<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/atom10full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0">
    <title>BaylyBlog: Out of our minds, too...</title>
    
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/" />
    <link rel="service.post" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854" title="BaylyBlog: Out of our minds, too..." /> 
    <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:weblog-1265854</id>
    <updated>2012-01-26T18:56:14Z</updated>
    <subtitle>Out of the minds of Presbyterian (PCA) pastors David and Tim Bayly...</subtitle>
    <generator uri="http://www.typepad.com/">TypePad</generator>
    <atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo" /><feedburner:info uri="baylyblogoutofourmindstoo" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><entry>
        <title>Men are the minority in Evangelical churches in Africa...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/tUGloepZXV0/when-did-you-last-hear-a-church-commended-for-her-manliness-when-did-you-last-hear-a-missionary-talk-about-the-absence-of-me-1.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e621842d970c" title="Men are the minority in Evangelical churches in Africa..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/when-did-you-last-hear-a-church-commended-for-her-manliness-when-did-you-last-hear-a-missionary-talk-about-the-absence-of-me-1.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e621842d970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-26T13:56:14-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-27T15:24:47Z</updated>
        <summary>When did you last hear a church commended for her "manliness?" When did you last hear a missionary talk about the absence of men in Evangelical churches in Africa? Have you ever heard how a Christian "spearman" in Africa keeps...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Africa" />
        <category term="Fatherhood" />
        <category term="Feminism" />
        <category term="Missions" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><a href="http://nebti5.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451d09d69e2016761203197970b-popup" onclick="window.open( this.href, '_blank', 'width=640,height=480,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0' ); return false" style="float: right;"><img alt="LolKo" class="asset  asset-image at-xid-6a00d83451d09d69e2016761203197970b" src="http://nebti5.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451d09d69e2016761203197970b-320wi" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px 5px;" title="LolKo" /></a>When did you last hear a church commended for her "manliness?" When did you last hear a missionary talk about the absence of men in Evangelical churches in Africa? Have you ever heard how a Christian "spearman" in Africa keeps the oodles of children in his church in order, or how he deals with the bones in his meat?</p>
<p>The author of <a href="http://sudanbrinkerhoff.blogspot.com/2011/12/lol-kok.html" target="_self">the post</a>, James Brinkerhoff, is the nephew of Scott Brinkerhoff. You and your church would do well to remove some of your missionaries who have long since turned away from Biblical doctrine and practice, and fill the holes that your due diligence opens up in your missions budget with Scott and James.</p>
<p>And what about the absence of men in African Evangelical churches? It may be the same reason men are absent or docile in American churches. Pastors run churches through the hard work of compliant women...</p>

Elders boards often are controlled by elders' wives and worship rarely rises above the level of Michal's sense of what is seemly and dignified. We don't discipline the men of our church in the pulpit or in person because disciplining men is dangerous. If a pastor does go for the men, either the men repent and love him or they resent him and get him fired.
<p>When the African and American Evangelical church turns her attention back to repentance in conversion, and personal rebuke and admonition and exhortation in sanctification; when pastors repent of our own adulterous and greedy hearts and begin to go for our men's regeneration and sanctification; then and only then will men take note of God's servants and message, and decide whether to kill or love us.</p>
<p>And if they love us, happy day, God has given us a CHURCH!</p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p>If you want to get in touch with Scott Brinkerhoff, here's <a href="mailto:brinkerhoffscott@gmail.com?subject=Your mission work">his e-mail</a>.</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/when-did-you-last-hear-a-church-commended-for-her-manliness-when-did-you-last-hear-a-missionary-talk-about-the-absence-of-me-1.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Large corporations are the real pirates...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/kcvtRl-bMTw/large-corporations-are-the-real-pirates.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20163001222b1970d" title="Large corporations are the real pirates..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/large-corporations-are-the-real-pirates.html" thr:count="1" thr:when="2012-01-25T05:27:40Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20163001222b1970d</id>
        <published>2012-01-24T21:14:19-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-25T02:22:55Z</updated>
        <summary>I'm sure many readers of Baylyblog consider my opposition to Christian organizations and publishers' claiming copyright on works in the public domain as quixotic, tilting at windmills. But it's not tilting at windmills--not at all. Rather, it's a serious case...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Copyright" />
        <category term="Web/tech" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>I'm sure many readers of Baylyblog consider <a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2006/02/christian_busin.html" target="_self">my opposition</a> to Christian organizations and publishers' claiming copyright on works in the public domain as quixotic, tilting at windmills.</p>
<p>But it's not tilting at windmills--not at all. Rather, it's a serious case of theft and you can get a better understanding of this evil by reading this <a href="http://radar.oreilly.com/2012/01/on-pirates-and-piracy.html" target="_self">article</a> showing that the real piracy today isn't your teenage son using Limewire to download a song or movie. That's shoplifting and it's sin, but the real piracy is done by the large corporations abusing copyright law for their own profits. And Christian publishers are not speaking out against these abuses. I have yet to see or hear of them taking a Christian stand against such theft.</p>
<p>If a reader can point me to a place where they have opposed it, please do so. <em>(TB, w/thanks to Lucas)</em></p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/large-corporations-are-the-real-pirates.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Please, Mr. Irsay; Don't do it. Do not do it...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/I5YH_BVQ_Qk/please-mr-irsay-dont-do-it-do-not-do-it.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e201676106db18970b" title="Please, Mr. Irsay; Don't do it. Do &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt; do it..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/please-mr-irsay-dont-do-it-do-not-do-it.html" thr:count="3" thr:when="2012-01-26T06:32:18Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e201676106db18970b</id>
        <published>2012-01-24T20:53:43-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-25T02:23:14Z</updated>
        <summary>Want to know how I feel about Colts owner Jim Irsay interviewing former Ohio coach Jim Tressel as Jim Caldwell's replacement? I'm utterly disgusted. IU hired Tom Crean's predecessor, Kelvin Sampson, after he also lost his job because he was...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Sports" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Want to know how I feel about Colts owner Jim Irsay interviewing former Ohio coach Jim Tressel as Jim Caldwell's replacement? I'm utterly disgusted. IU hired Tom Crean's predecessor, Kelvin Sampson, after he also lost his job because he was caught cheating. Can we please learn something?</p>
<p>Check out the first two questions and answers on <a href="http://blogs.indystar.com/coltsinsider/2012/01/23/some-fans-not-happy-with-the-colts-interest-in-jim-tressel-and-whats-up-with-peyton-mannings-rehab/" target="_self">the Indy Star blog</a> and you'll see I'm not alone in my sentiments.</p>
<p>Come on, Mr. Irsay. We didn't even like you using Mr. Tressel to advise Coach Caldwell on his appeals, and now you're thinking of him to replace Coach Caldwell? Don't do it. Please don't do it. <em>(TB)</em></p>
<p> </p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/please-mr-irsay-dont-do-it-do-not-do-it.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Joseph Maraachli and the state's usurpation of parental authority...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/DYebxXeWMEM/joseph-maraachli-and-the-nanny-state.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e2015437bb5a51970c" title="Joseph Maraachli and the state's usurpation of parental authority..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/joseph-maraachli-and-the-nanny-state.html" thr:count="7" thr:when="2012-01-27T04:41:44Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e2015437bb5a51970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-24T18:42:57-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-24T16:10:45Z</updated>
        <summary>Joseph Maracchli was the subject of an intense right-to-life battle in Canada last spring. Sadly, a couple months ago he died at his parents’ home in Windsor, Ontario. He was 20 months old. Andrew Henry wrote about Joseph on Baylyblog...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Abortion, euthanasia..." />
        <category term="Authority" />
        <category term="Children are a blessing" />
        <category term="Christian home" />
        <category term="City of man, city of God" />
        <category term="Fatherhood" />
        <category term="Government" />
        <category term="Motherhood" />
        <category term="R2K (Ridiculous Two Kingdom)" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Joseph Maracchli was the subject of an intense right-to-life battle in Canada last spring. Sadly, a couple months ago <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2042894/Terminally-ill-baby-Joseph-Maraachli-dies-home-aged-20-months.html" target="_self">he died</a> at his parents’ home in Windsor, Ontario. He was 20 months old. Andrew Henry wrote about Joseph on Baylyblog back in March. You may review the details <a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2011/03/authority-parents-vs-doctors.html" target="_self" title="Authority of Parents vs. Doctors">here</a>.</p>
<p>The number of similar cases will explode in coming months and years and there are important lesssons Christian fathers and mothers should learn. God has given parents the natural affection and compassion for their own children that no doctor can truly have no matter how highly trained or respected he may be.</p>
<p>This is not to say that parents are incapable of being neglectful of their children, but it's the exception rather than the rule. God’s good gift to children is parents who are loving and tender toward them.</p>
<p>The ever-increasing power and authority of government in our lives can only produce bad fruit, and the belief that a well-paid and benevolent bureaucracy can make better decisions than parents is wicked...</p>

but also purest nonsense.
<p>In his essay “<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=N6XyjWdJCiwC&amp;pg=PA173&amp;lpg=PA173&amp;dq=drift+from+domesticity&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=NGP9dsqeA_&amp;sig=wAoksp6dUyA17XXEYiauuMRIGR4&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=_tQeT6yQJcGnsQK8xcjZDg&amp;ved=0CD8Q6AEwBg#v=onepage&amp;q=drift%20from%20domesticity&amp;f=false" target="_self">The Drift From Domesticity</a>” in <em>The Thing</em>, Chesterton skewers this lunacy. Speaking of the “vague notion” of the state “eliminating the parental function,” he writes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is based on that strange new superstition, the idea of infinite resources of organization. It is as if officials grew like grass or bred like rabbits. There is supposed to be an endless supply of salaried persons and of salaries for them; and they are to undertake all that human beings naturally do for themselves; including the care of children…</p>
<p>The actual effect of this theory is that one harassed person has to look after a hundred children, instead of one normal person looking after a normal number of them. Normally, that person is urged on by a natural force, which costs nothing and does not require a salary; the force of natural affection for his young; which exists even among the animals. If you cut off that natural force, and substitute a paid bureaucracy, you are like a fool who should pay men to turn the wheel of his mill, because he refused to use wind or water, which he could get for nothing. You are like a lunatic, who should carefully water his garden with a watering-can, while holding up an umbrella to keep off the rain.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is our modern society. This is the superstition by which we justify the wholesale transfer of authority and responsibility from parents and pastors to government “experts” who are “better equipped” to handle such difficult decisions. Not content with a spade, we begin to dig ourselves deeper into this hole with a jackhammer. Then we turn to an excavator, and finally dynamite. We've gone from First Lady Hillary Clinton telling us "It Takes a Village" to President Barrack Obama's full-scale social welfare state where all responsibility is corporate and all authority flows from inside the Beltway.</p>
<p>Note carefully that the mass of authority never diminishes. No matter how hard rebels work, authority never declines. It simply is transferred from one officer to another, one location to another, one sphere to another. Authority is irreducible. And for many years now the mediating institutions of the home and church have seen the state confiscating the authority God delegated to them.</p>
<p>The church is content with this transfer since pastors and elders don't really want to bear the weight, anyhow. Thus the government doesn't need to worry much about them. The occasional sabre-rattling by the IRS in the face of white preachers who stray too close to saying something prophetic is all that's needed to keep churches docile. The state adds its weight to seminaries in rendering the Gospel innocuous.</p>
<p>Joe Sobran used to say "If voting did anything, it would be illegal." Sadly, this applies to churches, also. Take abortion as an example: "If churches said or did anything, they would be illegal."</p>
<p>Then consider the authority of the home.</p>
<p>That parents should have to fight tooth and nail to be allowed to take their child home to die in peace is such an awful thing that we can hardly look it in the face. Thankfully, in the case of Joseph Maracchli many faithful Roman Catholics took up the burden of exposing this wickedness, and were roundly ridiculed, derided, and condemned for questioning “the experts.”</p>
<p>As Protestants, it is our shame that we are not on the frontlines of the battles over life, death, mercy, authority, children and the home. To those who are, God bless you. Don't drop out of this good fight.</p>
<p>I've often said that the greatest wickedness of our civil magistrates in these United States is not that 1.3 million unborn children are slaughtered each year by our President, Congress, and Supreme Court. Rather, their greatest wickedness is their usurpation of the authority of fathers and mothers over their children through their claim of the right to assist those children in murdering their unborn children, and never mind what their parents have to say about it.</p>
<p>The present state of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphere_sovereignty" target="_self">sphere sovereignty</a> in these United States is that, by law, the civil magistrate now owns and exercises the authority of permitting the minor child to murder her unborn child. Meanwhile Reformed men have hissy-fits over what they claim is the clear and present danger of the church straying over onto the the civil magistrate's turf.</p>
<p>Honestly. It would be laughable if it were not so destructive of Christian witness and faithfulness.</p>
<p><em>(TB, w/thanks to Andrew Henry who wrote parts of this post--sorry, I'd forgotten.)</em></p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/joseph-maraachli-and-the-nanny-state.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>'Sodomite' is the most accurate and loving word to use (part 3 of 3)...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/AoMCztXnUUU/sodomite-a-word-of-love-part-iii.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e2015438235434970c" title="'Sodomite' is the most accurate and loving word to use (part 3 of 3)..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/sodomite-a-word-of-love-part-iii.html" thr:count="6" thr:when="2012-01-25T16:04:54Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e2015438235434970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-24T09:00:20-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-24T13:59:43Z</updated>
        <summary>It's taken a while to get around to it, but here are a few responses to one reader's comments on the two earlier posts, "'Sodomite' is the most accurate, loving word (part I)..." and "'Sodomite' is the most accurate, loving...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Homosexuality" />
        <category term="Mercy" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>It's taken a while to get around to it, but here are a few responses to one reader's comments on the two earlier posts, "<a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2011/12/one-of-my-seminary-professors-who-remains-a-dear-friend-just-wrote-taking-issue-with-my-use-on-this-blog-of-the-word-sodomy.html" target="_self">'Sodomite' is the most accurate, loving word (part I)...</a>" and "<a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2011/12/sodomite-a-word-of-love-part-ii-1.html" target="_self">'Sodomite' is the most accurate, loving word (part II)...</a>".</p>
<blockquote><em>James writes:</em> ... Mr. Bayly attempts to address comments (that) he "did not take Sodom's explicitly stated sins very seriously." After reading the entirety of his post and what followed, it seemed very obvious that the person who made that comment was referring to Mr. Bayly's nearly complete ignoring of the Ezekiel text and almost total exaltation of the Jude text.</blockquote>
<p>James, my purpose in what I've written has never been to give an historical analysis of all the sins of Sodom for which she was judged. Rather it has been to defend the church's historic use of the word 'sodomy' to designate same-sex carnal relations and to establish that according to the Word of God this was at the center of Sodom's wickedness.  Homosexualists have spent decades promoting a revisionist interpretation of the Genesis account, seeking to remove sodomy from the list of sins God judged when He destroyed Sodom. And to that end they emphasize all the sins of Sodom that have nothing to do with sexual immorality.  My purpose is not to analyze each of Sodom's sins but to defend the church's historic usage of the terms 'sodomy,' 'sodomitic,' and 'sodomite'...</p>

Homosexualists have sought to destroy any linguistic connection between God's destruction of Sodom and same-sex sexual sin.  Think about it: why on earth spend time arguing that Sodom was also guilty of the sin of pride when there's absolutely no one denying it? But millions are denying that Sodom was guilty of sodomy, so that's where we should focus our defense.
<blockquote><em>James writes:</em> Repeatedly in this blog, Mr. Bayly has said he is absolutely certain that God's judgment on Sodom was because of homosexuality, just as HIV/AIDS is "absolutely" God's judgment on homosexuality today.</blockquote>
<p>James' quote marks seem to settle the matter but a search in the "Sodomy" subject archive of this blog will show he made up his quote.  Still, if the actual quotation is fake, did he get the sense of it right?  Well actually, it's not me but my brother, David, who has been most explicit on this subject. Here's the most pertinent post:</p>
<blockquote><em>David wrote:</em>Those who deny the connection between human catastrophe and divine judgment often throw out the presence of "innocents" among the victims of catastrophe as proof the catastrophe could not be related to judgment.</blockquote>
<blockquote>As a hemophiliac who saw half the hemophiliacs of his generation die from AIDS (contracted from exposure to contaminated blood), I have little trouble making that connection.  By God's grace I was spared that illness, though I did receive another blood-born disease (HCV) often linked to illicit behaviour. Nor do I hesitate to view HCV as God's judgment on sexual profligacy and drug addiction.</blockquote>
<blockquote>But had I come down with AIDS, that would not have lessened the obvious link between AIDS and God's judgment on sodomy. Jonah's shipmates weren't running from God yet they suffered God's judgment on his sin. Nor were Lot's sons-in-law Sodomites in the transitive sense of the verb. But they died with those who were.</blockquote>
<blockquote>Few of the hemophiliacs I knew who died of AIDS would have hesitated to link AIDS to sodomy. In fact, I suspect some of their families resented sodomites for spreading the disease and selling blood which infected others with their disease. Nor would those who were Christians have blinked at understanding AIDS as divine judgment on sodomy.</blockquote>
<blockquote>Finally, had I come down with AIDS, it would have been quite possible to understand it as God's work in my life calling me away from sin. Indirectly, it could have been judgment. Indirectly, my HCV is judgment. It is the product of sin in general, and of my own sin in particular. God is chastising me as a son in accord with His promise in Hebrews 12. But it is not direct judgment of a sinful act.</blockquote>
<blockquote>When God allows the act of sin itself to carry with it the penalty of death, the man who denies any link to divine judgment is simply a fool.</blockquote>
<p>Again, like my defense of the church's historic use of the words 'sodomy' and 'sodomites', David is seeking to defend the church's historic teaching that God is active in this world and our lives not only in mercy, but also in judgment. And since few are denying His mercy, it remains for us to defend the breach in the wall--namely His judgment. And here's the most explicit statement David makes:</p>
<blockquote>When God allows the act of sin itself to carry with it the penalty of death, the man who denies any link to divine judgment is simply a fool.</blockquote>
<p>So, is David right or wrong?</p>
<p>But James doesn't argue that David's wrong. Instead he assumes that David is wrong, assuming also that those reading his comments will be as offended as he is that such a thing is even uttered in this late day.  Arguments today are not settled by logic, but rather by sympathetic associations. The man who does the best job of manipulating his readers' sympathies gets the win.</p>
<p>But not here on this blog. This place is dedicated to the Lord Jesus Christ and His timeless truth written in His Word, the Bible. And that means you can't win here simply by arousing sympathies and portraying your own angst and pain. You must demonstrate the truth of what you write from Scripture.  Does this mean that we don't care about your pain? No. We care very, very much. We have sympathy and grieve for you as we have for ourselves and many others caught in the web of Satan's deceit.  Yet it is precisely that sympathy and grief that cause us to warn you away from the sin of sodomy and to remind you that the connection between male sodomy and AIDS is one of the clearest examples given to us today of the truthfulness of the Holy Spirit's statement:</p>
<blockquote><em>Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life (Galatians 6:7,8).</em></blockquote>
<p>So repent, dear man, before it's too late and the preliminary judgment of God resident in STDs changes into the eternal judgment of God that is Hell.</p>
<blockquote><em>James writes:</em> (I'm) not trying to attack Christians (but) to examine whether or not they truly are living as Christ would toward homosexuals.</blockquote>
<p>If you, James, have chosen sodomy over Jesus and if all your friends are sodomites, as you report to us, it seems crazy for you to undertake educating those who do call themselves Christians concerning what approach our Lord would take towards sodomites.   When we find out that you think Jesus would be more gentle and helpful and considerate and non-judgmental than you <strong>falsely</strong> report concerning His followers, should any of us be shocked?  It's not a seminary-trained unrepentant sodomite that I want teaching me how to approach sodomites evangelistically, but rather a non-seminary trained and repentant former sodomite who now loves and obeys Jesus.</p>
<blockquote><em>James writes:</em> There is a subtle arrogance ...where we ...assume we know what God's motives are or were in a particular situation. Mr. Bayly assumes that God's primary ...motivation for destroying Sodom was because of same-gender male sex. However, nowhere does Scripture indicate that God's motivation was homosexuality (neither primarily nor exclusively).</blockquote>
<p>"Nowhere does Scripture indicate" God judged Sodom for its sodomy? Get real, James. There's a good reason no one in church history agrees with you--that is, until sodomites started repeating such sophistry in the past thirty years or so. Scripture is absolutely clear that sodomy is at the center of the Sodomites' wickedness:</p>
<blockquote><em>Now the two angels came to Sodom in the evening as Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. ...Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them."  But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, "Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly." (Genesis 19:1a, 4-7)</em></blockquote>
<p>To engage in male sexual relations is to "act wickedly." Yes, by pursuing this perversion in the way they did, they were also acting in an arrogant and inhospitable way, but it's the perversion of same-sex carnal relations that the Church has always recognized as the center of the Sodomites' sin. And in case we missed it in Genesis 19, the Holy Spirit clarifies it at the end of Scripture:</p>
<blockquote><em>...just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire. (Jude 7)</em></blockquote>
<p>The Sodomites "acted wickedly" by "indulging in gross immorality" and going "after strange flesh." Man with woman equals normal flesh; man with man equals "strange flesh" and "gross immorality."</p>
<blockquote><em>James writes:</em> We are taught, when interpreting the Bible, that clear passages should assist us in determining those that are less clear. So, let us suppose we are approaching the Bible and asking, "What was the sin of Sodom? Why did God destroy that city?" Wonderfully (or inconveniently, depending on your perspective), God has given us one of the most clear, direct answers to that He possibly could have given.</blockquote>
<p>I agree, and here is that silver bullet text James is looking for:</p>
<blockquote><em>...Sodom and Gomorrah ...indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh (and) are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire. (Jude 7)</em></blockquote>
<blockquote><em>James writes:</em> ...we should not use the term 'Sodomite' to refer to homosexuals (because) it is an extra-biblical term used when biblical terms are quite sufficient and more precise.</blockquote>
<p>The word 'Sodom' appears in both the Old and New Testaments, forty-seven times in all. And you say it's "extra-biblical"?  The name of the city most notorious in world history for same-sex carnal relations, and also most notorious in world history as an example of God's wrath and judgment, becomes the name of those who act and do as the Sodomites acted and did. City named in Scripture; sinful behavior described in Scripture; God's wrath and judgment of this city and her behavior recorded in Scripture; name and behavior clomped together and used throughout church history.  Adding a 'y' or 'ite' to 'Sodom' doesn't make the words 'sodomy' and 'sodomite' "extra-biblical." Each of these words comes straight from the Bible.</p>
<blockquote><em>James writes:</em> According to Mr. Bayly, these translators (of 1Corinthians 6:9 in the <em>New American Standard Bible</em>, the <em>New International Version</em>, the <em>New Living Translation</em>, and the <em>New King James Version</em>) by using the term "homosexuals," have not been "faithful witnesses to our Lord and His Truth."</blockquote>
<p>I've never written or said anything remotely like what James here claims since I've never given any thought to whether 'homosexual' is a good translation of the Greek word '<em>arsenokoites</em>' in 1Corinthians 6:9. But since he's raised the question, let's look at the meaning of this word as defined by the most respected lexicons used by Bible scholars today:  The Greek '<em>arsenokoites</em>' translated by 'homosexual offenders' in 1Corinthians 9 and 'perverts' in 1Timothy 10 is defined in <em>Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon </em> as "one who lies with a male as with a female, <strong>a sodomite</strong>." Further, in <em>Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament</em>, Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich define '<em>arsenokoites</em>' as: "a male who practices homosexuality, pederast, <strong>sodomite</strong>."  Note well that both standard lexicons of biblical Greek use the term 'sodomite' to define the Greek word '<em>arsenokoites</em>'.</p>
<p>Honestly, what more can I say?</p>
<blockquote><em>James writes:</em> If Christ were here today, it is likely he would receive criticism on this blog for being a "friend of homosexuals." I understand that my saying that will undoubtedly cause offense, but please know I don't say it with a critical nor condescending attitude. But I do sincerely believe it to be true. For, just as the Pharisees in Christ's day criticized Him for being a friend of prostitutes and sinners and would never have dreamed of having such close and consistent contact with those folks, most fundamentalists today have little or no contact with those in homosexual lifestyles. And I'm not talking about the token counselees or work associates. I'm asking, have you or anyone like-minded you know, ever been so involved in showing the love of Christ to homosexuals that the hypocrites piously looked down their noses and assigned you that label which, while intended to be disparaging, was exalted to honor by the One who wore it first: "friend of homosexuals." Would you allow yourself to get that close? I'm afraid that, from what I have seen on this blog, that would be very unlikely.</blockquote>
<blockquote><em>Then too, James also writes:</em> (With Bayly) almost no emphasis is given to exhort, challenge, and encourage Christians to reach out to the hurting ones.</blockquote>
<p>For three decades, now, I've worked with people tempted by same-sex intimacy, both male and female. Some are now happily married with children; some still single. Some have been given victory over this temptation by the Holy Spirit; some still struggle daily; and others are falling--right now. All of us at Clearnote Church, Bloomington love these brothers and sisters, and we'll continue to love them. In fact, when we had a man in town who worked full time with the sodomite community calling them out of their sin, he sent them to our church, rather than his own, because he knew we would love and accept them with open arms.</p>
<p>But should this be a surprise to James? Absolutely not.  He claimed to have read the pieces on sodomy on this blog, and those pieces make it clear that it is love for sodomites and a heart-felt desire to see them repent that is the basis of all we've written on the subject.  If James hasn't seen this love, it's because he's more interested in justifying his sin and his hardened heart than in repentance returning to the Shepherd of his soul. Like Paul Simon put it, "a man sees what he wants to see, and disregards the rest."</p>
<p>But, for the record, here is the end of a piece I posted to this blog on April 4, 2006. The piece is titled, "Sodomy and Pastoral Care," and I'm hopeful it will communicate what is the heart of my concern in this matter.</p>
<blockquote>But it must be remembered that the modern morass of sexual immorality didn't happen overnight; it was in the making for decades as Christian leaders chose personal job security over church discipline. Those of us who are pastors bear a large portion of responsibility for the horrible mess Christians find themselves in today for we have failed to "preach the Word, in season and out of season." We have failed to "correct, rebuke, and encourage with great patience..." (II Timothy 4:2).</blockquote>
<blockquote>After years of overlooking fornication, followed by years of remarrying adulterers, is it any wonder the church is now filled with sodomites crying out for equal time? How can we deny them when we have refused to rebuke sins such as divorce, fornication, abortion, and the love of money within the church?</blockquote>
<blockquote>We must return to God's Word and proclaim the wickedness of all sin, not just those sins still disliked by our flocks.</blockquote>
<blockquote>Finally, it must be remembered that although "the wages of sin (are) death" the "gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." There is no sin beyond the power of the blood of Jesus. No sin. None.  Therefore it follows that we should love sinners, caring for them tenderly. If Jesus came "to seek and to save that which was lost," surely today He would sit down to eat with intravenous drug users, sodomites, corporate raiders, and other notorious sinners.</blockquote>
<blockquote>Surely we should, too.</blockquote>
<blockquote>If conservatives expect the church to listen to Scriptural arguments against the endorsement of sodomitic relations, then as we proclaim God's Word on these matters we must have good works that are evident and commend our leadership to all.  Let a call go out from evangelicals... to raise up churches, pastors, and individual families who are ready and willing to serve the AIDS patients, in death as well as in life, before repentance as well as after repentance. Let us follow St. Augustine's charge: "With love for mankind and hatred for sins."</blockquote>
<blockquote>Sodomy is sin, but it's forgivable.   All of us live by grace.</blockquote>
<p><em>(TB: this ends a three-part series reprinted from a few years ago, slightly updated.)</em></p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/sodomite-a-word-of-love-part-iii.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Shaw on "university schoolboyishness..."</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/xOZRZULL7Tk/shaw-on-university-schoolboyishness.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffcb8e1c970d" title="Shaw on &quot;university schoolboyishness...&quot;" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/shaw-on-university-schoolboyishness.html" thr:count="4" thr:when="2012-01-25T12:39:35Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffcb8e1c970d</id>
        <published>2012-01-24T08:31:00-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-24T13:32:59Z</updated>
        <summary>One reader sent an e-mail reporting he couldn't find the Shaw quote on corporal punishment mentioned in an earlier post. He's right. I've looked for it several times through the years and couldn't find it either. Sorry. Still, I distinctly...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Academia" />
        <category term="Education" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>One reader sent an e-mail reporting he couldn't find the Shaw quote on corporal punishment mentioned in <a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/knives-are-necessary-to-cut-meat-and-bread-yet-sometimes-knives-are-used-to-kill-people-can-we-all-agree-knives-arent-the-p.html" target="_self">an earlier post</a>. He's right. I've looked for it several times through the years and couldn't find it either. Sorry. Still, I distinctly remember reading it about thirty years ago and I'm convinced it was Shaw, so that's how I report it.</p>
<p>Anyhow, in looking for that quote this reader came across another he forwarded...</p>

I think readers will enjoy it:
<p>"Older children might do a good deal before beginning their collegiate education. What is the matter with our universities is that all the students are schoolboys, whereas it is of the very essence of university education that they should be men. The function of a university is not to teach things that can now be taught as well or better by University Extension lectures or by private tutors or modern correspondence classes with gramophones. We go to them to be socialized; to acquire the hall mark of communal training; to become citizens of the world instead of inmates of the enlarged rabbit hutches we call homes; to learn manners and become unchallengeable ladies and gentlemen. The social pressure which effects these changes should be that of persons who have faced the full responsibilities of adults as working members of the general community, not that of a barbarous rabble of half emancipated schoolboys and unemancipable pedants. It is true that in a reasonable state of society this outside experience would do for us very completely what the university does now so corruptly that we tolerate its bad manners only because they are better than no manners at all. But the university will always exist in some form as a community of persons desirous of pushing their culture to the highest pitch they are capable of, not as solitary students reading in seclusion, but as members of a body of individuals all pursuing culture, talking culture, thinking culture, above all, criticizing culture. If such persons are to read and talk and criticize to any purpose, they must know the world outside the university at least as well as the shopkeeper in the High Street does. And this is just what they do not know at present. You may say of them, paraphrasing Mr. Kipling, "What do they know of Plato that only Plato know?" If our universities would exclude everybody who had not earned a living by his or her own exertions for at least a couple of years, their effect would be vastly improved."</p>
<p><em>(TB, w/thanks to Eric)</em></p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/shaw-on-university-schoolboyishness.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Roe v. Wade's 39th anniversary: The Lord's throne is in Heaven...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/FgBx_eyop1A/tim-on-the-occasion-of-the-thirty-ninth-anniversary-of-roe-v-wade-i-post-this-message-given-in-indianas-state-house-sever.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20162fff144ed970d" title="Roe v. Wade's 39th anniversary: The Lord's throne is in Heaven..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/tim-on-the-occasion-of-the-thirty-ninth-anniversary-of-roe-v-wade-i-post-this-message-given-in-indianas-state-house-sever.html" thr:count="20" thr:when="2012-01-25T12:27:02Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20162fff144ed970d</id>
        <published>2012-01-21T16:41:27-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-22T03:12:22Z</updated>
        <summary>(TB: On the occasion of the thirty-ninth anniversary of Roe v. Wade, I post this message. It would please me if you would take the time to read it. Thank you.) I remain amazed that abortion could even become a...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Abortion, euthanasia..." />
        <category term="Adoption" />
        <category term="Government" />
        <category term="Mercy" />
        <category term="Politics" />
        <category term="R2K (Ridiculous Two Kingdom)" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><em>(TB: On the occasion of the thirty-ninth anniversary of Roe v. Wade, I post this message. It would please me if you would take the time to read it. Thank you.)</em></p>
<blockquote>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em>I remain amazed that abortion could even become a political issue in a country with pretensions to being civilized. It is as if we were to debate the merits of legalizing cannibalism, with the liberal side chanting the slogan "Keep government out of the kitchen!" <br /><br />There is no danger that the other side will ever be persuaded that it is wrong; there is, however, the very real danger that we will become discouraged, worn down, and inured to an evil that should always horrify and sicken us. The erosion of our consciences is surely part of the destructiveness of this abominable "procedure."   - Joe Sobran</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><span style="font-size: 1.4em;">The Lord's Throne Is in Heaven</span></em></p>
<p><em>(For the choir director; a psalm of David.) In the LORD I take refuge; how can you say to my soul, "Flee as a bird to your mountain; for, behold, the wicked bend the bow, they make ready their arrow upon the string to shoot in darkness at the upright in heart. If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?" The LORD is in His holy temple; the LORD'S throne is in heaven; His eyes behold, His eyelids test the sons of men. The LORD tests the righteous and the wicked, and the one who loves violence His soul hates. Upon the wicked He will rain snares; fire and brimstone and burning wind will be the portion of their cup. For the LORD is righteous, He loves righteousness; the upright will behold His face. (Psalm 11:1-7)</em></p>
<p>Thirty one (now thirty-nine) years ago today, on January 22nd, 1973, the Supreme Court of these United States issued its infamous ruling, <em>Roe v. Wade</em>, in which the Court declared that a mother's intentional killing of her unborn child was a fundamental right guaranteed under our Constitution. Since that ruling, it has been a commonplace to observe that <em>Roe v. Wade</em>, the Court's repeal of the laws prohibiting abortion on the books of all fifty states, was simply the exercise of raw judicial power with a legal justification based upon a mist and a vapor--or as the Court itself might put it, emanations from penumbras.</p>
<p><em><span style="font-size: 1.4em;">Our Supreme Court: intentionally conniving at murder...</span></em></p>
<p>Since 1973, no one has made a name for himself defending <em>Roe. v. Wadeâs</em> history, biology, ethics, logic, or justice; and only a few have been foolish enough to claim this ruling will stand the test of time...</p>


<p>In fact, when the Court was handed what was, arguably, the best opportunity for reversal since <em>Roe v. Wade</em> was first issued, although the Court declined to reverse itself, its rationale was telling:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The <em>Roe</em> rule's limitation on state power could not be repudiated without serious inequity to people who, for two decades, have organized intimate relationships and made choices in reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail. The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives...</p>
<p>Overruling <em>Roe's</em> central holding... would seriously weaken the Court's capacity to exercise the judicial power and to function as the Supreme Court of a Nation dedicated to the rule of law... Moreover, the country's loss of confidence in the Judiciary would be underscored by condemnation for the Court's failure to keep faith with those who support the decision. A decision to overrule (<em>Roe v. Wade</em> would come) at the cost of both profound and unnecessary damage to the Court's legitimacy... (<em>Planned Parenthood v. Casey</em>, 1992)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Listening carefully, the Court chose not to reverse <em>Roe v. Wade</em> because the withdrawal of the right to kill their unborn child might harm the plans of fathers and mothers who count on abortion as a backup for failed birth control; also because the reversal of Roe v. Wade might harm women's exercise of financial and social equality; might "seriously weaken the Court's capacity to exercise judicial power" due to the country losing confidence in its judiciary; and might lead to "profound and unnecessary damage to the Court's legitimacy." Reading this rationale reminds us of a father refusing to apologize to his wife and children because he fears his apology would be viewed as a sign of weakness and undermine his authority. How sad the homes led by such little men, but what can we say about a nation whose highest court of law justifies its use of authority and power to support the murder of unborn children by such insecure self-justifications?</p>
<p>The irony of the matter is that, by their refusal to reverse <em>Roe v. Wade</em>, the Court has assured the very thing it sought to prevent--namely, a significant loss of confidence in the court's jurisprudence, as well as its members' integrity and honor, among those it governs. In fact, by standing firmly on the side of those who support and practice the murder of unborn children, the Court has assured there will be "profound and unnecessary damage to (its) legitimacy."</p>
<p><em><span style="font-size: 1.4em;">African slaves and the unborn...</span></em></p>
<p>Today it would be hard to imagine a ruling more controversial than <em>Roe v. Wade</em>, but some might single out the <em>Dred Scott</em> ruling of 1857 for that honor. This decision was a key part of the buildup of hostilities that led to the Civil War, and it is the judgment of some scholars that <em>Dred Scott</em> "probably created more disagreement than any other legal opinion in U.S. history; it became a violently divisive issue in national politics and dangerously undermined the prestige of the Supreme Court." [1]</p>
<p>What were the Court's judgments in the <em>Dred Scott</em> case? That...</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A free negro of the African race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a "citizen" within the meaning of the <em>Constitution</em> of the United States.</p>
<p>When the <em>Constitution</em> was adopted, they were not regarded in any of the States as members of the community which constituted the State, and were not numbered among its "people or citizens." Consequently, the special rights and immunities guaranteed to citizens do not apply to them.</p>
<p>The language of the <em>Declaration of Independence</em> is equally conclusive: ...</p>
<p><em>We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among them is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.</em></p>
<p>The general words above quoted would seem to embrace the whole human family... But it is too clear for dispute, that the enslaved African race were not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration...</p>
<p>(T)he men who framed (the <em>Declaration of Independence</em>)... perfectly understood the meaning of the language they used, and how it would be understood by others; and they knew that it would not in any part of the civilized world be supposed to embrace the negro race... (<em>Scott v. Stanford</em>, 1856)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Now let us stop and compare the declaration of the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the personhood of men and women of African descent in their 1857 <em>Dred Scott</em> decision to that of unborn children following the Court's <em>Roe v. Wade</em> decision one hundred sixteen years later. But rather than limiting ourselves to the comparison of quotes taken from these opinions, let us develop the arguments much as they might have been heard from the mouth of the man on the street defending slavery at the time of the Civil War and the killing of unborn children today. (And as I list these arguments, please keep in mind that I do not agree with them.)</p>
<ul>
<li>Although a <em>slave/fetus</em> has a heart and a brain, and is human from the biological perspective, a <em>slave/fetus</em> just is not a legal person under the <em>Constitution.</em> The Supreme Court made this perfectly clear in the <em>Dred Scott/Roe v. Wade</em> decision.</li>
<li>A <em>man/woman</em> has the right to do whatever <em>he/she</em> pleases with <em>his/her</em> personal property, the <em>slave/fetus</em>.</li>
<li>Both the social and economic burdens which will result from prohibiting <em>slavery/abortion</em> will be unfairly concentrated upon a single group: <em>slave-holders/pregnant women</em>.</li>
<li>Isn't <em>slavery/abortion</em> really something merciful? Isn't it really better never to be <em>set free/born</em> than to be sent ill-equipped and unprepared into an environment where one is unwanted, unloved and bound to be miserable?</li>
<li>Those who believe that <em>slavery/abortion</em> is immoral are free to refrain from <em>owning slaves/having abortions</em>; they should give the same freedom to those who have different moral beliefs.</li>
<li>Accordingly, those who believe that <em>slavery/abortion</em> is immoral have no right to try to impose their personal morality upon others by way of legislation or a constitutional amendment.</li>
<li>The claim that <em>slaves/fetuses</em> are like us is simply ridiculous; all one has to do is look at them to see that they are completely different.</li>
<li>The <em>anti-slavery/anti-abortion</em> movement is in fact a small band of well-organized religious fanatics who have no respect for democracy or the principles of a pluralistic society.</li>
</ul>
<p>And moving to the opposite side of the argument, we see the analogy works in that direction, also:</p>
<ul>
<li>The question of whether <em>slavery/abortion</em> should be tolerated is not a matter of personal or religious belief; it is a question of protecting the civil rights of millions of innocent human beings who are not in a position to protect themselves.</li>
<li>The humanity of <em>slaves/fetuses</em> cannot be denied simply because they look different from us; there is no morally defensible way to draw a line somewhere along a continuum of <em>skin color/(fetal) development </em>and claim, "This is where humanity starts, this is where it stops." [2]</li>
</ul>
<p>Two decisions a century apart, both so radical they undermine the Court's reputation and sow the seeds of violent division across our nation. Both deny the personhood of a class of human beings who are weak and oppressed; both refuse to bring the law's strong arm to bear in their defense. Both, rather than taking up the cause of the widows and orphans in their distress and thereby mirroring the perfections of the One our second president, John Adams, referred to as "the great Legislator of the Universe," [3] take the side of the oppressor, declaring him to be protected by the <em>U.S. Constitution</em>. Is it any wonder, then, that these opinions are hated and opposed at every turn, and that they have given birth to two of the most zealous forces for political change in the history of our nation--the abolitionist (or anti-slavery) and the pro-life (or anti-abortion) movements?</p>
<p>By what authority, though, do citizens oppose these rulings?</p>
<p><span style="font-size: 1.4em;"><em>Whoever sheds man's blood...</em></span></p>
<p>If this question is to be answered on something other than a superficial level, it must be acknowledged that opposition to both <em>Dred Scott</em> and <em>Roe v. Wade</em> springs from the Christian world view founded in Scripture and codified in the centuries-long common law tradition: That every human being is unique among all God's creation in that he alone is made in God's Image. And further, that this Only True God has decreed through His Word, "Whoever sheds man's blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man" (Genesis 9:6).</p>
<p>Undoubtedly, hearing the arguments made by the U.S. Supreme Court against the full personhood of African slaves and the extension to them of all the rights of a United States citizen in its <em>Dred Scott</em> decision awakens in each of us righteous indignation. We have no doubt that, had we been alive in that time, we would have stood against <em>Dred Scott</em> and called for an end to slavery just as William Lloyd Garrison and many others did. But if we are inactive in opposing the killing of unborn children, we certainly would not have been found active in the anti-slavery movement. Jesus was speaking to us when He said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, and say, "If we had been living in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partners with them in shedding the blood of the prophets." So you testify against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of the guilt of your fathers. (Matthew 23:29-32)</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em><span style="font-size: 1.4em;">Christian faith, and love for our brothers...</span></em></p>
<p>It's instructive to note the strong positive correlation between Christian faith and activism within the anti-slavery and anti-abortion movements. For instance, the first speech given by William Lloyd Garrison in which he repented of his past support for the colonization compromise, instead demanding a full cleansing of the evil of slavery from our national conscience under his uncompromising cry, "No union with slaveholders," was given in the basement of Park Street Church on the corner of Boston Common.</p>
<p>What sort of religious commitments characterize Park Street Church?</p>
<p>Our nation's Sunday school movement started in this church and to this day Park Street Church is known as New England's bastion of evangelical Christian faith.</p>
<p>This same correlation repeats itself over and over in the mid-nineteenth century. Jonathan Blanchard, the first president of Wheaton College in Wheaton, Illinois, was active in the Underground Railway. And today, Wheaton is known as the alma mater of Billy Graham and his wife, Ruth Bell Graham.</p>
<p>What of the anti-abortion movement?</p>
<p><em><span style="font-size: 1.4em;">A war between wicked and godly women...</span></em></p>
<p>Some years back <em>Family Planning Perspectives</em>, the research journal of the Alan Guttmacher Institute (a "special affiliate" of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America), published several studies examining the demographic composition of the pro-abortion and anti-abortion forces. The articles titled "Abortion Activists" [4] and "The War Between Women" [5] demonstrated the intractable nature of this conflict spawned by the Supreme Court. For instance, taking two of the principal political action groups on opposite sides of this issue--the National Abortion Rights Action League and the National Right to Life Committee--they found:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(Right to Life) members are far more likely than (Abortion Rights) members to have been reared in large families, to prefer large families, and (themselves) to have large families... Eighty-seven percent of (Right to Life) members report that religion plays a "very" or "extremely" important role in their lives compared to only 20 percent of (Abortion Rights) members... (causing the author of the article to observe) "It is difficult to imagine data that might more convincingly demonstrate that religion is a very important factor in determining attitudes about legal abortion."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Turning from the opposing organizations to individual women involved on opposing sides of this issue, in her January 1984 article, "The War Between Women" (also published in <em>Family Planning Perspectives</em>), author Kristin Luker speaks of the "emotional and volatile abortion debate," declaring "over the last decade the subject (of abortion) has galvanized--and polarized--Americans in the same way that such moral issues as abolition... once did." She continues,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Women who are engaged in the abortion debate are separated from one another by income, education, family size and occupation... Thus, the abortion debate grows out of two very different social worlds that support very different aspirations and beliefs... The life circumstances and beliefs of the activists on both sides of the (abortion) issue serve to reinforce one another in such a way that the activists have little room for dialogue and few incentives for it.</p>
<p>(O)ne may ask who is the "typical" (Right to Life and Abortion Rights) activist...? The typical (Abortion Rights) activist is a 44-year-old married woman whose father was a college graduate. She married at age 22 or older, has one or two children, and has had some graduate or professional training after her B.A. ...She is married to a professional man, is herself employed, and has a (high) family income... She attends church rarely, if at all; indeed, religion is not particularly important to her.</p>
<p>(Whereas) The typical (Right to Life) activist is also a 44-year-old married woman. She, however, married at age 17, and has three or more children. [Sixteen percent of the (Right to Life) women in the study have seven or more children.] Her father was graduated from high school only, and she herself has a good chance of having gone no further in school... She is not employed and is married to a small businessman or a lower income white-collar worker; her family income is (about $20,000 lower than the average Abortion Rights household)... Her religion is one of the most important aspects of her life... The two sides have very little in common in the way they look at the world, and this is particularly true with regard to the critical issues of gender, sex and parenthood. The views on abortion of each side are intimately tied to, and deeply reinforced by, their views on these other areas of life. Even if the abortion issue had not mobilized them on opposite sides of the barricades, they would have been opponents on a wide variety of issues.</p>
<p>(Abortion Rights) activists... see women's reproductive and family roles not as a natural niche, but as a potential barrier to full equality... A general theme in the interviews with (Right to Life) activists--many of whom have large families--is that there is an anti-child sentiment abroad in American society...</p>
<p>In short, the debate about abortion rests on the question of whether women's fertility is to be socially recognized as an asset or as a burden.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If a broad cross-section of American society is anti-child and views women's fertility as a burden, it's little wonder that unborn children are killed at the rate of around 1.3 million per year in our nation, sacrificed on the altars of our national gods of convenience, choice, autonomy, and self-determination. But it's also no wonder that godly mothers and daughters and sisters and grandmothers and wives will oppose this slaughter of the little ones with every fiber of their being.</p>
<p>Just as those involved in the anti-slavery movement believed in the full personhood and dignity of members of the African race because of their prior belief that every human being is made in the Image of God, so also those involved in the anti-abortion movement believe in the full personhood and dignity of all children because of their prior belief in this same biblical doctrine that every human being, born or unborn, is made in the image of God. Slaves or freedmen of African descent, unborn children swimming in the amniotic fluid of their mother's womb--each a precious soul who, in the words of our own <em>Declaration of Independence</em>, is "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among them is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...." And further, "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."</p>
<p><em><span style="font-size: 1.4em;">Mothers who forget their children...</span></em></p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>Can a woman forget her nursing child And have no compassion on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, but I will not forget you. (Isaiah 49:15)</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>This then is the impasse of our nation, and it grows ever deeper. On one side are those who believe in the dignity of every man, from the moment of conception to the time of natural death, because he has bears the Image of God. On the other side are those who do not believe in the dignity of every person, claiming that the dignity of some--particularly those living in the first world who are rich, white, educated, and (of course) already born--trumps the dignity of others.</p>
<p>To put it bluntly, our divided nation falls in behind two women: One woman loves her child and, from love, gives up her life for him, while the other hates her child and murders him.</p>
<p>Back in the 18th century, "in six pages of elegant, deadpan prose Jonathan Swift set forth an impeccably logical solution to alleviate the Irish famine: poor people should dismember and eat their babies. (Swift wrote) "A young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled..." Through satire, Swift intended to shock his readers out of their moral turpitude..." [6]</p>
<p>(But) today, when English professors teach "A Modest Proposal," they often find it hard to make students realize Swift was joking. Here's one actual response: "Well, I don't completely agree with him, but he does make some really good points.") Harvesting embryonic children for their stem cells is little different from Swift's proposal to harvest just-born children for food. But whereas Swift's audience pulled back in revulsion, much of the American public thinks this is a swell idea.</p>
<p>"Adults are supposed to provide for, protect, and, if necessary, give their lives to defend their children. They are not supposed to sacrifice children for their own well-being.... [7]</p>
<p>What has happened to us, to our senators and congressman and supreme court justices and presidents and mayors and governors and law enforcement officers and attorneys and physicians? What has happened to the men of this nation for thirty-one years now, that has caused us to look the other way as forty million unborn children have been slaughtered in their mother's womb? Has the killing of these children been invisible? Have we not heard their cries? Have we not felt their pain? Have we not seen their blood?</p>
<p>Again and again, Scripture declares God's hatred for the shedding of innocent blood:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Surely at the command of the LORD it came upon Judah, to remove them from His sight because of the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he had done, and also for the innocent blood which he shed, for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood; and the LORD would not forgive. (2 Kings 24:3,4)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But when the blood is shed by fathers and mothers--when it is the blood of their own children?</p>
<blockquote>
<p>They did not destroy the peoples, As the LORD commanded them, But they mingled with the nations And learned their practices, And served their idols, Which became a snare to them. They even sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons, And shed innocent blood, The blood of their sons and their daughters, Whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; And the land was polluted with the blood. Thus they became unclean in their practices, And played the harlot in their deeds. Therefore the anger of the LORD was kindled against His people And He abhorred His inheritance (Psalms 106:34-40).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If we are oblivious to their suffering, here is the condition of our hearts:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The righteous is concerned for the rights of the poor, The wicked does not understand such concern (Proverbs 29:7).</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em><span style="font-size: 1.4em;">Inasmuch as ye did it to the least of these...</span></em></p>
<p>Brothers and sisters, it is time we shake off our complacency concerning the oppression surrounding us and remember again the godliness and courage of those who have gone before us, those who dealt a mortal blow to the Supreme Court's <em>Dred Scott </em>decision and brought an end to slavery. Like us, every effort was made to silence them and to relegate their cries for reform to the backwater of private religious expression. But they would have none of it. They were determined to be heard. When they tried to silence Abraham Lincoln, he responded:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Let us apply a few tests. You say that you think slavery is wrong, but you denounce all attempts to restrain it. Is there anything else that you think wrong, that you are not willing to deal with as a wrong? Why are you so careful, so tender of this one wrong and no other? You will not let us do a single thing as if it were wrong; there is no place where you will allow it to be even wrong; there is no place where you will allow it even to be called wrong! We must not call it wrong in politics because that is bringing religion into politics; we must not call it wrong in the pulpit because that is bringing politics into religion...and there is no single place, according to you, where this wrong thing can be properly called wrong! [8]</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Let all such men, let each of us here this day, remember that God is not on His throne for nothing:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>...The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>May God have mercy on our motherland and raise up a great army of godly men who will follow the godly women leading the battle for the wee ones being slaughtered by the millions each year just down the street from our real estate agent and barber shop. We should tremble to think He has told us He is a Father to the fatherless.</p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p>FOOTNOTES:</p>
<p>[1] <em>Encyclopaedia Britannica</em> 2003 Edition; sub "Dred Scott decision" and "Roger Brooke Taney."<br />[2] Patrick Derr, "The Argument &amp; the Question," <em>Human Life Review</em>, Vol. V, no. 3, 1979, pp. 77-83.<br />[3] John Adams, <em>A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law</em>, 1765.<br />[4] Donald Granberg, "Abortion Activists," <em>Family Planning Perspectives</em>, vol. 13, no. 4, July/August 1981, pp. 157-163.<br />[5] Kristin Luker, "The War Between Women," <em>Family Planning Perspectives</em>, vol. 16, no. 3, May/June 1984, pp. 105-111.<br />[6] With thanks to S.B.<br />[7] Gene Veith, <em>World</em>, July 8, 2001.<br />[8] William McGurn, "Lessons from Lincoln: Abortion and The GOP; If the GOP Is Lincoln's Party, Maybe It Should Use His Tactics" in <em>National Review</em>, March 25, 1993.</p>
<p><span style="font-size: 0.8em;">[This message was given at a Sanctity of Life Memorial Service held in the Indiana State House on the occasion of the thirty-first anniversary of Roe v. Wade. The message was given by Rev. Tim Bayly, ClearNote Church, Bloomington.]</span></p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/tim-on-the-occasion-of-the-thirty-ninth-anniversary-of-roe-v-wade-i-post-this-message-given-in-indianas-state-house-sever.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Should Christian parents get vaccinated...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/Q6u_47WkKmk/should-christian-parents-let-christian-radio-innoculate-them.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5d267cd970c" title="Should Christian parents get vaccinated..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/should-christian-parents-let-christian-radio-innoculate-them.html" thr:count="8" thr:when="2012-01-23T17:04:37Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5d267cd970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-21T07:00:00-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-21T15:52:38Z</updated>
        <summary>Excellent blog post by son Joseph on the subject of the discipline of children and talk shows on Christian radio stations. Please read it. (TB)</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Children are a blessing" />
        <category term="Evangelicalism" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Excellent blog post by son Joseph on the subject of the discipline of children and talk shows on Christian radio stations. Please <a href="http://clearnotechurch.com/blog/2012/jan/19/should-christians-get-vaccinated" target="_self">read it</a>. <em>(TB)</em></p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/should-christian-parents-let-christian-radio-innoculate-them.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Old friends...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/hz67JKwzI04/back-at-evangelical-community-church-i-started-a-calvins-institutes-reading-group-and-a-young-graduate-student-at-the-church.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e2016760df3333970b" title="Old friends..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/back-at-evangelical-community-church-i-started-a-calvins-institutes-reading-group-and-a-young-graduate-student-at-the-church.html" thr:count="6" thr:when="2012-01-21T17:30:22Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e2016760df3333970b</id>
        <published>2012-01-20T18:29:58-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-21T20:37:53Z</updated>
        <summary>Back in the early nineties at Evangelical Community Church here in Bloomington, I started a Calvin's Institutes Reading Group and a young graduate student at the church named Steve Baarendsee helped lead it. For most of the twenty-five or so...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="PCA" />
        <category term="Throw the radio in the bathtub" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><a href="http://nebti5.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffeae66c970d-popup" onclick="window.open( this.href, '_blank', 'width=640,height=480,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0' ); return false" style="float: right;"><img alt="Ginos" class="asset  asset-image at-xid-6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffeae66c970d" src="http://nebti5.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffeae66c970d-320wi" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px 5px;" title="Ginos" /></a>Back in the early nineties at Evangelical Community Church here in Bloomington, I started a Calvin's <em>Institutes</em> Reading Group and a young graduate student at the church named Steve Baarendsee helped lead it. For most of the twenty-five or so men and women in the group, this was their formal introduction to Reformed theology and to the PCA (at the time I was PCA)...</p>

Cleaning out my desk just now, this pic reminds me of those days. It's taken at Gino's East during a conference RC was speaking at held at Covenant Presbyterian (PCA) in Chicago. From left to right, TB, Phil Henry (now church planting for MNA in the Jersey suburbs of Philadelphia), Steve Baarendse (English prof at Columbia International University and attending a PCA church), Mike Farley (M.Div. from Covenant Theological Seminary and now adjunct prof at Washington University), and Rob Dailey (doing IP work in Winston Salem, NC for Kilpatrick Townsend &amp; Stockton and attending a PCA church). I'm guessing Rob Hooper took the picture. Rob's now serving as an elder at a PCA church in Jacksonville, FL while running Atlanta Logistics. <em>(TB; Please note that Kilpatrick Townsend &amp; Stockton requested that Baylyblog remove their firm's name from this post. <em>Kilpatrick Townsend &amp; Stockton expressed</em> fear that our printing of their name would cause them to run afoul of state codes of legal ethics that ban certain types of advertising. For the record, then, let it be known that <em>Kilpatrick Townsend &amp; Stockton </em><em>neither requested nor paid for our naming their firm here. Strike a blow for clothing the naked public square with the doctrine of Jesus Christ and His Eternal Word.</em>)</em></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/back-at-evangelical-community-church-i-started-a-calvins-institutes-reading-group-and-a-young-graduate-student-at-the-church.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Sex-selective abortion...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/OB1IESlPGYg/sex-selective-abortion.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5b8d14f970c" title="Sex-selective abortion..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/sex-selective-abortion.html" thr:count="18" thr:when="2012-01-21T21:18:35Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5b8d14f970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-20T01:00:00-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-18T04:40:03Z</updated>
        <summary>Through FB our longtime friend Al Stout writes: Here is the argument… Abortion is a decision between a woman and her doctor. It is a matter of privacy, and the health of the woman is all that can be considered...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Abortion, euthanasia..." />
        <category term="Feminism" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><em>Through FB our longtime friend Al Stout writes:</em></p>
<p>Here is the argument… <br /><br />Abortion is a decision between a woman and her doctor. It is a matter of privacy, and the health of the woman is all that can be considered in these decisions. The fetus is not an individual life. It is not a person. It is a thing (sometimes a parasite) that cannot be taken into account by a third party to the abortion decision. An abortion is like a kidney, lung, or cornea removal.<br /><br />Since the "thing" in a woman's womb is not a person, why are <a href="http://vitals.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/16/10168064-keep-babys-sex-secret-to-prevent-gender-based-abortions-doc-says" target="_self">people upset</a> abortions are performed for reasons of sex selection? For that matter...</p>

if a person does not exist, how can the sex of a person exist? We don't have male or female kidneys. We don't have girl corneas or boy lungs. Sexual identity of those body parts must be derivative of the person who enjoys their use. Yet this "thing" is not a person.
<p>This is a terrible conundrum for the abortion rights folks.<br /><br />Even those who advocate abortion on demand cannot escape reality. What is the solution? Live with the inconsistency? Well, some of the people do that.</p>
<p>Meanwhile other people never make it out alive.</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/sex-selective-abortion.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Happy birthday, Professor Baker...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/g3G3xlRRuYI/happy-birthday-professor-baker.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5d23436970c" title="Happy birthday, Professor Baker..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/happy-birthday-professor-baker.html" thr:count="1" thr:when="2012-01-20T15:01:59Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5d23436970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-19T18:08:02-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-19T23:10:28Z</updated>
        <summary>Speaking of art, one blessing of Bloomington is the constant stream of operas (if you like that sort of stuff), recitals, and concerts flowing out of our music school. In the past few years a young husband and father of...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Music" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/UcPwgOgzoaE" width="420" /></p>
<p>Speaking of art, one blessing of Bloomington is the constant stream of operas (if you like that sort of stuff), recitals, and concerts flowing out of our music school. In the past few years a young husband and father of our congregation named Alex McNeilly has played his sax in several Jazz Ensemble concerts led by the universally respected jazz composer, Professor David Baker...</p>

This week the music school (IU Jacobs School of Music) is celebrating Prof. Baker's eightieth birthday with a host of clinics, discussions, performances by other jazz artists, and a gala concert Saturday evening. The <em>Indiana Daily Student</em> just ran <a href="http://idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=84920" target="_self">a good piece</a> on Prof. Baker's life and work.
<p>Here's an excerpt giving a good picture of the man's character and faith:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This care for the world around (Prof. Baker) permeates his entire life. Despite his many glittering accomplishments and connections with important people, Baker remains humble. He credits his success and reputation to his professors at IU, including world-famous Menahem Pressler, János Starker and Josef Gingold, who commissioned Baker to write classical music scores while he was still in school.</p>
<p>But most of all, Baker said he owes it all to God. “Everything I’ve ever needed has been given to me,” said Baker, who sees his talent for performance, composition, writing and pedagogy as gifts from God.</p>
<p>He believes everyone has an “expiration date”: His goal in life, above all the honors and recognition, is to leave the world a better place, with no stone left unturned.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Every concert of his Jazz Ensemble I've attended has won my heart over more to this humble man.</p>
<p><em>(TB, w/thanks to Eric)</em></p>
<p> </p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/happy-birthday-professor-baker.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>What's done in Atlanta stays in Atlanta....</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/5IF0AehR4e0/whats-done-in-atlanta-stays-in-atlanta.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffdae915970d" title="What's done in Atlanta stays in Atlanta...." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/whats-done-in-atlanta-stays-in-atlanta.html" thr:count="17" thr:when="2012-01-24T21:52:46Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffdae915970d</id>
        <published>2012-01-19T16:24:02-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-20T21:18:38Z</updated>
        <summary>Two years ago at the PCA's General Assembly our denominational stated clerk, Roy Taylor, spoke in support of an Administrative Committee funding initiative. In defending the proposal, Roy criticized unnamed PCA bloggers for lacking the courage to speak personally to...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Gelded discourse" />
        <category term="PCA" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Two years ago at the PCA's General Assembly our denominational stated clerk, Roy Taylor, spoke in support of an Administrative Committee funding initiative. In defending the proposal, Roy criticized unnamed PCA bloggers for lacking the courage to speak personally to the authors of the initiative before opposing it on the internet.</p>
<p>Because I had opposed the initiative on this blog and because I don't see myself as a shoot-from-the-shadows critic of PCA leadership, I made my way forward to introduce myself at the end of the session.</p>
<p>I told Roy I was one of the bloggers he had just accused of cowardice, but added that I hoped he would accept on the basis of my presence before him that I was willing to say in person what I said on my blog. Nevertheless, I added, despite speaking to him in person I held myself in no way bound by Matthew 18 to approach members of the committee personally before publicly criticizing their plan.</p>
<p>Roy responded that he hadn't been aiming his criticism at me individually, adding that he neither knew of me nor was familiar with my blog--though he corrected himself later by saying, "Oh, I think I did see that blog once."</p>
<p>The conversation was cordial and direct. I ended by telling Roy that I'm willing to be held accountable for the things I write while he reassured me he had not intended to malign me personally.</p>
<p>I tell this story in light of <a href="http://byfaithonline.com/page/pca-news/meeting-of-understanding-aims-to-ease-denominational-tension" target="_self">a ByFaith Online article about a conclave</a> of "PCA leaders" held at Roy Taylor's behest last Tuesday in Atlanta under what ByFaith calls "Chatham House Rules" to discuss "causes for conflict in the PCA that hamper our ministry and unity."</p>


<p style="text-align: left;">Now you've probably never heard of Chatham House Rules. Neither had I. But a little Google digging and Wikipedia fills in the blanks.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Sure enough, what one might suspect from the high-falutin' name all by itself is indeed the case: Chatham House Rules are the kind of high-minded principles adopted by British gentlemen on those occasions when they wish to act ungentlemanly without harm to their reputations.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">According to Wikipedia the rule originated at the home of the Royal Institute of International Affairs:</p>
<blockquote>
<div>When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.... The rule allows people to speak as individuals and to express views that may not be those of their organisations, and therefore, encourages free discussion. Speakers are free to voice their own opinions, without concern for their personal reputation or their official duties and affiliations. </div>
</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: left;">Give them a royal imprimatur joined with a British accent and the PCA's leaders are off to the races. Never mind that it's lipstick on a pig, the ecclesiastical equivalent of "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas." They're the "Chatham House Rules" after all and, if they're good enough for royalty, they're more-than-sufficient to assuage the guilty consciences of bounderish Presbyterians.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Personally I find it a more sanctifying--if more challenging--rule to assume that all I say and write will one day be revealed as my own. It's not for nothing that Scripture says, "Evil men love darkness." In fact, I'm constantly at war with my own desire to whisper from the shadows.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">But I'm sure the lights were on in Atlanta, weren't they?</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Sunlight cleanses. Darkness and secrecy promote corruption. For this reason, I stand publicly behind what is written here on BaylyBlog. If Tim and I sin by writing uncharitably or err by writing inaccurately, our goal is to admit it and to apologize even more publicly than the error apologized for. We have done this in the past. We will continue to do this in the future. This is the path of sanctification. And I challenge PCA leaders who find the courage to speak what they believe only under the cover of secrecy to act with forthrightness by making public accountability the hallmark of all they say and do. </p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Let me add that reading ByFaith's account of the Atlanta gathering is deeply depressing. Can there be any hope for a denomination so lacking in manly directness and courage? (<em>DB</em>)</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/whats-done-in-atlanta-stays-in-atlanta.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>The U.S. Constitution requires civil magistrates to protect the unborn...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/fCWEM2_6nCg/the-us-constitution-requires-civil-magistrates-to-protect-the-unborn.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffd94152970d" title="The U.S. Constitution &lt;i&gt;requires&lt;/i&gt; civil magistrates to protect the unborn..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/the-us-constitution-requires-civil-magistrates-to-protect-the-unborn.html" thr:count="8" thr:when="2012-01-21T02:07:23Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffd94152970d</id>
        <published>2012-01-19T13:11:38-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-19T19:24:02Z</updated>
        <summary>Here's the simple truth stated by the man I most respect in matters Constitutional: "The federal government and its magistrates and officials have a duty to stop abortion under the Constitution, not just the discretionary authority to decide to do...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Abortion, euthanasia..." />
        <category term="Government" />
        <category term="Politics" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Here's the simple truth stated by the man I most respect in matters Constitutional: "The federal government and its magistrates and officials have a duty to stop abortion under the <em>Constitution</em>, not just the discretionary authority to decide to do so."</p>
<p>Both the duty and the discretionary authority are denied by the curmudgeon libertarians muttering this and that out on the perimeters of our national political debates. This is why I do not trust them...</p>

Keep in mind that in 1972, the year prior to <em>Roe v. Wade</em>, there were around 750,000 abortions across our country--and this when abortion was illegal in almost every state of the Union except for certain states that allowed it in the exceptional cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother.
<p>But that's neither here nor there. This post is to hammer home the point that libertarians muttering about abortion being a states' rights matter don't know the first thing about the <em>U.S. Constitutio</em>n.</p>
<p>This statement is true.</p>
<p><em>(TB)</em></p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/the-us-constitution-requires-civil-magistrates-to-protect-the-unborn.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>RCJR on Sanctify of Human Life Sunday; with notes on Pharaoh, Herod, and Margaret Sanger... </title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/6ttD7TC83Nk/now-heres-an-excellent-post-by-our-dear-friend-recently-widowed-rcjr-he-speaks-of-the-celebration-of-christmas-the-church.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffc3576a970d" title="RCJR on Sanctify of Human Life Sunday; with notes on Pharaoh, Herod, and Margaret Sanger... " />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/now-heres-an-excellent-post-by-our-dear-friend-recently-widowed-rcjr-he-speaks-of-the-celebration-of-christmas-the-church.html" thr:count="1" thr:when="2012-01-19T12:56:49Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffc3576a970d</id>
        <published>2012-01-19T01:00:00-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-19T06:00:00Z</updated>
        <summary>Now here's an excellent post by our dear friend recently widowed, RCJR. He speaks of the celebration of Christmas, the church calendar, abortion, and the upcoming Sanctity of Human Life Sunday. He asks if it's Biblical and confessional to require...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Abortion, euthanasia..." />
        <category term="Fatherhood" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Now here's <a href="http://www.ligonier.org/blog/should-churches-observe-sanctity-life-sunday/" target="_self">an excellent post</a> by our dear friend recently widowed, RCJR. He speaks of the celebration of Christmas, the church calendar, abortion, and the upcoming Sanctity of Human Life Sunday. He asks if it's Biblical and confessional to <em>require</em> this observance in our pulpits and answers with a resounding, "No." I agree; the pulpit is not to be bound.</p>
<p>He goes on to ask whether it <em>may</em> be observed and answers with a resounding, "Yes."</p>
<p>My own suggestion is that you exercise two liberties at the same time and turn Sanctity of Human Life Sunday into <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07419a.htm" target="_self">Holy Innocents</a> Sunday. You could preach on those little ones who died as Joseph took Jesus and His mother down to Egypt. Study Exodus 1:7-10 noting how Pharaoh's genocide and God's rescue of Moses is the antitype to...</p>

Herod's slaughter of the Innocents and God's rescue of His Son; also how Pharoah's fears and genocidal attack upon the Hebrews is mirrored by Margaret Sanger's xenophabia and attack upon the poor in founding Planned Parenthood.
<p>* * *</p>
<p>In the middle of RCJR's post he drops a gracenote of God turning fathers' hearts to their sons and sons' hearts to their fathers by referring to his Dad as "my very wise father."</p>
<p>You know why I've always been drawn to Doug Wilson and RCJR and Jim Dobson? Each of them displays respect and tender love for their Dad. When you think of how they tower over their peers, stop and take note of the shoulders they stand on. It's the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1890626252/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=davtimbayouto-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=1890626252">Paul Vitz</a><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=davtimbayouto-20&amp;l=as2&amp;o=1&amp;a=1890626252" style="border: none !important; margin: 0px !important;" width="1" /> principle reversed. <em>(TB)</em></p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/now-heres-an-excellent-post-by-our-dear-friend-recently-widowed-rcjr-he-speaks-of-the-celebration-of-christmas-the-church.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Drab homes give birth to art idolatry...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/FW7FJxjhvWk/heres-an-interesting-explanation-of-the-worship-of-artists-spreading-through-the-pca-by-way-of-covenant-mna-and-redeemer-dr.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffcacb48970d" title="Drab homes give birth to art idolatry..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/heres-an-interesting-explanation-of-the-worship-of-artists-spreading-through-the-pca-by-way-of-covenant-mna-and-redeemer-dr.html" thr:count="12" thr:when="2012-01-24T02:50:55Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffcacb48970d</id>
        <published>2012-01-18T13:11:01-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-27T15:23:10Z</updated>
        <summary>(NOTE FROM TIM BAYLY: A large part of this post has been removed. A young man objected that I was replacing one idolatry with my own more sophisticated one, and I thought it best to pull the post rather than...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="City of man, city of God" />
        <category term="Covenant College" />
        <category term="Culture" />
        <category term="Reformed world" />
        <category term="Television" />
        <category term="Worship &amp; idolatry" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><a href="http://nebti5.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5c12533970c-popup" onclick="window.open( this.href, '_blank', 'width=640,height=480,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0' ); return false" style="float: right;"><img alt="Duchamp" class="asset  asset-image at-xid-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5c12533970c" src="http://nebti5.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5c12533970c-320wi" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px 5px;" title="Duchamp" /></a></p>
<p><em>(NOTE FROM TIM BAYLY: A large part of this post has been removed. A young man objected that I was replacing one idolatry with my own more sophisticated one, and I thought it best to pull the post rather than allow readers to concluding that I am promoting idolatry.)</em></p>
<p>Here's an interesting explanation of the worship of artists <a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2005/11/wics_love_offer.html" target="_self">spreading through the PCA</a> by way of <a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2006/02/pca_culture_bap.html" target="_self">Covenant, MNA</a>, and <a href="http://www.faithandwork.org/glimpses_page3653.php#148" target="_self">Redeemer</a> clones. George Bernard Shaw points out that this worship has its origin in artless homes and childhoods...</p>

* * *
<p>"But there are more dangerous influences than ragtimes waiting for people brought up in ignorance of fine art. Nothing is more pitiably ridiculous than the wild worship of artists by those who have never been seasoned in youth to the enchantments of art. Tenors and prima donnas, pianists and violinists, actors and actresses enjoy powers of seduction which in the middle ages would have exposed them to the risk of being burnt for sorcery. But as they exercise this power by singing, playing, and acting, no great harm is done except perhaps to themselves. Far graver are the powers enjoyed by brilliant persons who are also connoisseurs in art. The influence they can exercise on young people who have been brought up in the darkness and wretchedness of a home without art, and in whom a natural bent towards art has always been baffled and snubbed, is incredible to those who have not witnessed and understood it. He (or she) who reveals the world of art to them opens heaven to them. They become satellites, disciples, worshippers of the apostle. Now the apostle may be a voluptuary without much conscience. Nature may have given him enough virtue to suffice in a reasonable environment. But this allowance may not be enough to defend him against the temptation and demoralization of finding himself a little god on the strength of what ought to be a quite ordinary culture. He may find adorers in all directions in our uncultivated society among people of stronger character than himself, not one of whom, if they had been artistically educated, would have had anything to learn from him or regarded him as in any way extraordinary apart from his actual achievements as an artist. Tartuffe is not always a priest. Indeed he is not always a rascal: he is often a weak man absurdly credited with omniscience and perfection, and taking unfair advantages only because they are offered to him and he is too weak to refuse. Give everyone his culture, and no one will offer him more than his due.</p>
<p>"In thus delivering our children from the idolatry of the artist, we shall not destroy for them the enchantment of art: on the contrary, we shall teach them to demand art everywhere as a condition attainable by cultivating the body, mind, and heart. Art, said Morris, is the expression of pleasure in work. And certainly, when work is made detestable by slavery, there is no art. It is only when learning is made a slavery by tyrannical teachers that art becomes loathsome to the pupil."</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/heres-an-interesting-explanation-of-the-worship-of-artists-spreading-through-the-pca-by-way-of-covenant-mna-and-redeemer-dr.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Ugh, it's Christianity Today, again--this time weighing in against spanking...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/mO9Uc_iHnlI/knives-are-necessary-to-cut-meat-and-bread-yet-sometimes-knives-are-used-to-kill-people-can-we-all-agree-knives-arent-the-p.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffc14c4b970d" title="Ugh, it's &lt;i&gt;Christianity Today,&lt;/i&gt; again--this time weighing in against spanking..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/knives-are-necessary-to-cut-meat-and-bread-yet-sometimes-knives-are-used-to-kill-people-can-we-all-agree-knives-arent-the-p.html" thr:count="38" thr:when="2012-01-20T04:05:03Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20162ffc14c4b970d</id>
        <published>2012-01-17T21:00:00-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-18T18:23:05Z</updated>
        <summary>Knives are necessary to cut meat and bread. Every once in a while, knives are used to kill people. Can we all agree knives aren't the problem? Please? Pretty please? The abuse of a thing does not invalidate its proper...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Abortion, euthanasia..." />
        <category term="Academia" />
        <category term="Christian home" />
        <category term="ClearNote Fellowship" />
        <category term="Culture" />
        <category term="Evangelicalism" />
        <category term="Fatherhood" />
        <category term="Homosexuality" />
        <category term="Motherhood" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Knives are necessary to cut meat and bread. Every once in a while, knives are used to kill people. Can we all agree knives aren't the problem? Please? Pretty please?</p>
<p>The abuse of a thing does not invalidate its proper use.</p>
<p>This truth has eluded the editors of <em>Christianity Today</em>. In a recent editorial they use the death of several children at the hands of their fathers and mothers as the spectre to soften readers up to their dogma that "corporal punishment ...should be employed miles short of abuse, without anger, and as an absolute last resort." From their perch in Moses' seat, these scribes declare about spanking that "the Bible does not <em>require</em> it" (<em>emphasis in the original</em>).</p>
<p>Think about this. The magazine that purports to be the voice of Biblical inerrancy and Christian faith in these United States has run an editorial declaring that the rod of discipline God Himself requires God Himself does not require. And if that sentence confuses you, all I can say is I couldn't figure out how to put it more clearly.</p>
<p>And if you're one of the pigheaded ones who balks against progress, just be sure you only use the rod as "an absolute last resort." </p>
<p>But the Bible commands us to use the rod. God requires it...</p>

The most basic examination of God's Word makes this clear:
<blockquote>
<p><em>He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him. Proverbs 13:24  </em></p>
<p><em>Discipline your son, for in that there is hope; do not be a willing party to his death. Proverbs 19:18</em></p>
<p><em>Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him. Proverbs 22:15   </em></p>
<p><em>Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you punish him with the rod, he will not die. Proverbs 23:13   </em></p>
<p><em>The rod of correction imparts wisdom, but a child left to himself disgraces his mother. Proverbs 29:15 </em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>The editors of <em>Christianity Today</em> directly contradict God.</p>
<p>What is their authority for doing so? Two things: the murder of children and the received wisdom of InterVarsity Press.</p>
<p>First the murder of children. If it's pious or obedient to denounce one of God's commands in order to faciliate obedience of another of His commands, there's no end to the rebellion we can justify. And this is precisely what is happening with any number of God's commands today.</p>
<p>He Himself declares that sodomy is an abomination, yet we are told that the suicide of children is caused by religious fanatics who teach and preach that sodomy is an abomination, thereby leading these children to despair. He Himself declares that sacrificing our children to Molech as a sin so evil that it never occurred to Him, yet we are told that the death of mothers who in despair turn to back alley butchers and coat hangers to murder their child is caused by religious fanatics who oppose abortion. He Himself declares that the rod of discipline must be used, yet we are told that the murder of children is caused by religious fanatics who teach and preach that to spare the rod is to spoil the child. He Himself declares that wives are to submit to their husbands, yet we are told that the battering of wives is caused by religious fanatics who teach and preach that wives are to submit to their husbands.</p>
<p>In how many areas will the fear of man cause us to rebel against God before naive Christians will see through Satan's strategy? It is not love to give up teaching and preaching and practicing what God commands for the sake of avoiding Satan's blackmail. It is loving the world rather than God. It is friendship with the world which is hatred for God. In other words, when preaching and teaching and practicing the Biblical faith of calling sodomites to repentance is codified as hate speech (as it will be, soon), Christians will have aided and abetted that process and will have no one to blame but themselves for the hopeless time and eternity this abandons sodomites to. Similarly with corporal punishment: when it is outlawed (as it will be, soon), Christians like the editors of <em>Christianity Today</em> will be responsible for the destruction of the souls of children that will result from those laws.</p>
<p>Second, <em>Christianity Today's</em> editors report that some of the murders of children by their parents are tied to those parents having read Michael and Debi Pearl's <em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1892112000/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=davtimbayouto-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=1892112000">To Train Up A Child</a><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=davtimbayouto-20&amp;l=as2&amp;o=1&amp;a=1892112000" style="border: none !important; margin: 0px !important;" width="1" /></em>. Stop and ask the question whether the Pearls commend the use of the rod by fathers and mothers to murder their sons and daughters, and even those who have never seen the book know the answer. And they're right--the answer is no. So why did <em>Christianity Today's</em> editors bring <em>To Train up a Child</em> into their editorial?</p>
<p>Because the go-with-the-flow world of Evangelicalism has largely abandoned obedience to God in using corporal punishment and <em>To Train up a Child</em> is one of the only public voices left calling the Church back to obedience. So <em>Christianity Today's</em> editors diss the Pearls as "flying under the radar" of the establishment Evangelicalism of Wheaton <em>Christianity Today</em> represents, adding to the Pearls' crimes that <em>To Train up a Child</em> is (gasp!) "self-published." We all know what we're to think about the <a href="http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/520512/samizdat" target="_self">samizdat</a> press, right?</p>
<p>To the rescue rides InterVarsity Press, the official voice of the establishment Evangelicalism of Wheaton, which recently issued a book on corporal punishment that, after a sufficient amount of solemn consideration of the many deep issues involved, finally brought itself to declare that God doesn't require corporal punishment. Now everything is in place for the rebellion to consolidate its position. And it's not incidental that the establishment Evangelicalism of Wheaton will be able to leave some of its fundamentalist baggage behind, gaining respectability among the chattering class.</p>
<p>Winners all. Children win by not being murdered. Parents win by being pushed away from the samidzat press, back into the safe folds of Wheaton, <em>Christianity Today</em>, and InterVarsity Press. <em>Christianity Today</em> wins by appearing to be sufficiently progressive among rich Christians and intellectuals whose approval is the only thing that matters to them more than riches. And God wins by <em>Christianity Today</em> protecting His increasingly tattered reputation.</p>
<p>Listen, brothers and sisters: God really has commanded us to use the rod. The Pearls are wrong about some important things. In fact, years ago I told my wife Michael Pearl is a heretic. But it's not where Michael Pearl is wrong that <em>Christianity Today's</em> editors attacks him. It's where Michael Pearl contradicts the received wisdom of the chattering class that the editors bang their drums against him. And in this matter of corporal punishment being good, Michael Pearl is right.</p>
<p>What I'd like to see is a book as practical and helpful as <em>To Train up a Child</em> done right by an orthodox Protestant believer who believes in the Fall and Original Sin. And here in Bloomington we have a samidzat press ready to publish the book. Is there anyone reading this post who is game for the job? If you've read Ted Tripp's superb <em>Shepherding a Child's Heart</em> as well as <em>To Train up a Child</em>, you know that <em>To Train up a Child</em> does necessary practical instruction that <em>Shepherding a Child's Heart</em> doesn't do; and <em>vice versa</em>. So there's a need for a practical work fleshing out the practice of discipline and instruction to complement Ted Tripp's work. Let's get it done.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, spank your children. As George Bernard Shaw put it, spanking is the least painful discipline a child can be given. It's not emotional blackmail. It's not endless guilt-tripping. It's not hours of stewing in the bedroom, meditating on your sinful nature while the rest of family is downstairs finishing dinner, playing Uno, and eating popcorn. It's not a backhanded slap across the face given out of frustration and anger rather than faith. It's not mothers whining and endless time-outs and that wearisome wheedling and cajolng so many educated Christians think is enlightened.</p>
<p>It's a warning, then a spanking, then hugs and kisses, then over and forgotten.</p>
<p>So do it. Make your home happy. Make your wife happy (after a while when she sees the wisdom of it). Make your other children happy. Make your pastor happy. Make the child himself happy (as soon as the spanking stops, trust me).</p>
<p>You do want to be an obedient child of God? You do want to please your Heavenly Father, right?</p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>Discipline your son, and he will give you peace; he will bring delight to your soul. Proverbs 29:17   </em></p>
<p><em> My son, do not despise the Lord's discipline and do not resent his rebuke, because the Lord disciplines those he loves, as a father the son he delights in. Blessed is the man who finds wisdom, the man who gains understanding... Proverbs 3:11-13</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p><em>(TB, w/thanks to Alex)</em></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/knives-are-necessary-to-cut-meat-and-bread-yet-sometimes-knives-are-used-to-kill-people-can-we-all-agree-knives-arent-the-p.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>WITD...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/UdUxj37DvfI/id-ask-him-myself-but-it-would-be-so-embarrassing-so-can-someone-here-please-explain-to-me-why-my-son-in-law-always-signs-hi.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e2016760b8ea86970b" title="WITD..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/id-ask-him-myself-but-it-would-be-so-embarrassing-so-can-someone-here-please-explain-to-me-why-my-son-in-law-always-signs-hi.html" thr:count="17" thr:when="2012-01-19T23:49:43Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e2016760b8ea86970b</id>
        <published>2012-01-17T19:05:00-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-18T16:17:33Z</updated>
        <summary>I'd ask him myself but it would be so embarrassing. Maybe someone here can explain to me why my son-in-law always signs his e-mails, "Sent from my Dell Optiplex 780, Windows XP desktop computer"? You'd think he'd be ashamed. He...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Computers" />
        <category term="Web/tech" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>I'd ask him myself but it would be so embarrassing. Maybe someone here can explain to me why my son-in-law always signs his e-mails, "Sent from my Dell Optiplex 780, Windows XP desktop computer"? You'd think he'd be ashamed. He knows I've always had Macs. Is this a PC thing you can't get out of--like Microsoft and black plastic and PP clip art and bullet points?</p>
<p>If you have an idea, please use the comments to explain it to me. He doesn't like comments.</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/id-ask-him-myself-but-it-would-be-so-embarrassing-so-can-someone-here-please-explain-to-me-why-my-son-in-law-always-signs-hi.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Stop the sweetheart deal the wealthiest corporations are demanding of Congress...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/LIXefcTYfdA/the-ongoing-abuse-of-copyright-by-the-wealthiest-corporations-of-the-world.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5b995d5970c" title="Stop the sweetheart deal the wealthiest corporations are demanding of Congress..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/the-ongoing-abuse-of-copyright-by-the-wealthiest-corporations-of-the-world.html" thr:count="1" thr:when="2012-01-18T15:49:43Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5b995d5970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-17T19:01:00-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-18T06:26:57Z</updated>
        <summary>Did you notice Google's protest today, shown to the right? I can't remember another time we've done this on Baylyblog but rich corporations' abuse of copyright has to stop. Join millions of others in registering your opposition to Senate 968...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Copyright" />
        <category term="Government" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><a href="http://nebti5.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5b9c2e5970c-popup" onclick="window.open( this.href, '_blank', 'width=640,height=480,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0' ); return false" style="float: right;"><img alt="Google:SOPA" class="asset  asset-image at-xid-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5b9c2e5970c" src="http://nebti5.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5b9c2e5970c-500wi" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px 5px;" title="Google:SOPA" /></a>Did you notice Google's protest today, shown to the right? I can't remember another time we've done this on Baylyblog but rich corporations' abuse of copyright has to stop. Join millions of others in <a href="http://sopa.boldprogressives.org/call/call_sopa_allcongress_craigslist/?source=craigslist" target="_self">registering</a> your opposition to Senate 968 (PIPA) and HR 3261 (SOPA).</p>
<p>The corporate authors of this legislation are demanding <a href="https://www.eff.org/issues/coica-internet-censorship-and-copyright-bill">the ability to take down any web site</a> (including Craigslist, Wikipedia, or Google) that hurts their profits without prior judicial oversight or due process. You'll notice sites such as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page" target="_self">Wikipedia</a> and <a href="http://Indianapolis.craigslist.org/" target="_self">Craigslist</a> have joined Google in protest.</p>
<p><a href="https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=8173" target="_self">Register</a> your opposition now. Stop this money grab by the likes of News Corp, TimeWarner, Comcast, Ralph Lauren, ABC, Juicy Couture, Chanel, Sony, Rolex, RIAA, and Nike.</p>
<p>And if you think SOPA solves a real problem, read <a href="http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/tim-oreilly-why-im-fighting-sopa/" target="_self">this</a> and <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/107033731246200681024/posts/5Xd3VjFR8gx" target="_self">this</a>.</p>
<p>Odd allies of the protest include Nancy Pelosi and Ron Paul. The ACLU is right on this one.</p>
<p><em>(TB)</em></p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/the-ongoing-abuse-of-copyright-by-the-wealthiest-corporations-of-the-world.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>A correction and apology...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/w12k6bOZdr8/a-correction-and-apology.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5a64caf970c" title="A correction and apology..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/a-correction-and-apology.html" thr:count="1" thr:when="2012-01-21T22:45:00Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5a64caf970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-16T17:49:38-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-16T23:34:09Z</updated>
        <summary>After exchanging several e-mails with a commenter named Scott, it became clear to me I'd not done a good job writing the post, "Neglecting the Weightier Provisions of the Law." Specifically, I'd written it in a way that reasonable people...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Misc." />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>After exchanging several e-mails with a commenter named Scott, it became clear to me I'd not done a good job writing the post, "<a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/it-does-not-strike-me-as-helpful-to-have-so-many-folks-confuse-the-terms-libertarian-or-anarchist-with-constitutional-governm.html" target="_self">Neglecting the Weightier Provisions of the Law</a>." Specifically, I'd written it in a way that reasonable people would conclude my purpose was to answer Scott, personally, rather than answering more generally this error common among Reformed men--and specifically, the man Scott had provided a link to in our comments.</p>
<p>I'm sorry I wasn't more careful in the way I wrote this post and apologize to Scott for my failure and the wasted hours it took him to show it to me. The first two paragraphs of that post have been changed to call attention to this failure and correct it. <em>(TB)</em></p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/a-correction-and-apology.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Reformed pulpits today show Erasmus won...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/XoP9bX3gd2g/in-his-bondage-of-the-will-luther-opposes-the-roman-catholic-churchs-champion-biblical-scholar-erasmus-of-rotterdam-in-an.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5a53ba3970c" title="Reformed pulpits today show Erasmus won..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/in-his-bondage-of-the-will-luther-opposes-the-roman-catholic-churchs-champion-biblical-scholar-erasmus-of-rotterdam-in-an.html" thr:count="2" thr:when="2012-01-17T00:00:53Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5a53ba3970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-16T16:30:11-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-16T22:18:49Z</updated>
        <summary>In his Bondage of the Will, Luther opposes the Roman Catholic church's champion Biblical scholar, Erasmus of Rotterdam. In an earlier post, I put up an excerpt from the beginning of Bondage of the Will in which Luther tells his...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Academia" />
        <category term="Gelded discourse" />
        <category term="Preaching" />
        <category term="Reformed world" />
        <category term="Roman Catholicism" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>In his <em>Bondage of the Will</em>, Luther opposes the Roman Catholic church's champion Biblical scholar, Erasmus of Rotterdam. In <a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/appropos-to-everything-today-this-from-that-favorite-of-my-brother-david-luthers-bondage-of-the-will-first-of-all-i-wou.html" target="_self">an earlier post</a>, I put up an excerpt from the beginning of <em>Bondage of the Will</em> in which Luther tells his readers he will be making assertions because it's the character of the Christian mind to "delight in assertions."</p>
<p>One longtime Baylyblog reader who is a committed Roman Catholic thought to defend Erasmus here by placing a large quotation from Erasmus immediately under the Luther quote I had posted.</p>
<p>Reading the Erasmus excerpt, it was apparent Erasmus was saying one thing while doing another. The way Erasmus speaks in this excerpt is common among scholars today and, having put those scholars in charge of the training of our future pastors at our denominational seminaries, we've arrived at the place where preachers often are incapable of saying, "Thus says the Lord God Almighty."</p>
<p>Pastors preach for the approval of the lowest common denominator, scholars and the professional and chattering classes they manufacture, rather than the farmers, truckers, and coal miners who used to be Presbyterian but long ago left for Baptist and Pentecostal churches...</p>

You may not buy my sociology, but surely reading this excerpt from Erasmus will lead you to admit that the heirs of the Reformation have decided against Luther and have taken on the method and manner of Erasmus of Rotterdam. Reformed sermons scratch in the direction of scholars' itches. Reformed seminaries turn out geldings who lack faith, firmness of conviction, helpfulness of application, and manliness of method. Preferring the approval of their seminary profs and the wives of the doctors and lawyers on their sessions to the approval of God, they have suffered the abandonment of the Holy Spirit.
<p>As you may imagine, it was dirty work having to write this commentary pointing out the essential dishonestly of most everything Erasmus wrote. Nevertheless, I've seen way too much of this sort of preening by proud men claiming to be the only true keepers of irenicism and compassion, and I thought I might do well to warn others from ceding more territory within the church to these repulsive <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uriah_Heep" target="_self">Uriah Heeps</a>. <em>(TB)</em></p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;So let us pursue the matter without recrimination, because this is more fitting for Christian men</p>
<p>Luther didn't get the memo. Neither did the Apostle Paul, Jesus, John the Baptist, or any of God's prophets.</p>
<p>In point of fact, though, Erasmus didn't get the memo either. He could simply have proceeded "without recrimination" without telling us he was proceeding "without recrimination" and going on to say those who engage in recrimination are inferior Christian men.</p>
<p>Why does Erasmus engage in recriminations against others, tearing them down for their technique and preening himself over his own? It seems so needlessly hurtful for Erasmus to argue in this way. So proud. Don't we all wish Erasmus had been around to teach Jesus a better way to engage the Pharisees than berating them with His woes? Think of what kind of gentleman Jesus might have become had Erasmus been there to teach Him ways of speaking "more fitting for Christian men."</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;To be sure, I know that I was not built for wrestling matches: there is surely nobody less practiced in this kind of thing than I, who have always had an inner temperamental horror of fighting, and who have always preferred to sport in the wider plains of the Muses rather than to brandish a sword in a hand-to-hand fight.</p>
<p>Oh yes, don't we all pity poor Erasmus with all the force of the Holy Roman Empire behind him having to cross swords with scary, big bad Martin Luther who, himself, has only Frederick the Elector of Saxony standing between him and execution?</p>
<p>There Erasmus is whining about how much he wishes he didn't have to argue--it's so ungentlemanly and rude and scary, even--and he's so timid and weak and fearful. Don't you pity him? All he has is the Pope and all his minions to defend him. Poor pitiable Erasmus.</p>
<p>The Whore of Babylon is selling salvation across Europe and poor Erasmus thinks it's a time for subtlety and nuance and pleading weakness and fear and timidity. And there's big bad Martin Luther being the schoolyard bully over insignificant things.</p>
<p>And the Whore of Babylon is selling salvation across Europe to pay Michelangelo's wages for painting the Sistine Chapel.</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;...I prefer this disposition of mine to that with which I see some people endowed who are so uncontrollably attached to their own opinion that they cannot bear anything which dissents from it; but they twist whatever they read in the Scriptures into an assertion of an opinion which they have embraced once for all.</p>
<p>He does such a fine job of showing us the excellencies of a Christian gentleman, doesn't he? See how he avoids recriminations!</p>
<p>His opponents--he'd prefer to call them interlocutors, actually, but they won't allow it--are "uncontrollably attached to their own opinions," Erasmus says. Is there any man alive who wouldn't see he'd been slapped in the face on a very personal level when he argued from the plain text of Scripture and his opponent responded by attacking and accusing and denouncing him as being in an out-of-control bondage to his own mere opinions--certainly not to any exterior authority, least of all the Word of God?</p>
<p>One wonders if Erasmus is capable of arguing without simply engaging in recrimination against his opponent? I mean really.</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;They are like young men who love a girl so immoderately that they imagine they see their beloved wherever they turn, or, a much better example, like two combatants who, in the heat of a quarrel, turn whatever is at hand into a missile, whether it be a jug or a dish. I ask you, what sort of sincere judgment can there be when people behave in this way?</p>
<p>Don't you just love how calm and objective and to the point Erasmus' arguments are, never stooping to ad hominem or recrimination?</p>
<p>Young men in love with girls--there's a dignified image showing Erasmus' deep respect for Luther and the Reformers.</p>
<p>Or failing that, how about the image of two combatants in the heat of a quarrel? Isn't that dignified? Doesn't it show Erasmus' equanimity in this debate--that he likens his opponents to men who have escalated their quarrel into physical combat?</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;Who will learn anything fruitful from this sort of discussion -– beyond the fact that each leaves the encounter bespattered with the other’s filth?</p>
<p>So here is Erasmus accusing Luther of running around splattering his opponents with his own... What. Poop? Excrement? Shit?</p>
<p>Isn't it wonderful to observe the great care the Holy Roman Empire's humanist uses in avoiding recriminations?</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;There will always be many such, whom the apostle Peter describes as “ignorant and unstable who twist the Scriptures to their own destruction.”</p>
<p>Wonderful, isn't it, that this particular recrimination could be cited from the mouth of the Apostle Peter? But of course, here the Apostle Peter wasn't talking about that one man standing alone and God help him, was he?</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;As far as I am concerned, I admit that many different views about free choice have been handed down from the ancients about which I have, as yet, no fixed conviction, except that I think there to be a certain power of free choice.</p>
<p>Yes, yes; effete intellectuals are always in process, aren't they? And they expect that simple pronouncment (of them being in process) to commend them to their readers as men of sound judgment.</p>
<p>Why? Well because of their great humility, don't you see? Only proud men allow themselves to arrive at assertions and conclusions. Take Jesus, for instance: "You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." And "no man may come to me unless the Father draws him." And so on and so on and so on throughout the Word of God.</p>
<p>But here's humble Erasmus, in process on the matter, reserving judgment for a later date, meanwhile arguing and recriminating against that pathetic monk under the mighty Roman Empire's death sentence who is in such bondage to his own uncontrollable personal opinions that he's throwing his excrement on his opponents.</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;For I have read the Assertion of Martin Luther, and read it without prejudice, except that I have assumed a certain favor toward him, as an investigator may toward an arraigned prisoner.</p>
<p>Aha. The truth escapes him, doesn't it? He isn't, in fact, the weakling over in the corner of the playground being hammered by the big mean bully. Rather, he is the prosecutor with all the force of the Papacy behind him threatening death against its prisoner, Martin Luther.</p>
<p>Funny how this Erasmus goes so quickly from being a victim of a bully to the prosecutor listening to the captive. At one time pleading weakness suits him, but just a few words later institutional power suits him. My this man is changeable!</p>
<p>&gt;&gt;If anybody ascribes this to my slowness or inexperience, I shall not quarrel with him, provided they allow us slower ones the privilege of learning by meeting those who have received the gift of God in fuller measure, especially since Luther attributes very little importance to scholarship, and most of all to the Spirit, who is wont to instill into the more humble what he denies to the wise.</p>
<p>Ah yes, such masterful avoidance of recrimination as befits a humanist, a Christian man; indeed, to reach the highest level, a gentleman and a scholar.</p>
<p>&gt;&gt; if I grant to Luther in this Disputation that he be not weighed down by the prejudgments of doctors, councils, universities, popes, and of the emperor,</p>
<p>There he goes again. Timid and not-made-for-fighting Erasmus, piteous Erasmus, trembling before big bad Martin Luther while reminding everyone watching that he speaks for doctors and councils and universities and popes and the emperor.</p>
<p>So which is it, Erasmus? Are you weak or powerful? Is Luther a bully or a gnat? Why can't you make up your mind? You flit back and forth as if we, your humble readers, can remember from one moment to the next whether you are oppressed or the oppressor? Bullied or the bully? Timid or firm? </p>
<p>&gt;&gt;I would willingly persuade the man in the street that in this kind of discussion it is better not to enforce contentions which may the sooner harm Christian concord than advance true religion.</p>
<p>Oh yes, the eminent scholar, Erasmus, is the defender of Christian concord while Rome sells salvation in order to pay for Michelangelo painting the Sistine Chapel. The religious masters across all Europe are claiming to sell salvation, thereby leading the masses to Hell, and Erasmus believes it's time to avoid contentions and work hard to protect this whole state of affairs he has the audacity to label, "Christian concord" and the advancement of true religion.</p>
<p>And our dear Roman Catholic reader is so blinded as to think this excerpt will commend both Erasmus and the Whore of Babylon to Baylyblog readers.</p>
<p>Boggles my mind. Erasmus may well be the perfect example of crying "peace, peace" when there was no peace.</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/in-his-bondage-of-the-will-luther-opposes-the-roman-catholic-churchs-champion-biblical-scholar-erasmus-of-rotterdam-in-an.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Martin Luther: "not to delight in assertions is not the character of the Christian mind..."</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/EpWsqqhKlDY/appropos-to-everything-today-this-from-that-favorite-of-my-brother-david-luthers-bondage-of-the-will-first-of-all-i-wou.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20162ff945f98970d" title="Martin Luther: &quot;not to delight in assertions is not the character of the Christian mind...&quot;" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/appropos-to-everything-today-this-from-that-favorite-of-my-brother-david-luthers-bondage-of-the-will-first-of-all-i-wou.html" thr:count="8" thr:when="2012-01-17T12:18:18Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20162ff945f98970d</id>
        <published>2012-01-14T18:47:07-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-14T23:49:31Z</updated>
        <summary>Appropos to everything, this from the beginning of one of my brother David's favorites--Luther's Bondage of the Will. Here Luther is addressing the principal humanist of his generation, Erasmus of Rotterdam. As Luther makes clear throughout the course of this...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Academia" />
        <category term="Gelded discourse" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Appropos to everything, this from the beginning of one of my brother David's favorites--Luther's <em><a href="http://www.covenanter.org/Luther/Bondage/bowepref.htm" target="_self">Bondage of the Will</a></em>. Here Luther is addressing the principal humanist of his generation, Erasmus of Rotterdam. As Luther makes clear throughout the course of this book, Erasmus was committed to tenuous debate and only a modicum of reform:</p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p>First of all, I would just touch upon some of the heads of your Preface; in which, you somewhat disparage our cause and adorn your own. In the first place, I would notice your censuring in me, in all your former books, an obstinacy of assertion...</p>

and saying, in this book, "that you are so far from delighting in assertions, that you would rather at once go over to the sentiments of the skeptics, if the inviolable authority of the Holy Scriptures, and the decrees of the church, would permit you: to which authorities you willingly submit yourself in all things, whether you follow what they prescribe, or follow it not." These are the principles that please you.
<p>I consider, (as in courtesy bound,) that these things are asserted by you from a benevolent mind, as being a lover of peace. But if any one else had asserted them, I should, perhaps, have attacked him in my accustomed manner. But, however, I must not even allow you, though so very good in your intentions, to err in this opinion. For not to delight in assertions is not the character of the Christian mind: nay, he must delight in assertions, or he is not a Christian. But, (that we may not be mistaken in terms) by "assertion," I mean a constant adhering, affirming, confessing, defending, and invincibly persevering. Nor do I believe the term signifies any thing else, either among the Latins, or as it is used by us at this day. And moreover, I speak concerning the asserting of those things, which are delivered to us from above in the Holy Scriptures. "</p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p><em>(TB, w/thanks to Eric)</em></p>
<p> </p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/appropos-to-everything-today-this-from-that-favorite-of-my-brother-david-luthers-bondage-of-the-will-first-of-all-i-wou.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>A Harris Tweed is just plain serviceable...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/7I4p0GtSuqg/this-is-likely-a-first-but-may-i-offer-a-little-sartorial-advice-few-things-are-more-serviceable-to-pastors-than-a-good-har.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20167607bcb22970b" title="A Harris Tweed is just plain serviceable..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/this-is-likely-a-first-but-may-i-offer-a-little-sartorial-advice-few-things-are-more-serviceable-to-pastors-than-a-good-har.html" thr:count="3" thr:when="2012-01-16T05:14:47Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20167607bcb22970b</id>
        <published>2012-01-13T18:04:28-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-14T04:01:24Z</updated>
        <summary>This is likely a first, but may I offer a little sartorial advice? Few things are more serviceable to pastors than a good Harris Tweed. It goes down, to the middle, then up from jeans to chinos and then even...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Recommendations" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>This is likely a first, but may I offer a little sartorial advice? Few things are more serviceable to pastors than a good Harris Tweed. It goes down, to the middle, then up from jeans to chinos and then even gray flannels, shirt, and tie. But where to get one without breaking the bank? After much searching a year ago, I decided to use the internet and hop over the pond to make the purchase. I'm happy I did and want to recommend two sources for this jack-of-all-trades jacket. I've ordered from both these companies and commend their service and price.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.harristweedshop.com/jackets-index.html" target="_self">Harris Tweed Isle of Harris</a> (bought my own here)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.peterchristian.co.uk/Catalogue/Mens/Jackets-Coats/Harris-Tweed-Jacket-MJ15?source=EM1010A&amp;utm_source=EM1010A&amp;utm_medium=email" target="_self">Peter Christian</a> (also good moleskin pants)</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/this-is-likely-a-first-but-may-i-offer-a-little-sartorial-advice-few-things-are-more-serviceable-to-pastors-than-a-good-har.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Reilly on Tebow...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/WOSyIC6ytlk/reilly-on-tebow.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20167607b0ef9970b" title="Reilly on Tebow..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/reilly-on-tebow.html" thr:count="2" thr:when="2012-01-16T04:14:36Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20167607b0ef9970b</id>
        <published>2012-01-13T16:34:16-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-13T21:39:27Z</updated>
        <summary>Another good piece by ESPN's Rick Reilly. You may remember Reilly's nasty piece attacking the home-schooled boy who, in a state wrestling tournament last year, declined to wrestle a girl? On a different note, in this piece Reilly commends Tim...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Mercy" />
        <category term="Sports" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Another <a href="http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/7455943/believing-tim-tebow" target="_self">good piece</a> by ESPN's Rick Reilly. You may remember Reilly's nasty piece attacking the home-schooled boy who, in a state wrestling tournament last year, declined to wrestle a girl? On a different note, in this piece Reilly commends Tim Tebow. As the Apostle Peter puts it, Tim Tebow is keeping his behavior excellent among the Gentiles:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>Keep your behavior excellent among the Gentiles, so that in the thing in which they slander you as evildoers, they may because of your good deeds, as they observe them, glorify God in the day of visitation. (1Peter 2:12)</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p><em>(TB, w/thanks to Doug)</em></p>
<blockquote /></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/reilly-on-tebow.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Tim Tebow, Ben Roethlisberger, and Rick Santorum...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/ZijI8yH6XNY/tim-tebow-ben-roethlisberger-and-rick-santorum.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5604f02970c" title="Tim Tebow, Ben Roethlisberger, and Rick Santorum..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/tim-tebow-ben-roethlisberger-and-rick-santorum.html" thr:count="1" thr:when="2012-01-13T01:44:52Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5604f02970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-11T19:31:01-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-12T00:31:27Z</updated>
        <summary>The rare fair account of Evangelicalism that runs in the mainstream media--this by David Kuo and Patton Dodd from the oped page of the Washington Post a couple days ago.</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Evangelicalism" />
        <category term="Sports" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>The rare <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/who-is-gods-quarterback-tebow-roethlisberger-and-american-evangelicalism/2012/01/05/gIQAS6VcfP_story.html" target="_self">fair account</a> of Evangelicalism that runs in the mainstream media--this by David Kuo and Patton Dodd from the oped page of the <em>Washington Post</em> a couple days ago.</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/tim-tebow-ben-roethlisberger-and-rick-santorum.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Midwives, denominations, abortions, and my present political philosophy...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/KnCyG8T4jiU/governor-mitchell-e-daniels-jr-2012-state-of-the-state-address-january-10-2012-members-of-the-general-assembly-hono.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20162ff686a80970d" title="Midwives, denominations, abortions, and my present political philosophy..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/governor-mitchell-e-daniels-jr-2012-state-of-the-state-address-january-10-2012-members-of-the-general-assembly-hono.html" thr:count="2" thr:when="2012-01-12T02:44:15Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20162ff686a80970d</id>
        <published>2012-01-11T16:54:19-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-12T02:56:44Z</updated>
        <summary>I don't write much about Indiana politics and government but it's caused me no small sadness to contemplate the term-limit-departure of our fiscally excellent governor a little over a year from now. Gov. Mitch Daniels will have completed his second...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Abortion, euthanasia..." />
        <category term="Academia" />
        <category term="City of man, city of God" />
        <category term="Covenant College" />
        <category term="Covenant Seminary" />
        <category term="Creation" />
        <category term="Current affairs" />
        <category term="Government" />
        <category term="Gratitude" />
        <category term="Homosexuality" />
        <category term="Marriage" />
        <category term="Money &amp; stewardship" />
        <category term="Parachurch organizations" />
        <category term="PCA" />
        <category term="Politics" />
        <category term="President Obama" />
        <category term="R2K (Ridiculous Two Kingdom)" />
        <category term="Recommendations" />
        <category term="Reformed theology" />
        <category term="Reformed world" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>I don't write much about Indiana politics and government but it's caused me no small sadness to contemplate the term-limit-departure of our fiscally excellent governor a little over a year from now. Gov. Mitch Daniels will have completed his second term and will have to leave office.</p>
<p>If I am comforted in our loss of Mitch's magnificent fiscal leadership, my comfort comes from this: that his likely successor is a man, Representaive Mike Pence, who promises to govern with the same fiscal commitments while adding a theological framework to those commitments that promises to extend far beyond fiscal discipline, on to principles concerning many other areas of governance including the battlefields on which the destroyers of our nation and its states are focussing their revolution: sexuality, the Image of God in man, the origin and nature of sexuality and marriage decreed by our Creator in His Order of Creation, and so forth.</p>
<p>As you read through Daniels' penultimate State of the State Address delivered yesterday evening, you will gain a hint of why I respect him. He has been unflinching in disciplining the educationists of our state by a host of private initiatives that have finally brought competition into public education. True, he brags about over half of our state budget going to edcuation, and he seems to see higher education as an unqualified good. I disagree with both things as I disagreed with President Bush on similar matters. Mitch Daniels is not a wild-eyed enthusiast. He's a realist who really changed our state. Definitively. And reading, you'll see what difference it makes to each citizen of the state.</p>
<p>But there's something else I want to say, here.</p>
<p>Some thirty years ago, I was at the Presbyterian Church (USA) General Assembly to oppose their denominational abortion policy. My dear Mary Lee was pregnant and, since we were in the habit of having home births, I'd called the midwest representative of the PC(USA)'s self-funded independent medical insurance plan to ask if they'd cover the cost of our midwife? It was awkward. He hemmed and hawed and said he didn't know and would have to get back to me on it...</p>

Making the case, I pointed out that covering home births would save them many thousands of dollars, each time. But still he seemed inclined to decline coverage. But he'd get back to me on it, he promised. Then a thought came to me.
<p>I asked, "Hey, say my wife and I want to kill our baby--you know, 'have an abortion'--would you cover that? Because, you know, wouldn't it be ironic if you agreed to pay for us to murder our baby, but you refused to pay for her to be born?"</p>
<p>"Well, yes" he responded, "we do fully cover abortions, but I'll have to get back to you on whether or not we'll cover home births."</p>
<p>You may understand that, right then, I made a decision to publicize the denomination's abortion coverage for its pastors and missionaries as broadly as possible, and to oppose it as loudly as possible. No one knew of this coverage and I was at General Assembly to make it known.</p>
<p>So there I was at General Assemly and, since my Dad was the well-known editor and publisher, Joe Bayly, the men running the then-550,000 circulation monthly newspaper, <em>Presbyterian Layman</em>, immediately took me under their wings. At the time, the <em>Layman's</em> managing editor was an older and somewhat crusty Godly journalist named George Booker. Since this was my first foray into denominational politics, George was showing me the ropes, and of all the things he taught me, one sticks in my head to this day.</p>
<p>He said to me, "Tim, the only thing these men understand is money. Forget everything else--you have to take away all their money. That's the only reform that will work." And by "work," he meant taking away their money was the only way of limiting, let alone turning around, their wicked policies and implementations.</p>
<p>Now apply that to politics today.</p>
<p>This will raise a host of questions and concerns in the minds of readers, I'm sure, but the older I've gotten, the more I believe that there is only one way of fighting denominations like the PC(USA) and the RCA and the CRC and the PCA. Take away their money.</p>
<p>Remove all denominational support for Covenant College and Coveant Seminary. Those places do not deserve the support of anyone holding to historic Reformed and Protestant Christian faith. See for yourself, but David and I are in agreement about this.</p>
<p>And as with denominational colleges and seminaries, so also with denominational infrasctructures: take away their money. The godly people in the pews should not allow their denomination's headquarters to fund abortions or to puff big-name pastors who are in defiance of denominational standards.</p>
<p>And as with denominational colleges and seminaries and denominational infrastructures, so with denominational missions: take away their money.</p>
<p>So with denominational magazines and publishing houses--take away their money.</p>
<p>Nothing in Scripture or church history mandates the people of God footing the bill for a denominational college. Nothing!</p>
<p>Nothing in Scripture or church history mandates the people of God footing the bill for a denominational seminary. Nothing!</p>
<p>Nothing in Scripture or church history mandates the people of God footing the bill for a denominational magazine. Nothing!</p>
<p>Nothing in Scripture or church history mandates the people of God footing the bill for a denominational publishing house. Nothing!</p>
<p>And I'd even go on and say there's almost nothing in Scripture or church history that mandates the people of God footing the bill for a denominational church planting organization or missionary apparatus.</p>
<p>In each of these cases, churches banding together for one of these works is every bit as legitimate and far more Biblical than these works being done by a non-proft parachurch organizational trademark association whose borders are co-extensive with the nation state in which its headquarters reside. This is what denominatons have become.</p>
<p>Now apply this to the civil magistrate. I have no idea how we will stop the bloodshed of our wee ones across this glorious and wicked land. But what I do know is that we must take away their money.</p>
<p>And that's why I seriously considered supporting Mitch Daniel's candidacy for president, should he run.</p>
<p>Surprised? I am. If you had told me five years ago that the time would come when I even considered supporting a fiscally conservative and generally limited government man who was committed to putting these fiscal issues before what he calls the "social issues," I would have assumed I'd gone soft.</p>
<p>But I tell you, I'm not soft at all. What I increasingly believe is that the best method today of disciplining liberal iedeology continuing to take over our nation and states' governments is to take away their money.</p>
<p>Some might say that's what Ron Paul is all about, and I somewhat agree. But there's something else going on here that I ought to own up to. I've gotten to the point where I'm so bone-weary of men claiming to be supporters of God's Order of Creation and Moral Law, then demonstrating no zeal for even the simplest act of conscience in support of them after assuming the bully pulpit of our Imperial Presidency, that I'd rather elect a man who says he has no commitments than a man who claims one thing and does another; a man, for instance, who wants Christians to support him, but denies that sodomy is a sin and tries to cop a posture as compassionate in voicing his denial and rebellion against God.</p>
<p>So maybe this is the longest preface I've ever written on Baylyblog. But now I've commended my thoughts to you, good reader, and you have more of the story from which to judge the specifics of lesser posts. Thank you for reading this blog, and for your efforts to discipline my thoughts and commitments and character. I love you each, brothers and sisters in Christ.</p>
<p>God have mercy on the good state of Indiana. And God have mercy on these United States of America. And may the Holy Spirit cause many presbyteries of Biblically and confessionally faithful churches to form and work together in disciplining  and supporting one another in their fulfillment of the vows they and their officers have taken. <em>(TB)</em></p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p><strong>GOVERNOR MITCHELL E. DANIELS, JR.</strong></p>
<p><strong>2012 STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS</strong></p>
<p><strong>JANUARY 10, 2012</strong></p>
<p>Members of the General Assembly, honored guests, fellow citizens. For an eighth time, and the final time, you afford me the unrivaled privilege of this podium. As it’s my last such chance to express my appreciation for the public service you each perform, and to Hoosiers for hiring me twice so I could try to perform my own, I’ll start with a heartfelt thank you.</p>
<p>But the time for reminiscing will come later, much later. Tonight, and all nights in today’s Indiana, must be about the future, where we are and where we are going. </p>
<p>A reporter asked recently, “What keeps you up at night?” I replied that I generally sleep well, but if I ever do have trouble, I don’t have to count sheep. I count all the states I’m glad I’m not the governor of. </p>
<p>Around the time I first took office, a radio caller expressed a fairly common sentiment. He said “I like what you say you stand for, but Republicans, Democrats, nothing ever changes. Nothing’s ever different.” I recall responding, “Sir, I’m careful not to promise what I’m not sure can be delivered. But I’ll promise you one thing. In a few years, you may disagree with decisions we’ve made, or actions we’ve taken. But you will not think nothing’s different.” </p>
<p>I’m pretty sure that good man would agree tonight that things are very different in Indiana now. Then, we were broke and other states were flush. Tonight, while states elsewhere twist in financial agony, Indiana has an honestly balanced budget, a strong, protective reserve in our state savings account, and the first AAA credit rating in state history, one of just a handful left in America. Our credit is better – imagine this – than that of the federal government.</p>
<p>Another host of states raised taxes again last year, while Hoosiers are taxed at the lowest levels in a long time, thanks in part to the lowest property taxes in the nation. </p>
<p>While other state governments stiff their vendors, close parks, delay tax refunds, and ignore unacceptably poor service levels, Indiana state employees are setting national standards for efficiency. </p>
<p>Tonight, Hoosiers are served by provably the most productive government workers anywhere. Indiana has the fewest state employees per capita in the country, the fewest we’ve had since 1975. And yet our parks have never been in better shape, your tax refund comes back twice as quickly as it used to, and the average customer got in and out of a license branch last month in less than 14 minutes.</p>
<p>I’m not the only one to notice. In a national survey last summer, 77 percent of Hoosiers described their state government as “efficient,” far above most states and the second-highest rating in the nation.</p>
<p>Uniquely in public sector America, Indiana now pays state workers on a performance basis, so those doing the best job are properly rewarded for their superior efforts. But I know that the reward they value as much as money is simple recognition from the citizens they serve, and I hope you’ll show them right now that you value them and their hard work as much as I do.</p>
<p>Careful stewardship of the taxpayer’s dollar, and ceaseless efforts to improve public services, are matters of duty, and basic good government. But they are not the fundamental goals of public life. They are just means to the real goal, which is to make of our state a place of opportunity, and upward mobility, and a better standard of living. A place where young people, and people not so young, know that they can start with nothing and make a good life. From our administration’s first day, this has been the central objective around which everything else was organized.</p>
<p>We have worked relentlessly to move Indiana up the list of great places to do business. We set out to build the best sandbox in America, a place where men and women of enterprise knew that, if they risked a buck on their idea or their dream, they would have the best possible chance to get it back, with something left over they could use to hire the next Hoosier.</p>
<p>We have made steady progress, coming from nowhere to the top tier in every ranking: No. 6 according to the nation’s site selectors, No. 6 according to CEO Magazine, No. 5 according to real estate decision makers.</p>
<p>But it isn’t nearly enough. It was our ironic bad luck to create a top economic climate just as the nation plunged into its worst modern recession, and business investment slowed to a crawl: we became the prettiest girl in school the year they called off the prom.</p>
<p>Despite these headwinds, our recently strong state revenues show that something positive is happening to Hoosier incomes. In 2010, the most recent data we have, Indiana incomes grew at the eighth fastest rate in the country.</p>
<p>Here’s another encouraging sign: more people are moving into Indiana than moving out. Our population is growing at the fastest rate from Iowa to Maine. Maybe best of all, thousands more college graduates moved into our state last year than moved out. There is no better indicator of economic promise in today’s world than success at attracting top talent, and we are.</p>
<p>We are not where we want to be, nowhere close. But with a welcoming business climate, enormous investments in new public infrastructure, and a stable fiscal picture, we are poised for more progress, and better days.</p>
<p>Beyond the statistics lies a more basic difference in the Indiana of today: we are now, indisputably, seen as a leader. In hundreds of articles about fiscal prudence, economics, transportation, corrections, child protection, we are cited constantly now as an example for others to examine. From Cleveland: “Ohio should follow Indiana’s lead and dive in.” From Detroit: “Indiana has many of the answers…as seen in Indiana it certainly is possible.” From North Carolina: “Fortunately, there’s no need to speculate about how a state might proceed...Indiana has already done it.”</p>
<p>It’s more than words. We now experience the sincerest flattery all the time: our Economic Development Corporation has been copied by Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa among others; our corrections programs by Oregon; our employee health care by Oklahoma, Missouri, and Florida; our performance-based personnel policies by Tennessee and Wyoming; our air quality modeling and permitting by Kentucky and South Carolina; our online university, WGU Indiana, by Texas and Washington. And, at every governors meeting, someone says “If only we could pull off a deal half as good as Indiana did with its Toll Road.”</p>
<p>The latest realm in which Indiana is now a leader is perhaps the most important. From coast to coast, others are praising our reforms of public education. One national magazine wrote that Indiana has gone “from the backwaters of education reform in America to the front.” The Fordham Institute said “No one has been more successful in providing a comprehensive reform plan for a system that is failing America’s children.” And then there’s this, from even further away: the Daily Telegraph of London wrote that in education, “England would do well to follow Indiana’s lead.”</p>
<p>The days when education debates started and stopped at dollar signs are over, and high time. From President Obama down, everyone now recognizes that leaders in education are defined not by what they put in but by what they get out. But just for the record, and despite frequent misrepresentations to the contrary, Indiana is a leader in what we put in.</p>
<p>With this year’s spending increases, plus the additional funds we requested for full day kindergarten, K-12 spending is now 56 percent of the entire state budget, the highest percentage of any state in the nation. No state anywhere devotes more of its state funds to education.</p>
<p>But that’s not why others are following Indiana. It’s our new commitment to rewarding the best teachers, liberating principals and superintendents, and providing low- and middle-income parents the same choices as their wealthier neighbors; that’s what has caught the world’s attention. And this year, when we end the cruel, defeatist practice of passing children who cannot read into fourth grade, and when our most diligent students begin to graduate from high school in 11 years, and get a head start on college costs with the dollars they earned through their hard work, others will take notice of Indiana yet again.</p>
<p>There are few subjects more studied, or more intriguing, than leadership. Leaders come in many forms and often from unexpected directions. But some qualities are common among them, and one is that leaders never loaf. They never slip into complacency, settle for things as they are, or stop pursuing innovation and excellence of result. If they do, leadership will pass, and new leaders surpass. Leaders who loaf aren’t leaders for long.</p>
<p>Along with all the accolades, Indiana now bears this burden of leadership, the duty to keep pressing ahead. </p>
<p>This administration will not loaf. We have made out a long list of self-assignments for our eighth and final year. Our Economic Development Corporation captured a record 219 new jobs transactions in 2011; we have raised the bar to 250 for the year ahead.</p>
<p>We will press hard to accelerate further the ahead-of-schedule, under-budget delivery of our Major Moves transportation program. In 2012, we will invest $1.2 billion in road and bridge construction, the sixth straight record-setting year.</p>
<p>The last contract on the Hoosier Heartland Corridor will be let next summer and the entire project finished by 2013. The last contracts on U.S. 31 from South Bend through Kokomo will be let this year, and we have accelerated completion of the entire corridor into 2015. I-69 will be open for traffic from Evansville to Crane, as will the entire Fort to Port highway in Northeast Indiana. The Sherman-Minton Bridge will be rebuilt and reopened by March and, upriver, an agreement on a new bridge from Utica to Louisville will be in place, cementing Indiana’s place at the forefront of the public-private partnership movement. </p>
<p>We will build the state’s 3,000<sup>th</sup> mile of bike and hiking trails, and reach our goal of a trail within 15 minutes of every Hoosier.</p>
<p>Unknown to most citizens, the air and water of Indiana is now the cleanest in living memory. In 2011, every Indiana community met all national air quality standards for the first time in the history of the Clean Air Act.</p>
<p>Last year, we wiped out the last of a 550-case backlog of old, and therefore less strict, environmental permits, and are now the only state completely current. Our goal for 2012 is to maintain this status and, if national limits are lowered yet again, to find a way to meet those standards, too.</p>
<p>We will complete our successful overhaul of what was once America’s worst welfare system when, in February, the 10<sup>th</sup> and final region is converted to our reformed, public-private system. Backlogs have been slashed by 80 percent, timeliness and accuracy have soared above national averages, and last October the program earned a cash bonus and an award for most improved in the nation. We have set high targets for continued improvement in 2012.</p>
<p>The same is true of our campaign to conserve Indiana’s natural heritage. The last seven years have seen new records for protection of wetlands and habitats, 50,000 acres by the end of this year, highlighted by the largest such project ever at Goose Pond. In 2011, we launched new waterways conservation projects the size of three Goose Ponds in the Muscatatuck Bottoms, and five Goose Ponds along the Wabash Corridor. Before long, Hoosiers will be able to travel over 100 miles down our state’s signature river and never leave a protected wetlands.</p>
<p>Our coming Bicentennial gives us an ideal opportunity to extend this historic era of reverence for the beauty God bestowed on Indiana. I have appointed a commission of a dozen illustrious citizens, led by my partner Becky Skillman, and by the legendary Congressman Lee Hamilton, to guide the great celebrations to come. </p>
<p>As a first initiative, I have asked them to oversee a Bicentennial Nature Trust, a statewide project to protect still more of our most precious natural spaces. On our 100<sup>th</sup> birthday, Indiana launched its state park system. A statewide conservation initiative is a fitting sequel and bequest from our second century to our third.</p>
<p>We have identified state funding, within existing resources, of $20 million, but that must be just a beginning. The Trust is intended to inspire others, and to match their donations of land or dollars in a continuing statewide surge of conservation. The Commission joins me in challenging citizens, businesses, and in particular our unique network of county community foundations, to identify and fund local projects that will safeguard places of beauty for future generations.</p>
<p>In this Assembly, you too must set big goals. We should, at long last, enact a law to protect workers and patrons across Indiana from the hazards of second-hand smoke. Public support has grown, and so has the evidence of health risk to workers. It is time to move this long-sought objective to the finish line.</p>
<p>We should – no, we must – strengthen our laws against the horrid practice of human trafficking, and we must do it in time for the Super Bowl, the kind of event at which the exploitation of young women is rampant in the absence of such a tough law. </p>
<p>We should assist students with the cost of higher education by empowering our Higher Ed Commission to limit the “credit creep” which unduly increases both time to graduation and student expense. Undoubtedly, some degrees will continue to justify more than the traditional 120 credit hours. But schools requiring 126 hours for a degree in sociology, or 138 hours in special education, or 141 hours in music education, should have to explain why all that time and student expense is necessary, especially when other colleges offer high quality programs in less time and cost.</p>
<p>We should deepen the state’s response to the terrible tragedy that befell so many at last summer’s Indiana State Fair. A catastrophe so singular merits unique treatment, and I hope you will augment the amounts already provided the victims and their families by the state and private donors.</p>
<p>And we should trust the people of Central Indiana with the decision whether to raise local dollars for mass transit if they believe it crucial to their future quality of life.</p>
<p>Within weeks, one of the great public careers, and perhaps the greatest judicial career, our state has known will come to a close. Chief Justice Randy Shepard, let tonight be one of many occasions on which a grateful and fortunate state thanks you for a quarter century of fairness, firmness, and farsightedness on our highest bench.</p>
<p>Part of Justice Shepard’s legacy will be the landmark report that he and former Governor Joe Kernan co-authored, proposing overdue modernization of our pioneer days structures of local government. One way to honor this great public servant will be to advance more of the sensible and needed reforms set forth by the Kernan-Shepard Commission. I ask this Assembly to do so, on their own merits but also in recognition of this historic public servant.</p>
<p>Because economic opportunity, and building America’s best home for jobs, is the central goal of all we do, every year should include a bold stroke to enhance it. This year, the choice of actions has become obvious.</p>
<p>In survey after survey, by margins of 2 to 1 or more, Hoosiers support the principle known as Right to Work. After a year of studying the proposal, I agree.</p>
<p>The idea, that no worker should be forced to pay union dues as a condition of keeping a job, is simple, and just. But the benefits in new jobs would be large: a third or more of growing or relocating businesses will not consider a state that does not provide workers this protection.</p>
<p>Almost half our fellow states have right to work laws. As a group, they are adding jobs faster, growing worker income faster, and enjoying lower unemployment rates than those of us without a law. In those ratings of business attractiveness I mentioned, the only states ahead of us are right to work states.</p>
<p>What every economic development expert has testified to, we have learned from firsthand experience: over seven years and well over a thousand job competitions, we have found that, when Indiana gets a chance to compete, we win two out of three times. But too often we never get a chance, because a right to work law is a requirement. Especially in this poor national economy, a state needs every edge it can get.</p>
<p>Everyone knows that, among the minority favoring the status quo, passion on this issue is strong, and I respect that. I did not come lightly, or quickly, to the stance I take now. If this proposal limited in any way the right to organize, I would not support it. But we just cannot go on missing out on the middle class jobs our state needs, just because of this one issue. </p>
<p>For the sake of those without jobs, and those young people just beginning the ascent of life’s ladder, I ask you to remove this obstacle and make Indiana the 23<sup>rd</sup> state to protect the right to work.</p>
<p>I have a new prized possession. It is a letter, written to his parents by a young clerk named A.B. Carpenter, on February 12, 1861. Amid updates about haircuts, colds, and headaches, young Mr. Carpenter reported the following: “There is…considerable excitement concerning a couple of legislators who went to Kentucky to fight a duel. Mr. Heffern, a Democrat, slandered and abused Mr. Moody, a Republican in a speech and Moody challenged him. He accepted and choosed bowie knives. They went to Kentucky last Friday night and have not been heard from since.” </p>
<p>And we think we have disagreements! When we do, I hope we’ll keep them not only in state, but also in this Chamber, where the people’s business is supposed to be settled.</p>
<p>Mr. Carpenter’s letter wasn’t mainly about duels or haircuts. He wrote it because he had gone to see the newly-elected President, Abraham Lincoln, who had spent that day, his 52<sup>nd</sup> birthday, in Indianapolis. Young Carpenter described Lincoln’s arrival at Lafayette Road, the procession down Washington, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Illinois Streets to the Bates House hotel.</p>
<p>Seeing the new President filled Carpenter with hope, he said, that “(S)oon our government will be remodeled.“ I like the term. These measures I have mentioned are part of our continuing remodeling project.</p>
<p>In three weeks, the entire world will fix its eyes on this city, and our state. It should be a magic moment, I hope a matter of pride to every Hoosier everywhere.</p>
<p>But the Super Bowl didn’t get here overnight. Indy’s selection followed decades of constant striving, and building, and reforms to make our capital the vibrant, livable model city it has now become. No one leader, or group of leaders, made it happen. The work was passed from hand to hand, administration to administration, generation to generation, and in no era did the people of Indianapolis rest, or settle, or loaf. So it will have to be with the construction of the great Indiana we are determined to achieve.</p>
<p>I carried here from its place on my desk an atomic clock, given me by a friend who served a sister state as governor with great distinction. It sits directly in front of me each day, counting down the days, hours, minutes, and seconds until I turn over these duties and return to private life. It is there to remind me to use every moment as well as I can to make Indiana a place of greater promise and prosperity. Silently, it challenges me to search each day for the next improvement, the next efficiency, the next breakthrough, the next stroke of Indiana leadership.</p>
<p>Yes, these nights are about the future, but I do look back at past speeches, if only to avoid repeating myself. In one, I recounted telling an East Coast CEO who wondered what Indiana was known for that one day he wouldn’t have to ask. Tonight, he doesn’t.</p>
<p>In another, I said I hoped we would become bolder in our embrace of change, take our motto from the inspiring athletes of the Special Olympics, and be a braver state. Tonight, we are.</p>
<p>In the very first of these meetings, I invited you and every Hoosier listening to join us in rejecting mediocrity, demanding excellence, aiming higher. Tonight, we do.</p>
<p>In a column titled “Indiana promises a better future,” a young graduate student, a lifelong resident of a neighboring state, wrote to the Indianapolis Star that she had made a critical life decision. She would take her new degree and move to Indiana. She cited our “fiscally responsible choices,” our “economic integrity,” our avoidance of the “out-of-control spending we see in so many other states.” She concluded by predicting that more talented young people would make “that short drive down I-69 to a more promising future.”</p>
<p>That is the state we have dreamed of. A state that magnetizes people of talent, and the risk-taking capital that seeks to employ them. A state of growth. A state of hope. A state of promising futures.</p>
<p>We are not yet fully that state. But we are so much closer to it. We have leapfrogged other places, passed more competitors than Tony Stewart at Homestead. We are certainly, irrefutably, different.</p>
<p>Until it became real, I never imagined that, for eight fulfilling years, I would be given the chance to help make Indiana different. On the night it became real, I resolved to use every day, take every action, make every change that might make our state a place of promising futures.</p>
<p>I now have 369 days, __hours, ___minutes, and __seconds left as the people’s employee. I pledge to use every one of them, as wisely as I can, in the service of those who sent us to this chamber. I ask you to do likewise, to be the kind of leaders the new leadership state of Indiana now expects us to be.</p>
<p>God bless this Assembly and this great state.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/governor-mitchell-e-daniels-jr-2012-state-of-the-state-address-january-10-2012-members-of-the-general-assembly-hono.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Limited government, yes. Limitless bloodshed, no.</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/UPWpTGzt0n0/a-number-of-otherwise-reformed-men-are-making-the-case-that-federal-laws-against-abortion-are-unconstitutional-they-claim-co.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e555dd90970c" title="Limited government, yes. Limitless bloodshed, no." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/a-number-of-otherwise-reformed-men-are-making-the-case-that-federal-laws-against-abortion-are-unconstitutional-they-claim-co.html" thr:count="34" thr:when="2012-01-14T22:30:42Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e555dd90970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-11T01:54:07-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-11T06:54:07Z</updated>
        <summary>INTRODUCING A GUEST POST: A number of otherwise Reformed men are making the case that Federal laws against abortion are unconstitutional. They claim conservatives who call our nation's civil magistrates to stop the baby slaughter are the legal equivalent of...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Abortion, euthanasia..." />
        <category term="Government" />
        <category term="Politics" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>INTRODUCING A GUEST POST: A number of otherwise Reformed men are making the case that Federal laws against abortion are unconstitutional. They claim conservatives who call our nation's civil magistrates to stop the baby slaughter are the legal equivalent of liberals who claimed the Constitution as their authority for legalizing that slaughter. They announce there is moral equivalence between the two sides with each abusing the <em>Constitution</em> in the name of their own pet social issues.</p>
<p>So, as promised earlier today, here's an exposure of their argument written by a Presbyterian elder with significant appellate experience who currently serves in a high post of civil authority. Read it carefully and have the faith and courage to rise above these theological masters so once again we will expect of our civil magistrates, both federal and state, faithful protection of the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of each citizen whether he is black or white, rich or poor, old or young, born or unborn. <em>(TB, w/thanks to...)</em></p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p><strong>Limited government, yes. Limitless bloodshed, no.</strong></p>
<p>Men advocating on behalf of the Tenth Amendment and stumping for federal indifference to abortion nullify the very principle they purport to champion. The Tenth Amendment says: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the <em>Constitution</em>, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Reserved to those people, that is, who aren’t selected for State-tolerated dismemberment in the womb... 
</p>
Those little people, whose tiny body parts are discarded like so much bio-hazardous waste, must be grateful to men like Gary North and Scott for their scrupulous adherence to federalism.
<p>Unfortunately, their precious handling of the Tenth Amendment is patently unnecessary and betrays a callous disregard for the defenseless in our land. Really, how hard is it to see that the <em>U.S. Constitution</em> constitutes a government whose purpose is to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”? (<em>U.S. Const. Preamble.</em>) That’s what the document says it’s doing. But how just and tranquil can it be in a land soaking up the blood of 1.3 million unborn children every year? We’re to believe the Founders took great pains to secure themselves and their posterity from foreign invasion, insurrections, rebellions, and domestic violence, but they would have shrugged their shoulders at the widespread, State-endorsed abortion of their posterity whose death toll exceeds 50 million since 1973?</p>
<p>Clause, after clause, after clause of the <em>U.S. Constitution</em> demonstrates a careful division of power, but not for the monumentalizing of delicate political arrangements. The Founders purposed to divide power because they knew men were sinful and would be corrupted by power to the injury of their fellow citizens. They divided the executive department from the judicial and legislative. They divided the legislative itself in two. They maintained the separate governments of the States and the general (what we now call “federal”) government. They feared the centralization of government because that political system, when operated by descendants of Adam, tends toward oppression. The evil to protect against ultimately is oppression.</p>
<p>Gary North and Scott’s admonitions call to mind the image of men carefully and delusionally attempting to shutter their homes only after a Category 5 Hurricane has pulverized everything to bits. They worry that federal protection of unborn children may somehow justify current or beget later federal transgressions against the <em>Constitution</em>.  What could possibly be worse than the hellish, ghoulish slaughter ofmillions of little ones throughout these United States? Congress cannot now foist upon us abortion on demand; the Supreme Court has already done that. Indeed, this historical fact further justifies federal action to stem the tide of murderous hatred the High Court unleashed and perpetuates.</p>
<p>Taking the <em>Constitution</em> at its word, we simply cannot believe that a clause forbidding States to impair contractual obligations would appear in a document that would allow States to tolerate the systematic slaughter of unborn children. (<em>U.S. Const. art. I, § 10.</em>) We cannot believe that an amendment forbidding slavery would appear in a document that is indifferent to the systematic slaughter of unborn children. (<em>U.S. Const. amend. XIII.</em>) We cannot believe that a provision allowing the federal government to protect States from an invasion would appear in a document that is neutral to the systematic slaughter of unborn children in those same States. (<em>U.S. Const. art. IV, § 4.</em>) To the contrary, federal action to protect unborn children from abortion falls under the legal principle once described by the U.S. Supreme Court as: “coming within the spirit of the law and . . . not opposed to the letter of the law.” <em>See Polk’s Lessee v. Wendal</em>, 13 U.S. 87, 97 (1815).</p>
<p>The spirit of the law controls. The <em>Constitution</em> was made for man, not man for the <em>Constitution</em>.</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/a-number-of-otherwise-reformed-men-are-making-the-case-that-federal-laws-against-abortion-are-unconstitutional-they-claim-co.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>What a guy...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/eiaBS8kP7cM/what-a-guy.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5518882970c" title="What a guy..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/what-a-guy.html" thr:count="18" thr:when="2012-01-14T22:13:47Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e5518882970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-10T18:15:34-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-10T23:15:34Z</updated>
        <summary>Godly man. Manly Christian. And after the win, he's back home playing with his nephews.</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Sports" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Godly man. Manly Christian. And after the win, he's back home <a href="http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2012/01/tebow_wishes_mc.html" target="_self">playing</a> with his nephews.</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/what-a-guy.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>A parable...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/_UUbEMHEuPQ/a-parable.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20168e55140e4970c" title="A parable..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/a-parable.html" thr:count="4" thr:when="2012-01-12T01:07:07Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20168e55140e4970c</id>
        <published>2012-01-10T17:46:27-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-10T23:04:45Z</updated>
        <summary>To those Reformed men ever vigilant to protect our form of government from being harmed by the passage of code banning abortion across our nation, a parable... (TB) Here we have the Hutu father sitting on his porch holding forth...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Abortion, euthanasia..." />
        <category term="Government" />
        <category term="Politics" />
        <category term="R2K (Ridiculous Two Kingdom)" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><div>
<p>To those Reformed men ever vigilant to protect our form of government from being harmed by the passage of code banning abortion across our nation, a parable... <em>(TB)</em></p>
<p>Here we have the Hutu father sitting on his porch holding forth on the boundaries of his property and the limits of his legal powers and obligations as a group of neighbors use machetes to hack to shreds his own Hutu son and Tutsi daughter-in-law and their eight children (his grandchildren).</p>
<p>But of course, the bloodshed is out in the street just beyond his property line...</p>
</div>

The hacking is exquisitely legal. The nation's civil magistrates commanded it and what right does he have to stop it? The whole world's doing it and he's just a father and grandfather. Sphere sovereignty and all that, you know.
<p>He's the pastor of the local Presbyterian church and he is regularly featured as a conference headliner across East Africa. He's always talking about the importance of the church not meddling in the civil magistrate's turf. Says Machen agrees with him.</p>
<p>His best-known work (that's only sold in the tens of thousands because this is Rwanda, you have to understand) is titled, <em>Let the Church Be the Church: Gospel Centrality from My Front Porch.</em></p>
<p>Recently when he took his African Reformed preacher victory lap across America, he reminded his fellow Gospel coalitionists that they had no right to talk. After all, he and his people had only killed their hundreds of thousands while Americans continue to kill their tens of millions. "There's simply no comparison in the amount of bloodshed," he said. "Who are you to talk?"</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/a-parable.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>After ClearNote conference, send your chilluns on a river trip...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/JxhgRlCCRZ4/great-opportunity-for-your-chilluns.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20167604f0ab7970b" title="After ClearNote conference, send your chilluns on a river trip..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/great-opportunity-for-your-chilluns.html" thr:count="2" thr:when="2012-01-14T19:54:22Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20167604f0ab7970b</id>
        <published>2012-01-10T15:16:47-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-10T20:16:47Z</updated>
        <summary>This announcement just went out to our church family from our daughter, Heather Ummel. I've regularly recommended Al and Amy Parker's work of outdoor discipleship, Canoe Creation, to readers of Baylyblog. You'd not go wrong using them for your Christian...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Beauty" />
        <category term="ClearNote Fellowship" />
        <category term="Creation" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>This announcement just went out to our church family from our daughter, Heather Ummel. I've regularly <a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2009/08/take-a-river-trip-with-al-paker-and-canoe-creations.html" target="_self">recommended</a> Al and Amy Parker's work of outdoor discipleship, <a href="http://www.canoecreation.org/" target="_self">Canoe Creation</a>, to readers of Baylyblog. You'd not go wrong using them for your Christian school, home school co-op, church youth group, father-daughter or father-son church canoe trip, or taking part in Canoe Creation summer camps.</p>
<p>Here is something that may be more convenient for you since the date and location have already been set. Think about it and let Heather know if you're interested. <em>(TB)</em></p>
<p><strong>Canoe Creation Summer Camp</strong></p>
<p>Some of our church family will remember Al and Amy Parker, who lived in Bloomington and attended church with many of us years ago. If you were reading my dad's blog this summer in mid-July you would have <a href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2011/07/canoe-creation-spots-still-available-for-their-august-canoe-camp.html" target="_self">seen pictures</a> of a camp experience our boys had with their ministry, Canoe Creation. The wonderful news is that they're going to bring their camp to us this summer! They will be offering a 3-day, 2-night canoe camp right after this summer's ClearNote Conference (I Believe in God the Father). The conference will be Friday and Saturday, July 6 -7 here in Bloomington. Then worship with ClearNote Church, Bloomington Sunday, July 8, followed by you and your wife taking a couple days R&amp;R while your chilluns are off on the water with Canoe Creations...</p>
<p><strong>
</strong></p>
When: July 9-11
<p><strong>Where:</strong> Bloomington area, camping on a river or lake somewhere <strong>Who:</strong> Any 8-12 year-olds (older welcome as well, and there can be exceptions made for younger in some situations)</p>
<p><strong>Why:</strong> For incredible fun and excellent teaching from a naturalist that loves the Lord (more about the Parkers in another blog post of my dad's)</p>
<p>I'm very excited about this, as our boys absolutely loved their time at camp last summer. It's not every kid that has the experience of hearing a man call an owl and have the owl fly around overhead trying to find him.</p>
<p>What would be helpful right now would be to know what kind of interest there is among our church. The price can't be decided until more details are hammered out, but it will likely be in the neighborhood of $200. They try to keep their costs as low as possible, and the more kids that sign up, the lower the cost will be. Please <a href="mailto:ummelheather@gmail.com?subject=Interested in Canoe Creation's Bloomington camp">send me an e-mail</a> to let me know if this sounds like something you will be considering for your kid/s. We will be sending out more information as more decisions are made.</p>
<p> </p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/great-opportunity-for-your-chilluns.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Neglecting the weightier provisions of the law...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/165ZFFr3grs/it-does-not-strike-me-as-helpful-to-have-so-many-folks-confuse-the-terms-libertarian-or-anarchist-with-constitutional-governm.html" />
        <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.typepad.com/t/atom/weblog/blog_id=1265854/entry_id=6a00d83451d09d69e20167604daec6970b" title="Neglecting the weightier provisions of the law..." />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/it-does-not-strike-me-as-helpful-to-have-so-many-folks-confuse-the-terms-libertarian-or-anarchist-with-constitutional-governm.html" thr:count="6" thr:when="2012-01-17T15:08:01Z" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d83451d09d69e20167604daec6970b</id>
        <published>2012-01-10T13:12:06-05:00</published>
        <updated>2012-01-16T22:48:45Z</updated>
        <summary>Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>David &amp; Tim Bayly</name>
        </author>
        <category term="Abortion, euthanasia..." />
        <category term="Government" />
        <category term="Politics" />
        <category term="R2K (Ridiculous Two Kingdom)" />
        <category term="Reformed theology" />
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.baylyblog.com/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><em>Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others. (Matthew 23:23)</em></p>
<p>One commenter calls our attention to the blog of a writer of economic treatises popular within some Reformed circles who, in the linked blog post, makes the case that Federal laws against abortion are unconstitutional and that conservatives seeking federal action to protect the babies is the legal equivalent of liberals using the Constitution to declare baby-murder legal. Both sides abuse the Constitution for their own pet projects, this Theconomist argues.</p>
<p>(<strong><em>PLEASE NOTE</em></strong>: The paragraph above has been changed substantially in order to clarify that I meant for the words below to be more general than personal; but also that I did not intend them to be read as applying personally to the commenter, Scott, who provided the link to the other blog.)</p>
<p>Here's my own limited response. In the next day or so, though, we'll post another response written by a Presbyterian elder with significant appellate experience who currently serves as a civil magistrate in an high post of civil authority.</p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p>To argue that the federal government doing something to stop the wholesale slaughter of the nation's millions of defenseless infants is usurpation of powers is the sort of heartless rabbinical self-justification we should expect from those who tithe their mint and cummin. I've said over and over again that the Declaration of Independence was the basis for the mounting of our nation's revolution and the moral and legal context from which our Constitution was birthed and has any meaning or purpose yet today. The central purpose of our Constitution is the protection of the nation's citizens--not the protection of states' rights--and when that central purpose is defied or denied, the rest is straightening the deck chairs on the Titanic.</p>
<p>I've quoted the Declaration in this discussion. Its words are clear. If our federal civil magistrates' hands are tied in stopping the slaughter of our nation's fifty million wee ones...</p>

we need new federal civil magistrates. And if those seeking to replace them argue, even before taking office, that the Constitution bars them from acting to protect the wee ones, we know they are not the ones to elect.
<p>The lawyer asked Jesus who his neighbor was because he was "seeking to justify himself." This is always the case with those erecting legal boundaries defining the limits of compassion.</p>
<p>So now, leave the cruel ones behind and let's get back to our nation's founding legal Declaration of Independence, and therefore Declaration of Statehood.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.</p>
<p>We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Of course everyone knows that conservatives and liberals ignore the Constitution when it comes to their pet projects. This is a boring observation. Any idiot knows it.</p>
<p>Any idiot or really smart man also knows that using this observation as justification for opposing our nation's civil magistrates from acting to end the systematic slaughter of 50,000,000 of her defenseless citizens is simple heartlessness.</p>
<p>If a government can't protect her most vulnerable citizens from wholesale slaughter--well over 50,000,000 now and increasing by 1,300,000 per year--that government is presiding over anarchy. There is no rule of law.</p>
<p>Any idiot or really smart man knows this.</p>
<p>Here we have the Hutu father sitting on his porch holding forth on the boundaries of his property and the limits of his legal powers and obligations as a group of neighbors use machetes to hack to shreds his own Hutu son and Tutsi daughter-in-law and their eight children (his own grandchildren).</p>
<p>But of course, the bloodshed is out in the street just beyond his property line.</p>
<p>The hacking is exquisitely legal. The nation's civil magistrates commanded it and what right does he have to stop it? The whole world's doing it and he's just a father and grandfather. Sphere sovereignty and all that, you know.</p>
<p>He's the pastor of the local Presbyterian church and he is regularly featured as a conference headliner across East Africa. He's always talking about the importance of the church not meddling in the civil magistrate's turf. Says Machen agrees with him.</p>
<p>His best-known work (that's only sold in the tens of thousands because this is Rwanda, you have to understand) is titled, <em>Let the Church Be the Church: Gospel Centrality from My Front Porch.</em></p>
<p>Recently when he took his African Reformed preacher victory lap across America, he reminded his fellow Gospel coalitionists that they had no right to talk. After all, he and his people had only killed their hundreds of thousands while Americans continue to kill their tens of millions. "There's simply no comparison in the amount of bloodshed," he said. "Who are you to talk?"</p></div>
</content>

    <feedburner:origLink>http://www.baylyblog.com/2012/01/it-does-not-strike-me-as-helpful-to-have-so-many-folks-confuse-the-terms-libertarian-or-anarchist-with-constitutional-governm.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
 
</feed><!-- ph=1 -->

