Author Archives: Steve Long

Three Forms of Unity

Posted on by
2

I’ve known about the Westminster Confession and Catechisms (both Shorter and Larger)1

I also knew there were other confessions/catechisms, and I was kind of interested in the Baptist-flavored ones (like the 1689 London Baptist Confession, or John Piper’s adaptation of a Baptist catechism), because at this point I’m more inclined towards believer’s baptism than infant baptism. (Also, though I’m not sure what these creeds have to say about church polity, I’m more accustomed to congregational polity than presbyterian polity.)

However, I was recently intrigued by the “Three Forms of Unity” comprised of the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession, and the Canons of Dort.

I haven’t read through all three yet, but I would like to. It appears that these are the earliest of the confessional compilations that endure with significant use today.

The Belgic Confession is the earliest of the three, initially written in 1561 by Guido de Bres. Although de Bres wrote his confession independently, it reflects and incorporates the theology expressed by John Calvin. The occasion for this confession was to defend against charges of rebellion against the Roman Catholic political system. Reformed Christians rallied around this confession to affirm in the face of persecution that they believed and abided by the Scriptures. It consists of consists of 37 articles dealing with the doctrines of God, Scripture, humanity, sin, Christ, salvation, the Church, and the end times.

The Heidelberg Catechism has similar content to the Belgic Confession, but a different structure and purpose. Commissioned by Frederick III, the Electoral Palatinate of the Rhine, the catechism is designed to instruct church members in the faith and provide a structure for preaching the scriptures. The catechism was written by theologian Zacharias Ursinus and pastor/theologian Caspar Olevianus, and approved by the Synod of Heidelberg of 1563, then subsequently approved by other synods of the reformed faith. The catechism consists of 129 questions and answers, which have been divided into 52 sections.

Finally, the Canons of Dort are a judicial decision put forth by the Synod of Dort in in 1618-1619. Followers of Jacobus Arminius objected to some content within the Belgic Confession and the Heidelberg Catechism, and in 1610 drafted five “Articles of Remonstrance” articulating their differences with other protestants. An international synod met in Dordrecht to respond to the controversy between the Remonstrants and the “Calvinists.” The Synod rejected the views of the Remonstrants, reaffirmed the Belgic Confession and the Heidelberg Catechism, and reiterated their views on the five issues at stake in the Articles of Remonstrance. The resulting decision is an exposition of five doctrinal points that have come to comprise the five points (or TULIP) of Calvinism.

These documents were developed during the working out of the Protestant Reformation, in the years following Martin Luther’s 95 Theses (1517), the reforms of Ulrich Zwingli (1520’s), and the publication of John Calvin’s Institutes (1536). While other confessions , catechisms, creeds, and doctrinal statements were written before and after, these three are significant in that they are among the earliest and most enduring.

For future study, it would be interesting to compare the differences between the Belgic Confession, the Westminster Confession, the Baptist Confession, and the Savoy Declaration .

  1. aren’t those inconsistent terms? shouldn’t it be “shorter and longer” or “smaller and larger”? anyway, I digress… ↩

Quote o’ the Day

Posted on by
Reply

“If I profess, with the loudest voice and clearest exposition, every portion of the truth of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christ. Where the battle rages there the loyalty of the soldier is proved, and to be steady on all the battle fields besides is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point.”

-Martin Luther

(found at Douglas Wilson’s Blog and Mablog)

Creative Marketing

Posted on by
Reply

I got the following letter in the mail not long ago:

Steve,

Our love began with a glance across a parking lot.
You possessed me in just a few days.
I remember long drives through the countryside,
And long weekend getaways.

But the years passed, and like upholstery in the hot sun,
Your love began to fade.
And now in a time when I need your care the most,
You hit the blinker and turn away.

And while our gas tank of love may be running on fumes,
I still have plenty of love to share.
So if you have a quart of tenderness left for me in your heart,
Take me back to Firestone Complete Auto Care.

Love,

Your 2000 Celica GT

I didn’t know my car felt that way.  It’s been over a month, and I’ve yet to take my car back to Firestone.  Now there’s an awkward silence every time I get in the car.  Someone else who got a similar letter from their car decided to write back.

Elections

Posted on by
7

The elections are next week, so I thought I’d share some of my views. It strikes me that people like myself (conservative proponents of small government) frequently bemoan the problems of big government and the fact that decisions are made at a federal level that should be left to local government. However, we just as frequently have little knowledge or investment in some of the local government decisions closest to us. In light of that, I’d like to take a look at the choices many of us will face next week.

To see exactly what races and questions you will have an opportunity to vote on, find your precinct at the Indiana Voters site, then find the ballot you will vote on at the Allen County Election page.

PRESIDENT

I won’t say much on the Presidential level, because we all hear about that race every day. I’ll be voting for John McCain and Sarah Palin. I believe that they come closer to representing my values and their vision for the federal government is closer to what I believe it should be.

CONGRESS

For the 3rd Congressional District, I’ll be voting for Mark Souder. I don’t know enough about Mike Montagano to know what we stands for, how he would vote, and how effective he could be as a congressman. If he wants to shape public policy, I think he should gain some experience in the political arena first. Although Souder may make some decisions I disagree with, in general I believe he votes in a manner consistent with Christian morals and a conservative view of government.

GOVERNOR

For Governor, I’ll be voting for Mitch Daniels. I can’t say that I can think of anything in particular that Frank O’Bannon, Evan Bayh, or any previous governors accomplished. I think Daniels has made great progress at actually effecting positive change in Indiana. My impression is that he is very objective and seeks input from qualified individuals to help him make the best decisions. I have not heard Jill Long-Thomson offer much in the way of specifics that would make her a better choice for Governor.

INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL

In the race for Attorney General, I do not know much about either Greg Zoeller or Linda Pence. Zoeller is the current Deputy Attorney General. Some have indicated that Pence has a background of defending some rather shady characters in corruption cases in Northwest Indiana (google “sidewalks for votes”). Unless I learn something that changes my mind, I’ll be voting for Zoeller. (Note: Zoeller did respond positively to the Indiana Right for Life survey: view pdf here .)

SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

One race in particular that I think could have significant impact is the Superintendent of Public Instruction. The teachers unions are backing Richard Wood, who is opposed to vouchers for private education, favors restrictions on homeschooling, and opposes allowing qualified professionals to teach without first getting licensed as a teacher. He also favors increased taxes, abortion rights, and other “rights” to practice immorality. On the other side is Tony Bennett. In responding to questions from the Indiana Family Institute, he did not respond to questions not related to education, but on the three education-related questions in IFI’s voter guide, Dr. Bennett scores high marks in my view. I’ll be voting for Tony Bennett. (Download a pdf of the voter guide here, or an expanded voter guide with comments at focusvoter.com .)  (Also see the News-Sentinel’s endorsement of Bennett.)

FWCS BOARD OF EDUCATION

Another educational race is the local Fort Wayne Community Schools board. Last year the board tried to implement a spending package of $500 million or more that would have significantly raised property taxes. The necessity of some of the spending was questionable, and the board was unwilling to compromise. Only one member of the board voted against the exorbitant spending: Jon Olinger. If you have a chance to vote for Jon Olinger, I recommend him as a reasonable voice on the board who will try to do what is best for the students and the school system as a whole, not being swayed by the administration’s wish list. The man who rallied Fort Wayne to stop the $500 million spending package was Evert Mol, who is a long-time volunteer and tutor in FWCS. He is running against Steve Corona, a long-time fixture on the FWCS board. Corona has had his chance to prove that he will make FWCS schools more efficient and effective, and in my view he doesn’t have much to show. I will be voting for Evert Mol.  (Also see the News-Sentinel’s take on the FWCS board.)

ALLEN COUNTY TREASURER

In the race for Allen County Treasurer, current deputy treasurer Susan Orth is running against Maria Parra. I know little about either one, but my inclination is to vote for the Sue Orth based on the experience that she will bring to the office having already served as deputy treasurer.  (The Journal Gazette and News-Sentinel both endorse Orth.)

ALLEN COUNTY COUNCIL

For the Allen County Council, there are five people running for three positions. I don’t know much about any of them, but I do know I won’t vote for Kevin Knuth. I will probably vote for Moss and Buskirk, the Republican incumbents, and Armstrong unless I learn something that convinces me that Susan Hoot is a better candidate.  (Note: the Journal-Gazette and News-Sentinel both recommend Moss, Buskirk, and Hoot.)

JUDGES

There are five Indiana judges up for votes on whether they should be retained in office. Again, I don’t know much about any other them, other than the fact that Randall Shepard is the current Chief Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court. You can review decisions written by various judges at the Indiana judicial retention site. It’s pretty hard to wade through the cases trying to find something that is both understandable and offers a view of their character and competence. The Indiana Right to Life organization reviewed decisions that were made on abortion-related cases. Based on that information, it appears that Theodore Boehm has allowed his personal view that abortion is a basic civil right to cloud his judgment. I will be voting against his retention. Brent Dickson, on the other hand, showed a rational approach that upheld the constitution and basic human dignity. I will vote for his retention. I am also inclined to vote for the retention of Randall Shepard. I will probably abstain from voting on the retention of Carr Darden or Thomas Fisher, because at this point I just don’t know anything about them.

TOWNSHIP ASSESSORS

Other than some uncontested races, the remaining question on the ballet for many of us will be the question of whether “the assessing duties of the elected township assessor in the township [should] be transferred to the county assessor?” A little background on this question: in the past, it has been the duty of an elected township assessor to determine property values for homes in their township. They then turn this information over to the county assessor, who, along with the county council, determine the county-wide property tax rate. There has been a lot of scrutiny recently on the accuracy and efficiency of the assessed values, with some people seeing large swings in value, and some finding their property assessed for much more than it is actually worth. An independent, non-partisan group (led by former governor Joe Kernan and Chief Justice Randall Shepard) studied the topic of making local government more efficient, and presented their recommendations to Governor Daniels. One of their recommendations was to maintain uniform assessments by having assessments be carried out under the authority of the county assessor, rather than performed independently by various township assessors. The state legislature took up this concern this past year, and agreed that assessing duties should be given to the county assessor. However, they only stipulated that smaller townships would be affected. For larger townships, they decided to leave the question up to the voters. 95% (900+) of the townships in Indiana now have their property assessments performed under the auspices of the county assessor, but the largest 43 get to vote on it next week.

Normally, I would advocate that decisions with local impact should be made as locally as possible. However, assessing property values isn’t so much a “decision” as simply a task that needs to be carried out as accurately and efficiently as possible. Since the goal of assessing property values is to establish tax rates for the entire county, it makes sense for the county assessor to hold the responsibility for the assessments. Also, since county assessors now have the responsibility for 95% of the townships, it seems logical to keep the process consistent by putting the other 5% under their authority also. Visit MySmartGov.org to read more about this topic. I will be voting “Yes” to transfer assessing duties to the county assessor.  (Also see the Journal Gazette’s take on this issue.)

How are you voting? Are there facts I haven’t considered?

(Note: In addition to the voter guides mentioned above from the Indiana Family Institute and Indiana Right to Life, the Allen County Right to Life has a similar guide (in pdf format) with responses from local candidates here.)

Christian Research Institute

Posted on by
Reply

Charity Navigator, “America’s Largest Charity Evaluator,” has several “Top Ten” lists for charities that stand out in particular ways (sometimes good ways, sometimes bad ways). What caught my eye was seeing the Christian Research Institute at the top of the list of 10 Charities in Deep Financial Trouble.

In explaining why these ten charities are considered to be in deep financial trouble, Charity Navigator says,

If an organization owes more than it owns, that’s a bad sign. If the bills it owes by the end of the year are more than it can pay, that’s an even worse sign. These 10 charities are insolvent. Not only do their total liabilities, or what they owe, exceed their total assets, they also maintain negative working capital — that is, the bills they owe in the next year exceed the short-term assets they can use to pay those bills. While these charities may not be facing bankruptcy, their fundamental insolvency puts these charities in a very dangerous position.

They give CRI one star (out of four) overall. Revenue was down significantly for CRI in 2007, leaving them with $-374,464 of net assets and $-2,471,537 of working capital.

Is this just the unfortunate result of the struggling economy, or is something deeper going on here? Are people just not able to give as much, and CRI hasn’t been able to adapt quickly enough; or is there a fundamental flaw behind the reason why giving has dropped off or why CRI is spending more than they are bringing in?

I enjoy listening to the Bible Answer Man radio broadcast. I think Hank Hanegraaff gives good answers to most questions, and I appreciate his knowledge and ability to explain things clearly. I’ve also appreciated some of the articles produced by CRI. (Many articles from their Christian Research Journal are available on the CRI website.)

However, Google “Hank Hanegraaff” and you’ll also find this site detailing some decidedly un-Christlike behavior on the part of CRI’s current president. I’m not going to go through all the dirt on the way Hank Hanegraaff has purportedly run CRI, but it does make me wonder: is their current financial state a reflection of integrity within the leadership of the organization?