Merry Christmas!

Picture taken from http://communityoflife.net/bel.html

For unto us a Child is born,

Unto us a Son is given;

And the government will be upon His shoulder.

And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Of the increase of His government and peace.

There will be no end,

Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom,

To order it and establish it with judgment and justice

From that time forward, even forever.

The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

Isaiah 9:6-7 NKJV

Christopher Hitchens Has Died, Doug Wilson Reflects

How to think about the death of the outspoken atheist.

Douglas Wilson | posted 12/16/2011 12:00AM

Photo by Peter King

Editor's Note: Christopher Hitchens has died at the age of 62. A statement from Vanity Fair said that he died Thursday night at cancer center in Houston of pneumonia, a complication of his esophageal cancer. CT asked Douglas Wilson to weigh in on the life and death of the prominent atheist. (The image on our homepage features Wilson, left, and Hitchens in a mock arm wrestling match.)

Christopher Hitchens was a celebrity intellectual, and, as such, the basic outlines of his life are generally well known. But for those just joining us, Christopher Hitchens was the older of two sons, born to Eric and Yvonne in April 1949. He discovered as a schoolboy that probing questions about the veracity of the Christian faith were part of a discussion that he "liked having." His younger brother, Peter, followed him in unbelief. But unlike Christopher, Peter publicly returned to the Church of England, the communion where they had both been baptized.

Christopher spent some time in the 1960s as a radical leftist, but of course that was what everybody was doing back then. Somehow Christopher managed to do this and march to a different drummer, doing his radical stint as part of a post–Trotskyite Luxemburgist sect. He graduated from Balliol at Oxford, and soon became established as a writer, the vocation of his life, one in which he excelled. As a writer and thinker, he was greatly influenced by (and wrote about) men like George Orwell and Thomas Jefferson, while as the same time reserving the right to attack any sacred cow of his choosing—and the more sacred, the better. He is widely known for his scathing attack on Mother Teresa, and when Jerry Falwell passed away, he spent a good deal of time on television chortling about it.

But this was all part of Christopher's very public rhetorical strategy, not a function of an inability to domesticate a surly temperament. He was actually an affable and pleasant dinner companion, and fully capable of being the perfect gentleman. He was fully aware of the authority an enfant terrible could have, provided he played his cards right, and this was a strategy that Hitchens employed very well indeed. One man who delivers a terrible insult is banned from television for life, and another man, who does the same thing, has people lining up with invitations and microphones. In case anyone is wondering, Christopher was that second man.

A defining characteristic of his life was a willingness to break with the last group he was identified with. Whenever Orwell's "smelly little orthodoxies" began to develop, Christopher would be down the road. One of his books was Letters to a Young Contrarian, and that wordcontrarian appears to describe Christopher's approach to the desirability of not quite fitting in. After the attacks of September 11, he surprised a number of people with his full-throated support of the Iraq war, and he became a vigorous defender of the Western response to what he identified as "fascism with an Islamic face." As a result, he soon became identified with neoconservatives (who also supported the war), but he vigorously denied being a conservative of any stripe. At the same time, he found himself on the same side of a significant issue with George W. Bush, for example, while his former fellow leftists were most emphatically not.

I came to know Christopher during the promotion tour for his atheist encyclical, God Is Not Great. True to form, Christopher did not want to write a book attacking God and his minions only to have the release be a wine and cheese party in Manhattan with a bunch of fellow unbelievers, where they could all laugh knowingly about the rubes and cornpones down in the Bible Belt. So he told his publicist that he wanted to debate with any and all comers, and in the course of promoting his book, he did exactly that. I believe his book tour began in Arkansas, and the range of his debate partners included Al Sharpton, Dinesh D'Souza, and numerous others. In response to this general defiance he delivered to the armies of Israel, my agent Aaron Rench contacted Christianity Today to see if they would be willing to host a written exchange. They were, and when Christopher was contacted, he quickly agreed as well. That online exchange attracted some attention, and the debate was made into a small book (Is Christianity Good for the World?). The short promotion tour for the release of thebook was a series of debates that Christopher and I held in New York, Philadelphia, and Washington, which were filmed for the documentary Collision.

As a result of all this, we were thrown together in a number of situations. One time we shared a panel in Dallas, and I told the crowd there that if Christopher and I were not careful, we were in danger of becoming friends. During the time we spent together, he never said an unkind thing to me—except on stage, up in front of everybody. After doing this, he didn't wink at me, but he might as well have.

So we got on well with each other, because each of us knew where the other one stood. Eugene Genovese, before he became a believer, once commented on the tendency that some have to try to garner respect by giving away portions, big or small, of what they profess to believe. "If other religions offer equally valid ways to salvation and if Christianity itself may be understood solely as a code of morals and ethics, then we may as well all become Buddhists or, better, atheists. I intend no offense, but it takes one to know one. And when I read much Protestant theology and religious history today, I have the warm feeling that I am in the company of fellow unbelievers" (The Southern Front, pp. 9–10). Ironically, the branch of the faith most interested in getting the "cultured despisers" to pay us some respect is really not that effective, and this is a strategy that can frequently be found on the pointed end of its own petard. Respectability depends on not caring too much about respectability. Unbelievers can smell accommodation, and when someone like Christopher meets someone who actually believes all the articles in the Creed, including that part about Jesus coming back from the dead, it delights him. Here is someone actually willing to defend what is being attacked. Militant atheists are often exasperated with opponents whose strategy appears to be "surrender slowly."

G. K. Chesterton once pointed to the salutary effect that the great agnostics had on him—that effect being that of "arousing doubts deeper than their own." Christopher was an heir of the Enlightenment tradition, and would have felt right at home in the 18th-century salons of Paris. He wanted to carry on the grand tradition of doubting what had been inherited from Christendom, and to take great delight in doubting it. This worked well, or appeared to, for a time. But skepticism is a universal solvent, and once applied, it does not stop just because Christendom is gone. "I think, therefore I am. I think." We pulled out the stopper of faith, and the bathwater of reason appeared undisturbed for a time. But modernism slowly receded and now postmodernism is circling the drain. Our intelligentsia needs to figure out how to do more than sit in an empty tub and reminisce about the days when Voltaire knew how to keep the water hot.

Christopher knew that faithful Christians believe that it is appointed to man once to die, and after that the Judgment. He knew that we believe what Jesus taught about the reality of damnation. He also knew that we believe—for I told him—that in this life, the door of repentance is always open. A wise Puritan once noted what we learn from the last-minute conversion of the thief on the cross—one, that no one might despair, but only one, that no one might presume. We have no indication that Christopher ever called on the Lord before he died, and if he did not, then Scriptures plainly teach that he is lost forever. But we do have every indication that Christ died for sinners, men and women just like Christopher. We know that the Lord has more than once hired workers for his vineyard when the sun was almost down (Matt. 20:6).

We also know that Christopher was worried about this, and was afraid of letting down the infidel team. In a number of interviews during the course of his cancer treatments, he discussed the prospect of a "death bed" conversion, and it was clear that he was concerned about the prospect. But, he assured interviewers, if anything like that ever happened, we should all be certain that the cancer or the chemo orsomething had gotten to his brain. If he confessed faith, then he, the Christopher Hitchens that we all knew, should be counted as already dead. In short, he was preparing a narrative for us, just in case. But it is interesting that the narrative he prepped us with did not involve some ethically challenged evangelical nurses on the late shift who were ready to claim that they had heard him cry out to God, thus misrepresenting another great infidel into heaven. It has been done with Einstein, and with Darwin. Why not Hitchens? But Christopher actually prepared us by saying that if he said anything like this, then he did not know what he was saying.

This is interesting, not so much because of what it says about what he did or did not do as death approached him, and as he at the same time approached death. It is interesting because, when he gave these interviews, he was manifestly in his right mind, and the thought had clearly occurred to him that he might not feel in just a few months the way he did at present. The subject came up repeatedly, and was plainly a concern to him. Christopher Hitchens was baptized in his infancy, and his name means "Christ-bearer." This created an enormous burden that he tried to shake off his entire life. No creature can ever succeed in doing this. But sometimes, in the kindness of God, such failures can have a gracious twist at the end. We therefore commend Christopher to the Judge of the whole earth, who will certainly do right. Christopher Eric Hitchens (1949-2011). R.I.P.

Copyright © 2011 Christianity Today.

For Malaysian Christians, an Anxious Holiday Season

By LIZ GOOCH. Published by The New York Times on 12 December 2011.

KUALA LUMPUR — Beneath windows framed with forest-green wreaths studded with red and gold baubles, worshipers at St. Mary’s Anglican Cathedral, one of the oldest churches in Malaysia, knelt and clasped their hands in prayer. As part of the Advent service, they celebrated a baptism and sang their way through a series of hymns including “Child in the Manger.”

But their voices masked the unease many Christians in Malaysia are feeling this season, following accusations that they are trying to “Christianize” this Muslim-majority country by converting Muslims, which is illegal.

“It’s unfortunate that the authorities don’t take the relevant action against those making such wild allegations,” said Bishop Jason Selvaraj, who led the service at St. Mary’s. “We are upset about that. There’s a sense of justice is not done. We have not done anything wrong.”

The Malaysian Constitution both guarantees freedom of religion and designates Islam as the official religion — ethnic Malays are automatically considered Muslims. While Muslims are free to proselytize to others, most states have laws that prohibit members of other religions from proselytizing to Muslims. In Selangor State, the penalties can include a year’s imprisonment and a fine of up to 10,000 ringgit, or almost $3,200.

While the central government’s Department of Islamic Development says no one has ever been formally charged with trying to convert Muslims, recent statements by Muslim politicians and groups promoting Islam have left many Christians, who make up just 9 percent of the population, feeling victimized. Many are convinced that they are being used as political pawns to win support among Muslim voters in advance of the next general election, widely expected to be held next year.

“I think Christians are generally feeling that there is kind of a Christian-bashing going on,” said the Rev. Thomas Philips, a Syrian Orthodox priest and vice president of the Council of Churches of Malaysia, a group that represents Protestant and Orthodox churches.

While Christians, for the most part, work and live peacefully alongside Muslims in Malaysia, several incidents have heightened tensions in recent years, including the firebombing of churches in 2010.

The latest round of religious tensions was set off in August, when Selangor religious officials interrupted a church dinner outside of Kuala Lumpur, saying they had information that these Christians were proselytizing to Muslims.

Although the sultan of Selangor eventually concluded that there was “insufficient” evidence to take further legal action, Muslim politicians and leaders of Himpun, a new organization that has pledged to protect Islam, have continued to charge that there is a plot by some opposition political parties and Christian organizations to “Christianize” the country.

On Nov. 29, Ahmad Maslan, a deputy minister from the United Malays National Organization, or UMNO, the dominant party in the governing coalition, asserted that Islam would be “lost” if the opposition gained seats in the next election, according to a report by The Malaysian Insider, a news Web site.

“Say goodbye to Islam, because they are agents of Christianization,” he said, referring to the Democratic Action Party, a member of the opposition alliance.

The governing coalition, which has led Malaysia since independence from Britain in 1957, suffered its biggest loss in the 2008 elections, losing its two-thirds parliamentary majority for the first time. Some analysts say UMNO is trying to play on religious sensitivities to win back support from Malay Muslims.

Meanwhile, Himpun is planning a series of rallies around the country to “save and protect” Islam. The group, which held a rally in Kuala Lumpur in October that attracted 5,000 people, complains that the government is not enforcing laws that prohibit trying to convert Muslims.

“If we have a law which is not enforced, then it’s a mockery on the part of the religious authorities,” said Mohammad Azmi Abdul Hamid, Himpun’s chairman.

Christian leaders deny that they are part of a plot to “Christianize” the country. They say recent comments about “Christianization” by UMNO members indicate that the party is trying to shore up its support among Muslims, its traditional support base, before the election.

“The present climate and mood is more political than anything else,” said the Rev. Lawrence Andrew, editor of The Herald, the Roman Catholic Church’s weekly newspaper in Kuala Lumpur. Father Philips, who is also vice president of the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism, said he believed that UMNO was seeking to portray itself as the “savior of Muslims.”

“They are thinking that it will unite the Muslims together, but I don’t think that any Malaysians buy it,” he said. “It’s a political game.”

Farish Ahmad Noor, a political science professor at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, agrees.

While Prime Minister Najib Razak has been seeking to present Malaysia as a moderate Muslim nation and has opened diplomatic relations with the Vatican and spearheaded a “1Malaysia” policy to promote national unity and inclusiveness, Mr. Farish said his efforts were being undermined by conservatives within his party who were trying to appeal to Muslims. These elements, he said, threatened to alienate non-Muslims affiliated with other parties in the governing coalition, which includes the Malaysian Chinese Association and the Malaysian Indian Congress.

“It may prove to be counterproductive in the long run,” Mr. Farish said.

“If this fringe in UMNO thinks this is the only way they can secure the Malay vote, they have to understand that the coalition as a whole has to secure the votes of as many Malaysians as they can, and that includes Christians.”

Mr. Farish said while groups like Himpun say they are independent, “in the minds of Malaysians they are seen as another front” for the governing coalition.

Ng Kam Weng, director of the Kairos Research Center, which studies issues related to Malaysian Christianity, said that UMNO politicians may also be trying to intimidate Christians who were becoming more politically active and playing a greater role in civil society groups.

He said churches were careful not to proselytize to Muslims precisely because this could provoke a “backlash from authorities.”

“I think if the Christian community is clear in its conscience that it has maintained its integrity in how it practices its faith, I suppose we trust in God that he will override human mischief,” he said.

Bishop Selvaraj said the recent controversies would not dampen celebrations at St. Mary’s in the days leading up to Christmas. He has discussed the allegations in his sermons and urged the congregation — Malaysians of Chinese and Indian ethnicity, Africans, Indonesians and Europeans — to pray for peace. He said he has been encouraged by messages of support from Muslim friends.

“The majority of Muslims are good people,” he said.

International Anti-Corruption Day 9 December 2011

"On this International Anti-Corruption Day, let us pledge to do our part by cracking down on corruption, shaming those who practice it and engendering a culture that values ethical behaviour."

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

Message on International Anti-Corruption Day

Message of the Secretary-General for 2011

Corruption afflicts all countries, undermining social progress and breeding inequality and injustice.

When desperately needed development funds are stolen by corrupt individuals and institutions, poor and vulnerable people are robbed of the education, health care and other essential services.

Although the poor may be marginalized by corruption, they will not be silenced. In events across the Arab world and beyond this year, ordinary people have joined their voices in denouncing corruption and demanding that governments combat this crime against democracy. Their protests have triggered changes on the international scene that could barely have been imagined just months previously.

All of us have a responsibility to take action against the cancer of corruption.

The United Nations is helping countries combat corruption as part of our broader, system-wide campaign to help bolster democracy and good governance.

The United Nations Convention Against Corruption is a powerful tool in the fight. I urge all governments that have not yet ratified it to do so without delay. I also call on governments to include anti-corruption measures in all national programmes that support sustainable development.

The private sector, too, stands to gain enormously from effective action. Corruption distorts markets, increases costs for companies and ultimately punishes consumers. Companies can create a more transparent global economy through anti-corruption initiatives, including the work of the United Nations Global Compact.

On this International Anti-Corruption Day, let us pledge to do our part by cracking down on corruption, shaming those who practice it and engendering a culture that values ethical behaviour.

Resolution adopted by the General Assembly: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/58/4