Community

Greetings!

God has destined us for community. Since Genesis, we have been designed to participate in collective bodies. Ultimately, God Himself lives in community with Himself (trinity), and by His grace, extends an invitation to participate this majestic community. We find purpose in this community. Our intended design, our meaning, is to come into community with God!

His son Jesus went as far as the humiliation of the cross to bring us into the life-giving purpose of community.

However we do not merely participate from an individual standpoint, as secular American society tricks us into believing. As God made humanity as a family, emphasizing the goodness of being together, we find our secondary ultimate purpose: living in community with one another.

“For the entire law is fulfilled on one statement: Love your neighbor as yourself.” (Gal. 5:14). God gave the Jews the Law to teach them proper communal living with both God and each other. When we disobey this mandate to live as a community, sin enters the picture: “If you bite and devour one another, watch out, or you will be consumed by one another.” (Gal. 5:15).

In other words, we’re not to merely acknowledge each other’s presence, and restrain from doing each other harm (the message of world religions). The radical re-orientation of Christianity occurs in this: as Christ poured his life ultimately to attain and cleanse us for community, so are we to pour our lives into each other! This is the radical Christian community! The concept of discipleship! The pouring of lives for one another to reflect God’s pouring of His son into ours! Our ultimate model is in Christ, and as followers we are to emulate the sharing of this thing called life. The acting of this verb called love.

More than any other illustration, God describes us as a family. A bride and bridegroom. Brothers and sisters. We must not confuse the terms. We are not the simple worldly community that calls us to respect communal laws and presence. We are not merely a family bounded by blood relations. We are bonded by the fulfillment of laws in Jesus, and the bounding of sin by His blood!

We are a spiritual family, adopted into God, and called to live, serve, minister, and love as a community. A body. A single entity under Jesus’ lordship and example.

The challenge is as follows: With the golden opportunity of living in an actual seminary community, how are you living? Are your relationships merely associations? Simple friends? Shared identities in a seminary-academic institution? A vocation? Do you see it as merely a ‘responsibility’?

Or, is it something greater? Does it reflect the worldly examples of friendships, community, and family, or does it reflect the radical Holy Spirit empowered, Jesus-modeled, communal family under God?

If the former, how then will you move towards the two ‘Great Commandments’ (Matt. 22:37-40)? How then, shall you live with your Brothers and Sisters?

“Carry one another’s burdens; in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone considers himself to be something when he is nothing, he is deceiving himself.” (Gal. 6:2-3).

“I give you a new commandment: love one another. Just as I have loved you, you must also love one another. By this all people will know that you are My disciples. If you have love for one another.” (John 13:34-35).

A Word of Encouragement for Juan

I wrote this for a friend of mine as he travels to Venezuela. Simply some encouragement from one brother to another that I thought could perhaps encourage you as well. The content comes from a Church History I course I had with Dr. McKinion, as he explained to us our relation to the Old Testament, which he so rightly calls the Gospel according to the Prophets.

Juan I pray for you earnestly. I pray God will provide you opportunities to share His Son with anyone while you’re traveling. If at ever you need courage, find it in our Lord and the prayers we offer for His saints.

A quick word of encouragement: Remember when Moses went up to Mount Sinai, God gave him this promise: “Now if you will listen to Me and carefully keep My covenant, you will be My own possession out of all the peoples, although all the earth is mine, and you will be My kingdom of priests and My holy nation.” (Gen 19:5-6).

Incase you missed it, God was telling the israelites He would make them a kingdom of priests! A kingdom of the people whom would share His faith and glory and love and grace with all the nations.

What then happens with the Israelites? “Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet God, and they stood at the foot of the mountain.” (19:17). God had saved them from the Egyptians. God had provided for them food and drink. And still, they were scared, and did not trust him. The opposite of fear is faith. They had none of it. Moses walked up Sinai alone.

God offered to make them a nation of priests if they only had faith. Instead, they had not enough, and what then did God do? God gave them the Law. As a father punishes his child by removing what they enjoy when they become unruly, so God punished the Israelites. Instead of making them a Nation of Priests, He made them a Nation WITH Priests. They were forced to carry the burden of the law, UNTIL the coming of the Messiah.

When Jesus came, He freed us of the law. He made us into His disciples. God gave His greatest gift. Through Jesus, God made us PRIESTS! He made us the vehicle in which the world would hear of His mercy and love. YOU, Juan, are a Priest. You are His own possession. A royal priest of God, entrusted with the sacred command, and chosen rightly by God, to “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations…teaching them to observe everything I have commanded you,” (Matt 28:19-20). We are given this burden and this blessing. Nothing greater in life can be accomplished outside of this. To love God is to know God, to know God leads to loving His people, and to love His people is to share His message.

As you travel, remember you are His priest. Amen.

In Christ,

PS: May my prayers for you be like “a harp and gold bowls filled with incense,” (Rev. 5:24), a fresh, melodic encouragment to your soul, with the purpose of glorifying God. — Leonard O Goenaga

A Feminist Concept of Marriage vs. the Godly Alternative. Continuation of Facebook Marriage Discussion

Justin McNealy ./sigh…”No man ever believes that the Bible means what 

it says; he is always convinced that it says what he means.”

–George Bernard Shaw

And that’s really all I have to say about that.

Sat at 1:24am

 

Søren Stidsen That one is too easy.

It can actually be a tough one, when you realise, that you disagree 

with the bible and then have to adjust your own position.

Sat at 1:46am

 

Leonard Goenaga Oh Justin, come on now, that was entirely not even 

appropriate. If you surround yourself with such assumptions, that every 

man merely takes what he wishes from scripture, than you will 

oh-so-conveniently cast it aside.

The wonderful thing about being a protestant is that scripture is the 

final authority. You can place it within its historical, cultural, and 

literal setting and get a very straightforward answer.

Your quote will apply tremendously to liberal protestant scholarship, 

but hardly would that apply to an actual examination of what it says.

 

The conservative protestant would agree with you, that individ

uals warp 

scripture to theological justify certain beliefs. They take scripture 

to support a point, starting from their assumption, rather than 

starting from scripture.

 

Also, your quote had nothing to do with the issue of social 

generational responsibility, and the importance of the institution of 

marriage. It was merely an appropriate way to fan your presuppositions.

Sat at 2:47pm

 

Female Friend: Before you go around quoting feminist scholarly lit. READ 

the entire book. When you quote one line or two, you can make ANYTHING 

and ANYONE look bad.

 

I agree with Servia, I pity you. Further more, I actually pity your 

wife for being subjected to this because how you think projects on how 

you treat her. I don’t care if you buy her a BMW and a house on by the 

beach, a woman made to “submit” is not a woman loved. I don’t care how 

you sugar coat it. It’s an indentured servant.

 

“SUBMIT: to defer to another’s judgment, opinion, decision, etc.: I 

submit to your superior judgment.

 

to place (oneself) under the control of another,” from L. submittere 

“to yield, lower, let down, put under, reduce,”

 

DO YOU KNOW, that those words described above are also used to describe 

PSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE on the 5 branches of DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?!?

24 minutes ago

 

Female Friend: Further more, yes, there are gender diffrences, our organs 

hang inwards, while yours hang outwards. It gives us GREATER=2

0mind 

control because we think with our minds rather then our penises. AND 

psychologically speaking (proven by research), women reach rational 

thinking before men do.

 

YES, you can bench press more, WOW. Do you know that medically proven, 

women have great pain tolerence?!? And higher endurance?!? So I don’t 

give a damn about what you say about “gender diffrences,” it has not 

grounds on why we must “submit” to you besides you not wanting to grow 

up and be a man. Your mommy made your bed and cooked for you. Now your 

wife does it for you. Stop hiding behind your laziness and grow up. It 

has nothing to do with “natural order’ because if you look at nature, 

it is OFTEN the female in numerous specaies that is in charge.

18 minutes ago

 

Female Friend: And don’t hide behind “i take care of my wife so she cooks 

for me.” The majority of college grads ARE women. She doesn’t need you 

to pay bills, unless she’s to lazy to go out and get a job.

 

Do you know that wives that “submit” to their husbands live 5 years 

less then single women or women in feminist relationships and have 

higher depression? While men like you who have submitted wives live 5 

years longer then single men?!? Good for you! But it speaks about the 

stress on the wives who have such lives!

 

Do you know that research shows that women in feminist relatiionships 

are up to 70% happier then “submitted” wives?!? And 

husbands in such 

relationships have more sex a week then men in relationships like yours?

 

Feminisism did not do anything to divorce rates. Divorce rates have 

been increasing EVERY year since divorce was an option. Do your 

research. It had nothing to do with feminism.

 

Feminism HELPED with divorce rates. WOW. Do you know why?!? WOMEN 

STARTED WORKING!!! They didn’t

12 minutes ago

 

Leonard Goenaga For one who goes on claiming how blatantly in error I am 

for not reading them in full, you are quick to make assumptions on how 

I treat her. It would be best for you to ask yourself how she feels 

about the condition of her marriage; how she feels about the roles we 

both actively, and supportively, carry out.

 

The Church has to submit to Christ. If marriage is a mere finite 

expression of this submission, are you to suggest that the Church 

Body’s submission to Christ, as God had designed such a relationship to 

be, something as unloving?

 

The condition of a rebellious heart is made clear: you have problems 

submitting, to God and to anyone in general. The marital relationship 

God designed is absolutely beautiful. A woman submits to her husband’s 

leadership, and a man lays his life on the line and devotes himself to 

his wife as Christ devoted himself to the death.

 

If you disagree with this design, what then on your idea of Jesus’ and 

the bride of the Church?

5 minutes ago

 

Female Friend: They didn’t ave to stay with scum bags because they had an 

income. When women weren’t allowed to work, they had NO choice! It was 

either be homeless, or deal with the husbands ill behavior. Having an 

income gave them the option to not tolerate ill and lazy behavior from 

husbands. It helped marriages by sending a message to terrible husbands 

that they better get their act together.

 

Vivian Gorn made the quoted statement in your post about marrying men 

like you and Soren. She did NOT oppose marriage. She opposed sick 

marriages. There IS a difference.

 

A woman is not a child, she does not need to submit to you. We are ALL 

equal in the eyes of God, so twist it however you like. Submitting is 

not Gods will. The bible has been editing by MEN in their favor, and 

the many of the text hidden.

 

On another note, 86.2% of the population is Christian according to USA 

Census while less the 37% of American Women are Feminist. THAT IS NOT 

ENOUGH to cause the divorce problem happening in the united

3 minutes ago

 

Leonard Goenaga: Furthermore, a rebellious heart is a wicked heart. Why was Israel exiled? Because they rebelled against God.

 

You offered me a rant on the superiority of woman. Man, nor woman, are superior. Rather, we are lowly vile creations. We are absolutely equal in our depravity. One is no greater than the other. Both are made in the image of God, and are thus equal. Equal in our access to Salvation, and equal in our worth before God. You overtly have pride in your gender, I do not. I wonder why you must tell yourself your gender is somehow superior, but I will guess it to be a condition of the heart.

 

Listen, as you do not understand how this relationship works. God is the Father, Jesus is the Son, and then we have the spirit. Jesus came to us under the Father, and Jesus sent to us the Spirit. A hierarchy of the trinity exists, but one cannot be greater than the other; it is merely a relationship of hierarchy.

 

The president is higher than you in terms of hierarchy, but his value as a human is

about an hour ago · Delete

 

Leonard Goenaga: equal to yours. He can sign an executive order and you cannot, although your relationship to him is respected. However, his humanity is not greater than yours. Legally, if he murders someone, and you murder someone, you are both murderers. Your humanity is equal, but the hierarchy is the same.

 

Perhaps this will help you understand. Ever more, I force no one into submission. Rather, my wife chooses to submit willingly, as we both willingly choose to submit to Jesus.

 

You will have a hard time in any relationship, specifically with men, if you believe yourself to be somehow superior (as you obviously need to tell yourself you are, i.e. above comments). A relationship will only ever work if it is in submission; if it is in servitude to one another. 

 

The servitude in marriage is reflective of a greater more important and spiritual servitude to Christ. If you cannot accept, nor learn, how to serve your spouse, how than can you possibly understand to serve your God? How then, can you

about an hour ago · Delete

 

Leonard Goenaga: become a slave unto Christ? 

 

“The one who boasts must boast in the Lord.” (1 Cor. 1:31).

 

“For to those who are perishing the message of the cross is foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is God’s power.” (1:18)

 

“God’s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God’s weakness is stronger than human strength.” (1:25).

 

In addition, you tell me not to quote these feminists, yet you do nothing to explain these quotes to me. A simple way to cast them aside.

 

The spiritual significance is great. You greatly despise a vision of Men as posing themselves as greater than woman, as more powerful (things I not once did in my above comments, where I discuss marriage, not male supremacy). 

 

Although, how you commit the very sin you complain against, by going on a tirade of the superiority of woman. Do you not see a conflict here? A sort of hypocrisy?

about an hour ago · Delete

 

Leonard Goenaga: Why, must your convince yourself of such a superiority? Do you feel such a weakness? Have you been injured by wordly men?

 

I can tell you there is a man who can show you the value of submission. His name is Jesus, and he will show you how beautiful servitude can be. If there is any pity to be passed, and by all means you can judge my relationship however you wish, it is I who may not stop myself from pity.

 

You place your bet on the wisdom of the world, which is foolishness to God. What i pity, is that you must convince yourself about something. You must have been hurt by a man, or men, and you must now find strength in your gender; exaggerating such gender hatred to find some type of foundation.

 

However to do so is to build a house on sinking sand. Humanity’s wisdom is weak, and you will find no joy nor salvation in the knowledge of any gender-focused argument is greater than another. Only God can show you such, and you will only make it that much more difficult to submit.

about an hour ago · Delete

 

Leonard Goenaga: Btw, you’re in error with some of the things you’ve stated as factual. Brain studies have shown men and woman to be entirely different in their approaches to thinking and relationships via brain scan studies. The intellectual and scientific idea that woman and men are the same except for reproductive organs is archaic at best.

about an hour ago · Delete

 

Leonard Goenaga: “I believe both parties need to Submit to God and God ALONE.”

 

And finally, if you believe we must submit to God, than are you submitting to Him when he asks you to submit to your husband? Jesus is not inferior to God. The Spirit is not inferior to Jesus. It is called a relationship.

 

You also have no understanding of how our relationship functions. Their is no I and Her. there is no Katrina and Leonard. Your problem is that you view your relationship as two people, where God has established it as a union of one flesh. No identity outside the other exists. 

 

It is foolishness to pity someone for assuming, while your pity rests on assumptions themselves.

56 minutes ago · Delete

 

Leonard Goenaga: It was a simple question. Anyone can morph text however they wish. However, God’s truth is objective. He is rather straightforward in his truths. 

 

A Christian is someone who submits and follows Christ. As such you follow his commands and designs for marriage. You do not take such, and mold it to surround feminism, or ideology, or whatever other foolish philosophies of man.

 

It is simple. God offers this truth: wife’s submit to your husbands. God is asking you to submit to your husband. The idea to you gets polluted by whatever assumptions you make about men, or about this idea of servitude. It is polluted to you; some hateful relationship of man’s control over woman. It is an unwarranted assumption: you need to understand the Church’s loving role in submission to Christ, and then you would willingly wish to do the same.

 

In other words, if you care to call yourself a Christian, how are you approaching such a verse? Do you see it, and move to your feminism for an answer, or do you

51 minutes ago · Delete

 

Leonard Goenaga: allow God to speak for himself.

 

You cannot follow God and also follow militant feminism. One obviously has the greatest authority. To filter God’s truths through any ideology is to poison truth with presuppositions. With man as flawed as we are, why in the world would we want to filter His truth through our observations?

 

Again, what do you do with such a verse? How do you explain it? Do you just skip it, and look away, because your feminism tells you otherwise? If that is the case, I would highlight where your priority thus lies. In the world, or in the word?

49 minutes ago · Delete

 

Leonard Goenaga: So it is the men editing who do so? So instead of taking it as God’s word, you explain it away as Men editing. How is that not feminism poisoning understand of scripture? 

 

If you look over it as the editing of men, why take anything the bible says as truth, let alone our understanding of Jesus and God? The whole thing could just be a work of editing correct?

 

Fortunately that is as far-fetched as an understanding of scripture can come. 

 

Until you learn how to submit to Miguel, and Miguel learns how to do the same, a relationship will never be successful. 

 

Romance dies. Feelings die. What matters is the covenant, the promise. You do not get married for eachother, but for God. Marriage supports love, not love supports marriage. 

 

You’re not understanding how this marital relationship works: You’re seeing it in the modern romanticism version, not God’s intended design.

 

I want you to understand that your feminism is clouding your understanding of scripture. You say it is edited by men,

39 minutes ago · Delete

 

Leonard Goenaga: as your feminism assumes, instead of seeing scripture as scripture. Can you understand now what I am trying to highlight? Your Christianity is filtered through your feminism, and not the other way around. 

 

Study in depth how marriage works in bible. You will be surprised by its beauty. Read John Piper’s This Momentary Marriage (a really short read), and you will discover how incredible this relationship is. This Union. 

 

Again, I cannot stress it enough. Scripture speaks for itself. To filter it through any worldview whatsoever, is to poison God’s Word with human foolishness.

36 minutes ago · Delete

 

Katrina Goenaga: Friend, I am still unsure of why I need to be pitied, but I will respond with this.

I am a highly educated woman who graduated cum laude from a well-regarded private institution. I spent three years studying women’s rights and at one point would have probably considered myself to be a feminist. After years of rigorous study I have come to the conclusion that the only thing I am proud to be called is a God-fearing woman and a servant of CHRIST. I have only one master and his name is God. Before you go and assume you know everything about the other side of your argument you probably should have consulted me first.

27 minutes ago · Delete

 

Katrina Goenaga: The Bible clearly says in Ephesians 5:21, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” It doesn’t say that men are meant to be slave drivers in charge of women nor does it say that women are meant to be in charge of men. It clearly states that we, men and women alike, are meant to submit to one another out of respect for our creator. I’ll give you a perfect example: a police officer is put in place to protect his city and community, right? Does that mean because I am not a police officer that he is somehow better than me? Or that he is more intelligent or stronger? No, it merely means that he was placed in a role of authority. He has been given a job to protect and guard his community. Just as police officers are meant to protect and guard their cities, men, as prescribed by the Bible, are meant to provide for, protect and support their wives.

27 minutes ago · Delete

 

Katrina Goenaga: Does that mean that Lenny is somehow better than me? Absolutely not! Lenny and I were created equal in the eyes of God. I merely have a different role than him. Does that make me stupid or naïve? No! I am just as educated as Leonard, when we both had jobs I made just as much money as he did, if not more, I am free to do what I please when I please as long as it is respectful to myself, to God and my marriage. 

 

I am not Leonard’s slave, I am his wife and if you cannot understand this than I pity you because you will never know the love of a Godly man if you continue to hold on to these preconceived notions of what a biblical, God-centered marriage really is. It is obvious from your statements that YOU have never READ the Bible from which we receive our truths.

27 minutes ago · Delete

 

Katrina Goenaga: Ephesians 5:22-33 says, “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— for we are members of his body. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.”

26 minutes ago · Delete

 

Katrina Goenaga: My husband treats me with more respect and love than I could have ever imaged and that’s because he has God as his source of reference. The best way that my husband could ever show me how he loves me is through following the truths that God has placed for us in the Bible. I could not imagine how our marriage would be if Christ was not at the center of our relationship and we were merely married for our own selfish desires, which is what you basically follow. You seem to be unhappy because you are not able to get your way. Once you realize that marriage is not about yourself and is about a union with God and your husband you will begin to understand where we are coming from, but until then your views of submission are going to be skewed.

26 minutes ago · Delete

 

Katrina Goenaga: My husband does not need to buy me a BMW or a house, because I am complacent with nothing. All I desire is a Godly man, a man who is willing to treat me the way Christ loved the church and because you cannot comprehend the love that Christ had for his church you will never be able to comprehend the amount of love that Leonard has for me. I submit because I know that Leonard’s sacrifice was much greater than mine. He submits himself to me daily and for that I am eternally grateful. 

Tania, I have no problem submitting to my husband because I have submitted myself fully to Christ.

26 minutes ago · Delete

 

Female Friend: Okay, I have a question for you. Do you asks your wifes opinion on certain decisions? Or do you just do what you want to do? because if you consider her opinion or meet her half way, that’s not submission.

 

Also, not every man wants a woman to submit. Miguel asks for my opinion for every decision, and he WANTS to meet half-way, not just do whatever he wants and have me submit to his “authority”. Miguel wants an equal. Furthermore, he even wants me to manage the money once we get married. 

 

To me, submission=doormat, I guess you don’t see it that way, But I do, Miguel does too. And I know some other guys who do too. MOST men think like you, and I wouldn’t date someone who thinks like wise, because othere wise, it would be war. And Miguel has dumped all of his sex’s, because they submit, rather then be his equal. So it works perfectly for us. Not everyone wants what you have. and vice-versa of course.

22 minutes ago · Delete

 

Katrina Goenaga: I can answer that question. 

Yes, he does ask my opinion about EVERYTHING! Because Leonard is not an individual, he is only one half of our marriage. He cannot stand on his own. 

Submission does not mean that you ask for opinions or that you ask for permission. 

Submission is humbling yourself before God and your spouse. It is not making yourself a doormat, but opening up your heart and your love. If I was not able to submit to Leonard openly and if he was not able to submit to me openly our marriage would have a TON of problems because we would only be looking out for ourselves and not each other. You don’t get married to make yourself happy, you get married because you love the man you’re with, right? So why is it that every question you’ve asked has to do with you getting your way? 

Tania, my husband is not in charge of everything, nor am I. We have an equal partnership that is based on the truths that God has set out for us in the Bible.

14 minutes ago · Delete

 

Katrina Goenaga: Friend, I think it’s funny that you can judge us like you know us. Or at least like you know me, because you don’t. And you need to understand that. 

Leonard is my equal just as I am his. I live my life in a way that supports him and he lives his life in a way that supports me. That is what you are not understanding. I take care of my husband to the best of my ability, which does mean cleaning, cooking, etc and he takes care of me to the best of his ability, which means providing and protecting me. But this is not where our roles end. I also take care of him emotionally, spiritually, and physically, just as he does those same things for me in return, if not more.

8 minutes ago · Delete

 

Katrina Goenaga: I guess it worked out for you that you found someone who does not want you to be a Godly woman because that’s obviously not who you want to be. But you need to understand that submission does not equal doormat, it merely means letting go of your own personally selfishness and living for God’s truth.

5 minutes ago · Delete

 

Leonard Goenaga: In addition to what Katrina said, God did something incredibly genius with our relationship with men and woman. Men, being biologically stronger, as well as their mentality, have a greater ability to abuse.

 

As such, God designed his marriage, founded under equality, yet with the headship of the man, yet under the submission to God, to prevent a solution to the VERY abuse you’re arguing against! Man has a vast capacity to hurt, and to abuse, and to take advantage of. As such, God designed a form of marriage, that humbled before God, would counteract that very dilemma! It is a beautiful solution. He designs marriage in such a way, that a Godly man, would product women from the abuse against men.

 

It is beyond words in its beauty, and as such you understand the idea of a protector male figure, in the authoritative role that Kat mentioned (police officer). 

 

Even greater it is when understood within the biblical times it occurred.

2 seconds ago · Delete

 

FIU 30 Hour Famine

Click Here to Join Us Online!

To Whom It May Concern:

Before this day is over, 26,000 children under age 5 will die because of hunger, disease and poverty. 14,000 of them will die from causes linked to malnutrition alone. Today… tomorrow… and the next day… That’s one every seven seconds.

But here’s the good news. Students in our beloved Florida International University are choosing to make a difference. They are getting ready to take part in World Vision’s 30 Hour Famine (a 4/4 rated Charity by CharityNavigator.com). They’re going to raise money by not eating for 30 hours so that kids eat every day.

We have a vision. We believe that the Charity and Love of our fellow students can bond our University in common cause: feeding and loving the poor. We believe that the goals of tending to the impoverished and hungry can be accomplished within our shared collegiate community. We believe that we can overlook our factional divides, and together, we Students of FIU can bring about change in the malnourishment of hungry children worldwide.

Click here to Donate to FIU 30 Hour Famine

However, our vision does not include simply one club or fraternity, but the combined union of the University as a whole. We believe this is possible, and we believe it is forth-coming.

What Can You Do?
·    Pledge to Fast with Us During the 30 Hour Famine! Help us increase awareness and raise funds for starving Children worldwide. Join us online at

http://tiny.cc/FIUFamine

·    Sign Our Online Petition and Pledge to Remain Hungry for Hunger!
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/FIU30HourFamine/
·    Make any small donation! With just $1 feeding a hungry child for one day, EVERYTHING counts! The change you receive at lunch can literally be life-changing.
·    Join the 30 Hour Famine Team! We’re looking for officers, ambassadors and more. Ask about service opportunities.
·    Spread the Word! The more we share this opportunity, the more opportunities arise. Help us share this goal.Facts About Hunger
·    Every three seconds a child dies because he or she is malnourished or susceptible to disease.
·    As many as 1 in 5 children die before reaching their fifth birthday.·    Every $30 you raise, you feed and care for a hungry child for 30 days. $360 will feed and care for a child for an entire year.

I personally thank you for any future involvement. May our Panther Pride and compassion unite us in this Common Good. Thank You.

–

Leonard O Goenaga

FIU 30 Hour Famine Chairperson

786.223.2404, LGoen001@fiu.edu

A Conversation With a Mormon

Hello Friends,

I had a conversation with a Mormon today. I was defending Christianity within a chatroom, and he asked me for my denomination. I told him, and then he said he was Mormon, and after some discussion he asked me to explain to him why Mormonism is not part of Christianity (Christianity being Protestantism, Catholicism, and Orthodoxy). Here was the discussion. I’m going to skip down to the core of the discussion, starting after he mentioned Baptism of the dead.  After I touch on that, it really picks up. I post this in a humble spirit, and hope God uses it to reach out to Mormons, and equip fellow believers with some additional knowledge. Enjoy:

<Kannoth>: Actually, may I ask a simple question before we go further?

<Kannoth>: Since you mentioned baptism is needed to enter heaven.

<Lord`Saladin>: Go on then.

<Kannoth>: Answer yes or no, please: Is Baptism needed in order to go into heaven?

<Lord`Saladin>: Yes.

<Kannoth>: Is Baptism needed for salvation, which thus leads to heaven?: Yes or no.

<Lord`Saladin>: Understand, however, Baptism is not simply the act of immersion, but also the covenant that goes with it.

<Lord`Saladin>: Yes.

<Kannoth>: Alright, so you’re clarifying Baptism. Baptism is obviously asked upon by every Christian as a means of acknowledging one’s faith publicly. This is the traditional understanding of baptism. However, you’re saying that Baptism is needed to go itno heaven and have salvation.

<Kannoth>: In other words, you’re saying an ack of works is needed in order to get into heaven…

<Kannoth>: Since we’re talking about physical baptism (baptism of the dead), and not just some concept of spiritual baptism.

<Kannoth>: So the act of baptizing is then needed to enter heaven, correct?

<Lord`Saladin>: Yes.

<Kannoth>: Well we have a problem. This contradicts our source of Righteousness (Romans 1:16-17). “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith — and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God — not by works, so that no one can boast,” (Eph. 2:8-9, NIV).

<Kannoth>: So no act of our own can mitigate whether we get into heaven (ex.: baptism), but it is only by the gift God gives to us.

<Lord`Saladin>: Again, however, it is the covenant of Baptism that also accompanies the physical act that makes it so important…

<Kannoth>: There is the problem with baptism needing to be a requirement to enter heaven: It is poor theology. No work leads to salvation. It is purely a gift from grace. Baptism is only a public declaration of faith. An act the Christian should do in obedience. However, it will not nullify one’s entrance into heaven.

<Lord`Saladin>: The immersion and subsequent upcoming from beneath the water represent a new life, and also an act of cleansing away any previous sin before that point.

<Kannoth>: That only touches into one of the main areas of Doctrine (salvation). Now, may I define the central Christian Doctrines that Mormonism will have to agree to to be considered Christian?

<Kannoth>: Saladin, the act of Baptism is only a public represntation of the TRUE baptism; that of the Spirit. The ‘born again’ Jesus tells Nicodemus. It is no physical requirement needed to get into heaven.

<Kannoth>: But I don’t want to go down that tangeant, I’d like to define Christianity.

<Kannoth>: May I?

<Lord`Saladin>: Go on then.

<Kannoth>: There are 5 Central Key Theological issues. If Mormonism disagrees with any of them, it cannot be considered Christian. In addition, there are three essential other Doctrines as well.

<Kannoth>: Here are the first five:

<Kannoth>: All three branches can agree upon these central Doctrines (Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox): 1) the Deity of Christ (John 8:58), 2) Salvation by Grace (Eph. 2:8-9), and 3) Resurrection of Christ (1 Cor. 15:14), 4) the Gospel (Gal. 1:8-9), and 5) Monotheism (Exodus 20:3). Before we even progress, would you say Mormonism is in agreement to all these central doctrines?

<Kannoth>: Before we even progress, do you agree all five of these are central to being considered ‘Christianity’. If not, we don’t need to go on.

<Lord`Saladin>: Yes.

<Kannoth>: Alright, good. Now there are three others:

<Kannoth>: Secondary essential Doctrines: 1) Jesus is the only way to salvation (John 1:14-16), 2) Jesus’ virgin birth (Matt 1:23), 3) The doctrine of the Trinity (Matt 28:19).

<Kannoth>: Do you disagree with any of those three?

<Lord`Saladin>: No.

<Kannoth>: Which?

<Lord`Saladin>: <Kannoth> Do you disagree with any of those three?

<Lord`Saladin>: <Lord`Saladin> No.

<Kannoth>: Alright then, good.

<Kannoth>: So if I were to show that Mormonism conflicts any of these eight, can we say Mormonism is not Christianity, but an offshoot?

<Lord`Saladin>: If you mean show in terms of demonstration of lack of understanding of LDS doctrine, no.

<Kannoth>: Alright, let me hit a first point then.

<Lord`Saladin>: Which also means, rather than bulldozing over any word I have to say, you bring up each point, and I will confirm or otherwise.

<Kannoth>: The divinity of Jesus, and the character of the Monotheistic God.

<Kannoth>: THE DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS SECTION 130 says “The aFather has a bbody of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of cSpirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not ddwell in us.”

<Kannoth>: Mormonism teaches that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones (D. & C. 130:22) and that Jesus is a creation. It teaches that he was begotten in heaven as one of God’s spirit children (See the Book, Jesus the Christ, by James Talmage, p. 8). This is in strict contrast to the biblical teaching that he is God in flesh (John 1:1, 14), eternal (John 1:1, 2, 15), uncreated, yet born on earth (Col. 1:15), and the creator all (John 1:3; Col. 1;16-17).

<Kannoth>: This is denying the Trinity, denying Christ’ divinity, and denying the nature of God.

<Kannoth>: Then and there, just stating God the Father as having a body of flesh and bone’s as tangible as man’s, is outside Christianity.

<Kannoth>: For that alone we can classify Mormonism as what it is: Mormonism.

<Kannoth>: There are many more points we can move to as well.

<Lord`Saladin>: Right.

<Lord`Saladin>: Then let me cover this.

<Kannoth>: Sure.

<Kannoth>: There are followup points regarding the divinity of Jesus and the nature of the Trinity as well.

<Lord`Saladin>: John 1:14 reads: And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

<Lord`Saladin>: Which brings about John 3:16 – For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son…

<Lord`Saladin>: It is stated Christ was begotten of God.

<Lord`Saladin>: In multiple places.

<Kannoth>: Ah yes, I agree. That’s the trinity. Begotten, hints at the Trinitarian relationship: Three parts of a whole. However, Mormonism disagrees here. Mormon Theology teaches three distinct parts that form the office of the trinity.

<Kannoth>: Also, context of John 1 also highlights that the Word was with God, and before all creation.

<Lord`Saladin>: I am just coming to the Trinity…

<Kannoth>: Yup.

<Lord`Saladin>: Matthew 28:19 reads: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

<Kannoth>: Yup.

<Lord`Saladin>: It lists them as separate. Now, of course, they are one in the sense of purpose.

<Lord`Saladin>: Their purpose is one and the same.

<Lord`Saladin>: God and Christ each have physical bodies, physical bodies that have attained perfection.

<Kannoth>: No no. It does not list them as three seperate beings. To say they are three seperate entities is to say there is this office called the trinity, and there are three persons in it.

<Lord`Saladin>: The Holy Spirit, which dwells in each of us who accept it, is in spirit form so it can dwell within.

<Kannoth>: If you say God and Christ have seperate bodies, than you’re saying the trinity isn’t one being with three persons, but three seperate persons acting together.

<Lord`Saladin>: Neither, Kannoth, does it say they are one.

<Lord`Saladin>: Find where it says they are one being of three parts.

<Kannoth>: Of course. God is one. A center to Christianity is Monotheism. To reject monotheism is the reject Judeo-Christianity, which is the point I’m trying to make. By seperating them, you’re denying that central Doctrine of Monotheism, yet also running into problems with the Trinity, and the divinity of Christ.

<Kannoth>: Mind you, the Trinity is never mentioned in scripture. You used the verses to devise the concept of the trinity, however what I just posted of the Doctrine and Covenants talks about God and Jesus having different bodies, physical ones, meaning they are seperate.

<Kannoth>: You’ve agreed with this. And to agree with this is to deny monotheism, which would deny the title of Christianity.

<Kannoth>: We haven’t even touched the nature of the Gospels, how forgiveness of sins is attained, etc.

<Lord`Saladin>: Hm.

<Kannoth>: That nature of God is distinctly un-Christian.

<Kannoth>: Do you have facebook?

<Kannoth>: My name is Leonardo by the way.

<Lord`Saladin>: I see you are a good manipulator of words.

<Lord`Saladin>: My name is Saladin.

<Lord`Saladin>: I have Facebook, yes.

<Kannoth>: I do not think I am manipulating anything, rather scripture is scripture.

<Kannoth>: Would you like to exchange Facebooks, perhaps if we ever wish to have discussions (I have to leave work soon).

<Lord`Saladin>: It is not for online acquaintances.

<Kannoth>: Understandible.

<Lord`Saladin>: Scripture is scripture yes.

<Lord`Saladin>: The bible, we also know, has been changed to suit the designs of man

<Lord`Saladin>: Multiple times

<Kannoth>: Also, Mormon theology completely goes against the Doctrine of Monotheism (God used to be a man on another planet, Mormon Doctrine, p. 321. Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, Vol 5, pp. 613-614; Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, Vol 2, p. 345, Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333.)

<Kannoth>: Lord, that’s a red herring. We have the most accurate texts any generation has had. I study the greek, and the accuracy of the New Testament in comparison to any other ancient text is uncomparible.

<Kannoth>: Plus, if you want to say the doctrine has been changed to suit the designs of man, what stops me from saying that’s exactly what a Mormon is trying to do

<Kannoth>: ?

<Lord`Saladin>: Oh, I know.

<Lord`Saladin>: However, consider this…

<Lord`Saladin>: Perhaps as a closure to this discussion…

<Kannoth>: It’s an unprovable. However, I can open up my Greek, and point to where every Greek verse comes from (the Papyrus, it’s century, etc).

<Kannoth>: Sure. Although I would have liekd to continue this.

<Kannoth>: There are a plethora of other points where Mormonism disagrees outright with Christianity.

<Lord`Saladin>: Look at the structure of Christ’s church, that He set up whilst in this world…

<Lord`Saladin>: Tell me ANY denomination where it is the same.

<Lord`Saladin>: There is only one.

<Kannoth>: Wait. We agreed that if Mormonism disagreed with any of those 5 Doctrines, it isn’t Christian. It was clear there was a disagreement between the Monotheism of God. I think the case is set.

<Kannoth>: Christ’s church is simply the collective body of believers, not a physical institution.

<Kannoth>: It was never a single entity, but a loose collection of house churches.

<Lord`Saladin>: Now, who decided the definition of Christianity?

<Lord`Saladin>: Was it God?

<Lord`Saladin>: But, step away from any belief you may have.

<Kannoth>: We define Christianity through the source of Righteouss, the Bible.

<Lord`Saladin>: Oh dear.

<Lord`Saladin>: My friend, I am afraid to say you sound near robotic,

<Lord`Saladin>: *.

<Kannoth>: If you want to ignore the bible, you’re putting into question your source of righteousness and truth.

<Kannoth>: You’re not degrading me personally instead of discussing and debating the ideas. That’s usually an end to a conversation.

<Kannoth>: You agreed that it had to adhere to all those 5 central Doctrines, and it did not.

<Kannoth>: You now are questioning the definition of Christianity. That’s not what you yourself agreed to above.

<Lord`Saladin>: Hm… How to explain this…

<Lord`Saladin>: Hm.

<Kannoth>: Do we mean the Doctrine of Monotheism?

<Lord`Saladin>: Damn, if only this had taken place at a time other than 20 past one in the morning when my back is murdering me.

<Kannoth>: Friend, get some rest.

<Lord`Saladin>: Okay.

<Kannoth>: I do not want to bring you any uncomfort, honestly.

<Kannoth>: Let me say this, it was a pleasure talking to you.

<Lord`Saladin>: Let me give you the answer to your every question…

<Kannoth>: Sure. This being that of Monotheism and how God and Jesus can both have seperate physical bodies?

<Kannoth>: Alright, I would ask of you only the same. This is no academic teaching, but rather a study of the Bible, God’s word. <Kannoth>: It was a pleasure talking to you. <Lord`Saladin>: My friend, I have done the same. <Lord`Saladin>: On multiple occasions. <Kannoth>: Have a good day. God Bless, and merry Christmas.

Pray.

–

Leonard O Goenaga

Dear God, Thank you.

Thank you for showing me both love and mercy. My heart flows free with the honey of your compassion. Your grace floods my body with an ecstasy beyond explanation, and the evidence of your design in my upcoming marriage is shockingly beautiful. Hair raising. Heart pounding. Blood pumping.

If words could encompass the absolute beauty of your designed institution of marriage, I would not be worthy of putting it to pen. Your designs are flawless, and your measure is beyond my understanding. I fall flat with thanks, for I am not worthy of such a woman. Thanks again, for showing me such mercy.

Through this, I can merely utter my thanks, for providing me with not only a woman of my dreams, but more so the dreams you so perfectly knew would be best for me. You are truly a wonder, in every sense of the word, and I pray my marriage will be a reflection of such wonder. I pray my every day may be founded in the joy of exploring that wonder that dazzles me so.

May we, as one flesh, seek you, as all Love.

Amen.

Help Hani.

Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=20009734097 

TO WHOM IT CONCERNS, PLEASE READ:

Recently Hani, my friend and brother in Christ, was detained by immigration for deportation. He came here from Iran seeking a student visa to study in the United States. As he was studying here, the whole Iran political scenario started, and the government quickly denied him the student visa, and then his appeal (which is understandable given our geo-political climate). A week after they overturned his appeal, they arrested and sent him to a detainment center here in Miami.

What’s odd about Hani’s case is not only the environment in which he’s been rejected, but that he is honestly a political refugee. Upon coming to the United States, Hani converted out of Islam and into Christianity. In Islamic Sharia law, this person is called an Apostate, and is punishable by death (derived from Surah 2:217). Four major Sunni and the one major Shia Madh’hab (schools of Islamic jurisprudence) believe that apostates should be killed as capital punishment. An apostate in Hani’s home country of Iran is severely looked down upon both culturally, religiously and politically, and as such his deportation could lead to serious harm, if not death.

“Life for so-called apostates in Iran has never been easy, but it could become literally impossible if Iran passes a new draft penal code. For the first time in its history, Iran is considering the death penalty for apostates. In the past, authorities have executed apostates.” (thecuttingedgenews.com, May 2008).

http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=371

As such, it is requested that Hani be granted political asylum on the basis of the God given right of religious freedom, and be harbored in the United States on the grounds of being a political/religious refugee. While the governmental process makes its way, and Hani’s security it fought for, I beg that all you brothers and sisters in Christ write him a letter of encourage.

As early Christians, the church fathers, and Jesus himself experienced, persecution is a painful and active entity within Christianity. As we see in recent rejections of Pastors in China, murders of Christians by Hindu fundamentalist in India, and numerous other persecutions of believers and atrocities around the world, this is something we must actively deal with. Christianity was simple born into a world of persecution & worldly sin, and being embattled within this world, we will continue to deal with the existence of persecution.

“Blessed are you when men hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man. Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven.”

– Jesus, Luke 6:22

In this battle, as Hani himself now fights, it is invaluable and mandated by Christian teaching that brothers and sisters in the Lord come to the aid of fellow members. As a body, the church looks out and prays for it’s own. Encouragement is needed, and love is necessary.

Please pray for Hani as he experiences a modern-day persecution. Please pray for Hani, that his suffering may produce a multitude of blessing.

“But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it

for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save

many people alive.” 

– (Gen 50:20)

Please pray for Hani, and please find the time to write him a simple letter of blessings and encouragement. Let him know that even though you do not personally know him, as a brother or sister in Christ you love and pray for him. This letter doesn’t have to be long. It could be a simple paragraph or more.

PLEASE EMAIL THESE LETTERS TO:

 LGOEN001@FIU.EDU, &

 CHRISTIANSVAULT@GMAIL.COM

OR

Hand them in person to Leonard and Christian at Miami Baptist Church, any given Sunday.

God Bless you, and may we show both Hani and our God that we love, care for, and encourage those members of the true universal body of believers; His Church.

–Leonard O Goenaga

Two Updates

Two Updates as an explanation for my business and the lack of Blog Entries:

1) I was recently confirmed as my University’s Chief Justice (FIU, SGC-UP). It is sure to be a humbling and exciting opportunity of service.

2) I handle the finances and marketing for a family business. We’ve already doubled our firstmonth’s sales in our third, and our fourth month is looking to show continued growth at a time of economic ‘recession’. What a phenominal family God has given me.

Please pray that these two opportunities may continue to be blessing.

My Psalm 1

Oh Lord,

How my words weep of the disgust of my wrongs.

How my thoughts echo the pains of past sins.

Yet you take them all,

You remove me of my burdens,

You destroy my man-made fears.

You nailed them upon the simplicity of a wooden cross.

How my words rejoice of the beauty of forgiveness!

How my thoughts sing of the profound message of salvation!

You have shown me the error of my ways, yet offered an endless reserve of guidance & forgiveness.

            You have worked in me,

You have forgiven me.

And what have I done to receive such a Pearl? Such Gold? Such Jewels? Such Platinum? Such Credit?

            Nothing.

            Absolutely nothing.

The work is not of my own. My love is flawed. My intellect broken. My words of little value. My thoughts; vague.

Yet you…

            Your intellect defies understanding!

Your wisdom more precious than gravity!

Your love encompasses all meaning!

Oh how I beg to discover your ways! Oh how I beg to reflect your wisdom! Oh how I beg to praise you in actions, words, and deeds!

How my words rejoice of the beauty of forgiveness!

How my thoughts sing the profound message of salvation!

Amen.

The Meaning of Religious Liberty, Matthew Spalding, Ph.D.

December 5, 2007

“The Meaning of Religious Liberty

by Matthew Spalding, Ph.D.

WebMemo #1722

It is often thought that religious liberty means a strict separation of church and state, but that view is out of tune with the proper understanding of the role religion and morality play in the civic and public life of a self-governing people. A more compelling model is that of America’s Founders, who advanced religious liberty in a way that would uphold religion and morality as indispensable supports of good habits, the firmest props of the duties of citizens, and the great pillars of human happiness. Origins of Religious Liberty The story of religious liberty in America begins with religious persecution in the Old World. At the root of these conflicts was the much deeper controversy of divided loyalty between the city of God and the city of man. These dueling claims undermined political authority and obligation and led to religious wars and the civil coercion of faith. The basic parameters of the American Founders’ arrangement in the New World are well known: They sought to prevent the religious battles that had bloodied the European continent by removing entirely the authority of the church over matters of governance. In its place, they sought to secure the basis for political obligation in the consent of the governed, premised on concepts of individual freedom and equality that were grounded in human nature. In a letter written in 1791–all the more powerful because it was written by the first president to a Jewish synagogue–George Washington declared that ‘the Government of the United States . . . gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance’ but ‘requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens.’ Toleration, he continued, was no longer ’spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights.’ The Founders’ View of Religion in Public Life But far from wanting to expunge religion from public life, the Founders encouraged religion as a necessary and vital part of their new nation. They sought the official separation of church and state in order to build civil and religious liberty on the grounds of equal natural rights, but never intended–indeed, roundly rejected–the idea of separating religion and politics. The Founders opposed the establishment of a national church (though the federal government did not do away with state establishments); church doctrine would not determine the laws, and laws would not determine church doctrine. However, the Founders did favor government encouragement and support of religion in public laws, official speeches and ceremonies, on public property and in public buildings, and even in public schools. Indeed, the official separation of church and state allows and encourages (just as true religious freedom depends upon) a certain mixing of religion and politics. On the day after it approved the Bill of Rights, Congress called upon the president to ‘recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging, with grateful hearts, the many signal favors of Almighty God.’ President Thomas Jefferson regularly attended church services held in the House of Representatives and allowed executive branch buildings to be used for the same purpose. Jefferson seemed to find nothing wrong with the federal government supporting religion in a non-discriminatory and non-coercive way. Even after the ‘republican revolution’ of 1800, President Thomas Jefferson praised America’s ‘benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter.’ Religion and Morality The Founders’ support for blending religion and politics was based on the following syllogism: Morality is necessary for republican government; religion is necessary for morality; therefore, religion is necessary for republican government. ‘Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity,’ Washington wrote in his Farewell Address, ‘Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness–these firmest props of the duties of Men and citizens.’ Those two sentences are illuminating. Religion and morality are the props of duty, the indispensable supports of the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, and the great pillars of human happiness. They aid good government by teaching men their moral obligations and creating the conditions for decent politics. And while there might be particular individuals whose morality does not depend on religion, Washington argues, this is not the case for the nation as a whole: ‘And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion.’ In the end, while it is often thought that religion and politics must be discussed as if they are radically separate spheres, the Founders’ conception of religious liberty was almost exactly the opposite. It actually requires the moralization of politics, which includes–and requires–the continuing influence of religion in public life. The health of liberty depends on the principles, standards, and morals common to all religions. By acknowledging the realm in which reason and faith agree and can cooperate about morality and politics, religious liberty unites civic morality and the moral teachings of religion, thereby establishing common standards to guide private and public life. By recognizing the need for public morality and the prominent role that religion plays in nurturing morality, the Founders invite churches to cooperate at the political level in sustaining the moral consensus underlying their theological differences. It is by separating sectarian conflict from the political process and then strengthening this moral consensus that religious liberty makes self-government possible. America does not depend on a shared theology, but it does depend on a shared morality. In his First Inaugural Address, the first president said that ‘there exists in the economy and course of nature, an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness’ and that no nation can prosper that ‘disregards the external rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained.’ Jefferson put it more succinctly: The people, who are the source of all lawful authority, ‘are inherently independent of all but the moral law.’ What the separation of church and state does, then, is free religion–in the form of morality and the moral teachings of religion–to exercise an unprecedented influence over private and public opinion by shaping mores, cultivating virtues, and, in general, providing an independent source of moral reasoning and authority. At the same time, religious liberty reminds man to pursue his transcendent duties and frees religion to pursue its divine mission among men. Alexis de Tocqueville observed that even though religion ‘never intervenes directly in the government of American society,’ it determines the ‘habits of the heart’ and is ‘the first of their political institutions.’ Conclusion Today, it is increasingly evident that there is a close connection between America’s deepest social ills and the weakening of religious participation and the abandonment of traditional moral norms taught by religion. Rebuilding a post-welfare state society demands the return of religion and faith-based institutions to their central role in the nation’s civic and public life. To attain this, Americans must abandon the interpretation, maintained by the Supreme Court, that religion is in conflict with freedom and that any ‘endorsement’ of religion creates an unconstitutional religious establishment. That interpretation prevents government from recognizing or advancing religious faith generally. At the same time, sectarian politics is not the way to restore and strengthen America’s religious heritage. A better course is to return to the more reasonable, historically accurate, and faith-friendly view of religious liberty that upholds religion and morality as indispensable supports of good habits, the firmest props of the duties of citizens, and the great pillars of human happiness. Matthew Spalding, Ph.D., is Director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies at The Heritage Foundation.” Work: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Thought/wm1722.cfm