Thursday, May 16, 2013

All Around the World - May 16, 2013

New Zealand Herald - Homosexual Rejected, Heads to Tribunal |

A homosexual man is taking the Anglican Bishop of Auckland to the Human Rights Tribunal after being rejected for training as a priest.

A hearing begins today following a complaint from the man, who says he feels discriminated against because of his sexuality.

It is understood the man - who is in a sexual relationship with his partner - has wanted to enter the church's training programme for priests for years.

But after applying to enter after years of study, he was rejected by the Bishop Ross Bay, who approves entrants.

Gospel Coalition - When Carl Henry Trash-Talked with Karl Barth |

USA Today - Bride-to-be broke up with her mirror for a year |

Q: How about relationships?

A: I was struggling to trust people when they said that I looked fine. I realized that was something I'd been doing all along – thinking 'Sure you think I'm beautiful, but your opinion doesn't count because you love me.' And I realized how backward that is. If the people who love you think you are beautiful, that's really what matters the most. I learned to trust people.

Q: Did you really get through your wedding day without mirrors?

A: The short answer is yes. I didn't look in the mirror that day and it wasn't a big deal at all. The longer answer is that I was really nervous about this idea that looking in the mirror on your wedding day is important. Women had told me that this moment is when you are able to, forgive the pun, reflect on the day. I'd read in bridal magazines all these lists and on a few, the very last thing to check off was spending a few moments in front of a mirror before you walked down the aisle. I was nervous I would regret not having that moment for myself. But I asked myself 'Is it the mirror that makes that moment or something else?' I decided it wasn't about seeing yourself in the mirror, but having time by yourself to contemplate this huge life moment. It didn't have to happen in front of a mirror. Instead I decided to journal about it. I could have had that fleeting moment to look in the mirror, but now I have my journal entry to remind myself of what I was thinking.

Christian Century - Debating Hymns | Why the PC(USA) rejected "In Christ Alone"

Even more sustained theological debate occurred after the conclusion of the committee’s three-and-a-half years of quarterly meetings in January 2012. We had voted for a song from the contemporary Christian canon, Keith Getty and Stuart Townend’s “In Christ Alone.” The text agreed upon was one we had found by studying materials in other recently published hymnals. Its second stanza contained the lines, “Till on that cross as Jesus died / the love of God was magnified.” In the process of clearing copyrights for the hymnal we discovered that this version of the text would not be approved by the authors, as it was considered too great a departure from their original words: “as Jesus died / the wrath of God was satisfied.” We were faced, then, with a choice: to include the hymn with the authors’ original language or to remove it from our list.

Because we were no longer meeting as a committee, our discussions had to occur through e-mail; this may explain why the “In Christ Alone” example stands out in my mind—the final arguments for and against its inclusion are preserved in writing. People making a case to retain the text with the authors’ original lines spoke of the fact that the words expressed one view of God’s saving work in Christ that has been prevalent in Christian history: the view of Anselm and Calvin, among others, that God’s honor was violated by human sin and that God’s justice could only be satisfied by the atoning death of a sinless victim. While this might not be our personal view, it was argued, it is nonetheless a view held by some members of our family of faith; the hymnal is not a vehicle for one group’s perspective but rather a collection for use by a diverse body.

Josh Reich - 21 Skills of Great Preachers |

  • Content: All of my “Great Preachers” had something to say. Even as “great communicators,” they didn’t substitute style for substance.
  • Passion: The best Preachers I’ve heard had a passion for what they said which seemed to spring from a general spiritual burden for people, which is different from just loving to preach. Messages are easier to love than people.
  • Credibility: Great Preachers practice what they preach-”they live it.” “Great Communicators” might get away with all kinds of private sin, but not truly “Great Preachers.” I’ve had to downgrade some of my “Great Preachers” to “Great Communicators” over the last few decades.
  • Prepared: Great Preachers don’t “wing it”-even if the people couldn’t tell. (They can.)
  • Notes: Most Great Preachers limited their use of notes. Thanks to TV, preachers can no longer read to a crowd with their nose buried in their notes.

DC Talk was once on the Arsenio Hall show.

Post a Comment