Jonathan's blog

From an article titled "Domestic Agencies Face Cuts in Bush Budget" by Andrew Taylor on abcnews.com:

Domestic priorities like federal aid to schools and health research are squeezed under President Bush's proposed budget for next year, but funding for the Pentagon, the war in Iraq and anti-terrorism efforts get impressive increases. Monday's budget tome will have a price tag of more than $2.7 trillion. The departments of Education, Commerce, Interior and Energy will see their budgets, on average, frozen or cut slightly below today's already austere levels. Even though domestic non-entitlement programs take only one-sixth of all federal spending, they are in the administration's bulls eye as it tries to reel in the growing deficit. The National Institutes of Health's budget is frozen at this year's level and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is being asked to take a 2 percent cut. Both programs lose ground as Bush puts a higher priority on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and hurricane relief. The Pentagon would receive a nearly 5 percent increase in its budget, to $439.3 billion, defense officials said, with an additional $120 billion earmarked for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those war funds would be spread over both the current budget year and fiscal 2007, which begins Oct. 1. The budget also will project spending $18 billion more this year for hurricane relief along the Gulf Coast, bringing total spending in response to September's devastating storms over the $100 billion mark. Some of the new proposed cuts, such as eliminating the $107 million Commodity Supplemental Food Program, are likely to get a chilly reaction on Capitol Hill. The program provides food to low-income mothers and children under 6 years old, as well as to the elderly poor.

From an AP story on MSNBC:

Quoting from Islamic, Jewish and Christian texts, rock star Bono called Thursday for the U.S. government to give an additional 1 percent of the federal budget to the world's poor. Speaking to President Bush and members of Congress at the National Prayer Breakfast, the U2 front man said it's unjust to keep poor people from selling their goods while singing the virtues of the free market, to hold children to ransom for the debts of their grandparents and to withhold medicines that would save lives. "God will not accept that," he said. "Mine won't. Will yours?"

Here are a couple of interesting articles: one titled "A More Excellent Way" in ChristianityToday by Charles Colson and another by Tony Campolo titled "Is Christianity a Casualty of War?" in The Huffington Post. They both draw attention to some of the down sides of the strong association between faith and politics. I've observed that many (most?) Christians are glad to have a president who wears his faith on his sleeve. I guess I have a different perspective. I'm glad to live in a secular society. I have no desire to force my faith on anyone else nor to have anyone force theres on me. I'm glad president Bush is a man of faith, just like I would be for anyone, but not so much in his role as a head of state. Sometimes countries have to do things in their own interest, perhaps, that aren't the best P.R. for the faiths of their citizens. Frankly, I'm not eager for the rich white guy who drops bombs to be the face of Christianity that the rest of the world sees. From Colson's article:

I shudder every time I hear triumphalistic statements by Christian leaders, because they feed such fears - and understandably so, when a Christian leader predicts God's wrath on the people of Dover, Pennsylvania, for rejecting alternatives to evolution in their school curriculum. If we are honest, we must admit that we often act as if we're powerful because we have - or say we have - big constituencies. For example, after President Bush's 2004 reelection, Christian leaders argued they deserved payback for delivering the votes for his victory. Some even warned the President that if he didn't support a ban on gay marriage, they wouldn't support his Social Security reforms. These leaders may have been well intentioned, but this was pure power brokering - the kind that allows our critics to say we're equating the Christian faith with a political agenda. We have to remember that we owe whatever influence we have to the moral authority we derive from serving God, not from the number of names on our mailing list. To seek political victories in this heavy-handed way is not only a bad witness; it's also unwise. Ultimately, we need both political victories and cultural support. Even if President Bush's judicial appointees tip the Court into reversing Roe v. Wade (as I pray will happen), would there be fewer abortions? Not immediately. The issue would then return to the 50 states, and we'd have 50 battles instead of one. Of course, the law is a moral teacher, but changing the law is an empty victory unless we also change the moral consensus. To change the culture, therefore, we must learn how to engage the political process more winsomely. It will require a different mindset. We'll need to recognize that we're appealing to hearts and minds, not twisting arms. In fact as well as in appearance, we are not seeking to impose, but rather to propose. We're not demanding something for ourselves; we are inviting a hungry and needy world to come to Christ and find goodness and fullness of life. The Christian church makes a Great Proposal, inviting everyone to the table - regardless of ethnic origin, background, or economic status. We're inviting people to consider a worldview that's livable, that makes sense, in which people can discover shalom and human flourishing. This means, first, loving those we contend against in the political process. Martin Luther King Jr. said, "Whom you would change, you must first love." Some Christian leaders do get this. Jerry Falwell, whatever else he has done, has gone out of his way to engage the gay community protesting against him. James Dobson set a similar example when protestors surrounded the Focus headquarters. Second, we offer our strongest witness when we demonstrate that we do love others by fighting AIDS in Africa or the worldwide sex-trafficking trade, or by reforming prisons and prisoners, loving the most unlovable. One New York Times columnist who vehemently opposes our political efforts has nonetheless praised Christians for the work he's seen us perform around the world. When the world sees us working for human rights, we earn moral authority that blunts the "imposing your morality" attacks in the public square. Our cultural mandate requires us to work for justice and righteousness so that God's creation reflects his majesty and goodness. That includes engaging in politics. But we must remember as we do this that we are proposing a more excellent way to a needy society, and that we do so in love, no matter how much abuse is heaped upon us.

From Campolo's article:

Recently, I sat in dismay as I watched a television show that featured a prominent Christian author defending the use of torture in the war against terrorism. I was outraged that this man could try to make a case for followers of Jesus condoning such an immoral practice. I shared my feelings with a group of fellow Evangelicals and was stunned when the consensus that emerged from this group of Christians was in agreement with this author. One of those in the group was wearing one of those WWJD bracelets that proposes that when facing any decision and in every circumstance, the question should be asked, "What would Jesus do?" He evaded the question as to whether or not Jesus would torture a terrorist. The question is would Jesus ask, "What doth it profit if you gain information from a tortured terrorist and lose your own soul?" I came away from that discussion with a sense that many of us Evangelicals have given up our moral compasses and wandered into an ethical wasteland where we are not only losing our souls, but also losing our testimonies as good people. Checking around, I found very little condemnation of America's use of torture from those pundits of Christian Fundamentalism who usually can be counted on to speak out with righteous indignation whenever our government provides even the appearance of evil. Friedrich Nietzsche once said, "Beware when you fight a dragon, lest you become a dragon," and I wonder if we are becoming as despicable as those evil terrorists who are our declared enemies. Secondly, I am asking if we evangelicals are not only losing any moral authority we once had, but also are losing our opportunity to carry out what we believe is our Biblical imperative to preach the whole Gospel to the whole world. One of the distinguishing traits of we Evangelicals has been our zeal to carry the good news of Christ's salvation to every nation--even as our Lord directed us to do. Sadly, one of the consequences of our support of our nation's foreign policies is that the doors for missionary work are being shut. Because Christianity, throughout the Muslim world, is associated with America, anti-Americanism has heated up anger against Christians in many parts of the Islamic world. In Iraq, Christians, who even during the evil days of the Hussein regime had the privilege of boldly worshipping and evangelizing, are now being threatened. There have been churches in Baghdad that have been burned down, and tens of thousands of Christians have been fleeing the country in fear of persecution. Undoubtedly, missionary endeavors are losing ground in Iraq. Furthermore, if democracy comes to Iraq it is not likely to bode well for Christians there. The new government probably will be Shiite and, if history is to be trusted, Christians will not fare well under Shia law. More than 300 missionaries who had been serving in Pakistan have lost their visas. Christianity is so identified with American power and politics that in some places missionaries are being sent home, not only because they are thought to be people who denigrate Islam, but also because of suspicion that they might even be CIA agents. Again the question must be raised as to whether or not Christianity is becoming a casualty of the war on terrorism.

100 years after the division between a cappella churches of Christ and instrumental Christian Churches, several events in 2006 are highlighting what those two groups have in common. From an article by Bobby Ross Jr. in The Christian Chronicle:

To mark the centennial, the Abilene Christian University Lectureship in Texas and the Tulsa International Soul-Winning Workshop in Oklahoma both plan tag-team keynote addresses featuring university presidents or ministers from both groups. In addition, about 40 ministers from a cappella churches of Christ will speak at the largest annual gathering of instrumental Christian Churches - the North American Christian Convention in Louisville, Ky. The ministers of the largest congregations in each fellowship - Rick Atchley of Richland Hills Church of Christ in Fort Worth, Texas, and Bob Russell of Southeast Christian Church in Louisville - will appear at all three events. "We're not soft-pedaling the differences. We think they're real and significant," said Mark Love, director of the ACU Lectureship, set for Feb. 19-22. "But they shouldn't stop us from loving each other and talking together and celebrating the things we do agree on." Both fellowships grew out of the Restoration Movement of the 1800s. Disagreements over instruments in worship, missionary societies and what it means when the Bible is silent on an issue caused a split shortly after the Civil War, according to historians. But until 1906, religious almanacs included both groups under one heading: "Christian Churches." That changed when the editors of the Gospel Advocate, unofficially representing the a cappella churches, and the Christian Standard, on behalf of the instrumental churches, asked for separate census figures. In the 1920s, a separate split occurred among the instrumental Christian Churches over issues such as open membership, the ecumenical movement, liberal theology and denominational hierarchy. The people in favor of those changes formed a third group: the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), which has about 770,000 members in the U.S. Knowles, who has organized unity forums for more than 20 years, said the two groups share "the same spiritual DNA." "In the essentials, we are one. In non-essentials, we need to allow liberty," Knowles said. "In all things, we need to have more love." Both groups believe in the inspiration of Scriptures, elder-led congregations and world evangelism, church leaders say. But Jack Evans Sr., president of church of Christ-affiliated Southwestern Christian College in Terrell, Texas, said he sees the unity events as "just another ploy of Satan to help change the total identity of the New Testament church." "As it proceeds, I see a complete abandonment by some churches of Christ of the basic principles of the New Testament within the next few years," Evans said. On the other hand, some a cappella church leaders who view instrumental music as doctrinally wrong say they nonetheless consider instrumental church members "their brethren." Flavil Yeakley, director of the Harding Center for Church Growth in Searcy, Ark., said he would not teach that an instrumental church member coming to an a cappella church would need to be re-baptized. "However, I could not in good conscience be a part of a congregation that used instrumental music in the worship assembly," Yeakley said. "I believe that the instrumental brethren are "brethren-in-error" - but brethren-in-error are the only kind of brethren we have."

January may have been the warmest on record, but times may be tough for the nation's homeless this winter. From an article by Liz Szabo in USA Today:

...many advocates for the poor say they worry about people such as Hundley, predicting the nation's poor could face a bleak winter. Community charities across the country report that donations are down. Donors who gave generously to hurricane disaster relief now have less to give to local charities, experts say, especially because of rising prices for fuel, heat and other necessities. The decline in contributions couldn't come at a worse time for charities, which typically bring in half of their annual donations between Thanksgiving and New Year's, says Sandra Miniutti, spokeswoman for Charity Navigator. "Giving doesn't change much from year to year unless there is a drop in the economy," she says. Donors are giving less and less to groups that fight chronic problems, such as poverty and homelessness, Miniutti says. This year's slump follows several years of declines in giving to human services. Donations have decreased 13% since 2001, according to the Giving USA Foundation. Prices are rising for a number of essentials: • Home heating oil prices are expected to rise 27% this winter compared with last, with natural gas prices going up 41%, according to the Department of Energy. • Although gasoline prices have fallen since their peak of $3.06 a gallon after Hurricane Katrina, they are still 10% higher now than this time last year, according to AAA. • Food costs are inching up. Kraft Foods, for example, recently announced plans to raise the price of several of its products by an average of 3.9%. Those expenses are most punishing to people with lower incomes, because they spend a greater share of their salaries on essentials, says Stacy Palmer, editor of The Chronicle of Philanthropy.