’ve heard read by Tom Parks, but I really liked him! He’s a very engaging reader, and has the added benefit of sounding a lot like one of my favorite preachers. I hope to hear more from him!

After hearing Shai Linne’s last album, The Attributes of God, I became an even bigger fan of his music (see my two part review of this album here and here). I love the way he uses the art form of hip-hop to communicate the gospel with depth and clarity in a way that other genres of music usually can’t. So ever since I heard he had a new album coming out (Lyrical Theology will be released April 9), I’ve been eagerly anticipating it!

Today a track from the new album was released, and it’s a message that desperately needs to be shared. “Fal$e Teacher$” deals with the proliferation of “prosperity theology,” particularly in Africa, where it has spread like wildfire. At about the 2:30 mark, he starts naming names. Check it out:

Here’s a video in which Shai Linne explains his motivation for writing this song, and why he chose to specifically call out some of the most popular preachers on the planet:

The book he references in this video (Health, Wealth, & Happiness: Has the Prosperity Gospel Overshadowed the Gospel of Christ?) is excellent (my review). If you or someone you know has been influenced by these false teachers, check out this book.

You can preview the rest of the tracks from Lyrical Theology here. I’ll leave you with a word from John Piper, who, like Shai Linne, doesn’t mince words about the health & wealth garbage:

The first song recorded in Scripture is the Song of Moses in Exodus 15, written after the crossing of the Red Sea by the people of Israel. Moses also wrote a second song—this one dictated by God himself—just before the crossing of the Jordan into the promised land. These songs give fascinating insight into the character and attributes of God, and have an enduring relevance to the people of God. So enduring, in fact, that Revelation 15 depicts the redeemed singing the Song of Moses in heaven!

I chose these songs as the topic of a paper for my Old Testament survey class. I realize that posting seminary papers is a little out-of-the-ordinary for a blog, but I enjoyed writing this one and thought it might benefit others who have a similar interest in Old Testament worship. If you’d like to check it out, here it is: Who Is Like Yahweh? The God of the Old and New Testaments Revealed in the Songs of Moses. No word yet on what my grade is…

Three of the books I referenced in the paper are particularly excellent, so if you’re interested in learning more about the Old Testament in general or Old Testament songs in particular, these are a great place to start:

• God’s Lyrics: Rediscovering Worship Through Old Testament Songs by Douglas Sean O’Donnell
  
• God’s Glory in Salvation Through Judgment: A Biblical Theology by James Hamilton
• The Message of the Old Testament: Promises Made by Mark Dever

Now that this paper (and the rest of my homework for this semester’s classes) is out of the way, I should finally be able to get back to blogging consistently… at least until my next round of classes starts up in June!