Thursday, March 31, 2005

Canada, Religion Expression and Freedom of Speech

This article is incredible. It was an address given by Dr. Chris Kempling, a counsellor in Canada, to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and he received a standing ovation. In it he records something of the way in which Canadian laws are affecting religious expression in Canada, and the examples he gives are incredible. Here are the examples:

1. A man is now in British Columbia's maximum security prison for protesting. His protest - holding a sign saying thou shallt not kill outside an abortion clinic, entirely peacefully.

2. A Christian nurse was fined $15,000 by his association and $20,000 by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission. Why? - speaking out against homosexuality.

3. His own case, where he was convicted of conduct unbecoming a member of the BC College of Teachers. The charge - writing a letter outlinging the dangers (as recorded in the scholarly literature) of homosexuality.

His address is well worth consulting, and seeing just how bad things have got in Canada with their new laws. He writes on the potential implications if his appeal fails:

I appealed the conviction to the BC Supreme Court, but lost in February of last year. If this verdict is upheld by the courts, teachers will not be able to write privately to their own supervisors to question a new curriculum resource, or write privately their own elected officials on a matter of public policy, nor will they able to address the topic of homosexuality in post graduate research papers. I was disciplined for doing all of these things. This is an unacceptable restriction of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and freedom of intellectual expression.

I can hardly believe it. At least we still have freedom of speech (for now...)

N. T. Wright on Gay Ordination and the Scottish Episcopal Church

I appreciate N. T. Wright's defense of the Christian faith and the resurrection. I am not at all supportive of his work on the so-called New Perspective. Whatever your fellings about him (and he as a very gifted man), as the fourth ranking bishop in the Church of England, his opinion on matters such as the American and Scottish Episcopal Churches' support of gay ordination is worthy of consideration. Here is his response to questions on the issue while at Pittsburg Theological Seminary this week:

"We're looking at questions of how you hold the church together when that happens," Wright said. "Only secondary is the question of homosexuality."

Very intersting comment - outward church unity comes above doctrinal and biblical truth. Sure, homosexuality is not as fundamental as issues such as the resurrection and substitutionary atonement, for example, but it's there, and it's clear...such a stance, if held church wide, can only result in both church disunity and theological and biblical error.

More from Mohler on Terri - Part III

Dr. Mohler's analysis of the implications of the last two weeks for American culture, and his final questions are what does this mean for patients? and what does this mean for doctors?

In answer to the first question, Mohler fears that the culture is moving (or has moved already) to a place where quality of life is the deciding factor in end of life issues, not the inherent dignity and instructed worth of life. He also notes the way in which not only life and death have been redefined, but eating and drinking, with 'experts' stating Terri is feeling no pain (then why the morphine?), and one even stating that she was not denied food and water - of course she was, and it's deceptive and disingenuous to state otherwise (see the Editorial in the National Review on the euphemisms surrounding the case). It is frightening that our end of life choices are being taken out of our hands.

On the second question, Mohler points out the vehemence with which doctors have been attacked who have disputed the cliaims of those the court followed in making the PVS diagnosis - by their fellow doctors. Claims of religious bigotry and ineptitude have been made, and as Mohler points out, the extreme language and bitterness reveals that more than simply a single life or death decision has been made here. It is a sign of a bigger battle to come, in which physicians and medical experts are going to be at the centre. And as many have disregarded the claims of some doctors because of the religious beliefs they hold (such as Stanford's rejection of Chershire's diagnosis), this does not bode well.

I'd encourage the reading of the columns...

Terri Schiavo is Dead indictment on us all...

Should People of Faith be Allowed to Make Laws

I've often been amazed at the arguments to keep people of faith out of politics, and the liberal outrage that Christians and others with religious moral values have such a sway in this country (less and less, however, I fear). Christians are wrong in the beliefs they hold by definition of the fact that they are religious beliefs (and therefore, by definition, irrational). Liberals, gay rights supporters, abortion supporters, stem-cell reasearch supporters, etc., etc., are right by virtue of the fact that they are not religious (and therefore, by definition, rational). Of course, the definitions of religious and rational in those statements would have to be those defined by the liberals, but that's OK, because being liberal, by virtue of the fact it's not being conservative, is to be unbiased and fair-minded!!

Anyway, Hugh Hewitt's most recent Daily Standard column is worth reading on this. Noting the liberal outrage and criticism of the religious right, he comments:

All of these charges--from the most incoherent to the most measured--arrive without definition as to what "the religious right" is, and without argument as to why the agenda of this ill-defined group is less legitimate than the pro-gay marriage, pro-cloning, pro-partial-birth abortion, pro-euthanasia agenda of other political actors.

It's not enough to define the terms in ways you like (or not define them and intead just throw them around), or to make charges without defending them. In eseence, what the liberals say in response to questions on why their position is the right one is to say, 'because', or 'it just is', much like my sister used to reply to my mother in sticky situations when she was a teenager. And if other can't understand it, well, they're just really not worth explaining it to.

Hewitt continues his essay by arguing the uprise in religious activism is simply a response, however, and brought by the liberals, secular elites and courts on themselves. In bringing all these issues, such as gay marriage, Terri Shciavo, and others, into the spotlight, and making law by 'judicial fiat', the response by religious people who wee their whole world-view being attacked is entirely unsurpising.

Hewitt finishes by commenting on the attempts to silence religious political activists:

Attempts to silence them, marginalize them, or to encourage others to do so are not arguments against their positions, but admissions that those positions represent majorities that cannot be refused a place at the law-making table.

The argument really is that the liberals and secularists are fear the power of a majority who think unlike them. My fear, looking at the way things have gone over the last year or two, is that their fear is becoming less and less justified...

Wednesday, March 30, 2005

More from Mohler on Terri - Part II

Here we have Mohler's second part (of what I now see will be a three part series) on the Terri Schiavo case. Following his questions in the first part, Dr. Mohler now asks what is the future for the courts and for conservatism in light of this episode?

To the first, the article argues that in the descisions such as Roe vs. Wade and the definition of food and water as medical treatment demonstrates

... a horrible set of legal precedents and court decisions. The courts have increasingly identified a "right to die" as a matter of legal protection and, in some cases, of constitutional right. In so doing, the courts have put themselves into inevitable conflict with larger moral questions.

Mohler also points to the fact that many commentators have referred (often with satisfaction) to the judicial supremacy, and he comments that

Unless these trends are checked, we are increasingly facing a government ruled by judges, for judges, in the name of the courts.

Whatever the case, Terri Schiavo's death has certainly made people look very much more closely at the relationship of the three branches government.

In response to the question of where conservatism goes from here, the article points to what Mohler sees as potentially dangerous divisions in the conservative movement:

At the same time, this controversy points to larger issues that might well divide the conservative movement in years ahead. The libertarians, focused almost exclusively on individual liberty, are increasingly averse to morals legislation. Fiscal conservatives are more willing to negotiate on matters of deep moral concern. All conservatives must recognize that deep worldview implications underlie every significant question.

The divisions are there to see. But as Mohler rightly states (in my view), if there is indeed a lack of moral courage in the conservative movement just now, tehre is little reason for it to continue, for a conservative movement that will not contend for the sanctity of human life is a conservative movement that does not deserve to survive.

I think Mohler may be a little harsh here, but having seen the way the House and Congress backed away from the moral issues of the case as soon as the poll figures turned, I can't be anywhere near certain.

Tuesday, March 29, 2005

Homepages of Theologians and Biblical Scholars - Links

Update: Sent out emails to a lot of scholars at evangelical seminaries, and got some reposnses (expect quite a few more)...I've added the first results.

I've wanted for a while to start a page devoted to biblical scholars and theologians who have homepages that have a decent amount of useful material (and are evangelical in outlook and sound inthe foundational doctrines of the Bible). As I've started this blog, I thought this a place I could at least start on it, and I'll pin this thread soon, So, here's a start, and I'll add to the thread as I find more sites (please, anyone reading this, if you know of any, please recommend them - my decision on the ones I find useful and sound is final, but I accept a pretty wide range, and want this to be useful to others...

Albert MohlerPresident of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary here in Louisville, and one of the most insightful Christian commentators around. His site has articles, a link to his radio program, and a link to his daily Crosswalk Commentaries.

Robert A. J. GagnonAssociate Professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. His site has a lot of excellent material on Christianity and homosexuality.

Doug Groothuis Professor of Philosophy ar Denver Seminary, and very well known Christian author. Site has many articles and book reviews he has published, focusing on Christian apologetics (also, links to his wife, Rebecca's site).

Mike StallardProfessor of Systematic Theology at Bible Baptist College. His site has a lot of good articles worth reading.

David S. DockeryPresident of Union University, and an excellent theologian and cultural commentator. His page has links to many of his articles and addresses.

Francis WatsonProfessor in New Testament Theology, King's College, Aberdeen. Has several of his published and unpublished articles (including a couple on the new perspective).

Wesley J. SmithSenior Fellow at the Discovery Institute, Smith is at the forefront of discussion of contemporary cultural movements (such as abortion, stem cell research and so on) from a Christian perspective. His site has a wealth of material, inncuding articles and a link to his Blog.

Simon GathercoleLecturer in New Testament, and young evangelical scholar with ever growing credentials. Site has links to some articles he has published.

Peter HeadNew Testament Research Fellow, Tyndale House. Links to a wide range of his published and unpublished work.

Richard G. HoweWith his brother (see below), a Christian Apologist and writer. His site has several of his articles.

Thoms A. HoweProfessor of Bible and Biblical Languages, Southern Evangelical Seminary. Site has good articles on biblical issues, and good reviews of Brian McLaren and the late Stanley Grentz.

William DembskiSoon to be Director of Center fo Science and Theology, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. A site with a LOT of articles on intelligent design and associated issues.

William Lane CraigExcellent Christian Apologist and Research Professor of Theology at Talbot School of Theology. Not with him on his neo-Molinist views, but very good apologetic articles at his site.

Norman GeislerPresident of Southern Evangelical Seminary, and well know Christian apologist. Not much on his site by way of articles, but some good articles on the recent controversy over Clark Pinnock and John Sanders in the ETS and open theism.

John WhitcombFormer Professor of Theology and Old Testament at Grace Seminary. About a dozen articles he has written on this site.

R. Scott ClarkAssociate Professor of Historic and Systematic Theology at Westminster Seminary. Excellent materials here from his taught classes

David LindenAction International Ministries. A lot of theological work here, including commentaries on Isaiah and Hebrews, with many other articles.

H. Wayne HousePresident and Professor of Biblical and Theological Studies, Oregon Theological Seminary. A good number of articles on theology, law, ethics and other subjects.

Paul CopanChair of Philosophy and Ethics, Palm Beach Atlantic University. Copan has several articles, mainy on christian philosophical issues.

Daniel AkinPresident of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. A vast array of materials from Dr. Akin on many theological issued. You could spend a lot of time here.

Thomas COnstableSenior Professor of Bible Exposition, Dallas Theological Seminary. Dr. Constable's Expository notes on the whole Bible - a lot of material!

Ron RhodesAdjunct Professor of Theology, Biola University. Christian apologist, with many articles on apologetics.

David HowardProfessor of Old Testament, Bethel Seminary. Well known Old Testament scholar, with many of his published articles available on his site.

Robert RakestrawProfessor of Theology, Bethel Seminary. Links to some of his published articles and bibliographies.

Dennis SwansonSeminary Librarian and Direcotr of Israel Studies, The Master's Seminary. Links to articles, and also Swanson's blog.

William BarrickProfessor of Old Testament, The Master's Seminary. Links to many of his articles.

John Mark ReynoldsAssociate Professor of Philosophy, Biola University. Has many of his articles, and also links to his excellent blog.

Wayne McDill Senior Professor of Preaching at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina. His site has over a dozen articles on preaching, evangelism and pastoral care, as well as a book on preaching available for free download. The site also has a blog.

Alvin Reid Associate Dean of Proclamation and Professor of Evangelism at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina, His site contains around 10 articles on evangelism and Christian living, as well as a number of links on evangelism.

David Black Professor of New Testament and Greek at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina. His personal site contains a vast amount of information in the forms of essays and columns on a wide range of issues from a Christian perspective, as well as a blog.

Ravi Zacharias Visiting Professor at Knox Theological Seminary, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, and a highly respected Christian apologist. His ministry website contains a wealth of apologetic material.

Mark D. Futato Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, Florida. He is also serving as the acting Academic Dean. His site contains some personal information and a handful of essays.

Calvin Beisner associate professor of historical theology and social ethics at Knox Theological Seminary in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, and an adjunct fellow of the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty and of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow. His site has a large number of articles on Biblical studies, economics, environmental issues and politics.

Reggie Kidd Professor of New Testament and Dean of the Chapel at Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando. Dr. Kidd’s site has a wide range of essays and class materials focusing on worship and on Pauline studies.

Carl "Chip" Stam Associate Professor in the School of Church Music and Worship at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. His site has an interesting worship quote for the week with discussion, and a link to his personal home page.

That will do for a start...really looking forward to finding out about more useful links - thanks in advance...

Conrad Gempf Lecturer in New Testament at London School of Theology, London, UK. He has a blog which he adds to often with devotional thoughts, and the site includes some articles and book information.

John Kilner Franklin Forman Chair of Ethics at Trinity International University, Illinois. His page contains links to a good number of articles he has written as well as book information, primarily in the field of bioethics.

C Ben Mitchell Professor of Bioethics and Contemporary Culture at Trinity International University, Illinois. His page His page has links to a lot of articles he has written as well as book information, primarily in the field of bioethics.

John Frame Professor of Systematic Theology and Philosophy at Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando, Florida. This site contains a very large amount of his articles on a wide range of subjects, from a very well respected theologian. More can be found throughout the site: Reformed Perspectives.

Rodney J. Decker Associate Professor of New Testament, Baptist Bible Seminary, Clark Summit, PA. The site has some of Dr. Decker’s materials on the New Testament, as well as a wide range of links on New Testament and Theological issues.

Allen Ingalls Associate Professor of Old Testament Languages and Literature, Baptist Bible Seminary, Clark Summit, PA. The site has a strong focus on Hebrew language studies, with some material and many links.

Gary Gromacki Associate Professor of Bible and Homiletics, Baptist Bible Seminary, Clark Summit, PA. Contains several of Dr. Gromacki’s articles, and a great deal of information on his investigation of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

P B Ryan Professor of Biblical and Historical-Theological Studies as Baptist Missionary Association Seminary, Jacksonville, Texas. His site contains many articles on theological, historical and Baptist issues.

Jack Willsey Associate Professor of Systematic Theology and World Missions, Northwest Baptist Seminary, Tacoma, WA. His page has five articles on postmodernism, hermeneutics and the trinity.

Ralph Wood Professor of Theology and Literature at Truett Theological Seminary, Waco, Texas. Dr. Wood’s site contains articles on writers such as Tolkein, C. S. Lewis, P. D. James and G. K. Chesterton.

Carl Laney Professor of Biblical Literature, Western Seminary, Portland, Oregon. His page has a link to five of his articles on theological issues.

Gary Breshears Professor of Theology, , Western Seminary, Portland, Oregon. Links to a very wide range of papers providing outlines of theological themes.

James Hamilton Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies, Harvard School for Theological Studies, Fort Worth, Texas. Dr. Hamilton has links to a few of his articles and presentations on his page.

William Pinson Jr. Distinguished Visiting Professor at Truett Theological Seminary, Waco, Texas. This growing site covers Baptist distinctives.

Misinformation Rules

Wesley Smith has a post on why people are not aware of the facts surrounding Terri Schiavo...worth a read.

John Leo on Terri Schiavo

Came across this column from Wesley Smith's blog Leo makes some excellent and incisive points in his column, and the whole is worth reading. Quoting John Neuhaus on the decline of ethics in general over the last few decades, we read:

Thousands of ethicists and bioethicists, as they are called, professionally guide the unthinkable on its passage through the debatable on its way to becoming the justifiable, until it is finally established as the unexceptional.

Puts it pretty well, I think. Then, on the relation of bioethics to the Terri Schiavo case, Leo ums up:

The killing of Schiavo is a scandal successfully redefined as unexceptional and therefore moral.

That's very true, and one of the most disturbing things of all - that this state sanctioned killing of a helpless woman can be viewed by so much of the population of this country as moral. Our society is, to paraphrase Alice in Wonderland, turning upside down and downside up...and it seems with every passing year there are a lot more downsides...

Terri's Personhood

Wesley Smith's article on the denial of Terri's personhood by bioethicists, and the implications of such denials...

Also, see Rich Lowry's excellent article on the mumbo-jumbo double-speak surrounding Terri's death. He quotes Felos in one of the most sickening quotes I think I've read in the whole affair:

In all the years I’I've seen Mrs. Schiavo, I've never seen such a look of peace and beauty upon her.

He also has this comment on a supposed expert's comment that nobody is denying Terri of food and water (!?):

This expert's argument is that, since she is in a persistent vegetative state, she has no knowledge of food. By this logic it would be morally acceptable to suffocate her with a pillow since she has no knowledge of air. She could be dropped out of a 15-story window because she has “no knowledge of gravity. She could be shot because she has no knowledge of ballistics.

Can we really put Terri to death on the recommendation of experts such as this?

Scottish Episcopal Church and homosexuality

A link for the Scottish Anglican Network (a group of churches in the Scottish Episcopalian church with Charismatic leanings...we disagree a little there, but we share our fundamentals! of the churches is around 5 minutes from my old church in Ayr). They have their meeting with the bishops on April 7th concerning their disagreement with the church's stand on openly supporting the ordination of practicing homosexuals.

Scottish Preachers and Theologians - Links

I'm going to start a few blog entries to do with Scotland, and the first is a links thread (which I'll pin soon) on Scottish preachers and theologians, both past and present. Just a single link to start off, but an excellent one:

Scottish Preacher's Hall Of Fame Maintained by Alan Newbie, and Englishman!!, this site has photos, links and sermons from many of Scotland's greatest preachers from the past, from Robert Murray McCheyene, to the Bonar brothers, to Thomas Boston, and a whole host more...spend a lot of time here!

Iain D. Campbell A minister at Back Free Church of Scotland in Stornaway, Dr. Campbell has written an excellent book entitled The Doctrine of Sin. This site contains many of his articles and sermons.

Scottish Preachers This site has links to articles or sermons by several modern and older scottish preachers and theologians, such as John Kennedy, John Knox, Thomas Chalmers, and the excellent Sinclair Ferguson.

More links to come !

More from Mohler on Terri

His most recent commentary is Terri Schaivo - Enduring Questions, Part I. In it he asks two questions stemming from the whole tragic episode.

First, Mohler asks what does this mean for the culture in the United States? The answer is that the division between two widely divergent views of life exist in America, with an impassable gulf between them. First, the social conservatives, who believe all life is intrinsically valuable and precious, and second, the social liberals who believe that quality of life is what matters. Mohler cites several writers, and I'd encourage any readers to go to his article as I won't steal his thunder, but I do appreciate the response he gives to Andrew Sullivan (a brit who I used to read in the Sunday Times before moving here, and who has gone off the rails even more in the last year or two). Sullivan was horrified at the intervention of Congress over the State powers of Florida, and vehemently defends state rights. Dr. Mohler's response:

His argument that "moral" issues should not trump federalism, if taken seriously, would have meant the continuation of slavery.

I'm sure Sullivan would back away from that, but the logical conclusions of liberal arguments often seem unclear to the proponents of those ideas.

Mohler's second question is what does this mean for the future? He begins his answer with these words:

Every significant moral precedent leads to the formation of new moral habits and the framing of new moral issues.

As he goes on to argue, the signs are ominous. Over half the population, and over half the conservatives and evangelicals, if polls are anything to go by, believe the decision to remove the feeding tube was correct, and accept the quality of life argument of the social liberals. Pointing to other related issues such as abortion and stem-cell research, Dr. Mohler concludes:

On issue after issue, the American public seems to be shifting into a worldview based in utilitarianism and a radical vision of individual autonomy.

That's scary to me, and I can be certain that it grieves that heart of God, and angers Him.

The second part of Dr. Mohler's response comes tomorrow...

An Autopsy for Terri?

It seems, from Blogs For Terri, that Michael Schaivo wants her to have an autopsy. Why? To prove the extent of her brain injury. The comment from the writer of the blog bears repeating:

Regarding the rationale reported above, doesn't it seem more appropriate to determine the extent of Terri's brim damage before she is starved to death?

It is extraordinary that they would want to prove it was right to kill Terri after the event, rather than have the required MRI and PET scans before withdrawing sustenance. And further on this point, listening to Hugh Hewitt the other night, I find that Terri is being given morphine. Why? To relieve the pain. But haven't we heard that Terri is in no pain, because she has no brain function to be able to feel it?

And further on starvation, comments in the Daily Texan from a philosophy student (HT: World Mag Blog):

Last week, The New York Times published an article citing expert claims that starvation results in a "gentle" death. According to the article, the process of starvation "is relatively straightforward, and can cause little discomfort."

At least now I don't have to feel guilty about little kids with bloated bellies in Somalia. Don't worry, kids. The doctor says it doesn't hurt

The language surrounding Terri's death from so-called experts, and the protestations that this is a dignified way to die, are stomach-turning.

If there is an autopsy (and I'm not holding my breath), I just hope it is by an unbiased third party.

Monday, March 28, 2005

Supreme Court and Abortion

The Supreme Court just ruled against reinstating an Idaho law requiring parental consent for abortions in teens under the age of 18 (High Court Lets Stand A Parental Consent Ruling). So, the Supreme Court is unwilling to stand up to protect the life of a helpless, defenseless Terri Schaivo, but willing to make it much easier for girls who know very little of life to destroy the helpless, defenseless on inside them. I guess at least they are consistent...

Lets hope, then, the least the court can do is go after abortion doctors who don't hold up their statutory duty to report abortions in under age girls.

Scottish Episcopal Church and Gay ordination, part II

Update on the debate in the Scottish Episcopal Church over gay ordination from the BBC. An evangelical group, The Scottish Anglican Network (where did they get that name!), has threatened to split from the Scottish Episcopal Church if they do not withdraw their support of the ordination of homosexuals. A Gay Advocacy group (Changing Attitude Scotland) has accused the network of

"Those who are calling for the bishops to withdraw their statement appear to be frightened of that discussion taking place," he told BBC Scotland's news website.

I wonder if they have ever just thought that they are appalled by the watering down of Biblical truth and orthodoxy? Anyway, watch this space for more.

Pat Sajak Says - Who'd Have Thunk It?

When you think of interesting conservative commentators, the world of Television Game Shows is not where you generally run to...however, having being pointed to an article by World Mag Blog, I went to Pat Sajak's site, and found he does a weekly commentary that is actually quite good!! The most recent is Arguing With Liberals, Why I've Stopped. He notes the irrationality of much of the liberal debate in his conversation with liberal friends (he probably has a few!) Here we have a representatively sane quote, talking of much of the liberal debate (this example based on a friend stating Justice Scalia was worse than the Nazis!):

They tend to do things like accusing members of the Right of sowing the seeds of hatred while, at the same time, comparing them to mass murderers. And they do this while completely missing the irony.

Another quote I liked, speaking of the disdain much of the liberal elite holds for the backward Red States:

It turns out it is superiority, not familiarity, which breeds contempt.

I've found that to be all too true in my university experiences.

In the previous weeks column, Mr. Sajak points to the slant of the liberal media (i.e. the great proportion of it [see, for example, the newest potential fraud, the so called Republican Talking point Memo on the Terri Schiavo Case, which could be a huge embarrassment to ABC who ran with it, Fake But Accurate Again). The column discusses the slanting of the coverage of Terri Schiavo in particular, and in it he makes this very true comment concerning the honesty of the coverage among bloggers more than in the mainstream media:

But don’t these bloggers also have a slanted view of the issues? Of course they do, but, in most cases, they acknowledge it and the consumers can factor in that slant when they read. When you check out something called “The View from the Right”, you know what you’re getting, but when you read The New York Times, you think you’re getting “All the news that’s fit to print”.

It's the same in apologetics, I find...those opposing Christianity, or defending evolution, and so on, and so on, are the sane ones, who by the nature of the beliefs they hold are somehow granted a position of greater rationality and lesser bias than those believing the irrational special creation or resurrection. Christians generally admit their biases more readily than liberals - it's simply true. But that's because liberals believe they have no biases.

For the record, I am a Bible believing Christian, believe that God created me and this world for His pleasure, that He reigns in Heaven and Earth, and that the Word of God is our sure foundation through which to view the world and all in it. Just in case you hadn't got that!

Anyway, never thought I'd be doing this, but go to Pat Sajak's site, and read his commentaries - you'll be pleasantly surprised!!

Mohler on Terri

Al Mohler's most recent Crosswalk Commentary summarizes the case well, even in the title - The Bell Tolls for Humanity. Mohler makes several points that have been repeated often and bear repeating. First, that spousal privilege, although a well set precedent, should not trump every other consideration in cases like these...the fact that Michael Schaivo should be given the life or death decision for his wife, while living with another woman with whom he's borne children and having a potential financial motive in desiring her death (whether or not these two facts have influenced his decision), is deeply troubling. Second, medical science has come on leaps and bounds in the ten years since the medical evidence the courts relied on to make the decision was proposed, and PVS (if Terri is in a PVS, which as I say, it seems very likely she is not, if only the courts would listen to the countless doctors willing to testify so) is not necessarily completely irreverible - as Wilson pointed out in his article in the previous post:

The chances that such a recovery will occur are very small, but they are not zero.

If they are not zero, then withdrawing a patient's feeding tubes and allowing her to die from a lack of water and food means that whoever authorizes such a step may, depending on the circumstances, be murdering the patient. The odds against it being a murder are very high, but they are not 100%.

Further, Michael Schiavo has denied Terri the medical tests necessary to really tell for certain one way or the other (MRI and PET). Further, Mohler comments on the notion of food and water being medical treatment:

Some observers attempt to find recourse in the legal definition of food and hydration as medical treatments. This is yet another of the perversities currently established in legal precedents. Since when is food and water a form of medical treatment? There can be no doubt that numerous courts have now agreed in this finding, but the moral consequence of this distinction is both fundamental and far reaching. Infants are obviously unable to feed themselves, but no one would rationally characterize the feeding of a healthy infant as a medical treatment. Those attempting to justify the courts' determination to end Terri Schiavo's life would immediately jump to a distinction between a healthy infant, who may be presumed to advance towards healthy adulthood, and Terri Schiavo, who, it is claimed, has little hope of any recovery or advance. This is a tempting distinction, but where does it end? Who will be next in line to be judged to have an inadequate quality of life or an inadequate chance of recovery? The logic of death advances on our refusal to face these questions directly.

Mohler further comments on the rulings of James Whittemore against the obvious intent of Congress. The fact that Congress took such extraordinary actions to pass legislation to allow Terri a further hearing based on the multitudes of new evidence, and that this man ignored this (and not only him, but the judges of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (well, most of them, or at least half - enough to send it up), and the Judges of the Supreme Court), is astonishing. And claiming his reason was that they were not likley to win an appeal on the merits of their case - that wasn't his judgement, in just a few hours - that was meant to be the judgement of a court based on the merits of their case, not his view of the expected outcome. As Mohler writes,

Judge Whittemore's decision not to hold such a hearing was not only a devastating loss to Terri Schiavo and the Schindlers, but to the cause of life itself and to hopes for a recovery of moral sanity within the judiciary.

This Easter period, the thought of Pilate comes to mind, washing his hands of the blood of Jesus...but the water couldn't wash away his guilt. The judiciary in this case stands in exactly the same position - Terri's blood is on their hands. But not just theirs: ours, as a society as a whole. The moral indignation has been muted, and many people are content to let Terri die.

The last word from Mohler again:

If one member of the human race can be so devalued as to be considered unworthy of life, every single human life is effectively discounted. As the poet John Donne would remind us, the bell that tolls for Terri Schiavo tolls for all humanity.

Playing God

James Wilson writes a good column. In it he argues that it was entirely unnecessary to kill Terri (a revelation, it would seem, to many out there). Basically he repeats the simple points that she was not in state as many others where she would die quickly without life support (and the idea food and water is life support is ridiculous - how did that ever become legal argument?!), and that she could (even if in a PVS, which she probably is not) have recovered.

In another column, John Fund interestingly compares the case of Terri with the case of Elian Gonzalez. Janet Reno and the Democrats went in and by force got the boy, while there is no such action in the case of Terri. Is it simply the case that here it's not politically expedient to do so? Surely Terri isn't going to die because of simple political expediency (though I guess history teaches us people do all the time - I don't see why it should be different today).

Friday, March 25, 2005

American Idol - Telling the Truth

Interesting article here at Opinion Journal. Talks about the success of American Idol, and suggests that the following may be the reason:

We live in an age in which being "judgmental" is a social vice; where our vanities are puffed and our lives misled by the moral disengagement of Randy Jackson and self-esteem diet of Paula Abdul. Mr. Cowell's judgments may be stern, but they are sharp, and his stardom attests to the fact that, deep down, Americans still hunger for some unvarnished truths. Funny that it takes a Brit to remind us.

I remember watching the first American Ido back in Scotland (it started in Britain), called Pop Idol, and thinking that Simon was indeed refreshingly honest. It was a big draw. Interesting comment from the article mentioned above, that "deep down, Americans still hunger for some unvarnished truths". I hope it's true. It seems, however, that over the past week or so, the judiciary and the media do not. Had they sought the truth, Terri would still be being fed and not starving to death. I hope the public at large begins to find out the real facts at the basis of this case, and while it seems every more likely it will tragically be too late for Terri and the Schindlers, may it not be too late for the United States...may Terri's lagacy be a step towards a Reformation for a culture of life and not death, and may Americans really be struck with a burden for Truth...

Terri's Legacy...

Editorial from Opinion Journal (require's free online subscription) is worth reading:

Democratic Party politics will be affected too; of the 100 House Democrats who made it back to Washington, 47--including nine members of the Congressional Black Caucus--voted for Congress to intervene. Even within their own party, liberals will find it harder to make the argument that the "right to die" is part and parcel of the "right to privacy."

I hope it's right on this point...indeed, the leagacy of Terri Schaivo could be to make the whole right to die issue a whole lot more transparent. I hope and pray her death is not in vain, and that in looking back, with debate and discussion, many good things could result. I do believe it willmake the Republicans have to look harder at the whole nuclear option, and getting rid of the judicial filibuster so misued in Persident Bush's furst term by the Democrats (see Payback Time by Hugh Hewitt) in the most recent WORLD magazine.

See also Joe Belz's column in WORLD, A Solomonic Decision. The last paragraph says it very well:

It could all have been so simple. All it would have taken was a Solomonic decision by any of a dozen judges—all of whom in this case overcomplicated the case before them. One profound difference, of course, was that in Solomon's case, the court saw to it that the baby lived.

Andrew McCarthy - Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

In this article, Andrew McCarthy writes the following:

If I am right, if reasonable doubt is the minimum constitutional requirement, then the court should proceed to a full-blown hearing at which the evidence of Terri's supposed PVS and desire to die are weighed anew — de novo — on the more demanding evidentiary standard. Perhaps then we would learn why basic, easy-to-do scientific tests to measure brain damage were not done in Terri's case; whether the clinical observation on which the Florida court relied (essentially, a 45-minute examination by a neurologist who is a right-to-die zealot) was adequate for a death case; and whether Michael Schiavo was credible when he suddenly remembered, seven years after the fact, that Terri happened to mention that she wanted to die if she were ever in a PVS.

He argues the minimum standard in a course like Terri's is that it is necessary for proof beyond a reasonable doubt (can I say, duh!, but it seems a point that needs to be repeated, as so many of the justices that have considered the case have forgotten it). I mean, this is a life and death can the courts possibly say they are right to have ingnored the mountain of evidence that suggests Terri would not have wanted this, and that Michael Schiavo has possible motives that were inconsistent with his role as Terri's guardian?? Despair does not even begin to cover what I feel about justice here in the States just now...

Evolving Standards of (In)Decency?

Excellent short article by William Kristol:

Evolving Standards of Decency

Init he summarises many of the most disquieting problems about the Terri Schaivo case, noting the willingness of the Supreme Court to overrule the states on the death penalty for murderers, but not, it seems, on the death penalty for fraglie defenseless, innocent women who may or may not (probably not) have said in a passing moment they wouldn't want to live with artificial medical support, based on the word of an unfaithful husband. At the time of writing, it seems very much as though Terri has run out of options, and her tireless, courageous family are going to be left heartbroken by a court system that should have served them far better...

See also the other articles in today's weekly standard on the case:

The ABCs of Media Bias by Fred Barnes (on the spin the media gave about Terri, not covering the facts much at all, except from Michael Schaivo's perspective - nothing about her true state, the many doctors willing to state she was not in PVS, the fact the main doctor who's testimony the court accepted that she was is a evehment euthaniasia supporter, and so on, and so on..)

How Liberalism Failed Terri Schiavo by Eric Cohen

The Politics of the Schiavo Case by Jeffrey Bell and Frank Cannon

The last paragraph of the last article:

The judicial confirmation debate will now unavoidably be about whether democratic decision-making on abortion should continue to be prohibited by our courts and (effectively) by the American legal profession. From the beginning, those who believed Roe would corrupt the rule of law feared that state sanction of private killing would put all public order and all private restraint in doubt. The fate of Terri Schiavo makes clear that those fears were utterly on target.

Terri's case is jet another stumble down a slippery slope that America stated on over 30 years ago...

Thursday, March 24, 2005

A Husband's Right To Choose?

I was just writing a comment in another blog (the excellent Between Two Worlds), and some of my thoughts were inspired by the comments of Michael Schiavo on Larry King Live:

M. Schiavo. This is not about them, it's about Terri. I've also said that in court. We didn't know what Terri wanted, this is what we want...

Not usre if it was a slip of the tounge or not, but as there are several others who are willing (and have) sworn Terri wanted differently, the best that can be said is that Judge Greer has decided Terri's death based on nothing more than hearsay, and not very strong hearsay at that...Here were my comments:

Appreciate all you are writing on this - it's gut-wrenching and deeply troubling, the whole Schiavo case. I even started my own blog to be able to vent about it many people are being so moved by it - but none in the judiciary it seems (save the notable exceptions of a couple in the 11th Circuit Appeals Court. How in the world can justice be so blind. We'll save cows, or even onions (as Hugh Hewitt pointed out yesterday), but not a life. It's no surprise, perhaps, as the most vulnerable have been being killed en masse for the last 30 odd years (via abortion) - seems that in addition to a woman's right to choose, we now have a profligate, adulterous, unfaithful husband's right to choose...

I'm truly disgusted and horrified by the way this defenseless woman has been not only neglected, but conspired against by the very ones who are meant to protect her...

The Law and the Intent of Congress

Hugh Hewitt makes a very good point in his most recent post - in reponse to some professors arguing that the federal courts in the Schiavo case were simply following thier reading of the law passed by Congress at the weekend, and that they should not be looking at the discussion (i.e. intent) in Congress over the bill, he asks why in the world not if Justices in the Supreme Court are going to look as far afield foreign courts for advice (e.g. Anthony Kennedy in the recent judgement on capital punishment)? Surely the intent of Congress is at least of as much merit as the rulings of countries such as Zimbabwe?!?

A Judicial First - Not A Good One

From Worldmag Blog:

While covering the Schiavo story for WORLD's upcoming issue, I interviewed Lynda Bell of Florida Right to Life (FRTL). We were discussing Judge Greer's most recent order to terminate Terri's life. It's been noted before here that his ruling didn't merely give permission to remove Terri's feeding tube, but ordered it removed. Ms. Bell told me the ruling marked the first time in American history that a judge has ordered a non-criminal put to death. After letting the implications of that sink in a minute, I started trying to think of other, previous examples, but couldn't...can you?

Supreme Court Denies Request

The Supreme Court has denied the request to hear the case...I hold out very little hope that Governor Bush can do anything, that the Flordia Couts will allow him to. This is a very sad day for the United States, and I hope this case brings changes to the consciousness of America as the facts eventually come out to the population a at large. I pray some miracle can still happen, but I pray most for Terri and her family...

And the Loser is...

According to an article I just read by Richard Cohen (at the Washington Post), remarkably, the democrats - read here:

Where Are The Democrats

From my reading, a woman dies, and the democrats are the losers (not Terri, or her family) because they failed to stand up in Congress and support her prolonged starvation more passionately...forgive me for not being able to even begin to comprehend that argument. Could the States be more divided - I don't even like to think where we'll be in five years. I'm hopeful, though, that most are not so out of touch with the reality of what's happening on the Democtratic side to agree with Cohen.

In Love with Death

The title of an article from Peggy Noonan today, asking why the keep-the-tube-out-and-let-her-starve people as so vehement and passionate in their support of Terri's death - well worth reading...

In Love With Death

In the meantime, Terri has gone almost 6 full days without food and water...the Supreme Court looks the only real hope...

Wednesday, March 23, 2005

Terri's Hopes Pinned on the Supreme Court

Not good news...finding it hard to write much. Kennedy is considering the appeal to the Supreme Court now, amd Terri is still starving. I've read reports that not only did the Forida legislation fail again, but that Judge Greer has ordered DCF cannot get access to protect Terri. The only hope seems to be the Supreme Court - keep praying.

I did find this quote that sums up the state of the case well - "The Terri Schiavo Case in 70 Words":

Since we have no reliable way of knowing whether Terri Schiavo would have wanted to live in her current condition and since there is at least one highly qualified expert who has examined her and believes that she could improve if given rehabilitation, it would be monstrously cruel & unethical to deliberately allow her to die without doing more testing to verify that she is truly in a persistent vegetative state. John Hawkins

Keep Praying...

Down to the Governor

It seems now that Terri's life is in Jeb Bush's hands...the 11th Circuit Appeals rejected the appeal, and there is very little chance of the Supreme Court taking up the case. The Florida House has just rejected a bill to save Terri. However, Sean Hannity is reporting that it is possible Jeb Bush could take Terri into protective would be a polarizing thing, but it would be the right thing, and the brave thing. He seemed to say he would at 3 this afternoon - pray he follows through...

Going back to full 11th Circuit Appeals Court

Just read on Fox News that they schindler's (Terri's parents) are going back to the Atlanta court to have the case heard by the full court...obviously not too hopeful of the Supreme Court taking the case (they've rejected that twice). Again, pray....

Charles Krathammer on Terri

A recent good column from the Washington post:

Between Travesty and Tragedy

I hear Jeb Bush is pushing for the Florida Legislature to pass a law to save Terri surprised if it passes, but pary hard. In the meantime, Terri has been starving for 120 hours...

Andrew McCarthy on the 11th Circuit Appeals Court Decision

Here's the link from his most recent article:

Another Loss, But A Glimmer of Hope

Interesting, and again, my applause to the judge, Judge Charles Wilson, who voiced the minority opinion. I wonder at the title. A glimmer of hope, only if Terri manages to stay alive, and if she does, how much dmage has already been done to her? I hope the Supreme Court takes it, but the Circuit Justice for the Court is Justice Anthony Kennedy, who recently backtracked on his earlier ruling in the recent case on the death penalty. Doesn't inspire me with confidence (see a post by Hugh Hewitt here: Will Justice Kennedy Cite the Gronigen Protocol?). I hope I'm wrong. Keep praying for this porr woman and her family...

World Water Day

Over at another blog worth reading on Schaivo case:


a rather tragic irony is noted - today, the day that the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals vboted 2-1 against reinserting the tube to allow Terri to stop starving and to be able to drink, it is World Water Day. Enjoy your drinks today, and enjoy the fact that you can...

Ed: Just discovered the theme of World Water Day this year: Water for Life...

Scottish Episcopal Church follows United States on Gay priests

There are a lot of good Scottish-American links and ties, but this is one that I'm not exactly thrilled about. The Scottish Episcopal Church has announced that being homesexual is not a bar to ordination. Actually, that would not be so bad, but they actually say being a practicing homosexual should not be a bar to ordination as a priest, and so follow the Episcopal Church in the United States. Here's the story from the BBC:

Scottish Church Supports Gay Ordination

It seems the Bible doesn't matter any more. I don't deny people the right to believe what they believe, but why do they have to call themselves Christian...biblically, the Scottish Episcopal Church is heading towards apostasy, so why claim the Bible as their guiding light...why not simply admit that they are making up their own faithm, and be done with it, rather than claiming to be something the are definitionally notm (the Bible being the source of the definition and descriptiuon of a true church). The Church of England is a bit of a mess just now, and the best thing Archbishop Rowan Williams could do would be to take the advice of the African and Asian communions (and the evangelical wing back in England, though thyis group is diminishing, I would say, with the death of Stott, Packer leaving, and so on). Get back to the foundations of the church, ideally to the teaching of the 39 articles, and the Church of England may again perhaps become somewhere that a Ryle could be happy again.

Terri Schiavo

I've just heard that Terri Schiavo has been ruled against again, this time by the 11th Circuit Federal court in Atlanta, 2-1. I have to say that I like millions of others , have been horrified by the happenings in this case. Michael Schiavo stands to gain financially from what I've read a very large amount of money, he has denied rehab for his wife for the last 15 years, is living with another woman with two kids, seemed to be waiting for his wife's death and seeming to look forward to it (from sworn depositions from medical staff looking after Terri), and gives conflicting stories about whether she did or didn't say she wanted to die (he only remembered she did several years after her medical problems began, and after he received an award of around 1 million dollars which he said he would put towards Terri's care - he's not spent it on her care...the court approved him spending it on legal bills to kill Terri instead). The courts have ruled her to be in a Permanent Vegatative State (PVS) on the basis of two or three doctors (one of the main ones being a doctor who used to be on the board of the Euthanasia Society of America), while by all accounts dozens are willing to testify she is not, including one doctor nominated for the Nobel Prize for his work in exactly this area. Indeed, Michael Schiavo has refused a PET scan or MRI scan for Terri, which would give a far more reliable picture of whether she is indeed in a PVS. There are even allegations of possible abuse against Michael Schiavo against his wife. Yet in light of all these facts, because he has a ring on his finger it seems, Michael Schiavo gets to decide, it seems, whether his wife lives or dies. I can't even begin to explain how horrific all of this is to me...and while almost 2 dozen judges now (my congratulations to the one in Atlanta who voted for Terri) have ignored clear evidence against Michael Schiavo, refusing to listed to many depositions against what Michael Schiavo has been saying, Terri enter's day five of her state sanctioned starvation to death. As many have pointed out, even death row prisoners get treated better, and are permitted to die with far greater dignity.

For those who may come across this blog, the following links give some good commentary on the issues, and outline the facts:

From the National Review (mostly Andrew McCarthy's articles):

Starving for a Fair Diagnosis (on the lack of necessary care provided by Michael Schiavo)

Too Vigourously Assisted Suicide

Torturing Terri
Conservatives and Terri Schiavo
Lingering Questions
Ducking Tough Questions

From Other Sources:

Terri's Fight (the official site, with videos of a happy Terri with parents etc)

Terri Schiavo and the Law: The Case for Life(Wall Street Journal Editorial)

Blogs for Terri(a collection of many relevant articles from all over the Web)

It seems to me that the culture of death is just making further inroads into our society, and it's saddening - too soft a word - sickening, to see so early into my move to this new country the way in which the fragile vulnerable woman has been treated by those who should be defending her. I can't believe it's come to this - a week ago I was sure they would find legal remedy, but against a generally misinformed and misinforming media (purposefully?), and a largely untroubled population (there are many who feel as I do, but it seems to be a minority), the family and supporters of Terri Schiavo have lost - even the government could not overcome the courts.

And that for me is one of the scariest thing about the whole story. Beside the terrible tradgedy of a vulnerable and weak life being cruelly and inhumanely taken by court sanction (and there should be no surprise there - with countless millions of unborn babies having gone the same way in the last three decades) is the ever growing power and unconstitutionalism (if there is such a word) of an ever growing liberal reactionary court, not defending the law, but making it (and arguably bending if not breaking it). How they can go against the obvious will of congress and government in the bill passed over the weekend is , I think, frightening. Legistlation from the bench is never what the founders envisioned, and yet here it is happening before our eyes again, and precedent is being established making the taking of the life of family members all the easier. How the courts cannot agree with the President that we should err on the side of life is beyond me, but the fact that they can, and that they can enforce the starvation of a helpless woman is, frankly, terrifying. I have to say in light of the happenings of the last few days, the much talked about nuclear option in the Senate has to surely become a reality, lest the Supreme Court become simply a wing of the more liberal elemnts in our culture to legislate in the way they cannot acheive through the elected government.They say the law is an Ass - I wish it were that harmless.

The Terri Schaivo case says very unsavory things about the world in which we live, and gives me a sense of forboding about the my new country will go in the next ten years - I can only hope the backlash is enormous, and my sense of gloom is misplaced. I fear it is not. But at the center of all of this lies a woman, slowly, painfully, starving to death, and a family grief-stricken by the ever growing likelihood of the death of a daughter and sister. So pray for our country, but pray hard for Terri, and for her family. What they are suffering I cannot imagine.

Scot's Wha Hae - Wahey!!

Being a Scot recently moved to America to marry, and thus a Scot who is now far more proud and fiercly posessive of his Scottish heritage, I decided the title of the Blog, "Scot's Wahey!", was a good one. Actually, I'd wanted to call it Scot's Wha Hae (Scot's Who Are), after the opening lines of Robert Burn's immortal poem which he wrote as an imagined air that Robert Bruce and his army marched against Edward's English army at Bannockburn in 1314 - a fantastic piece I remember learning at primary school (elementary, for my new American brothers and sisters!). The words are worth putting in this, my inaugral post:

Scots, wha hae wi' WALLACE bled
Scots, wham Bruce has aften led
Welcome to your gory bed
Or to Victorie

Now's the day and now's the hour
See the front o' battle lour
See approach proud EDWARD'S power
Chains and Slaverie

Wha will be a traitor knave?
Wha can fill a coward's grave?
Wha sae base as be a slave?
Let him turn and flee!

Wha for Scotland's King and Law
Freedom's sword will strongly draw
Free-Man stand, or Free-Man fa'
Let him follow me!

By Oppression's woes and pains
By your Sons in servile chains!
We will drain our dearest veins
But they shall be free

Lay the proud Usurpers low
Tyrants fall in every foe!
Liberty's in every blow!
Let us Do or Die!

Powerful, especially so for a Scot abroad! Give me liberty, or give me death!!! So I thought that would be a good start to my blog, and I also thought would be a good and memorableblog address, but to my annoyance, somebody got there first. And to my greater annoyance, that someone has written precisely no posts - what a waste of a fantastic domain (as bad as the person who chose my first domain - - who hasn't used it since 2003!!) Anyway, with these depressing discoveries, I adapted my choice, and came up with Scot's Wahey!

Scot's Wahey seems to me a most apt title for a blog by the son of one of the greatest nations on God's good earth! Scotland is the home of invention: the telephone (Alexander Graham Bell), the television (John Logie Baird), the steam engine (James Watt), radar (Robert Watson Watt), refrigerators (James Harrison), and as all Star Trek fans are aware, teleportation (beam me up, Scotty!!) It is a home of medicine: the hypodermic syringe, quinine (George Cleghorn), anaesthetics (James Chalmers) and penicillen (James Fleming). It is a home of economics, from the foundational text , The Wealth of Nations (Adam Smith) to the Bank of England! It is a home of literature, with the historical novel (Sir Walter Scott) and the greatest poet of the last 500 years (Robert Burns), Treasure Island and Jekyll and Hyde (Robert Louis Stevenson) and Peter Pan (J M Barrie). It is the land of some of the most attractive and haunting scenery anywhere on earth, from the beauty of the highlands to the grandeur of it's castles, the evocative Isle of Skye to the splndid architecture of it's cities. It is a home of mathematics and the sciences: the decimal point and logarithms (John Napier) Scotland is a home of sports, from golf and the famous links courses, to football (trans: soccer), with Glasgow Cerltic, Glasgow Rangers, and of course, Kilmarnock (my local team!!) And for my new homeland, Scotland is the home of the Buick (David Dunbar Buick) and the US Navy (John Paul Jones)!! Indeed, if it is true that everyone I meet has sScottish ancestors here in the US, as I am told by everyone I meet, we are actually the founders of the United States. Scotland has an output of genius far beyond its size, so as I say - Scot's Wahey!!

However, my blog will probably be far less filled with things about Scotland than it will with things about my faith, and comment on Biblical themes or my faith in relation to what is going on in society around me. Scotland has a proud heritage of Christianity, from John Knox, to the Covenanters, to the many sound Christian theologians and pastors of previous centuries (Thomas Chalmers, Horatius and Andrew Bonar, Robert Murray McCheyne, Alexander MacLaren, Thomas Guthrie, Samuel Rutherford, David Livinstone, Robert Haldane, Sir Robert Anderson, and Mary Slessor) to the superb theologians and pastors, (such as Sinclair Ferguson, Alastair Begg, Eric Alexander, Donald MacLeaod, Douglas Kelly). A proud heritage indeed.

So welcome to my blog, and I'll try to write now and again when time allows!!