About Me

Name: Shaun Pierce
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
Vist My Primary Blog

Our Pastor Problems

 
By now you know about Barak Obama and his pastor problems. Yet he is not alone.

New York Times writer Frank Rich put televangelist Rev. John Hagee in his literary crosshairs. Hagee endorsed John McCain back in February over Mike Huckabee.

I'm no fan of Hagee. In fact I think his a false teacher. At the same time Hagee is no fan of the Catholic church and has called the church “the Great Whore” before his television audiences.

The purpose of the Rich article attempts to draw a parallel with Hagee & McCain and Obama and Wright. While I certainly don't think Hagee will help McCain with the Catholic vote, we must understand that Hagee is NOT McCain's pastor. If we were electing the nuttiest pastor, then the Hagee - Wright race would be a good match up.

The real story here is not about presidential candidates and pastors. It's the millions of Americans embracing, accepting and welcoming these wackos who claim to be legitimate clergy. THEY ARE NOT.

Why do politicians accept endorsements from pastors? Because they want the congregation to vote like the pastor. The sad fact is the pastor needs to a recognizable personality who is a television star in order to have any value to a candidate. If your own pastor endorsed a candidate, do tyou hink that candidate would show up to accept? Not unless your pastor has a high profile mega-church and best selling book and a huge viewing audience.

Wright claims the government invented AIDS. Hagee claims God created Hurricane Katrina to punish New Orleans for its sins. Both men present these claims as fact when it's merely personal theories and nothing more. In Hagee's case, he appears on multiple religious networks, including Trinity Broadcasting, which reaches 75 million homes. Millions of people are being fed this garbage from the pulpit.

We must question what we as Christians hold up and present to the rest of the world as representative of our Christian faith. What do people see? They see Joel Osteen who can't explain the basic way to get to heaven smiling in his arena church. They see John Hagee preaching opinion. They see Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, blame the Sept. 11th attack on abortionists, feminists, gays. They see Benny Hinn, TD Jakes, Robert Schuller, Marilyn Hickey, Paul & Jan Crouch, Rod Parsley, RW Shambach, Carlton Pearson, John Avanzinni, Kenneth & Gloria Copeland, Jessie Duplantis, Oral Roberts, Richard Roberts, Kenneth Hagin Sr., Kenneth Hagin Jr., Frederick Price, Creflo Dollar, Rodney Howard Browne, Jack Van Impe, Rinehard Bonnke, Texx Marrs, Joyce Meyer, Morris Cerello, John Kilpatrick, Clarence McClendon, Kent Hovind, Rick Joyner, Hal Lindsey, Charles Capps, Robert Tilton all asking for money and all marketing salvation to the poor souls who don't know any better. We need to scrub the airwaves of this deceptive trash.

While we should rightly exercise great care in choosing a person to represent our country to the world, should we not do the same with our faith?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (1) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Federal Funds for Abortion, Racisim Sexual Crimes

Imagine you open your bank statement. As you look through the list of charges to your account you see a charge for Abortion. Further down there is charge for Racism and yet another charge for Sexual Crime. Would you want to know why those charges are there? In reality you pay those charges. They just don't appear on any statement.

Over $300 million of your tax dollars go to Planned Parenthood each year. That's the bill for killing American children over 12 months. If our government is unwilling to outlaw abortion, then at the very least those who hold life as sacred should not be forced to bankroll what is morally abhorrent.

The name "Planned Parenthood" is misleading. It's more about avoiding parenthood (ie. responsibility for personal actions) rather then planning it. The charges continue to pile up against Planned Parenthood. Some of them are more shocking then ever imagined. First came the revelations that Planned Parenthood clinic employees were coaching a 14-year-old girl on how to avoid triggering statutory rape reporting requirements against her 22-year- old boyfriend. That's called covering up a crime. Why has Planned Parenthood taken on the role of legal counsel? In fact, they are not even protecting their client, the are protecting the person who may have committed the crime of rape.

As recently reported, Planned Parenthood employees were recorded accepting donations from an avowedly racist customer. He asked that his money be earmarked for the abortion of an African-American baby. Even after making it clear that his intention was "to lower the number of black people in America" Planned Parenthood gleefully accepted the money. Was this an isolated incident? Apparently not. Seven clinics were called. Not one of them objected to or balked at taking donations targeted for the abortion of African-American babies. Where is the outrage and leadership in the black community? Where is Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton on this issues. I hear nothing but crickets. If the Rev. Jeremiah Wright really was to address a crime against blacks in this country, he ought to speak out against the government funded abortions of generations black children.

We live in a free country. That also means people are free to make bad choices. However when we are forced to fund the bad choices of others and the racist practices of an organization a line must be drawn. The issue involves us all. If a person is truly pro choice then they should acknowledge a persons right to chose not to have money fund the killing of babies.

Let Planned Parenthood financially stand on their own. If the pro-choice crowd loves them so much, then let them fund the organization. If any other group covered up sexual crimes against children and accepted racially motivated donations the outcry would be deafening. Not only would tax money cease, the group would be shut down and prosecuted. Yet some how Planned Parenthood is allowed to do what most of us don't even want to think about.

Conservatives came together to deliver the house and senate to Republicans who dangled the dream of ending abortions in front of us. We gave a pro-life president two terms. Abortions still remain legal and federally funded.

Before President Bush leaves office we must call upon him and all pro-life officials to use their God given position of authority and ensure that tax money must no longer be used subsidize abortion, support racism and hide sexual crimes against children.

Read More from Shaun Pierce

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Catholic Reformation

By Shaun Pierce

There was a time when Catholicism was abhorred by Protestants all over the world. The horrors of the medieval church and its sales of indulgences caused an uprising to counter act these abuses. For some the answer was was to break free from Catholicism and pursue a new form of religion.

Those that remained within the Catholic church have always been looked upon with suspicion. John F. Kennedy when running for president of the United States had many wondering about his intentions. Would he take his marching orders from Rome? That answer turned out to be no, as he won the election and the people’s fears of Catholicism abated. We had taken a step forward. There was still a long way to go.

In 1966, Pope Pius VI spoke at the United Nations, President Lyndon Johnson visited the pontiff at his hotel. Had the pope come to the White House, there would have been an uproar. Still, the president met with the pope. Another step forward. In 1979, Pope John Paul II became the first pope to visit the White House.

It seems those early small steps have now become a giant leap as President Bush not only hosted the pope at the White House, he picked him up at the airport! The words of President Bush said it all: "The best way to honor Pope…, truly one of the great men, is to take his teaching seriously; is to listen to his words and put his words and teachings into action here in America. This is a challenge we must accept." .

How the times have changed from Luther to Pope Benedict. While some will always choose to preserve the separation between Catholics and other Christians, that mentality is finally fading. It does not make sense anymore to continue distrust of Catholicism when the acts of kindness through school and hospital networks make Catholics and the fruit of such labor a powerhouse for good in this world.

Today, the very meaning of Christianity is under attack as issues of homosexuality, same sex marriage and what role God has in society, trade traditional Biblical teaching for a more politically correct language of tolerance and acceptance. Radical Islam has become a global threat to all Christians. We have seen the damage that is possible as evidenced by the changes in Europe. This is not the time for Christians to be divided. We need each other if we hope to face the challenges before us. Christ wanted us to be one. That time has come.
 
Read more fron Shaun Pierce
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Abortion As Art

The horror of this story is beyond explanation.

Aliza Shvarts is an Art Major at Yale. She will be displaying her "art project", a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself "as often as possible" while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.

This young lady needs to be in therapy, not art class. Since when is the murder of human beings considered art? Can all you "pro-choice" folks see how far we have sunk?

Shvarts said her goal was to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body. We had a discussion about the "Bodies Exhibit" that uses human bodies as art. This to me is very different. In the Bodies Exhibit humans were not created for the single purpose of art. What Shvarts fails to understand is she is not creating art, she is destroying it.

God is the ultimate artist. Look at a sunset, snowfall or a child. For anyone to destroy such an amazing creation, the result can not be art but a crime against all.

The abortifacient drugs Shvarts took were legal and herbal, she said, and she did not feel the need to consult a doctor about her repeated miscarriages. Therein lies the problem. Freedom of choice allows destructive and often dangerous decisions.

It's hard to believe that this will be hosted at Yale. Yale’s roots can be traced back to the 1640s, when colonial clergymen led an effort to establish a college in New Haven. The charter was granted for a school “wherein Youth may be instructed in the Arts and Sciences [and] through the blessing of Almighty God may be fitted for Publick (original spelling) employment both in Church and Civil State.”

How far they have strayed.

Story
 
Read more from Shaun Pierce
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

History Repeats - Remaking the Democrats of 72'

By Shaun Pierce

My father sent me an interesting tidbit of information. Since I was busy being born in 1972, I wasn't really following politics much. But he brought up the idea if you look at the "1972 Democratic Convention" you find something that looks like it's the script from today's newscast. Only the names have changed.

In 1972, new quotas mandated that certain percentages of delegates be women or members of minority groups. Also taking center stage of debates for the first time were abortion and gay rights. 36 years have gone by and it seems we really have not moved an inch.

36 years ago new rules for choosing and seating delegates created an unusual number of rules and credentials challenges. Sound familiar?

Back then South Dakota senator George McGovern had amassed the most delegates to the convention by using a grass roots campaign that was powered by opposition to the Vietnam War.
Now Senator Barack Obama is amassing delegates by using a grass roots campaign powered by opposition to the Iraq War.
Back then many traditional Democratic leaders and politicians felt that McGovern's delegate count did not reflect the wishes of most Democratic voters. Kind of like the infighting that we see going on now.

Back then Georgia Governor Jimmy Carter helped to spearhead a "Stop McGovern" campaign. The stop-McGovern forces tried unsuccessfully to alter the delegate composition of the California delegation. California had a "winner-take-all" primary format, which was contrary to the delegate selection rules. So even though McGovern only won the California primary by a 5% electoral margin, he won all 273 of their delegates to the convention.

The anti-McGovern group argued for a more proportional distribution of the delegates, while the McGovern forces stressed that the rules for the delegate selection had been set and the Stop McGovern alliance was trying to change the rules after the game. Hello Florida and Michigan!

Can someone tell me what year this is? Now I feel like Marty McFly watching the news. Just this morning on CNBC they interviewed a financial analyst who proudly wore on his lapel a large "WIN" button circa 1974. That stands for Whip Inflation Now (WIN) and was an attempt to to combat inflation, by encouraging personal savings and disciplined spending habits in combination with public measures, urged by U.S. President Gerald Ford.

It amazing with all the slick language of "Change" and "Progressiveness" you could still put on a pair of bell bottoms and be in political style. Maybe McGovern will win this time.
Tags: Politics  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rev. Wright & The Opinion Pulpit

Rev. Wright & The Opinion Pulpit 

by Shaun Pierce

It's always tough to tackle the subject of racism. Emotions tend to run high and often statements are misunderstood.

The words of Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. have captured the attention of all kinds of people. It has sparked both good and bad discussions about race, the church and what is being taught in pulpits.

I have spent considerable time looking into information available and I've learned much. I will do my best to share that information in a concise manor. Let me stress, I will keep the political aspect out of this discussion.

Some say that selected comments by Wright have been taken out of context. From all that I have reviewed, I can not agree. Wright himself writes on the church website "To have a church whose theological perspective starts from the vantage point of Black liberation theology being its center, is not to say that African or African American people are superior to any one else. "

Yet a church that replaces the Bible as the center with "Black liberation theology being its center" has strayed from the Word of God and the basis for the church's religious and political philosophies will follow suit. That explains Wright's long history of divisive speech and not just a few comments over 20 years.

We should all be aware by now that sins have been committed against people of color. Sins have also been committed by people of color. We can spend the rest of our days assigning blame to one another and that accomplishes nothing. Let's specifically deal with the thinking behind the comments made by Rev. Wright.

Some have attempted to justify the comments made by Wright. In his defense there is evidence of a few bright spots. Wright ended one particular message with a blessing on all people, saying "All of God's children white, black, red, yellow, male, female, all together". However, the divisive comments are much more numerous. While it may be easier to dismiss his divisive comments, it is also irresponsible. One can not decry racism against blacks and remain complacent when racism against others surfaces.

What Wright preaches and teaches should offend all people alike. At the same time he does have a right in this country to say those things. I'm glad that he does not hide his true beliefs. I'd rather know where a man really stands even if I disagree. However, preaching personal opinion, prejudice and ideology from the pulpit should never be packaged and disguised as the Word of God.

When people begin to believe that they are a victim and society is against them they look for someone to rescue them. Living this way makes a person paranoid and everything thing is suspect. That's how an educated man can preach and get people to believe that we attacked our own country, HIV was invented by the government and the government supplies drugs to destroy black communities. (You can see video posted by the church here.)

Wight has a blog on a website that fights for what they call "reproductive health" being defined on the site this way: "Reproductive health therefore implies that people are able to have a satisfying and safe sex life and that they have the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when and how often to do so." They oppose pro life groups that promote abstinence including groups such as American Life League, Focus on the Family, Priests for Life and 13 other groups.

While I don't want to impose my own beliefs on anyone, their must be a basic Christian foundation of belief. We can disagree on doctrine but the issue of defending human life and supporting those that do should be the starting point of Christianity and not a point of divergence.

This issue goes much deeper then who was offended by what comment. There is a basic flaw in the understanding of Wright and others like him who claim to teach, preach and know the gospel. Wright has been leading his congregation in this manner for over 30 years! We wonder why people turn away from Christianity. Could it be that within the confines there exists inconsistent messages of hate, division, them vs. us and so fourth?

While it's natural to focus on Rev. Wright as he is tossed into the spotlight, this reaches far beyond one man or one church. Wright has over 8,000 members who attended his church according to his own numbers. That's not a few fringe folks. Wright is also not the inventor of this ideology. He credits multiple people for developing his views. Those names include: Dr. James Cone, Dr. Cain Hope Felder, Dr. Gayraud Wilmore, Dr. Jacqueline Grant, Dr. Kelley Brown Douglas, Dr. Renita Weems, Dr. Katie Cannon, Dr. Dwight Hopkins, Dr. Linda Thomas, and Dr. Randall Bailey.

The ideas that Wright espouses are by no means exclusive to his congregation. It's much more widespread then I ever imagined. That should be the major concern of all Christians. Racism, hate and division is being preached from the pulpit. Once any pastor begins to preach anything without the Gospel as the foundation of the message, they begin to stray into areas where it is easy to confuse our own ideas with the ideas of God.

It's sad that "black theology" and "white theology" even exist. Theology that comes from God is not bound to any ethnic group, skin color or denomination. Every man and women of God should speak out against any attempt to hijack theology for a personal purpose.

I understand that often we hear very different things while listening to the same words. While I might hear divisive anger, others hear righteous anger about oppression that is common in sermons delivered in black churches. That aspect seems to be missing from the conversation.

Time and time again I wonder where the voices of our Christian leaders are? We can put Joel Osteen on CNN for an hour to mangle what it means to be a Christian, yet when uncomfortable issues in the church pop up few respond.

The truth is we all must be liberated. Not from those who oppress us or our ancestors, but from our own sins. The message of salvation is for all. While some may bury their heads in the sand when these tough issues present themselves, we must embrace the moment to speak to the world. To lovingly rebuke those who teach opinion as truth and those who divide instead if unify.

Any person should be welcome to walk into a true Christan church. If you worship race, country, ethnicity, skin color, denomination, or yourself, then you fail to worship the God of us all.
Tags: rev. wright  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Boycotting Boycotts

By Shaun Pierce

I'm not a fan of Christian boycotts. Don't get me wrong, there are some companies out there the Christians would do well not to support.

Still, if it's your money, spend it where and how you see fit. I admit I jumped on the boycott bandwagon a few times, then I noticed something. No one really wins.

There are very few companies that decide they exist only to serve Christian customers. Homosexuals, Pagans, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and people who worship an oak tree all eat food, wear clothes, need products and services and drive cars. Ok, maybe the tree people ride bikes, but you get the idea...

The American Family Association does some wonderful work. They also appear quite frequently in the media for spearheading boycotts against major companies.

In the past they have placed in their cross hairs of morality on Target (fitting isn't it), American Girl, Kraft, Movie Gallery, Disney, Proctor & Gamble, Wal-Mart , the list goes on. While the boycotts gain some attention, the actual impact on these major companies is debatable.

We see boycotts come and go but it's almost impossible to measure if this is an effective method to change hearts and minds. The Disney boycott only came to an end after the release of "The Chronicles of Narnia," a movie that made Disney millions of dollars. Was this an act of Disney repentance, or did someone run the numbers and figure out that there is money to be made if both Christians and non-Christians buy movie tickets?

The AFA announced they are suspending their two year boycott of Ford Motor Company. Were you aware their even was a two year boycott? Unlike most, I've actually was aware of the boycott and no it would not stop me from buying a Ford if I wanted to buy a Ford. It's Ford that would keep me from buying a Ford.

Therein lies the problem. Christians have a phantom army that will sign online petitions, forward an endless chain of emails strewn with half truths and often outright false information and a few will even cast a stern judgemental eys at those who drive their Ford Taurus to Target to buy a Micky Mouse T-Shirt.

Ford has about 283,000 employees. Did anyone stop to think that Ford may have a few Christians working for them? Was the sales guy at the local Ford dealer who is a believer and trying to support his family considered in all of this? Is it right to lead the attack on dealers, suppliers, and others in order to force a standard on some who would disagree with your own faith? Ford spent $87,000,000 on philanthropy in 2006 in the middle of this boycott. We are very good at talking at people, but not so good at talking WITH people?

According to the AFA : "Individuals are free to purchase Ford vehicles again. Your support of the boycott played a key role in convincing Ford to cease its significant support of the homosexual agenda. During the 24 months the boycott was in effect, Ford sales dropped an average of 8% per month. The boycott was not entirely responsible for the drop in sales, but it played a very significant role. A total of 780,365 individuals signed AFA's Boycott Ford petition."

I wonder how many of those 780,365 individuals would have bought a Ford in the first place?Sales for American car makers were down in general. Even for automakers that were not part of any boycott.

While we must honor the intention behind these efforts, let us not fail to realize that a culture war has the potential to destroy the livelihood of tens of thousands of Christian employees, and eliminate millions of dollars of charitable giving to pro-family causes.

All is well, peace is restored, go buy a Ford and make sure you are on the email list for the next boycott announcement.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Penalty Box


It's time once again to toss the yellow flag of stupidity. Yes, we have more penalties to dish out and send the offenders to the penalty box to sit and think about their actions. It's going to be crowded this week!

First in the box is anyone who signed "A Southern Baptist Declaration on the Environment and Climate Change" Signaling a significant departure from the Southern Baptist Convention’s official stance on global warming, 44 Southern Baptist leaders have decided to back a declaration calling for more action on climate change. Still, many powerful Southern Baptist leaders and agencies did not sign the declaration, including the convention’s influential political arm, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.

For causing another unnecessary rift, go to the box....

Next is Boulder, Colorado Open Space Board of Trustees member Bruce Bland. He wants to wants to push an ordinance that would require cat owners to keep their pets inside so they don't kill birds and other animals. Like mice.....

Maybe Mr. Bland should pass a law that requires mice and birds to stay inside. I mean why pick on the cats? Go to box Mr. Bland and have a seat next to those 44 Southern Baptists.

And we will squeeze one more in there. Mayor Gerard Lalanne. The mayor of a village in southwest France has threatened residents with severe punishment if they die, because there is no room left in the overcrowded cemetery to bury them.

In an ordinance posted in the council offices, Mayor Gerard Lalanne told the 260 residents of the village of Sarpourenx that "all persons not having a plot in the cemetery and wishing to be buried in Sarpourenx are forbidden from dying in the parish." It added: "Offenders will be severely punished."

I guess we will have to put the dead French people in with the Mayor, Mr. Bland and the Southern Baptists.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Same Sex Sermon

By Shaun Pierce

It's always been puzzling to me how two people can read the same thing and come up with two very different meanings. Take for instance the Sermon on the Mount given by Jesus. I have read that several times and never once did I grasp that he was addressing the issue of same sex unions. Maybe there are even veiled references to drilling in Anartica, and Wal Mart holding dominion over pagans.

On the campaign trail in Ohio, Sen. Barack Obama defended his support of abortion and same-sex unions. That's too be expected. The man is entitled to his opinion and his vote. It's how he chose to build his defense that is disturbing.

In response to a question, Obama said he does not support calling same-sex unions marriage, but thinks same-sex couples should be given the recognition and benefits granted to married couples. Maybe we call it "Deirram". It's married backwards. It will mean the same thing but have a different word. Kind of like "liberal" and "progressive".

Obama said: "I think that it is a legal right that they [homosexuals] should have that is recognized by the state. If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans."

Yeah, let's just toss that second rate Romans thing out. I mean heck, how many Romans are there in America anyway? He is not running for president of Rome, so let's not waste time with such things.

Jesus teaches on a number of issues central to the Christian life in the Sermon on the Mount. I've read it over and over again. I see the part about being witnesses to the world, loving our enemies, honoring marriage. Still as hard I try, even if I hold the pages up to the light and look at them upside down, I find no instruction on same-sex unions.

As for St. Paul's writing in Romans, it is distinguished not by its obscurity but by its clarity and consistency with all of Christian teaching about the nature of sexuality and marriage.

Paul writes: "They [the unrighteous] exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator - who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." (Romans 1:24-27, NIV)

Somebody dig Romans out of the trash please. We might need it after all!

Obama also told the crowd that his support of abortion (he voted against banning partial-birth abortion, and against notifying the parents of minors prior to their having an abortion) and his support of same-sex unions do not make him "less of a Christian."

He is right. A vote doesn't make anyone less of a Christian. However, total ignorance of Scripture and the basic understanding of the value of human life certainly does permit one to question Obama's theology came from the back of a cereal box?

If you don't want to be a Christian that's fine. Support gay marriage, support the killing of children, be an advocate for gay causes, calling for higher taxes, a socialist health care system, tell the people what you really think.

The political activism of Christians has been noticed and the wolves are out shopping for clothes. Candidates now assume either be or appear to be Christian to have any change of actually being elected anymore. Candidates create there own version of "Christianity" that fits them and their ideas and hope to pass it off to shallow believers.

If you believe that the Sermon on the Mount was speech given by Jesus in support of same sex unions then Barack is your man. "A great ignorance did sweep across the earth. Behold, with a smile the savior led them to the promised land. It was not what anyone had envisioned and the people cried out, what the heck were we thinking?" - A reading from the book of Obama

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Erosion of the Church

A recent release by the Pew Forum shows one out of every ten adult Americans is a lapsed Catholic. The numbers come from the "Religious Landscape Survey".

Catholics still constitute the single largest religious denomination in the US, accounting for 23.9% of the adult population. Combined Evangelical churches are 26.3% of the American population. Yet those number divide among the different Protestant denominations.


Baptists run a distant second, with 12.7%. If you add together Americans who have deserted the Catholic Church of their childhood you have the third-largest religious group in the country, with 10.1% of the population.

About 44% of adult Americans now belong to a church different from the one in which they were raised. The Religious Landscape Survey shows that mainline Protestant churches have suffered the most severe losses, and Protestants are now barely clinging to their majority status, with 51% of the population. The largest gains show up, ominously, in the "unaffiliated" category, which now accounts for 16% of America's increasingly secularized people.

It's no wonder, when sex scandals, homosexual clergy and cirrus side shows with Jesus as the opening act grab headlines. As the lights, music and highly polished presentations of Christianized feel good social clubs draw people away from traditional denominations, one has to wonder what else is being abandoned in the process?

The Catholic proportion of the US population has remained roughly constant over the past 30 years. But 29% of American Catholics are of Hispanic origin. It no wonder we see the Catholic church joining the immigration debate and at times offering safe harbor for illegal immigrants. For without the Hispanic population, Catholic representation in America would decline sharply.

31.4% of the respondents said that they had been raised as Catholics. 2.6% had entered the Church as converts. But again, 10.1% had left the Catholic faith. That math does not paint a pretty picture. For every new convert, the Church loses four Catholics.

Blame for this is not in short supply. However blame does not change the fact that Catholics are leaving the faith. So why the exodus? My own theory is people don't not understand and have not been properly taught what it is they accept or reject.

Most Catholics can not express, explain, share or defend the scraps of Church teaching they have absorbed in their lifetime. Their Catholic faith is equal to their ethnic identity. It's something they are born with. They accept the identification regardless of their beliefs. In fact only a minority of self-described Catholics are regular church-goers. If you talk to any Catholic convert you will quickly find they know much more about the Church than most life long Catholics.

One encouraging sign I see is many young people are discovering the Church. In the wake of baby boomer generation, many are starving for truth. The seek leaders with moral clarity that will not wavier with the changing tides of culture. Some of that leadership is coming from sources other than clergy. There are some wonderful lay apostolate efforts that are challenging all people to not only learn, but live their faith.

The damage that has eroded the Church will not be repaired in quick fashion. Yet the process must begin. We are promised the survival of His Church. The question must be, are we active members of His Church, or simply associated in some superficial manner?

Pew Research
 
Read More from Shaun Pierce
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Put On Your Global Warming Sweater

I'm really, really hoping Al Gore and his friends stumble upon this post.

Part of science is searching for proof to validate a theory. Prior to that proof discovery, one looks for clues and evidence as guideposts to point them in the right direction. Global warming is in the theory stage, even though many have just jumped ahead to considering it fact.

When you base things on emotional response and how you think they are, it's easy to get lost. Take for instance evidence for a cooling planet.

The most recent data from the past year shows China had its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad saw its first snow in all recorded history. North America had the most snow cover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.

That's good news right? Not if you have invested billions of dollars in the global warming theory.
While we can't say one 12 month period defines our global condition, we also can not ignore that recent evidence and hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously. A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here.

The total amount of cooling is in a range large enough to wipe out nearly all the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time! For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down. Should we now sound the global COOLING alarm?

So why the sudden change? Scientists link the cooling to reduced solar activity which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man-made greenhouse gases. While the data doesn't itself disprove that carbon dioxide is acting to warm the planet, it does demonstrate clearly that more powerful factors are now cooling it.

Could it be that God is that more "powerful factor" in control here? Is it possible that the Creator of the universe actually considered man might have an environmental impact on the planet by simply living here. Has anyone considered God may have factored green house gases into his divine plan?

Or could it be an over reaction to global warming fears has plunged us into the deep freeze?
Let' s hope it not the later. The mean temperature of the planet is about 54 degrees. Humans, and crops and animals prefer a temperature closer to 70. It looks like the mercury has much more room to move up then down and still keep us alive.

There is much more then temperature at stake here. If one believes that man can destroy the entire planet, then he must also believe that man can save the world. To believe the after of the globe rest in our hands assigns a greater power to man over God. It's possible the global warming crowd is more interested in power than temperatures. That's a chilly thought.

Read More from Shaun Pierce
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rendell's Presidential "Race"

Doesn't it make you proud when your Governor basically says that Pennsylvania is full of white bigots?

Gov. Ed Rendell, one of Hillary Rodham Clinton's most visible supporters, said some white Pennsylvanians are likely to vote against her rival Barack Obama because he is black.

"You've got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate," Rendell told the editorial board of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Now, how does he know that? Rendell cited his 2006 re-election campaign, in which he defeated Republican challenger Lynn Swann, the former Pittsburgh Steelers star, by a margin of more than 60 percent to less than 40 percent.

What he forgets is this state predominantly blue collar, union and democrat. For any Republican black, white or other to get 40% of the vote in nothing to scoff at. Not to mention it was Lynn Swann's first run for public office of any kind.

I dare say you put a black democrat up against a white republican in Pennsylvania and the democrat has the better chance at winning. It's simple math, not racial prejudice.

This is very concerning that we have a Governor who thinks this way. While gender and race may be a issue for some, our elected officials should not exploit such ideals for political gain.

Rendell's spokesman said the governor did not mean to offend anyone. No doubt, but he DID offend people. Present company included.
"He was simply making an observation about the unfortunate nature of some parts of American society," said spokesman Chuck Ardo. "He wasn't being critical, he wasn't making accusations, but just being realistic."

Here is reality. I may not like Obama because of his liberal ideas. I may not like his policy, priorities or his worldview. I have plenty of reason not to vote for him. Skin color is not one of them. Ideas can change. Skin color can not and I would never vote for or against anyone based on such a trivial thing.

It is sad that in this day and age that this is even uttered from the mouth of those who should know better. I'm sorry to be so harsh toward Gov. Rendell. However, I choose to judge him on the content of his character. Right now that character leaves much to be desired.

Read more from Shaun Pierce
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Penalty Box



I was watching a hockey game the other night. If you do something wrong in hockey they send you to the penalty box. It's a sort of professional sports version of "time out." Then the camera shows the person who is supposed to sit in shame for a bit.

We need a Christian penalty box! Every week I come across some goofy Christian who does or says something stupid. Blow that whistle! Go to the penalty box and think about your act of stupidity!

So I'm starting the Christian penalty box. Email me the person you think needs to sit in the box.

In fact, let's start with two right now.

First in the box is the Archbishop of Canterbury. He goes to the box for saying Islamic law should be recognized in Britain. Try to be Archbishop of Iran if you like Islamic law so much. Go sit in the box.

Sitting next to him is internet evangelist Bill Keller. (He preaches the gospel to IBM & Mac users) He was thrilled about presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s withdrawal from the race. Keller said, " A vote for Romney is a vote for Satan" Keller was especially critical towards those he referred to as "Judas'," those Christian leaders who he claims "sold out the faith to support the member of a satanic cult that is leading the souls of men to hell." That earns him a trip to the box.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Faith Based Frustration

I'm not very happy with the GOP these days. It seems like they need to lose now in order to get back to their roots and win in the future. The problem with that theory is the next 10 years will be crucial for our country. In terms of security, energy, economy and simply preserving our freedoms, not since World War II has so much been at stake. Can we afford to learn a lesson from losing?

Yes, I whole-heartedly believe that the GOP is going to lose big time. Can you say president Obama?

I'm no prophet, but it does not take a genius to stand back and observe the political suicide that the GOP has launched.

The Barna Group released its latest survey on voters' allegiance. According to the poll, if the election were held today, most Christian voters would choose the Democratic nominee for president! Hello, is anyone listening? The people that put the GOP in power are fed up.

Barna's research indicates that "born-again" voters are most likely to vote for Sen. Hillary Clinton (20 percent), followed by Sen. Barack Obama (18 percent), and Mike Huckabee (12 percent). You have a baptist running against a borderline communist and the baptist comes in 3rd!

Voters with their brain engaged don't vote for parties. They vote for people and ideas. Sometimes they vote against people and ideas. I think we are about see such an occasion.

If the country is about to go into the toilet, I might as well vote for the people I want to blame down the road. Both parties have deemphasized social issues and bought into the political fad of the day. They pitch big government (aka big spending) approaches to poverty and global warming. Poverty has been an issue since the beginning of civilization. Only individuals can pull themselves out of poverty. Government spending just brings us all closer to being poor.

Global warming, well that's like trying to capture a fart with a net.

Hillary Clinton wants to force you to get health insurance by garnishing your wages if you refuse. So much for freedom. Is that solving the health care problem or just distributing it?

Both parties are hoping to spend their way into Americans' hearts. If you steal a dollar from me and give it back as a gift, I'm not going to say thank you. The government does not make money. They take money. When they give it back to you they have not "spent" it. They have simply returned it to its rightful owner. Don't be fooled by "affordable" solutions or a check in the mail.

The Republicans have lost their credibility, their congressional majority and if they don't stop treating their supporters as if they were disposable, it will cost them the presidency.

Read more from Shaun Pierce on PowerBlog!

Shop PowerBlog!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

God's Design Flaw

I recently spoke to emergent church leader Brian McLaren. I could write a thousand blog posts on him alone, but I'll leave that to someone else. Brian said something that started me thinking.

He was talking about how for the first time in history we are destroying the planet faster then it could ever be repaired. We are in fact responsible for the rapid destruction of earth he says.

While I think that theory is a bunch of toxic garbage in itself, let's explore it for a moment.

If you believe that God created earth & man, then you must believe he intended man to live on earth. (Are you with me so far?) God also gave us dominion over the earth. We are to "go forth and multiply" So, if God's own creation is now destroying his other creation by simply driving a car fueled by what came out of the earth( and using hair spray) then it seems to me that there is a major design flaw on God's part.
 
Does "on earth as it it is in heaven" mean that somewhere angels are debating heavenly warming? Does the continual use of harps cause friction, that somehow cools hell and warms paradise to the point that some celestial coalition is calling for a immediate action?
 
Maybe God's perfect plan isn't so perfect. Maybe he just didn't think this thing through. I mean, he obviously didn't see that sin thing coming in the garden. He could have put a barbed wire fence around that tree, but no, he didn't think of that.
 
So then he sends his only begotten son to give us one last chance shot at salvation. We crucify him, and now many just flat out could care less about what he did. Does this seem logical to anyone?

On the other hand, maybe God knows exactly what he is doing. Maybe he predicted all this as part of the fall. Maybe, just maybe, God does have a perfect plan and no C02 gas emission or scientific panic can change it.
 
The earth isn't in danger........ we are.

Read More from Shaun Pierce
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive