Morgentaler, Murder & Molech

I think it is safe to assume that most of us are aware that Dr. Henry Morgentaler has been named to the ‘Order of Canada’ which “recognizes a lifetime of outstanding achievement, dedication to the community and service to the nation.” (cited from the government webpage here)

Mr. Morgentaler is best known for being an advocate of abortion rights. At one time he was even charged and jailed in March of 1975 for ‘conspiracy to commit an abortion’ (for a history of abortion rights in Canada go here).

Thus we should take Mr. Morgentaler and his supporters very seriously; not only because of the seriousness of the issue but because of the manner in which they promote and protect their cause. It is not a legal issue for them as much as it an ideological issue: something they to which they are faithfully committed.

This brings to mind words such as faith and belief. Liberal deputy House leader Marlene Jennings is quoted as saying (in response to the appointment):

“I’m sure that there are those of all political stripes who will not be pleased, who would like to see constraints on a woman’s right to choose what happens to her own body, but I think it’s a wonderful day for Canadian women and for women’s rights”.

As quoted in an online Globe & Mail article.

Apparently this is an issue of belief in the name (or guise of) rights, in particular women’s rights. Apparently this is about something universal and uncompromisable that all women share by virtue of being female. One wonders though on what basis this right comes to be or came to fruition? Many argue, as the Supreme Court did originally, that the right for a woman to have an abortion is in concert with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But even if this was only a legal issue one would have to ask the question: where do these laws or rights originate? If, in the words of Marlene Jennings, it is so ‘wonderful’ that woman can have an abortion in Canada why do so many Canadians oppose this right and even claim that it is wrong and a violation of the right to life? Are these rights, therefore, universal?

Since we have now dug down to the foundations of law we see that it cannot merely rest upon popular opinion (even if that might be the case) nor the power of the Supreme Court. For if it merely rests upon these entities what would prevent the law from being changed if it went to a referendum or if the Court suddenly (miraculously) changed its opinion?

And if the law changed wouldn’t abortion rights advocates be angry about the decision especially if the very power that granted them that right revoked it? Wouldn’t they claim that this was morally wrong?

Avoiding the basic or foundational issues will, therefore, get us nowhere. This brings us to our current situation where we see that abortion rights have less to do with legality and morality as they do with power. The Supreme Court struck down the abortion laws through an imposition of their power. The people of this country who support such rights continue to shout down the opposition and claim federal funds without tax payers consent to commit what many of us consider to be a crime against humanity (sorry but the term ‘murder’ is politically incorrect). Who has the right to make right and wrong? Those in power.

Now as Christians, however, we believe in another power. Not a ‘higher power’ (as the popular phrase goes) but the God of the universe who has created all things for the glory of His name. Recognizing His sovereignty and lawful authority is, in part, what it means to be a true believer. Saying that murder is wrong is simply an reflection of the law that God has given man in creation and in His Word.

Yet even most Canadians (except murderers I guess) think that murder is wrong so that even if we don’t demand ‘a life for a life’ we surely demand some kind of justice be done against the murderer and some kind of protection for those who might be harmed by others. After all, don’t our Charter of Rights and Freedoms say, and I quote, that

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

Now here is the dilemma. How does this apply to the so called fetus in the womb? From this article we must conclude therefore that the fetus’ in their mother’s womb must be thought of as follows: a) not Canadian citizens and therefore not protected by this ‘Legal Right’ or b) “in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice” their life is forfeit. Yes I am aware of the irony that the Supreme Court of Canada used this very statement as the foundation of their decision to make abortions legal in Canada. But you see that is the whole point.

According to conclusion a) legally and logically one is not a Canadian citizen until they have been born (because the law protects children who are born). But why then may a mother sue a person if they, for example, recklessly strike her in some fashion causing the fetus in her womb to be hurt or even killed? We must conclude then, it is within the power of the person carrying the child to make this fetus a person, or a citizen. But THAT is contrary to the very spirit of the article that “everyone has the right to life” and may not “be deprived thereof” which itself is not based upon personal opinion, one way or the other.

We are left with option b) that, therefore in accordance with the principles of justice someone’s life may be forfeit. I ask however: what principle of justice is it that allows a life to be taken at the whim of someone who, in their opinion, determines this life to not be of value to them? Does it take a genius to see the extension of such a principle to anyone in this country that is deemed not valuable to those who may have some fundamental interaction with it? (think Latimer). Does it really make us stop and think about the history of eugenics and the struggle of power over life?

Okay, okay I know. Life begins when the brain waves develop or when the heart starts beating (of course there is no universal law or limit that can be cited or one that has been legislated, but perhaps the better scientists will instruct us). But is that what human life is? A heart beat, a brain wave? Is that what we say by implication? Yes we do. My right as a woman, as a man, as a Canadian citizen is greater than the right of the fetus. My life is more important than theirs and so I may take that life. It is that simple and it is that mad.

But what I really don’t understand is how we can say that a woman’s right to choose is based upon the Charter of Rights and Freedoms when that very same document tells us that “Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.” Uh, come again? The supremacy of God?

Now I am not going to go down the road of arguing that Canada is a Christian nation, nor even that it was at some time and that we need to return to that (even if these statements were correct let us avoid them for the sake of staying focused on the issue at hand). At the same time a proper understanding of the statement ‘the supremacy of God’ would, I think, largely hinge on what God or god we are speaking about. I must admit that I don’t know a lot about the history of the Charter of Rights but I do know that they were referring to some god and it behooves us to find out what god we are talking about so we can all know who is supreme over this land, as our national anthem states “God keep our land glorious and free”.

Perhaps the Supreme Court of Canada can tell us which god is supreme over us (and them?). Or better let us allow the abortion advocates inform us that we can’t have religion(s) or the religious tell us what to do even though, as we have seen, they base their arguments on what they perceive to be fundamental universal rights which is about as religious as one can get. In any case they must know what god we now serve, right?

For when the Charter of Rights and Freedoms were written abortion was illegal in this country. Apparently the god of that time was not in favour of such a thing. Later however we must have had a new god take over who was pleased with abortion, or at the very least, would not stand in our way. When I was baptized as an infant, the minister pronounced the blessing in this way: “I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.” I believe that the Triune God of the Bible says no to murder (as we pointed out above). That was in 1977. 11 years later though, some other god must now be speaking to me and all Canadians saying ‘yes’ to abortion.

Of course the Charter of Rights and Freedoms says that Canada is also founded upon the rule of law so perhaps it was just the law that made abortion legal (as per the ruling of the Supreme Court based upon the aforementioned article). But of course this still begs the question: which law and how do we bring those laws in harmony with the supremacy of (our) god? Apparently by ruling as they did, the Supreme Court therefore says that the god of Canada rules us in such a way that our laws must allow women to have an abortion.

I have an answer to that question of ‘which god?’ that I am not going to assume that everybody is going to like. I think however it is an honest answer, one that truly looks the issue square in the face and doesn’t back down. An answer that doesn’t muddy the water with legal jargon, debates about conception and even democracy. (Side note: democracy and the supremacy of God? One wonders how these two things can coexist. But that is an issue for another day).

And, sorry, but I am going to get religious on you. That is just the way we are all made (believing in something). So I am going to go to the Bible and let you know what god I think is supreme in Canada (at least in the hearts of many Canadians - but thankfully not in reality: see Daniel 4:35).

His name is Molech. You meet him in such passages as Leviticus 20 & Jeremiah 32:35. Molech’s name is derived from the Hebrew verb ‘to rule’. He is a ruler and he expects allegiance. He wants your children, and he wants them to die. Apparently parents would sacrifice their children through fire to appease this god.

This god loves death, of the greatest and most horrific kind. Death is his goal, his reason for being. Not his death of course but that of your children, let us say Canada’s children. The problem or inconsistency on our part is that this god wanted the children after they were born, not merely from the womb as a fetus. Maybe we should start thinking about this before we make that god angry and expose our country to his wrath for not abiding by his ’supremacy’.

You see the ancients would often expose their newly born, rejected children to the elements. They were not as sophisticated as we are with our Supreme Courts and terminology that cleanses or sanitizes our actions. They would probably laugh at us for our laws that distinguish between a fetus in the womb and a child born to his or her parents.

All that aside, it seems we are worshiping this god, this lord, this supreme being today. Well some of you are. I’m not. Maybe that puts me in conflict with Canadian law that still retains the statement about ‘the supremacy of (g)God’. Maybe I should be part of the culture of death that surrounds us and what we accept day by day as part and parcel of our lives.

Maybe then we should wish death upon anybody and everybody, whom, as we pointed out before, is in fundamental conflict with the principles of justice that Molech has ordained.

But we don’t. We are a fickle bunch. We claim this god as our own but then do silly things like protect life in other instances. We get angry about drunk drivers who because of their carelessness and foolishness kill others. We allow our Supreme Court to put them in jail and deprive them of their fundamental rights and freedoms. We are incensed with gang violence and even manslaughter of all kinds. This signifies something different within us: just a small bit of rebellion against Molech and his death culture.

The Bible, at least, tells us that we are made in the image of God (not a god). So we still, in a sense, know right from wrong. We still appeal to universal absolutes especially when we are the offended party.

In addition the Bible tells me that God gave man his laws for his well-being and that to keep them meant life and to disobey them meant death. Thus it tells us that when we sin we will be punished in accordance with justice. Paul told the Romans in chapter 1 of his epistle that God deals with us in accordance with our sin to the extent that He gives us over to the most basest desires.

Fortunately, however, the Bible also tells us that God sent His Son into the world that whosoever might believe in Him would have eternal life. The Bible tells us to repent, to confess and grieve over our sins, our wickedness and turn to a gracious Creator who would not be at war with us (Romans 5:1) if we are justified by faith through His Son. The Bible tells us that murder, the unlawful taking of a life without regard for its worth as being made in His image, is wrong and destructive. And so the Bible tells us that in Christ by His Holy Spirit we will want to stop murdering (even in our hearts - see Matthew 15:19 and then Galatians 5:19-24).

Of course I am powerless aren’t I? I can’t change people’s hearts or minds. ‘Abortion rights’ are so ingrained in the hearts and minds of Canadians that to suggest that they should be overturned is to invite anger and hostility. I am not a justice of the Supreme Court and my one vote doesn’t really make a difference come election time when most politicians avoid the issue anyways. And to top it off my religion is not welcome in the public sphere and even mocked because, well, some other god is apparently being worshiped.

But I am comforted by the thought that my God reigns despite what the pundits say. And He is sending His Son to judge the living and the dead. This is not out of some petty or violent desire for revenge. This is in light of the principles of justice that we all, in one fashion or another, accede to, as demonstrated in the very words of our Charter.

You see we are guilty of murder. We are guilty of worshiping a false god. And we, quite frankly, are ripe for judgment. I pray then, that God’s mercy will find us out before our nation dies in the most terrible sense of that word.

‘O Canada’ there is blood on your hands. ‘O Canada’ I weep for your fallen children. ‘O Canada’ repent.

Calvin on Covenant & Election

Calvin has a great statement in the Institutes on the relationship between ‘general election’ and ‘eternal election’ that I would like to post (as a follow up of this point that we discussed on Sunday afternoon):

“his free election has been only half explained until we come to individual persons, to whom God not only offers salvation but so assigns it that the certainty of its effect is not in suspense or doubt… So, indeed, God’s generous favor, which he has denied to others, has been displayed in the adoption of the race of Abraham; yet in the members of Christ a far more excellent power of grace appears, for, engrafted to their Head, they are never cut off from salvation… It is easy to explain why the general election of a people is not always firm and effectual: to those with whom God makes a covenant, he does not at once give the spirit of regeneration that would enable them to persevere in the covenant to the very end. Rather, the outward change, without the working of inner grace, which might have availed to keep them, is intermediate between the rejection of mankind and the election of a meager number of the godly… Not that it was a vain and unprofitable thing simply to be a child of Abraham; such could not be said without dishonoring the covenant! No, God’s unchangeable plan, by which he predestined for himself those whom he willed, was in fact intrinsically effectual unto salvation for these spiritual offspring alone.” 3.21.7

‘Expelled’: Released in Canada

The movie ‘Expelled’ has finally been released in Canada. Empire City Centre 9 is showing it right now. Click here to search by movie to find the dates and times it is playing.

And to whet your appetite, the Globe and Mail has a story about the movie.

N.B. Online articles change or are even erased over time. You may not be able to read the G&M article in a few weeks or even less.

Forgetful?

Sometimes we forget the most basic things. This past week I was so busy getting ready for Classis and traveling to Thunder Bay for the pulpit exchange that I forgot to update the blog with the liturgy.

We are creatures of habit to be sure and those habits ingrain themselves into our minds so that we remember what we are to do, even if we have been doing it for years. Why then do we forget? Because we are weak, our minds are subject to the fall of Adam, and we are simply too busy with so many things that we cannot successfully ‘juggle’ all the information and events that occupy our thoughts.

We may be thankful, however, that God does not forget. Isaiah begins the 49th chapter of his prophecy with some stirring and encouraging words from the LORD. In particular God speaks through His servant to the people of Israel and tells them that He has comforted His people and has mercy on the afflicted. Jerusalem, or Zion, replies in haste: “‘The LORD has forsaken me, and my Lord has forgotten me.’”

Though the book of Isaiah was written in the days of “Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah” (Isaiah 1:1) many of the promises and warnings are also intended for future generations. And so in the days of the exiles (to Assyria, Babylon and later Persia) these words of doubt and despair in Isaiah 49:14 would certainly have carried much force as God’s people awaited the return to the promised land.

God replies in the following verses however by saying: “Can a woman forget her nursing child, and not have compassion on the son of her womb? Surely they may forget, yet I will not forget you. See, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands; your walls are continually before Me.” (vss. 15-16) The relationship between God and His children is such that he is like a mother with child, holding and protecting them in the midst of trial. As children leave home, they might forget a birthday or an anniversary. They may not call for many weeks, months or even years. But a faithful mother or father never forgets to pray for them and be concerned for their well being.

So God never forgets us. It is true that we often think He does, just like Zion of old. And it is true that we sometimes think that because life’s circumstances seem more real and powerful than God’s presence. But then we hear that word again and remember that God is faithful to a thousand generations. We hear from Isaiah that He has inscribed us on the palm of His hand. As God’s people we are deeply ingrained in His mind and in His thoughts.

Yes Christ would bear the shame and humiliation of the elect people hundreds of years in the future, even having His own flesh scarred and marred, bearing our griefs, carrying our sorrows, even stricken, smitten and afflicted by God. For “He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.” (Isaiah 53:4-5)

So if I should forget, if I cannot remember, I will in faith call to mind that my God does not forget me. If my mind should fail, even if my body should die, I will continue to believe that my body will be brought back to life by my Lord and Saviour upon that day when He returns again to judge the living and the dead. Yes, He cannot forget me because He cannot forget Himself. For whoever “eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.” (John 6:56)

Is Church ‘Out for the Summer’?

Catechism & Bible studies are postponed until the fall and Council will probably meet with less frequency. Many of us will be out and about for the summer: visiting friends and family abroad and the like.

Yet, if we are honest with ourselves, we know that the church follows the worldly pattern of taking a summer break from her usual education schedule. Did the priests of Israel said to the people: ‘okay we need some time off this summer because the heat is really getting to us’? Or maybe the Old Testament kings would think: I should really go vacation to the Mediterranean Sea because these people are a real headache. Perhaps the apostles of the early church should have been able to go to the Roman baths once in awhile because they were so tired from bringing the gospel to the Jews and Gentiles.

In all seriousness, however, we see that some people really got into a lot of trouble when they were not attentive to their work (think of David, 2 Samuel 11:1ff. or the parable of the lazy servant, Matthew 25:26)

In contrast, Timothy was called to “Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season.” (2 Timothy 4:2) If any man had reason to complain about his work schedule it would be Paul who traveled thousands of miles for the sake of Christ, bringing the gospel to the nations. (1 Timothy 4:10) The only break he ever had, as far as we know, was when he was in prison.

When we read Romans 16 we may be struck by the work of the many Christians who ‘labored’ (meaning that they worked hard even to the point of weariness) in the Lord. Indeed every one of us through the victory in Christ may conclude that we are “always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 15:57ff.)

So is it wrong to, as it were, ‘take a break’ from church activities? Not necessarily; recreation and fellowship can also be a form of worship and labor for Christ (see 1 Corinthians 10:31) But there is a important reminder in this of which we must be aware. What such a break should do is make us see the many other things that we have either neglected or perhaps not had an opportunity to do during the rest of the year. Whether it be to visit a church member, get involved in community evangelism or projects, or mow the lawn on the church property (hint, hint) we can be busy at this time of the year to serve the Lord.

You see it is not just a matter of church attendance that suffers because people are off camping or traveling. It is not simply a matter of money that we may lack in our offerings because we may be spending it doing some big yard project at home, or because we are finally taking that vacation to Hawaii for which we have been planning so long. No, the most prevalent issue for the Christian at this time of the year (if not all the time) is we that we must never become weary in doing good. (2 Thessalonians 3:3)

Furthermore, we should not think that the summer is time to stop learning. Some grow weary of study and need a summer break from writing and reading (see Ecclesiastes 12:12). And yet others, according to Paul, are “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” (2 Timothy 3:7) So let us not sleep now but be wide awake. Let us hear the word of God, believe it and rejoice for He delights to feed us (Psalm 81:10) Summer worship is like fall or winter worship, just a little warmer. The same law is declared, the same gospel is preached, the same Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ still speaks for He does not change for any season but is the same yesterday, today and forever. Indeed this is why ‘various and strange doctrines’ come about: because people want novelty and change (Hebrews 13:8ff.) But God will do all the changing we need (Genesis 8:22).

So is church ‘out for the summer’? God’s promises cannot fail and thus no less can God’s people strive to always be active in the things of the Lord. For in reality there is no ‘me time’ or even ‘family time’. It is all God’s time. He is sovereign and He is Lord: He gave it to you not to do as you please but to please Him. Ponder these truths this summer as you serve Him in all that you do.

This Lord’s Day

We welcome Rev. Joel Vander Kooi to our pulpit as part of an Alberta wide URC exchange. Rev. Vander Kooi is pastor of the Bethel United Reformed Church of Calgary. Their website is here.

How to Listen to a Sermon

There is some danger in a pastor recommending guidelines on how to listen to a sermon. Is he trying to avoid criticism or, worse, setting an agenda for the congregation to follow? I believe these are valid concerns but not so weighty that they should overthrow good counsel from a godly Puritan!

The following statements were originally written by Christopher Love (1618-1651). Pastor Shane Lems of the Sunnyside URC posted these “seven practical directions for listening to the preaching of the gospel”.

1) Take heed that you hear the Word of God preparedly. As the preacher must take care to find acceptable words, so the people should labor to bring acceptable affections to the work - when we come to the service of God we should hear with all attention and pray with affection.

2) Hear the Word attentively, as those did in Acts 8.6. Those who hear the Word with gazing eyes, wandering thoughts, and sleepy bodies cannot hear it attentively, but are to be reproved.

3) Hear the Word of God retentively. Labor to keep in your memory what you hear, that you may put it into practice for your life. Hearing is for practice’s sake. This also has to do with treasuring the Word, so it will have a continual impression upon your hearts.

4) Hear the Word understandingly. Christ called the multitude and bade them hear and understand. This is what the Bereans did.

5) Hear the Word applicatively. If a patient has never such excellent counsel given him, never so powerful a medicine prescribed, if he does not apply it, it will do him no more good than if he had never known it.

6) Hear the Word of God reverentially. Many people represent God to themselves in such familiar notions that they ultimately breed a contempt of God which we ought not to have. We must demean ourselves with a humble reverence in His presence.

7) Hear the Word of God obediently. Come…ready, prepared, and disposed to stoop and submit to all the instructions, corrections, and reproofs of the Word of God, like those spoken of in Acts 10.33.

To see the original post click here.

Official URC website

After many years of planning and work, our federation now has an official website. Click here.

Please note that the site is still being updated. For example if you look at Grace’s entry under the church directory you will find some errors. Hopefully this will be changed/updated in the next few months.

Another Review of ‘Expelled’

This time from a Reformed pastor. Click here.

HT: The Heidelblog

N.B. June 28, 2008 - The link above is now dead. Please go here to read the article.

Just a Thought

As I was preparing for tonight’s sermon on the Ascension of Christ I came across an interesting thought from J.A. Alexander’s commentary on Acts (which is an excellent commentary by the way - it is part of the Geneva Series of Commentaries published by the Banner of Truth).

Many commentators state that the “two men” of Acts 1:10 are angels, which of course, is a fair assumption to make. However, Mr. Alexander tells us:

a still more striking supposition, which I owe to the suggestion of a friend, is that these two men were Moses and Elijah, who had been present at the transfiguration, and there talked with Jesus of his exodus about to be accomplished at Jerusalem (Luke 9:31.) There is something sublime in the idea, that the great prophetic Legislator and Reformer, who had come from heaven to be present at the momentary anticipation of the Mediator’s glory, now appeared again as witnesses of his departure to take final and perpetual possession of it.”

He notes that this should be regarded as mere conjecture but I believe it to be worthy of some meditation.