A poignant memory from 'shelter in place'

This article was published in the May 2020 issue of The Fort Wayne Lutheran 

By Donna Volmerding

My husband received an email from a Christian organization asking churches to ring their bells at 3:00 p.m. on two Sundays in March. Churches in Europe would ring their bells, too, on their time. What a superb idea! Church bells would ring in America, in Europe, perhaps all over the world to proclaim the presence of God in our lives. 

We arrived at our church and walked through shadowy hallways, past empty offices into a deserted sanctuary. I sat alone in the church pew; the church, once bustling and alive, was dark, bleak, desolate. When the church bells pealed, I was overwhelmed with how much this church has meant to me. I attended grade school here from kindergarten, was confirmed here, married here, my daughter was baptized here, my children attended school here and were confirmed here. 

We have so many wonderful friends here, people who are strong and wise and good. Our lives are intertwined with the life of this church, with the lives of God’s people, with God. I miss it all so much. This invisible enemy has taken away so much in such a short time, but it will not destroy us. 

Our churches will be alive again with worship and songs, sermons and Bible readings, dinners, fellowship and coffee hours, events and gatherings — the stuff of life for God’s people, their lifeblood, the church and the God it serves. 

Life will continue, perhaps not the same, but God’s name will be praised nonetheless, always and forever. May we never have to go through a crisis like this again to appreciate the great blessings we have received from the God Who never deserts us. 

“Fear not, for I have redeemed you;

I have summoned you by name; you are mine.

When you pass through the waters,

I will be with you;

And when you pass through the rivers, they will not sweep over you.

When you walk through the fire you will not be burned;

The flames will not set you ablaze.

For I am the LORD your God,

The Holy One of Israel,

Your Savior.” Isaiah 43:1-3a

Donna and David Volmerding are members of Bethlehem Lutheran Church, 3705 S. Anthony Blvd. 

Columnist misleads on scientist's critics

This article was published in the Sunday, May 31, 2020, issue of The Journal Gazette

Michael Gerson’s article, “The right’s sick parody of populism,” is filled with half-truths, fabrications and vitriol. He states that “the right has turned hard against science and expertise.”

Perhaps, but I have questions. Does the left believe, as settled science, that preborns are indeed human life, possessing all necessary human DNA that is separate from its mother’s, and is not just a cluster of cells? Does the left dismiss hard science about male and female chromosomes, and choose to believe that gender is only what we want it to be?

Gerson states that “Tucker Carlson questions whether Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is ‘right about the science.’”

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., the only U.S. senator to have had a confirmed case of COVID-19 who also is a physician, asked Fauci about the science on the other side, stating that the public-health response to the pandemic has been riddled with “wrong prediction after wrong prediction.”

Carlson proved this, pointing out several wrong or misleading statements made by Fauci, including this one in March — “Right now in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks. … there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask.

Concerning COVID-19, Fauci stated in January that “we need to take it seriously and do the kinds of things that the CDC and the Department of Homeland Security are doing. But this is not a major threat for the people in the United States, and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about.”

Fauci even stated that it was fine to have sex with strangers met on Internet dating apps but also said that “nobody should ever shake hands again, just to be safe.”

After calling President Trump a “proven and perpetual liar,” Gerson states that Carlson called Fauci a “buffoon.” In truth, Carlson said, “This is just buffoon-level stuff …, and we’re not doing this to mock the guy (Fauci). … (But) is this the guy into whom you want to vest all of your trust? Is this the guy you want to chart the future of the country?”

Gerson clearly is not being honest about what Carlson said, nor is his harsh assessment about millions of intelligent, compassionate citizens who value freedom.

Does this make Gerson a proven and perpetual liar?

Vote! Our Christian liberties are at grave risk

 This article was published in the November 2020 issue of The Fort Wayne Lutheran.

By Donna Volmerding

The election of 1860 may have been the most critical election in the history of the United States, but the election of 2020 is the most critical election in our lifetimes. 

In this election of hoopla and hype, sometimes it is difficult to sort through all the issues. Sometimes we may even find ourselves burned out, tired of it all, just wishing the election would soon be over. 

I think it is time, however, to remind ourselves of the importance of choosing leaders for the greatest nation in the world and of the truly wonderful process we have at our fingertips: the right to vote. 

In a world in which countries change governments by force overnight, where despotism and atrocities against human freedoms abound, where people live in constant fear of upheaval, riots and firing squads, we, the American people, have the right to decide the fate of our country through one simple task — voting. 

Our Christian liberties are at grave risk, as Christian values, beliefs and expression are removed from the public square. Have we forgotten the words of President John F. Kennedy when he declared in his inaugural speech, “The rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God”? 

If we are not “endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights,” then where do our innate rights come from? If they come from the state, the state can remove them. If they come from God, they cannot be rescinded. 

Before you vote, contemplate these considerations. Which candidate and party better understand the moral challenges we face? Which candidate and party better understand that our rights, freedoms and privileges are God-given, not state provided? Is the candidate and/or party supported by groups and organizations that are hostile to Christianity? 

The late Supreme Court Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote, in his dissent on Roe vs. Wade, that the court should not depart from the longstanding admonition that it should never “formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than is required by the precise facts to which it is to be applied.”

Courts, and the Supreme Court in particular, are to interpret the law where people disagree as to its meaning.

Activist judges have usurped the rights of lawmakers to decide the laws by which we are governed. Instead, we are forced to live under laws enacted by courts and judges, not elected legislators who answer to the people for the laws they pass. 

As Christians, we are losing ground in the culture wars. We are outgunned by autocratic judges who bypass legislative processes and constitutional procedures to make laws that are not of the people, by the people or for the people. This is not the government that our forefathers gave us; this is tyranny.

Activist judges display open hostility to Christians, Christianity and Christian values. At the same time, many Christians are lulled into complacency by misinformation, lies and deception. 

What are the primary voting issues of our day? As Christians, they are ensuring our rights to express our faith in the public square and in our public schools, and to present a Christian worldview in all cultural, moral and political discussions.

Our nation was founded on Judeo/Christian principles, justice and morality, and our country will continue to decline until we win the overarching moral battles we face. 

We have the honor and the privilege to live in the greatest nation on earth. Let’s not allow her to be destroyed by the enemy within. 

Freedom is a hard-won privilege, paid for by the blood of hundreds of thousands of patriots, and it must be nurtured and protected against all harm. Only a strong, involved, informed electorate can do that. It is easy to become lazy, careless and apathetic, but democracy demands diligence and courage. 

Our forefathers pledged their lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor to liberty when they signed the Constitution. Most of them paid dearly, with their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to secure that freedom. 

The next time you feel a little overburdened with the ballyhoo of an election, remember the wondrous gift we have been given — the gift of deciding our own destiny as a nation and a people. This is a gift that is rare in our world, even today. 

Congressional chaplain Peter Marshall wrote: “The choice before us is plain: Christ or chaos, conviction or compromise, discipline or disintegration. I am rather tired of hearing about our rights and privileges as American citizens. The time is come, it now is, when we ought to hear about the duties and responsibilities of our citizenship. America’s future depends upon her accepting and demonstrating God’s government.”

Our country is at a crossroads. Will we choose to live in “the last best hope of earth” (Abraham Lincoln) or a reincarnation of Venezuela?

It is not just our right to vote — it is our sacred duty. 

 

“It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity and freedom of worship.” 

Patrick Henry

Biden a patsy for unAmerican ideas, forces

This article was published in the Monday, October 19, issue of The Journal Gazette.  

 

UNELECTABLE — Biden a patsy for unAmerican ideas, forces

The election of 1860 may have been the most critical election in the history of the United States, but the election of 2020 is the most critical election in our lifetimes. 

I read the paper, and I must share another side of reasoning. 

• Joe Biden has total disdain for the truth. 

He has lied about his stance on fracking. On March 15, 2019, he said he wanted “no more subsidies for (the) fossil fuel industry. No more drilling on federal lands. No more drilling, including offshore. No ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period.” On September 6, 2019, Biden said, “I guarantee you we’re going to end fossil fuel.” In April 2019, vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris said, “There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking.” But during the vice-presidential debate, Harris said that she and Joe are very clear — they will not ban fracking. 

He said he graduated in the top half of his law class at the University of Syracuse law school. In truth, he graduated at the bottom half of his law class (76th out of 85). He stated that he was the only one in his class to receive a full academic scholarship. Not true. He said he graduated with three degrees; nope, he graduated with one. He said he was named outstanding political science student; he was not.

He has plagiarized several notables, including Hubert Humphrey, Robert F. Kennedy and British politician Neal Kinnock.

He said he attended a historically black college or university (HBCU). “I got started out of an HBCU, Delaware State,” Biden said, a claim denied by a representative of the school.

• Biden and his family are corrupt.

Author Peter Schweizer, in his book, “Profiles in Corruption,” states that Biden is the most corrupt vice president ever. He speaks of “the Biden five,” comprised of son Hunter, younger brothers James and Frank, sister Valerie and daughter Ashley. Through a complicated tangle of taxpayer-funded loans and grants, business dealings and consulting fees, these five family members received millions of dollars, cashing in during the Obama administration. 

• Biden and his vice-presidential candidate, Kamala Harris, refuse to state if they will pack the Supreme Court. 

In 1983, Biden said that FDR’s attempt to pack SCOTUS was “a bone-head (sic) idea” and a “terrible, terrible mistake to make.” Even the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was opposed to packing the court. Now, Biden states that voters don’t deserve to know what he will do. During the primaries, Harris said, “I am open to increasing the number of people on the Supreme Court.” 

• Biden foments violence. 

As Antifa riots, burns and destroys our cities, and bullies citizens, Biden stated that Antifa is just “an idea.” (No, Joe, that’s the tooth fairy.) He finally denounced the riots on August 31, while our major cities were looted and destroyed. In fact, staffers for Biden and Harris bailed out an alleged child abuser through the Minnesota Freedom Fund. 

• Biden wants to remove all borders and have U.S. taxpayers pay for healthcare for all illegals. What could go wrong?

• Biden wants to enact the Green New Deal, which would essentially ban the internal combustion engine, impede air travel and basically eradicate natural gas for more expensive renewables. 

• Biden called our troops “stupid bastards.” Trump’s alleged comments about “suckers” and “losers” have been discounted, even by Trump hater John Bolton, who was with Trump when he was supposed to say this. 

• Biden is “mentally deteriorating,” says Democratic strategist Justin Horwitz. His “gaffes clearly indicate that he is not all there anymore.” Democrats are well aware that a Socialist cannot win the presidency, but a “moderate” could win, then step down and let radicals run the country. 

These extremists are not your parents’ Democrat party. No, these new Dems are militant Marxists who want to destroy America and its Constitution. Our country is at a crossroads. Will we choose to live in “the last best hope of earth” (Abraham Lincoln) or a reincarnation of Venezuela? 

A mother's thoughts

"Like the dawn of a new day is the miracle of birth, bright with hope and colored by tomorrow’s dreams."
Donna Volmerding, on the birth of her son, October 13, 1974
"More wondrous than the universe at twilight is the miracle of birth. When we gaze in awe at the workings of the Lord, we realize how little a role we play in them."
Donna Volmerding, on the birth of her daughter, June 26, 1977

Columnist misleads on scientist's critics

This article appeared in the Sunday, May 31, 2020, issue of The Journal Gazette.

Michael Gerson’s article, “The right’s sick parody of populism,” is filled with half-truths, fabrications and vitriol. He states that “the right has turned hard against science and expertise.” 

Perhaps, but I have questions. Does the left believe, as settled science, that preborns are indeed human life, possessing all necessary human DNA that is separate from its mother’s, and is not just a cluster of cells? Does the left dismiss hard science about male and female chromosomes, and choose to believe that gender is only what we want it to be?

Gerson states that “Tucker Carlson questions whether Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is ‘right about the science.’” 

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., the only U.S. senator to have had a confirmed case of COVID-19 who also is a physician, asked Fauci about the science on the other side, stating that the public-health response to the pandemic has been riddled with “wrong prediction after wrong prediction.”

Carlson proved this, pointing out several wrong or misleading statements made by Fauci, including this one in March — “Right now in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks. … there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask.” 

Concerning COVID-19, Fauci stated in January that “we need to take it seriously and do the kinds of things that the CDC and the Department of Homeland Security are doing. But this is not a major threat for the people in the United States, and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about.”

Fauci even stated that it was fine to have sex with strangers met on Internet dating apps but also said that “nobody should ever shake hands again, just to be safe.”

After calling President Trump a “proven and perpetual liar,” Gerson states that Carlson called Fauci a “buffoon.” In truth, Carlson said, “This is just buffoon-level stuff …, and we’re not doing this to mock the guy (Fauci). … (But) is this the guy into whom you want to vest all of your trust? Is this the guy you want to chart the future of the country?” 

Gerson clearly is not being honest about what Carlson said, nor is his harsh assessment about millions of intelligent, compassionate citizens who value freedom. 

Does this make Gerson a proven and perpetual liar?

Lewis and the Third Commandment

This article was published in Indiana Policy Review, November 2, 2016

On C.S. Lewis and his meditation on the Third Commandment

By Donna Volmerding

Particularly in this election year, Christians are having discussions about the candidate whom they think is the better one, and the philosophy and ideology that they believe is best for America and shows God’s love the best.

In C.S. Lewis’ Meditation on the Third Commandment, he discussed the “growing desire for a Christian ‘party,’ a Christian ‘front’ or a Christian ‘platform’ in politics.”

He expounds by saying “Nearly all parties agree in professing ends which we admit to be desirable — security, a living wage, and the best adjustment between the claims of order and freedom. What distinguishes one party from another is the championship of means. We do not dispute whether the citizens are to be made happy, but whether an egalitarian or a hierarchical State, whether capitalism or socialism, whether despotism or democracy is most likely to make them so.”

We do not have a Christian party in America, and most Americans would not want one. (I haven’t found anyone who would.) First, our kingdom is not of this world. While we certainly are commanded to make this world as good as we can for ourselves, our families and our neighbors, it is not the final resting place for Christians. It is a stepping-off point.

Second, there is so much disagreement among Christians about what ideology and/or system of government truly serves God’s ends the best. As Lewis stated, some Christians believe that no one can be trusted with more than minimum power over others, some that an authoritarian state better promotes the Christian life, and some demand a Left revolution and redistribution of wealth.

Third, our Constitution was wisely based on a government with deep Christian influence and thought but one that allows freedom of religion. The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

Political science professors at the University of Houston collected 15,000 writings from the founding era, isolating 3,154 direct quotes made by the Founding Fathers. This is the breakdown of the source of those quotes: Baron Charles de Montesquieu, 8.3 percent; Sir William Blackstone, 7.9 percent; and John Locke, 2.9 percent. Most interestingly, the researchers discovered that the Founding Fathers quoted directly from the Bible 34 percent of the time. Blackstone, a brilliant 18th-century English judge, author, professor and lecturer of law at Oxford University, used the Bible to arrive at his conclusions.

These are quotes from our Founding Fathers:

• Benjamin Franklin:

“The longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: ‘that God governs in the affairs of men.’ And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?” (June 28, 1787, at the Constitutional Convention when the delegates were deadlocked)

“Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that belongs to us by the laws of God and nature.”

• George Washington:

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. … Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. … It is impossible to govern rightly without God and the Bible.”

• John Adams:

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

• James Madison:

“We have staked the future of all of our political institutions … upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”

In 1800, Congress approved the use of the Capitol as a church building for Christian worship services. As president, Thomas Jefferson attended these services and employed the military band to play for them, at taxpayer expense.

John Quincy Adams said, “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: that it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of Christianity with the principles of civil government.”

The influence of Scripture is evident in the Supreme Court building, the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, the Jefferson Memorial, the Capitol Building and the Library of Congress.

Author Jerry Newcombe says that “Without exception, the constitutions of all 50 states refer to ‘the Almighty God of the universe, the Author and Sustainer of our liberty.’”

Almost every Ivy League school was established primarily to train ministers of the gospel. Harvard College’s first presidents insisted that there could be no true knowledge or wisdom without Jesus Christ.

In 1892, the Supreme Court stated that “Our lives and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise … our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian … This is a religious people … this is a Christian nation.” (Holy Trinity Church vs. U.S.)

Because of their understanding of the Bible and laws based on Judeo-Christian principles, our Founding Fathers gave us several invaluable gifts — a comprehension of the importance of limited government because of man’s fallibility, laws based on a wise understanding of Who gives us our freedoms, and the right of conscience with freedom of religion.

Can there be any doubt, even among those who profess a strong central government as the ideal, that our Constitution gave us the greatest, richest, most free, most powerful nation that ever existed? It is certainly one that has been exceedingly blessed by God. It would be a travesty to deny the wisdom and discernment of the Founding Fathers and trample the documents they produced.

As C.S. Lewis explained, “By the natural light He has shown us what means are lawful: to find out which one is efficacious He has given us brains. The rest He has left to us.”
Donna Volmerding, a member of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, is editor of The Fort Wayne Lutheran newspaper.

The Fragrance of Mercy

Want to read a good book? “The Fragrance of Mercy” is an adult Christian mystery that plumbs the process of forgiveness in all of its aspects. Forgiveness is ultimately experienced as a gift of God and His grace, for our healing, our strength and our ultimate joy. I pray that you will enjoy this book and that it will be meaningful in your life.

The book thread is

-->

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077B8X7JH/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1510360632&sr=8-1&keywords=the+fragrance+of+mercy

Are we haters?

By Donna Volmerding

I loved to watch the TV show “Little House on the Prairie.” The Ingalls family, who were excellent role models, were sometimes opposed by the dysfunctional Oleson family — in particular, Nellie. Years later, the Olesons adopted Nancy, a girl who made Nellie look like a choir girl.

Whenever Nancy did something hateful or malicious and got caught, her quick response was “You hate me!” I would roll my eyes and say to myself “Puhleeeeze.”

In today’s politically correct climate, I often feel the same way about hot-topic discussions. You don’t agree with gay marriage? You hate. You didn’t vote for Hillary? You hate. You don’t believe in open borders? You hate.

Thoughtful, informed, reasonable discussion is shut down. You are labeled a bigot, homophobe, misogynist, xenophobe, sexist, fascist, blah, blah, blah. You are in a basket of deplorables, irredeemable, in fact.

If you have any beliefs other than what the radical left deems appropriate, you’re a hater. Your speech is mean and hurts others feelings; therefore, you are denied your First Amendment right to free speech.

It isn’t that the left needs to hone its message. The problem is, lefties don’t have a message other than to demean those who disagree with them. When they are asked probing, serious questions from those who seek understanding, the kneejerk response is “You hate!”

My eyes roll, and I say to myself “Puhleeeeze.”

Abortion: The courts, the judges and the lies that bind

This article was first published in the May 2004 issue of The Fort Wayne Lutheran

By Donna Volmerding

Our Founding Fathers believed that we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. This is the foundation of our government — that our rights are bestowed by God, not by the state.

Our Founding Fathers set up a system of government with three equal branches, performing separate tasks and duties but answerable to the people. When judges and courts make laws that circumvent the constitutional process, we all suffer, our system of government suffers, and justice and righteousness are too often ignored.

In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled that each woman had a right to abort her unborn child, for no more compelling reason than she just didn’t want to have a baby. The court ruling, Roe vs. Wade, discovered (after 200 years!) a previously unrecognized “right to privacy.” But there’s more to this story that must be told.

Norma McCorvey, the defendant “Roe,” has publicly stated that her entire case was built on lies and fabrications, falsehoods known to her lawyer at the time of trial. McCorvey was a 21-year-old carnival worker who, at the time, was pregnant with her third child.

According to defense arguments for Roe vs. Wade, “Roe” was raped and did not want to bear her child. McCorvey confesses that she was not raped, and she ended up placing her child for adoption.

Eventually, McCorvey joined with anti-abortion activists in 1994 to have Roe vs. Wade overturned. She cited what she termed as more than 30 years of evidence that abortions are psychologically harmful to women.

Sandra Cano, the Doe in Doe vs. Bolton, a companion case to Roe that instituted partial-birth abortion, also has publicly attested to the deception perpetrated in her trial.

“My case was based upon a fraud upon the court,” Cano said. “I did not want abortion. I would not want to kill babies. Partial-birth abortion is wrong, and it should be called murder since they are killing the baby with part of its body already outside the mother’s womb. It is murder, in my opinion.”

Bernard Nathanson, M.D., co-founder of the pro-abortion group NARAL, “served as chairman of the executive committee of NARAL (the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws, and later renamed the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League) as well as its medical committee,” stated the December 2002 issue of Whistleblower magazine. Nathanson was one of the principal architects and strategists of the abortion movement in the United States, the article said.

He tells an astonishing story.

“In 1968 I met Lawrence Lader,” Nathanson said. “Lader had just finished a book called ‘Abortion,’ and in it had made the audacious demand that abortion should be legalized throughout the country.

“I had just finished a residency in obstetrics and gynecology and was impressed with the number of women who were coming into clinics, wards and hospitals suffering from illegal, infected, botched abortions.

“Lader and I were perfect for each other. We sat down and plotted out the organization now known as NARAL. With Betty Friedan, we set up this organization and began working on the strategy.

“We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal, enlightened, sophisticated one,” Nathanson said. “Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls.

“We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60% of Americans were in favor of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority. We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000, but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000.

“Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public,” Nathanson said. “The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200-250 annually. The figure we constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans, convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law.

“Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalizing abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S., and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1,500% since legalization,” he said.

If a democratic process had been followed in these decisions, in which all sides can be heard, facts checked, volatile subjects discussed with cool heads and moral sensibilities, these miscarriages of justice may not have occurred.

But when these issues are taken out of the governance of the people by courts and federal judges, “vitally important cultural issues are now decided for us by a handful of unelected elites,” said columnist Ann Coulter. “It’s a lot easier to get a majority out of nine votes than it is to get a majority of 280 million votes.” (The U.S. population is now about 320 million.)

It is imperative that all of us are aware of the lies, half-truths and misconceptions that deeply harm our country and the spirit of our people. We have the honor and the privilege to live in the greatest nation on earth. Let’s not allow her to be destroyed by the enemy within.

The ties that bind

-->

“Lots of people talk about miracles, but, let’s face it, no one has ever really experienced one,” my friend said. “At least no one I know,” he added.

Then I told him my story, a truly miraculous tale of God’s direct intervention in a crucial second. Do you believe in miracles?

In the spring of 1981, my then 3-year-old daughter, Sarah, and I were in the family room of our home. I had my sewing box out, and I was doing some mending while Sarah played.

My son, Matthew, who was in kindergarten, had given me a retractable measuring tape for Christmas the previous year. It was a small one; the tape was no more than one-quarter of an inch wide. Sarah enjoyed pulling the end out, pushing the button and watching the tape spin back inside again. It was a harmless play toy, or so I thought.

I became involved with my mending and wasn’t paying a lot of attention to her play.

When I looked up, I saw Sarah red-faced, the measuring tape bound closely around her neck with several tight knots in it.

I quickly dropped my mending and ran to help her.

I tried to untie the knots, but they wouldn’t budge. The thin plastic tape was bound so tightly, the knots held true. I grabbed a pair of scissors in an effort to cut the tape off, but I was concerned about stabbing her or cutting her in the neck with the point of the shears. After several unsuccessful attempts of carefully trying to get the scissors under the tape, the tape held tightly. I could not get scissors under it without risking serious injury to her neck — or worse.

By this time, Sarah was struggling to breathe, and her face was growing redder. It was such an effort for her to get air that she couldn’t even cry.

I realized that I couldn’t untie it, and I couldn’t cut it off. I briefly considered calling 911, but I was doubtful if an ambulance could make it in time.

I touched the tape, frantic and trembling, desperately attempting to remove it one more time. In total anguish I cried out, “Dearest Jesus, please help me!”

Instantly, after my desolate plea, the measuring tape came loose and unwound, making it easy for me to remove it. The tape fell on the floor with one stubborn knot remaining; the other knots were, well, gone.

I held Sarah tightly, both of us shaking with emotion, trying to comprehend what had just occurred. I knew that I was not able to get the knots undone, but they were undone anyway.

Upon reflection, however, I knew what had happened. In a time of peril, I called on the precious name of Jesus, and He answered my earnest plea in a heartbeat. I felt as if I had witnessed something as spectacular as Peter walking on water or Jesus healing the sick — a supernatural intervention by a great and loving God.

“In my distress I called upon the Lord; to my God I cried for help. From His temple He heard my voice, and my cry to Him reached His ears.” Psalm 18:6

Can you explain it? Neither can I, but I do believe in miracles.

Climate change: Seven indisputable facts

-->

This is an excellent article by Rep. Lamar Smith. 

The Hill, September 09, 2015, 07:00 am

By Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas)

President Obama last week visited Alaska to preach about the inevitable doomsday scenarios the world will face if Americans fail to embrace his extreme climate change agenda. Like all climate alarmists, the president wants Americans to believe there is no uncertainty about climate change. They pretend to know exactly how much human actions contribute to the changing climate. By denying any uncertainty, their goal is to shut off debate. ‘Just trust us. We know what’s best for you.’

But the truth is there are more questions about climate change than there are answers. For instance, even the most advanced climate models all failed to predict the lack of warming the Earth has experienced over the last 18 years. But the president and his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) refuse to let facts get in the way of their determination to impose greater government control over the lives of the American people.

Below are seven irrefutable facts about climate change that are ignored because they do not fit into the alarmists’ scare tactics. These facts are not disputed.

1. For the past 18 years, weather satellites have not measured a global increase in temperatures although carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased over that same period.  Weather satellites are the most advanced instruments for measuring global temperatures.  The fact that these satellites have not detected a measureable temperature increase despite an increased concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere calls into question the correlation climate change alarmists preach between carbon emissions and temperature.

2. According to EPA’s own data, U.S. carbon emissions have decreased nine percent since 2005.  These carbon reductions have occurred as a result of technological advancements and free market forces, which will continue. This raises the question of whether burdensome regulations are necessary.

3. The natural cycle of global temperatures has resulted in both higher and lower temperatures over the past 1,000 years than exist today.  These temperature fluctuations occurred before significant fossil energy use.  So temperatures the Earth is experiencing now have been seen before.

4. If implemented, the Obama administration’s Climate Action Plan would reduce global temperatures by only 0.01, or one one-hundredth of a degree Celsius.  President Obama’s former Deputy Secretary for Fossil Energy at the Department of Energy, Charles McConnell, said that EPA’s carbon rules will have only a minor impact on global climate change.  Yet regulations will cost billions of dollars and jeopardize thousands of jobs.

5. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has reported that there is little or no connection between extreme weather and climate change. According to a 2012 report, IPCC stated that there is “high agreement” that long-term trends in weather disasters “have not been attributed to… climate change.”  Climate change alarmists point toward hurricanes, tornadoes and other global weather disasters as a proof that man-made carbon emissions are hurting our planet.  However, as the IPCC report stated, the opposite is true. There is scientific agreement that weather disasters are not caused by climate change, despite President Obama repeatedly trying to connect the two.

6. Population growth, especially in the developing world, will account for even more global carbon emissions. Carbon emissions from developing countries are projected to increase by over 125 percent by 2040. And world population is expected to surge by over 2 billion people by 2050, an increase of more than 30 percent. Yet few climate scientists acknowledge the potential impact of population growth on carbon emissions.

7. Carbon dioxide accounts for a very small part of the Earth’s overall atmosphere and those levels have fluctuated throughout the Earth’s history. Carbon dioxide currently accounts for only .038 percent of our planet’s atmosphere. And human-made carbon dioxide only makes up about three percent of that. Put another way, if all the gases in the atmosphere were represented by the length of a football field, only the last 1/10 of an inch would be carbon emissions caused by humans. It’s hard to believe that such a small amount would supposedly have such huge consequences.

The EPA and other government agencies too often fail to present all the facts. Their agenda comes first; accuracy comes second. Climate change has many explanations — and unanswered questions.  The American people need good science, not science fiction promoted by alarmists.

Lamar Smith has represented Texas’ 21st Congressional District since 1987. He chairs the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, and also sits on the Homeland Security and the Judiciary committees.

Obama needs to pay attention to the ‘stuff of governance’

-->

This letter was published in The News-Sentinel on Dec. 20, 2013.

As usual, columnist Charles Krauthammer is correct in his understanding of political situations. His Dec. 16 column in the Forum section was precise in his description of Barack Obama, titled in The Washington Post as "Obama the Oblivious."

However, his closing lines were unfortunately omitted. After aptly pointing out that Obama "has shown little aptitude and even less interest" in the "stuff of governance," Krauthammer added these sentences:

"'I don't write code,'" said Obama in reaction to the Web site crash. Nor is he expected to. He is, however, expected to run an administration that can."

Exactly.

The greatest love of all is God’s love for us

By Donna Volmerding

“Learning to love oneself is the greatest love of all.” That’s what the song tells us, that self-love is the ultimate goal. How often are we told that we can’t learn to love others until we learn to love ourselves? Our society is saturated with this kind of specious reasoning, even in the church body itself. However, this kind of thinking is diametrically opposed to the teachings of Christ and everything that the Bible tells us.

The First Commandment, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me,” is paramount above all the others. God is telling us that we can only learn to love others by learning to love Him first. Never did He command us to love ourselves above all else; in fact, He never even commanded us to love ourselves. He commanded us to love our God, and He commanded us to love others as we love ourselves, understanding better than we do how much we already do love ourselves.

As a chosen people, bought for a very high price by a great and loving God, we have good reason to esteem ourselves, however. We are special; we are children of the King. But this esteem must come because of what God has done for us, never because of who we are in this world and what we have accomplished. So, what is the greatest love of all? The greatest love of all is God’s love for us. That we could never duplicate.

Render unto God and care for the poor

By Donna Volmerding

“For the poor you have with you always, but you do not always have Me.” Jesus Christ

In a September 30 Journal Gazette (Fort Wayne, Ind.) letter to the editor, Pastor Rick Pettys wrote that “… if we are authentic Christians, we are always on the side of the poor, the marginalized, the least, the last and the lost.”

Authentic Christians do not dispute the fact that they are to be caring servants, but discussions about how best to care for the poor is when the water gets muddy.

Today in America, there are 47 million people on food stamps. I am certain that many of them do not want to be on public assistance; they want a job. There are some, however, who feel entitled to take from the public trough.

In his book “How Should Christians Vote?,” the Rev. Dr. Tony Evans, founder and president of The Urban Alternative and senior pastor of Oak Cliff Bible Fellowship, Dallas, Texas, writes: “Government assistance for able-bodied citizens should be temporary and not designed to produce long-term dependency and an entitlement mentality. There should be accountability tied to the assistance so that the person receiving the assistance has to perform some sort of work or volunteerism that is connected to what they receive.”

It is not biblical that Christians and/or the government are to provide an unending supply of food, goods, money, etc., for those who refuse to help themselves, for those who are takers only.

“If a man does not work, you do not offer him a welfare check to pay him for his irresponsibility. You don’t look to the government to pay for laziness while taxing others to cover the bill,” Evans says.

Charity is personal giving from the heart. It is an act of love to God and one’s fellow man. It is enlightening, enriching and elevating for the one receiving the gift as well as the one who gives it. However, when a bloated, powerful government usurps money from those who work to dole out to those who do not, it is not philanthropy; it is theft.

Evans paraphrases St. Paul in Romans 13: “The one overarching job of civil government … can be defined as … ‘under God, the government is to promote the conditions for the well-being of the citizenry for good, while protecting the citizenry against the proliferation of evil.’”

Government should “create an environment for compassion to flourish,” Evans says. Otherwise, “the state becomes an all-encompassing promoter of federal economic dependency (that leads) to illegitimate and irresponsible personal and corporate welfare.”

Yet limited government does not mean a government that lacks compassion. Instead, “civil government should provide a safety net specifically and intentionally designed to produce self-sufficiency and not long-term dependency,” Evans says.

Unfortunately, the welfare state in America is a mile wide and an inch deep. Those who are truly disabled, mentally or physically, and cannot provide for themselves must have a long-term safety net. Yet when able-bodied people are not providing for themselves or their families, they take precious public funds away from the truly needy. This is a monstrous scandal and fraud perpetrated on taxpayers through deception. Supporting bureaucratic waste that squanders billions of dollars — our hard-earned money — has nothing to do with kindness, caring or compassion; it has everything to do with the federal government amassing enormous sums of money, and power and control.

Authentic Christians must understand that giving from the heart is a personal act. It is rendering unto God what is God’s. Rendering unto Caesar is not charity; it’s called taxes.

Blog: ptft.blogspot.com.

Never worked? The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world

This article was published in the April 19, 2012, issue of The News-Sentinel
By Donna Volmerding
“(She) never worked a day in her life.” Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen about Ann Romney, wife of presumptive presidential nominee Mitt Romney This remark by Ms. Rosen has sparked a firestorm of controversy; it certainly touched a nerve with me. In the ‘70s, when I gave birth to my first child and became a stay-at-home mom, I discovered quickly how utterly exhausting a new baby is, and I developed a profound new respect for stay-at-home moms who worked very hard.
We breast-fed, gardened, sewed, cooked, cleaned, shopped, washed our own diapers (paper diapers were too expensive), scrimped and fell into bed each night in sheer exhaustion. Never worked?
The budget went in free fall, too. I remember vividly the time when my husband and I wanted to buy a cup of coffee at a fast-food restaurant, and we didn’t have enough money, even combining our change.
I envied women with nice clothes who took great vacations. I wore sweats and stained shirts; my big day out was packing peanut-butter sandwiches and taking the kids to the park. Never worked?
Many of my college-graduate “sisters” took a different path. Although many became mothers, too, several felt the cultural pressure of the times, as well as the economy, and headed to the office or the classroom.
The “working” moms I knew also worked very hard, and I respected their choice, and they respected mine. Yet, the siren song of the women’s movement, and its smug arrogance, was condescending and insulting. The left insinuated that (educated) women who stayed at home were wasting their talents, selling out the sisterhood by depending on a man to support them. It was often said that we “never worked.”
Besides, everyone knew that mothers’ minds turned to mush. How could they not? What kind of intellectual stimulation is it to wipe sticky faces and clean dirty bottoms?
When my children were in grade school, and I headed to the office, I was amazed when, on my first day, another woman brought coffee to me! I also realized that staying at home with small children was far more strenuous than my office job.
We stay-at-home moms endured the disdainful snobbery of NOW and others who respected no other path but their own. Our efforts, our concerns and our abilities were disparaged, often with high disgust. This was, and I think still is, the mindset of the left. This isn’t just a war against women; it’s a war against women who dare to go against their cultural dictates. Many on the left truly believe that stay-at-home moms and homemakers “never worked.”
This dispute will not end until all women (and men) understand and respect the contribution of mothers who work at home and outside of the home. Homemaker moms have as much insight into the economy, national security, good government and the culture wars as “working” moms. They have earned a place in the public forum to make their voices heard.
As the saying goes, “The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.”