Posted on 12/22/2013 8:08:23 AM PST by CHRISTIAN DIARIST
Karen Owen, a writer for the Free Lance-Star in Fredericksburg, Virginia, authored a recent column in which she sneered that “the term Christian conservative” is “an oxymoron.”
How, she asked, “can we call ourselves – and practically insist that we are – a Christian nation when we seemingly ignore so many teachings of Christ?”
So what examples does she cite to make her dubious case?
Well, there’s the decision by greeting card giant Hallmark to alter the lyrics of “Deck the Halls” on a Christmas ornament from “don we now our gay apparel” to “don we now our fun apparel.”
“Why aren’t we bothered,” asked Owen, “by the insult to a subset of the U.S. population?”
Well, maybe it’s because “gay” has a different meaning in 2013 than it did in 1862 when Thomas Oliphant’s original English lyrics were published. Also, Hallmark hardly can be considered “homophobic” when it sells gay wedding and gay Valentine’s Day cards.
Owen also claims that Christian conservatives “actively despise” the “down on their luck,” the “mentally ill” and the “substance abuser.”
Those canards do not stand up to scrutiny.
Indeed, a recent study by the Chronicle of Philanthropy found that states in which residents are most generous to the needful are overwhelmingly blue states populated by God-fearing folk, most of whom are Christian conservatives.
Another study, sponsored by the UCLA/Rand Research Center on Managed Care for Psychiatric Disorders, found that “faith-based providers are the only source of care for some persons with mental disorders.” That is, the mentally ill residing in “low-income, ethnically diverse communities.”
And as to substance abusers, there is no more effective program for treating alcohol or drug dependency than Celebrate Recovery, which was launched 20 years ago at Saddleback Church in Southern California and which has since been adopted by 20,000 other churches.
Then there’s Owen’s suggestion that Christian conservatives “have no problem with poor people or the uninsured dying rather than receiving quality medical care.”
She obviously hasn’t heard of Methodist Healthcare in Memphis, the largest provider of medical care for the Volunteer State’s poor, often for no pay. Nor Texas Health Resources, a faith-based nonprofit that is the largest health care provider in North Texas.
Nor the many other faith-based health care systems around the country – most guided by Christian conservative principles – that provide most of the uncompensated indigent care in this country.
Owen suggested she learned compassion “as a little girl attending Sunday school at the family Presbyterian church.” But her grown-up view of compassion has been corrupted by her doctrinaire social liberalism.
Indeed, the column writer suggested Christ would look favorably upon homosexuality. But as the Lord declared, when God created humankind, He “made them male and female.” If the Almighty was okay with gay couplings, He could have given Adam a boyfriend. But He did not.
As to the needful, Owen places her faith in the welfare state to feed the hungry, to provide drink to the thirsty, to shelter the stranger, to clothe the naked, to visit the sick and to rehabilitate the prisoner.
But those of us who are Christian conservatives know that faith-based organizations do a much better job than government in ministering to the least of those in our communities.
For instance, the government proffers food stamps. But faith-based organizations – like Second Harvest – not only provide food and drink but also the Good News of Jesus Christ, who promised: “I am the bread of Life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger and he who believes in Me shall never thirst.”
Finally, Owen agrees with other disciples of social liberalism who maintain that Christ would support Obamacare.
But there’s no way the Lord would give His blessing to government-mandated contraceptives for the unmarried, tacitly condoning sexual promiscuity. Nor would He condone taxpayer-funded abortions under Obamacare.
Owen’s brand of Christianity is amoral and soulless. But because of her socially liberal world view, she’s too blind to see it.
Indeed, a recent study by the Chronicle of Philanthropy found that states in which residents are most generous to the needful are overwhelmingly blue states populated by God-fearing folk, most of whom are Christian conservatives. …Democratic states?
Thank you Olog-hai. Not blue states, but definitely red states.
Christ never advocated for a government program to solve a problem and he certainly wouldn’t endorse mandatory compliance under threat of imprisonment for non-compliance.
Christ wanted YOU to help your brother DIRECTLY, and not abdicate that responsibility to someone else with your confiscated money.
Turn the question around: Would social liberals accept Christianity?
If by Christianity it is meant the faith that Jesus actually conveyed to the Apostles and upon which He founded His church, the answer is no. Society is controlled by Satan as Jesus plainly told us. Jesus came in part to qualify to displace Satan and at His return, the kingdoms of this world will become the kingdoms of our Lord (Revelation 11:15).
Now, if by Christianity it is meant the “social gospel”, “liberation theology” and all the other ways that liberalism has co-opted what Jesus taught, then certainly. There all kinds of Protestant denominations that have already traveled a good distance down the road to being CINO (Christian in Name Only).
I wish the Christian church for one month would actually cut all services to people not in good standing in their local church and actually illustrate how much the church does. The problem is that Christians are compassionate so this would never happen. In the meantime we have to listen to liberals badmouth Christians.
We have the late Tim Russert to thank for that counterintuitive nomenclature.
+1
I do not believe the biblical references are what really bothered the liberal / gaystappo in the Robertson situation. I believe it was the direct way he described the physical act. When it is not the nebulous “a different kind of love” but is instead a descriptive act of what they actually do it is hard pressed for even those not moved by biblical discussions to consider it “normal”.
I agree that is was the literal description of the act that riled up the homosexuals the most since they had a lot of people believing that it is all just sweet hand holding and kissing. Personally I think every church should show a clip of the San Fran gay pride parade
Charity volunteer knocks on a liberal’s door.
The charity volunteer says to the liberal, “Would you like to make a donation?”
The liberal responds, “Yes, put my neighbor down for a hundred, oh wait, make it two hundred, he can afford it.”
The charity volunteer says, “How much would you like to contribute?”
The liberal smiles and winks, “I just made my contribution.”
Wait, I’m confused. Does she want a state religion imposed?
“Is Social Liberalism Compatible With Christianity?”
NO. No, it is not. Social liberalism is a communist tool.
Exactly.
http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
Christ wanted YOU to help your brother DIRECTLY, and not abdicate that responsibility to someone else with your confiscated money.
Well stated, ravenwolf; but very few will understand your point.
The Modernist bishops of the Catholic Church continue to lead many foolish Catholics (and Protestant who have followed) over the “social justice” cliff.
But in the end, there will be a mighty accounting, and God will exact His vengeance at that time.
I’m no longer FB friends with 2 family members because of this.issue. somehow relying on the Bible is not compatible in today’s society. Sill we need is our feeeeeeelings
Nope
I have never heard of Karen Owen, probably because i do not read books about what Christianity is or should be.
I have been to some Churches who go beyond the scripture to try to make a point and i will just say that a little can go a long way.
Many preachers will use the scripture to try to prove the point that all sins are the same, and while that may be true, are we talking about sins natural to man or do we include those acts that are against our very nature?
The bible also talks about those acts against nature which are not even named in the ten Commandments.
But to get away from these abominations, how about the other things which are taught, for instance the idea of a certain number of hail Marys and are fathers or counting beads?
Or the pentecostal preacher who will holler out in prayer to God in front of his congregation, even though The scripture said to pray in secret with in your closet.
Or any preacher who savagely frowns on drinking and smoking but says nothing about anything else.
The point is that there are so many scriptures that we can and do disagree on, with out arguing about so many things that are not even mentioned in scripture.
But due to the small disagreements within the Churches it has gotten so out of hand that people like Karen Owen is disputing something like gay apparel or fun apparel which have nothing to do with any scripture i have ever read.
Well stated, ravenwolf; but very few will understand your point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.