Mediaboss Marketing

If youre a conservative evangelical Christian who feels called to ministry, youre welcome to attend Princeton Theological Seminary. But youre not worthy of honor there. Thats the message sent by PTSs president Craig Barnes today.

In an email to faculty and students, Barnes announced he reversed his decision to honor Pastor Tim Keller with the annual Kuyper Prize for Excellence in Reformed Theology and Public Witness. Doing so, Barnes said, might imply an endorsement for Kellers conservative views on womens ordination and same-sex relationships.

Im more progressive than Keller on these issues, but I disagree with PTSs decision.The American church is grappling with issues of gender and sexuality right now, and some on both sides have decided to declare their foes anathema. We must learn to make space with Christians of mutual goodwill who disagree with us on secondary theological issues.

To be clear, PTS has the right to honor whomever they wish. They are not obligated to let Keller speak, much less grant him this award. Setting this aside, we must ask, How does marginalizing Tim Keller make the world a better place? And since were talking about a seminary, we might add, How does it promote unity among disparate churches? The answer to these questions is the same: it doesnt.

Ive had the pleasure of being with Tim Keller on two occasions. Each time, I recognized areas where his theology and mine did not align. But I also walked away feeling I had been in the presence of someone who was eminently reasonable, thoughtful, kind. Tim Keller is no extremist. He is no misogynist. He is no bigot. He is not hateful. Anyone who has paid attention to his Manhattan ministry can attest to this.

If Christians like Tim Keller are unworthy of honor and deserve to be marginalized, American Christianity is in serious trouble.

Keller is like the tens of millions of American Christians who hold to traditional interpretations of the Bible on these issues. Most of them do not hate gay people (though some do). Most do not believe women are inferior (though some do). They are doing their best to love their God and love their neighbors and live their lives according to what they believe the Bible teaches.

Its important to recognize that Barnes decision not to grant Keller the award came in response to outcry from students and alumni. As PTS alum Rev. Traci Smith wrote on her blog,

Ill let others argue finer points of Rev. Kellers theology. My personal soapbox is much less refined. It boils down to this: an institution designed to train men and women for ministry shouldnt be awarding fancy prizes to someone who believes half the student body (or is it more than half?) has no business leading churches.

I dont know the make-up ofthe PTS student body or its views. Lets assume that half of them disagrees with Keller. What about the other half that holds to a traditional view of sexuality and gender? Should an institution designed to train men and women for ministry tell the conservative half (more than half?) of its student body that their theology makes them unworthy of honor?

I appreciate the work of PTS, andwill even be speaking there thisSummeras part of the Frederick Buchner Writing Workshop. But I am dismayedby the message this sends to conservativeChristians. Havinggrown up in a conservative Christian community, Ive familiar with this message. For years, Ive watchedevangelicals marginalize their progressive brothers and sisters over issues of gender and sexuality. They have made these mattersa litmus test, withholding honor from any Jesus follower who dared to asserta more progressive stance. These conservatives have marginalized and maligned progressives, treating them with contempt.

At the same time, progressive Christians have pleaded with their evangelical brothers and sisters to make space at the table for them. Theyve argued for diversity of thought and theology on secondary issues like these. Conservatives often dismissed their pleas, drawing lines in the sand over issues of sexuality and gender.

As the cultural tides shift, the church is also transforming on these matters. Will progressive Christians gain more cultural and religious influence, will theyembody the Golden Rule and make space at the table for conservatives (as they once asked conservatives to do for them)? Or will they treat conservatives the way conservatives have treated them for years?

Though I wish it were not so, many will likely choose the latter. After all, conservatives havent cornered the market on fundamentalism.

See the original post:
Why Princeton's snub of Tim Keller should outrage progressives - Religion News Service

Editor: Trump supporters wonder why progressives are holding anti-Trump rallies and demonstrations. You lost the election, get over it, they say; or give Trump a chance before you start criticizing him. Progressives have gotten past the election; its the Trump supporters who cant seem to get over it, continually crowing about their landslide in the Electoral College.

Were rallying about what has happened since the election, and continues to happen every day. The Trump administration and its fellow travelers in Congress have mounted a full-scale assault on just about every American value.

From environmental concerns, to medical care, to equal protection, to Americas leadership in the Free World, Trump seems to be determined to undo them all.

Probably most important are First Amendment freedoms: speech, press and religion. Trump and his apologists disdain the truth, attack anyone who disagrees with them, punish members of the press who dont toe the party line, discriminate on the basis of religion on and on.

We cant take a wait and see attitude in the face of this attack. To wait is to allow our constitutional freedoms to be eroded. We must push back to protect our Constitution and our values.

See you in the streets.

Greg McClelland

Ponte Vedra

Read more:
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Progressives push back for freedom - St. Augustine Record

Progressive health care reform advocates plan to demonstrate in defense of the Affordable Care Act on Thursday, holding protest events in Chicago and congressional districts across the country, as well as in Washington, D.C.

The day of rallies is the latest attempt by supporters of the ACA, also known as Obamacare, to put a political price on Republicans plans to repeal the signature reform. The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on the GOPs replacement bill Thursday, the seventh anniversary of the original laws passage in 2010.

Health Care for America Now, a labor union-backed umbrella group that played a key role in Obamacares enactment, is coordinating the days actions. It estimates that thousands of activists will turn out to protest the Republican legislation.

The new bill offers tax breaks to wealthy Americans and insurance and drug companies on the backs of our seniors and families, HCAN co-director Margarida Jorge said in a statement.Americans from coast to coast know theres too much at stake for themselves, their families and millions across the country to allow this bill to pass.

Carlos Barria / Reuters

The rally at 1 p.m. in D.C., which is being organized by the foundation-funded HCAN ally the Center for Popular Democracy and other groups, will feature speeches by Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee, as well as Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards and Mary Kay Henry, president of the Service Employees International Union. Attendees will gather at Freedom Plaza to hear the speakers and then march to the Trump International Hotel and the White House, where activists plan to perform acts of civil disobedience.Later in the day, Ellison, who is also co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, plans to hold a press conference on the Republican bill with several CPC members outside the Capitol building.

A mass protest in Chicagos Federal Plaza will focus on House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who was originally slated to visit the city to attend a fundraiser for Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner (R).

And at the district offices of several House Republicans, activists plan to protest the ACAs repeal by setting up mock emergency rooms. The theatrical gesture aims to show how the drop in insurance coverage from the laws repeal an estimated 24 million people would become uninsured by 2026 under the GOP plan would overwhelm emergency rooms as uninsured Americans seek care there.

AARP intends to stage its own colorful protest of the repeal bill Thursday morning at the Capitol South Metro stop outside the House office buildings. The nations largest seniors group plans to have people dressed as Charlie the Squirrel, a character in its video ads opposing repeal, distribute flyers with AARPs talking points against the bill.In the ads, Charlie is the comedic companion of a middle-aged American upset about a feature of the Republican legislation that would allow insurers to charge older people five times more than younger people for premiums. Since the bills age-based tax credits are not enough to make up the difference, AARP has dubbed the provision the age tax.

The planned demonstrations follow a Wednesday protest by House Democrats against Obamacare repeal on Capitol Hill. Former Vice President Joe Biden attended the rally, predicting that the Republican bill is not gonna pass.

House Democrats have decided not to throw up last-minute procedural obstacles to delay the bill, according to Politico. The caucus has instead calculated that it is best to let Republicans vote on the legislation and suffer whatever political consequences ensue.

Read more:
Progressives Plan Day Of Obamacare Activism As House Prepares To Vote On Repeal - Huffington Post

Threats of violence against President Donald Trump and conservatives in general are on the rise and not a word is being heard from "progressive" leaders to try to calm the waters.

Death threats against conservatives from the president on down are becoming a cottage industry:

Gary Bauer of American Values says make no mistake the Secret Service is paying close attention. But he points out there's not one word from leaders of the anti-Trump left.

"I am not aware of one liberal politician in the federal government including the former president who has said anything condemning this kind of rhetoric and, in some cases, actual violence," he shares with OneNewsNow.

And the anger shows no sign of letting up. Bauer is fearful of what the elections of 2018 and 2020 are going to look like.

"This kind of activity, if it continues, could lead to things down the road that I don't think anybody wants a sort of unraveling of the bonds that bind us together as a nation," he warns.

According to Bauer, one of the first responsibilities of a movement is to root out and expel those who would hijack the cause for violent or dangerous ends. He argues that the silence from Democratic lawmakers is sure to be seen by the thugs as tacit endorsement of the violence.

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved.

Follow this link:
Bauer: 'Progressives' evidently OK with death threats - OneNewsNow

Progressive organizations are ramping up their campaign against President Trump's Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, and calling on Senate Democrats to do more to oppose his confirmation.

On Monday, leading organizations on the left including MoveOn, UltraViolet and NARAL Pro-Choice America sent emails to their millions of members asking them to demand that Democrats filibuster any vote to confirm Gorsuch. The push came as the Senate Judiciary Committee today began its confirmation hearing for Gorsuch.

While the majority of Democrats are expected to oppose Gorsuch's confirmation, there has been palpable frustration among progressive activists that more Democratic senators have not yet publicly declared which way they intend to vote. Progressives wanted commitments even before questioning of Gorsuch is completed.

"We're not hearing from enough of the Democratic senators that they will fight this nomination with everything they have. We need them to understand that simply stating their opposition to Neil Gorsuch is not enough," NARAL President Ilyse Hogue wrote in an email to the group's list that went out this morning. "We need Senate Democrats to filibuster this nomination and demand a nominee who represents the mainstream values of our country."

Last week, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York held a press conference with individuals he argued were hurt by Gorsuch's rulings. Still, he would not definitively say he planned to vote against the judge. Schumer said that he has a "strong presumption against" Gorsuch but that he would wait until after he heard the judge's testimony before making up his mind.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, a senior Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, echoed Schumer. Blumenthal said that he was prepared to filibuster Gorsuch if he was not satisfied with the judge's answers before the committee but that he has a "profound duty" to question Gorsuch before announcing his final decision. Blumenthal added that he prepared "tough but respectful" questions for the hearing this week.

In 2013, when Democrats were in the majority in the Senate, they changed the chamber's rules so that federal judges could be confirmed with a simple majority vote, but they maintained the long-standing requirement that Supreme Court picks need at least 60 votes to end a filibuster and move their confirmation forward.

In order to get those 60 votes, Gorsuch will need at least eight Democrats to vote with Republicans, assuming all Republicans back him. But because the vote with the 60-vote threshold is technically a procedural vote, some Democrats may be tempted to vote in favor of him as a compromise and not risk being labeled obstructionist.

Trump has said that if Democrats slow the process, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky should consider the so-called nuclear option and change the rules to allow a vote to proceed without the 60-vote minimum. Schumer said last week that he did not think Republicans want to go that route.

Some Democrats have already been vocal about their opposition to Gorsuch, including Sens. Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey of Massachusetts. They joined advocacy organizations for an event in front of the Supreme Court last week.

"When Justice Scalia died, giant corporations and their right-wing buddies spent millions of dollars to keep that Supreme Court seat open so Donald Trump could name a replacement. Why? Because giant corporations and their right-wing buddies don't want a neutral court that simply upholds the law for everyone," Warren said at the event. "They want a court that favor corporations over real people. And we are here today to fight back."

There is still a lot of resentment among Democrats that Republicans kept President Obama's nominee Judge Merrick Garland from even getting a hearing. After the event in front of the court last week, volunteers and staffers delivered petitions with over a million signatures, they said, urging senators from both parties to oppose Gorsuch's confirmation.

Progressive groups are quick to point out Gorsuch's conservative record on social issues, including his high-profile ruling in the Hobby Lobby case, in which he sided with a religious employers in their case against a Obama-era mandate to provide contraceptive coverage in health insurance plans. Other Democrats would rather focus on what they say is Gorsuch's record of backing Big Business over workers' rights.

All the witnesses that Schumer took to the Hill last week were plaintiffs in cases in which Gorsuch sided with employers over employees.

View post:
Progressive groups demand a filibuster against Trump's Supreme Court pick - ABC News