Well, not really, but once again the cliché comes forward. Today, we are all Passion City Evangelicals. The outing and ousting of Pastor Louie from the Presidential Inauguration makes one thing clear – There is a new State Religion and it is called “None of the Above” – and this religion has an Army, a Judiciary and its own media.
I respect and admire the works of Pastor Louie Giglio of Atlanta. It was a great coup for a him to pray at the inauguration and he has a rockin’ and active parish in Atlanta – one that we can learn much from an evangelistic standpoint.
Pastor Louie committed the only sin in the Church of “None of the Above” – he said that homosexual behavior is a sin that prevents you from entering heaven. Being an Evangelical Christian pastor, knowledgeable of Scripture, this is an expected conclusion. But once this sermon – from the 1990’s was made public, Pastor Louie was outed and ousted.
For the first time in history, no minister will give the inaugural invocation because the State Church – the Church of None of the Above does not have any ministers, reverends, pastors or Fathers. When it is impossible for one who upholds the universal religious view of non-marital and same –sexual behaviors to pray at a public event, we now have a de facto established state church – The “Church of None of the Above”.
The statement Giglio made that got him the boot was nearly a direct quotation from Scripture. Unrepentant homosexuals, Giglio said “will not inherit the kingdom of God.”
As they say in New Orleans – “true dat”.
Every Christian faith holds (1) all are sinners (2) all non-marital sexual acts are sinful (3) no sinner can enter the Kingdom without repentance. Pastor Louie, once preached this in the context of homosexual acts; branding him a heretic or untouchable of sorts in our state church.
The “Church of None of the Above” specifically excludes all conduct standards, including the natural law standards of sexual morality so this church excludes the sexual teachings of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Adherents of those sects are tolerated as long as they shut up about sexual issues.
We have seen this before, Church.
At the dawn of America, some states issued preaching licenses to Anglican and congregational churches in an effort to exclude Baptists. Most states oppressed Catholicism except two – Rhode Island and Maryland. The First Amendment corrected this but our new state church requires a “preaching license” of sorts – the embracing as a good any form of consensual sexual expression in any context and places in a ghetto the rest.
As citizens, we ought to insist that the President encourage a healthy pluralism in the public square. The problem is not that Pastor Louie wants to “impose his religion”. Nor does Pastor Louie want to exclude homosexuals from the public square or deny them their civil rights. The problem is that Pastor Louie says that sexual sinners cannot go to heaven without repentance. Making Pastor Louie’s exclusion the result of a religious test – and this is contrary to the ideals this nation was founded on.
This is why, events like the Festival for Freedom, requested by the USCCB and so well executed here in our Diocese are necessary.
The Church of None of the Above has been established by the State as a doctrine-free and leaderless religion armed with popular support and, in the fullness of time, state power to tax and jail with impunity.
Listen Church, our old understanding of church/state cooperative relations is toast. Don’t think so? The Roman Catholic Governor of New York brought his concubine to his inaugural Mass and sat in the front row. That is how irrelevant Catholicism is in the public square. First you are irrelevant, then you are isolated (see Pastor Louie above), then mocked, then licensed/taxed or regulated to the curb. Finally there is outright persecution because no one is obligated to hire a Christian bigot, 501(c )3 status goes only to those who serve the “public good” and that leads to outright schism because we all know there are those who will prostitute the Truth for “mission”.
Remember this Church – There is nothing more offensive in America today than the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Nothing. More. Offensive.
Support the Festival for Freedom. A Christian has a right to a place in the square.
|
I think it’s a real stretch to say that every Christian faith holds that homosexual acts are sinful. The Episcopalians just approved a same-sex wedding ceremony and announced last week that such ceremonies will soon start being done at the Washington National Cathedral! They’ve long had openly homosexual priests and now bishops. And the Presbyterians and Methodists, unless I’m mistaken, are even more “progressive” than the Episcopalians.
I really do hope that the conservative Evangelicals take a good look at the strong and consistent stand our Church’s fathers have taken and continue to take, in the face of increasing public opposition (and now government opposition). Hopefully, this will lead to a new sort of Ecumenism and increasing unity among the churches that resist the prince of “this world.”
I forgot to add – your last sentence is right on! Nothing. More. Offensive.
And the folks around here who persist in opposition to our Church’s moral teachings on matters sexual (E, for one) need to decide which side they’re on. Either the Church (ordinary Magisterium) is the Christ-chosen arbiter of moral teaching or she is not, and if she is not, then it’s sheer hypocrisy to stay around.
I stand corrected, Mouse. The Episcopalians and others have surely skipped over a few chapters of St. Paul, effectively jumping the moral ship. My sentimentality got ahead (a little) of my facts.
Well that statement isn’t too far removed from being correct – it wasn’t too long ago that they all would consider a “same sex” wedding simply unthinkable. But some of these religions are so much more “enlightened” in the ways of the world than we backward Catholics.
It’s what happens when all matters moral are put to an annual vote.
I think that we have to keep in mind that the goal of secular humanism is not necessarily to eliminate our Catholic denomination but to eliminate the concept of religion altogether. However I am of the opinion that the Creator has wired us to have some sort of belief system or faith. Secularism will not change our wiring but will substitute some other entity for worship such as the “state” or materialism with its Cathedrals of Commerce.
Robbie George concurs at First Things (with better prose and less words).
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2013/01/shrug-not
Below is the content of an email sent me by a friend.
(unfortunately I had no link to the article and was forced
to copy it in its entirety)
Of interest is the author’s reference to the NONES.
I like comparing that to DanilKane’s The Church of None of the Above.
Enjoy
A recent Gallup Poll about religion discovered that the number of people in the United States declaring themselves religious has dropped about 50% since 2005. In fact atheism is up about 5%. What’s behind this fall from grace?
One major factor is that many churches are chasing the modern trends of liberalism rather than being rooted in a core of biblical beliefs. Take for example the Episcopal Church of America, a member of the Anglican community. The church’s legislative body has approved a ceremony for same-sex marriage (so too have many other mainline protestant churches). They have adopted this measure to show that we are “all God’s children.” The Bible however denies this saying “In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God (1 John 3:10). Homosexuality is not a righteous act (1 Corinthians 6:9, 10).
They have also removed barriers for transgendered people to serve as priests. During the debate on this issue one bishop cautioned that this would bring about theological confusion. Another responded that confusion is precisely what was needed! At a communion service to celebrate their victory, a lesbian bishop recited a prayer thanking “the Spirit of Life” for “disordering our boundaries.” She then asked the non-patriarchal spectre “to feel” his own “laughter.” God may be laughing, but not in the way the bishop may think.
I’m not making fun of homosexuals, but I am making fun at the way liberal Christians are running like lemmings off the cliff of progressive thought in many areas of sound doctrine. Remember Wile E. Coyote from the old Warner Brothers cartoons? One of these days liberal, non-biblical Christians are going to look down and realize that there is no ground under their feet. Swoosh!
But don’t bust your shirt buttons yet conservatives, your churches are losing ground too. According to a major study by Robert Putnam of Harvard and David Cambell of Notre Dame, all organized religion in the US is in decline. Is this good news for atheists? Not necessarily. The authors of the study coin a new term for the growing numbers leaving the church. They are the “Nones.” The “Nones” do not belong to a church, but they believe in God. And the “Nones” are mostly young people who disagree with the biblical teaching on homosexuality and chaff at a Christianity married to conservative political values.
These “Nones” are not joining liberal churches; they are not going to church at all. According to the study “Nones” believe that God exists and that He wants us all to play nice. God is concerned about our being happy. He plays the role of a divine butler or cosmic therapist and is never judgmental. And so I understand dropping out of the church scene. If God is nothing more than a spiritual bell-hop why get out of bed on Sunday morning? Hey, Lord, bring me a Latte.
But here’s the rub. It seems that some “Nones” are discovering that their “spirituality” cannot give them the hope they need to really understand life and live above the level shallow pop culture. They do not have the inner strength to endure trials and suffering. With no deep Scriptural faith in the God of the Bible, the Father of Jesus Christ, they find themselves “having no hope and without God in the world (Ephesians 2:12).”
But where will those who have a “come to Jesus moment” go? Will they find godly nourishment in churches that have traded in the will of God for a pot of progressive ideals? What is needed is a church where faith is rooted in Holy Scripture.
In Jeremiah 6:16 the Word of God declares. “… ask for the old paths, where the good way is, And walk in it; Then you will find rest for your souls.”
Dominick Anthony Zarcone prays God people come to a faithful, orthodox
Catholic Church!
I don’t think that’s true – I’d like to see that poll.
Karl Rahner once said that by the year 2000, people will have had to become mystics or become nothing at all.
Dominick: The source of your article would seem to be here.
Ben: The most recent Gallup poll on religion I could find is here. In no way does it support the article’s contention that those calling themselves religious have dropped 50% since 2005. Gallup reports that those claiming a religious preference did drop, but only 5% (from 87 to 82%), while those claiming none rose 4% (from 10 to 14%).
FWIW, the Gallup polls do show that since 2005 there has been a 24% rise (from 48 to 72 % – which does amount to a 50% net increase) in the number of those who believe that religion is losing its influence on American life.
I’m not trying to be a nitpicker, but I do think some clarification of terms could help communications. A rise in a response from 10% of respondents to 14% of respondents is a 4 POINT rise in response, but it is a 40% increase. 14% divided by 10% is 1.40; the .40 is the 40%. It might seem a little more complicated in considering a drop in percentage data. To drop from 87% to 82% is a 5 POINT drop, but 82% divided by 87%, is 0.9425. When subtracted from 1.000, we get 0.0775 which is a drop of 7.75%. It is important in trying to communicate using percentage data that it is clear what the #points increase or decrease is, separate from the percentage increase or decrease (which is clearly NOT the same as the number of points.) I just hope this helps our communications.
PS Using these principals, the rise from 48% to 72% is a 24 POINT increase, but 72% divided by 48% is 1.5. When again subtracted from 1.0, an increase from 48% to 72% is a 50% increase.
Diane, working with raw percentages is a royal PITA — indeed the very phrase “raw percentages” is an oxymoron. Not your fault, that is what poll people use. But it still is difficult. So your trudging about is clumsy but understandable. My main gripe is that whatever formulation used to describe results should be invariant to phrasing the issues in the complementary way, but percentages never are: going from 1% to 2% sounds like a bigger deal than going from 99% to 98%.
Because of this, whatever the result is, one can always spin it to sound better, or worse, when just using percentages. Thanks for nothing pollsters.
There are metrics called odds ratios which avoid all these ambiguities. Problem is, while they are fantastic at comparing changes (say, mass attendance change from 1960 to 2010 in Lincoln, NE vs. Rochester), trying to interpret one change in isolation is as clear as mud. Thanks for nothing double time.
[\geek off]
But to be fair (and thankful) it is exactly difficulties like these which allow people like me to put food on the table.