Di Mana Mereka? Where Are They?

Pastor Joshua Hilmy and wife, Ruth; Pastor Raymond Koh; and Amri Che Mat had two things in common – they were all religious workers helping the poor and needy. The other similarity among the four is more ominous – they have all disappeared without a trace. The first to disappear was Amri on November 24 last year, followed by Hilmy and wife several days later on November 30 and Koh on February 13 this year. And it is their disappearance, which has raised concerns among their families, civil society and religious bodies, who want answers from the authorities. Below are details of the missing four:

Pastor Raymond Koh

The 62-year-old was abducted after a group of well-trained men stopped his silver Honda Accord along Jalan SS4B/10 in Petaling Jaya. CCTV footage of Koh’s abduction went viral on social media, showing a professionally executed abduction involving more than 10 men in three black SUVs. Police had previously arrested 31-year-old Lam Chang Nam, who was later charged with blackmailing Koh’s son, Jonathan. But police said he was not involved in the abduction of Koh. There has been no ransom demand made for Koh’s release. His family have offered a RM100,000 reward for information on his whereabouts. Local media reported that Koh and his NGO, Haparan Komuniti, were accused of proselytising Muslims, following a raid by the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais) at a thanksgiving dinner in 2011. Church groups have been rallying around Koh’s family in a show of support.

Pastor Joshua Hilmy and Ruth

Hilmy’s disappearance was first highlighted in an Australian website, xyz.net.au, on February 23, 10 days after Koh’s abduction. It was reported that the pastor of Malay descent, who was also a former Muslim, went missing on November 30, 2016. The article stated that Hilmy had received threatening phone calls prior to his disappearance. It said Hilmy’s car was also missing. Petaling Jaya police chief Mohd Zani Che Din had told TheSun daily that police didn’t have enough information on the background of Hilmy and his wife Ruth, who is believed to be missing, too. Police, however, confirmed that a report was lodged by a man who claimed to be a close friend of Hilmy and his wife on March 6. Zaini told TheSun that the report was lodged in Klang but the case was referred to PJ police, as the complainant said the missing duo lived in Kampung Tunku, Petaling Jaya. The case was classified as a missing persons’ report.

Amri Che Mat

Amri’s case resurfaced after opposition leader Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail held a press conference on March 23, highlighting the disappearance of the 43-year-old social activist from Perlis. Amri, who was part of the 1997 Mount Everest Malaysian expedition team, went missing on the night of November 24, 2016, after he reportedly told his eldest daughter that he was going out. His wife, Norhayati Ariffin, 43, who lodged a police report the next day, said there were cars and bikes parked near their house when her husband left home. The vehicles had their lights off despite having occupants. Amri’s car was found about 20km away from his house, near an abandoned sports school. Norhayati said her husband did not receive any threatening calls and there were no abnormal transactions in his bank accounts. 

Read more here: https://www.themalaysianinsight.com/s/1347/

Finding Real Love

BY CHUA EE CHIEN. Published by Asian Beacon on 28 July 2013.

Edmund Smith is a good-looking pastor, loving husband and father of two children who once led a “wild homosexual lifestyle,” as he says.

Smith had his first gay relationship when he was 18. A pub singer at night and a special education teacher by day, he used to entertain thoughts of having a sex change and tried to behave as femininely as possible. Plucking his eyebrows and shaving the hair on his legs were just two of his many womanly routines. What drove him to this lifestyle and what made him walk away from it?

Confusing Childhood

“I am the fourth boy in my family. When Mum was pregnant with me, they had hoped that I would be a girl. Perhaps that’s why, until I was five, my mother brought me up like a girl. I played with dolls and wore dresses,” says Edmund. “My father rejected me – he never
hugged me or touched me. My rejection deepened especially after my younger sister was born because I could remember clearly my father loving her and saying nice things to her just because she was a girl.”

“So, for the first five years of my life, I remember wishing to be a girl due to all the ‘self issues’ that had developed because of how my parents treated me and my confusing upbringing. I hated being a guy and naturally I began to think, feel and talk like a girl,” he recalls.

“When I reached the age of six and started to go to kindergarten, my mum suddenly decided to stop treating me like a girl after receiving comments from others and she started abusing and beating me up, making me more confused,” he says.

Edmund was later sent to an all-boys school and there he found boys who were just as effeminate. So, at the age of 13, he began his homosexual life.

Triggers

Based on his personal experience, he finds that there are mainly three specific issues which would trigger one’s journey to homosexuality, if not dealt with.

The first is the ‘vacuum’ issue, which is related to a lack of parental love. “Everyone needs the ‘V’ love. A mother’s love flows down from one side, and a father’s love flows down from the other and a child needs both parents’ love. Most gay guys have never had a father’s love,” he says.

The second trigger is the ‘self issue’, which is basically something about ourselves that we reject. For example, if you are a man and you reject your masculinity, that becomes a ‘self issue’ towards your gender.

The third trigger is the ‘barrier issue’, which causes one to look at the opposite gender negatively due to bad experiences such as abuse and bitterness.

Unfortunately for Smith, he had all three issues and therefore, looked for real love among his kind all through his secondary school days, while trying to be as feminine as possible.

Smith had his first real relationship with a man when he was 18 but it only lasted a year as his partner became possessive. He then started another relationship with another man.

It was not until he was 24 when he was dumped by his third lover that Smith decided he was sick and tired of his lifestyle and decided that he’d rather be single than be used by men again. It was a lonely journey to recovery as he had to walk away from his friends and give up his lifestyle of frequenting gay clubs and saunas.

Meeting The Right Man

Brought up in a Roman Catholic home, Smith faithfully went to church even while he was practising the homosexual lifestyle. “I went to church every Sunday, but I never had a relationship with Jesus,” he says.

His turning point came when he met Jenny, his colleague at Salvation Army where he worked as a teacher. “One day, Jenny asked me, ‘Why don’t you give Jesus a try?’ I then decided to open up my heart and receive Christ into my life.”

Upon Jenny’s invitation, he started attending the Salvation Army Church and grew in his relationship with this Jesus.

Looking back, Smith realises that his “right man – Jesus” had always been by his side because when he was going through his third break-up, he happened to be at a place where he was surrounded by Christians.

“If not for Jesus and the support from fellow Christians, I would have gone back to my old lifestyle. The journey to recovery from sexual brokenness is not an easy one. You need a church or group who can listen to you and lift you up when you fall,” Smith says.

One of Smith’s greatest blessings is his wife, Amanda Amutha Perumal, who was his colleague and good friend at Salvation Army. In 1997, Smith and Amanda went to Singapore Bible College to further their studies and there, they got to know about Choices, a Singapore- based organisation which reaches out to homosexuals.

They were trained at Choices for their ministry with homosexuals and in 2003, they moved back to Malaysia and set up Real Love Ministry (RLM) in Malacca.

“I started the ministry with the goal of raising up Befrienders-trained RLM workers who will journey with homosexuals who want to leave their lifestyle. I also started giving talks on the issues of sexual brokenness and formed support groups,” says Smith.

Spreading The Love

In 2006, Edmund and Amanda felt God’s call to start a church in Malacca which they later named Real Love Fellowship. Today, Edmund is the Senior Pastor of the church, reaching out and spreading the love of Jesus to the sexually-broken and marginalised community. His church is attended by the young and old from all walks of life.

The proud father of two – Angel and Ethan – has a passion for the performing arts and still sings, acts and dances professionally. His album, Wake Up, was inspired from his years of community work with the mentally-challenged, AIDs patients and homosexuals. He also travels frequently as an itinerant speaker, sharing his testimony to many.

Seeing the huge need of the homosexual community, Smith says that his church is looking to doing more work among the community. “There are hundreds of homosexuals who want to come out, but we have only few Befrienders,” he says. “We need more people to step out to reach out to these people.”

The Smiths also hope to purchase their own building to cater to the increasing needs of their church members and ministry. More information on Real Love Ministry is available at www.r-l-m.com.

North Carolina Judges Resign Over Refusal To Conduct Same-Sex Weddings

By Samuel Smith. Published on 30 October 2014 by Christian Post.

Since gay marriage was legalized in North Carolina on Oct. 10, at least six North Carolina judges have resigned from their benches because they do not want to go against their Christian faith and conduct wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples.

While it was reported last week that Rockingham County magistrate John Kallam Jr. and Swain County magistrate Gilbert Breedlove resigned from their positions because of the legalization of gay marriage, media reports have surfaced indicating that at least four other magistrates have done the same.

All six magistrates, Kallam, Breedlove, Bill Stevenson (Gaston County), Tommy Holland (Graham County), Gayle Myrick (Union County) and Jeff Powell (Jackson County) say they are waiting on God to give them direction in starting the next phases of their lives.

Stevenson is the latest judge to have publicized that he has stepped down from his position citing religious conflicts with the newly passed North Carolina marriage law.

Although reports surfaced only just this week that Stevenson had resigned, he issued his resignation on Oct. 16, just six days after same-sex marriage was legalized in the state.

"It was something I had to do out of conscience," Stevenson told NBC's Charlotte affiliate. "I felt like to perform same-sex unions would be in violation of the Lord's commands, so I couldn't do that."

Although Stevenson has only been a magistrate for over a year and a half, he is not concerned that he will be losing his main source of income as North Carolina Magistrates get paid more than $50,000 a year, according to the Winston-Salem Journal.

"I hate to wax it so biblical but it says 'what good is it for a man to gain the whole world but lose his own soul,'" Stevenson said. "So, that's the stakes I put on this."

Fifty-eight-year-old Graham County Magistrate, Holland, who is also Baptist, said he knew he had to resign as soon as he got a memo from the state saying that magistrates would have to honor the new marriage law no matter what their beliefs on same-sex marriage were.

"When the federal judges ruled that gay marriage was legal and North Carolina honors that, and part of a magistrate's job is to perform marriage ceremonies, I knew I couldn't honor that law," Holland told The Christian Examiner. "It's against my belief. It's against what the Bible says … I was raised a Southern Baptist. God has always taken care of me."

Myric, 64, issued a similar notion that she could not go against her own convictions.

"I believe that marriage was ordained by God to be between a man and a woman," Myrick told The Christian Examiner. "For me to do what the state said I had to do, under penalty of law, I would have to go against my convictions, and I was not willing to do that. I want to honor what the Word says."

Powell, who is now the former Jackson County magistrate and is currently a pastor of Tuckasegee Wesleyan Church, confirmed with a few news sources that he too has stepped down because of the gay marriage issue but has declined to comment further.

While these magistrates are just six of the 670 county magistrates that serve in North Carolina, other Christian judges who haven't resigned have indicated that they will simply not conduct the same-sex marriages as required by law, which could lead to their dismissal.

As the Winston-Salem Journal reported, Republican state senator Phil Berger, along with 27 other Republicans, have requested the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts to protect state officials who refuse to participate in gay marriages because of religious beliefs.

Berger also told the newspaper that he will draft a bill that will grant protections to state officials who refuse to either issue marriage licenses or conduct gay marriages, out of religious belief.

"Here in Rockingham County, forcing Magistrate Kallam to give up his religious liberties to save his job is just wrong," Berger said.

Gay marriage advocates disagree with Berger's position and claim that magistrates should be willing to uphold and interpret the full extent of the law.

"While we understand people have their own religious beliefs, we don't think this is about religious discrimination. It's really more so about the magistrates doing their job and following the law," said Rick McDermott, a board member of the state's gay marriage advocacy group, Equality NC.

Link: 

http://www.christianpost.com/news/four-more-north-carolina-judges-resign-over-refusal-to-conduct-same-sex-weddings-128890/

Why Christ, Mao And The Buddha Are Making A Comeback In China

By Matt Sheehan. Posted on 08/06/2014 8:31 am EDT Updated: 08/07/2014 2:59 pm EDT by The Huffington Post.

BEIJING -- The dominant political narrative in China today is one of resounding triumph: targets for economic growth achieved, rival countries overtaken, an Olympics successfully hosted. Yet in the telling of a philosophy professor at a prominent Shanghai university, many of these supposed victories have proven hollow for the Chinese people.

"On the surface we've achieved the goals, but no one is happy," the professor, who goes by the English name Luke, told The WorldPost. "There's no love, no hope. For more than 100 years we Chinese have been trying to catch up with Western countries. We want science, technology and military power. But the most important thing is the soul of the culture. The mind is based on the soul, and we've lost our souls."

Luke, who asked that his Chinese name not be used because he worships in one of China's many illegal underground churches, isn't alone in his concern for the state of the country's soul. As a convert to Christianity, he is one of a growing number of Chinese who are turning to a variety of faiths as they grapple with what they say is a gaping moral abyss in society.

"People today are afraid of showing love, afraid of being laughed at by other people," Luke lamented. "That spells the end of society."

China’s Christian population has been expanding at rates that rival its awe-inspiring GDP growth, with one scholar predicting that by 2030 China will be home to more Christians than any other country on earth. Many Chinese are also seeking solace in traditional belief systems such as Buddhism and Confucianism, in what they describe as a reaction to China's transformation from a poor agricultural society to an urban-industrial powerhouse. Yet others have found spiritual comfort in a return to Communist ideology and view Mao Zedong, former chairman of the Chinese Communist Party, as a savior who will help them revive communal bonds.

"Many people perceive a moral and spiritual crisis in China today," wrote the editors of the Review of Religion and Chinese Society, a new academic journal dissecting China's religious revival. "The foundation of a better future for China is believed by many people to be a spiritual renewal."

The topics of faith and the state of one's soul have been on the backburner for many Chinese since 1978, when leader Deng Xiaoping turned China away from the pursuit of a Communist utopia and toward the construction of a modern market economy.

Deng's sober and pragmatic push for economic reform came in response to Mao's Cultural Revolution, a movement from 1966 to 1976 to enforce Mao's version of Communism and purge China of any competing ideologies, everything from capitalism to Confucianism. Fanatical believers in the movement desecrated the Buddhist and Confucian temples that had served as the bedrock of Chinese spirituality for thousands of years. Meanwhile, Mao issued ideological manifestos and presided over mass public rallies that elevated him to God-like status in the hearts of many.

The Cultural Revolution robbed China of a decade of development, demonized traditional Chinese religious practices -- and, in the process, discredited Maoism for millions. Since then, 35 years of economic reform have more than quintupled both rural and urban income levels. But China and its people are currently at the "lowest of lows," according to Luke.

Asked to identify the low point for Chinese society, Luke and many other Chinese point to Oct. 13, 2011. That was the day Wang Yue, the 2-year-old daughter of migrant shopkeepers in southern China, wandered into an alley behind her father's store and was run over by two vehicles. For seven minutes she lay crying and bleeding in the street as 18 pedestrians, one by one, delicately made their way around her body without doing anything to help. It wasn't until a woman scavenging for trash came upon her mangled body that Wang was taken to a hospital, where she died eight days later.

The entire event was captured on closed-circuit television, and this bone-chilling display of indifference to human suffering was the second most viewed video of the year in China. What became known as the "little Yue Yue incident" stirred up a wave of soul-searching and hand-wringing among Chinese people, and strengthened Luke's conviction that China needs God's grace.

DABBLING IN FAITH

Luke's personal journey to Christianity had already begun a few years earlier after he made a painful decision facing hundreds of millions of Chinese: He left behind his wife and young child, moving to another province in pursuit of a better job. The coveted position as a professor of philosophy at a prestigious university came at the cost of personal isolation and a deteriorating marriage.

Luke first sought solace in the practice of Buddhism, but said he quickly grew disillusioned with the monks' emphasis on hierarchy and ceremonial gifts.

"I took on a Buddhist name, read the books, and for two months prayed every day, but I didn't find peace," Luke recalled.

He then turned toward the western tradition of Christianity, which he'd first encountered several years earlier in philosophy courses. After a brief period of time attending the state-sanctioned "Three-Self" churches, Luke found a loving community and a sense of belonging in an underground "house church."

"The relationship between the brothers and sisters is full of love, and everyone can speak," Luke said. "It's not like the Three-Self churches where only the priest can speak and everyone else sits there listening."

He said the sense of purpose and humility that came with his conversion have transformed his life and marriage, as well as the way he sees his country and culture. Luke believes that Christianity can also help China solve its myriad social woes and put an end to the spiritual drift that followed the Cultural Revolution.

"The culture was and still is destroyed," Luke said. "The most important things for Chinese people have been demolished, and what happened to little Yue Yue is related to the destruction of that meaning."

REVERTING TO RED

Each Sunday morning, while Luke is worshipping the Christian God in a house church, 54-year-old Fan Huiming is attending her own services in Jingshan Park at the very center of Beijing. She plays the role of congregant, preacher and choir member, putting all her heart into singing the praise of a different deity: Chairman Mao Zedong.

"It doesn't matter whether you look at his leadership, his art, his poems, his philosophy, his calligraphy ... In my heart he's simply a perfect person," Fan said. "As someone who truly loves Chairman Mao, as a true Marxist-Leninist, I will never change my faith."

Fan's faith is a result of her birth into unique historical circumstances. Just as Mao's Red Army was closing in on Beijing and preparing to declare the founding of the People's Republic of China in the fall of 1949, Fan was born in the capital to parents who were officials in Chiang Kai-Shek's defeated Nationalist government. Many in her family were able to flee to Taiwan, but Fan's pregnant mother couldn't make the journey, and she gave birth to Fan amid the tumult of the new Communist order.

Her status as the child of Nationalists -- Mao's sworn enemies -- would dog Fan through much of her life. Despite a fanatical devotion to Mao and a venomous hatred for the Nationalists, she said she has never been allowed to join the Chinese Communist Party. But what she lacked in credentials she made up for in zeal. Throughout the Cultural Revolution she collected Mao memorabilia, memorized his speeches and struggled against capitalists and all perceived enemies of the proletariat class.

Thirty-eight years after Mao's death, she still gathers with fellow Mao devotees in Jingshan Park every Sunday morning to sing red songs, hold up Mao's portrait and lecture passersby through a microphone. A sturdy and serious woman, Fan shuns the "red" dancing that many of her fellow 60-somethings enjoy, choosing instead to challenge people who seek to tarnish Mao's image.

"Nowadays you have so many people attacking Chairman Mao," Fan fumed. "I'll just come right out and say it: Those people are taking money from the American government."

Her impassioned defense of Mao's legacy stems from rosy childhood memories of the chairman's reign, when everyday life was imbued with a kind of communal spirituality, she said.

"Mao Zedong's era was about saving people's souls, about teaching people to strive for something higher," Fan said. "People from that time really put all their heart and soul into building this country and into following Mao Zedong."

Fan said she remembers a time when no one locked their doors at night, and maintains that the crimes committed in a single day in 2013 surpassed those committed over the entirety of Mao's 27-year reign. In her mind, the Cultural Revolution was a necessary bump on the road to a Communist utopia; where things really turned sour was with economic reform, she said.

"When Deng Xiaoping first brought up this idea of letting some people get rich first, it was just wrong, and it completely violated the main principle of the Communist movement," Fan said emphatically. "Everything is going in the direction of privatization. We're missing the concept of doing things for the common good, for the country, and to serve the people."

In the early 1980s she wrote a letter to Deng expressing this sentiment. She was rewarded not with a reply from China's leader, but with an ominous visit from state security agents.

Yet decades into the changes that have catapulted China toward superpower status, she is still a true believer in the principles of her youth.

"We've been through so much, and now only Mao Zedong Thought can save China," Fan said. "After so many years of reform and opening, people are just more isolated and hopeless."

Adoration for Mao is concentrated heaviest among people who came of age during the Cultural Revolution, but it has also spilled over into broader society during moments of international tension. During anti-Japan protests in recent years, patriotic demonstrators frequently carried portraits of the former leader and chanted, "Long live Chairman Mao!"

For Fan and her cohorts, an absolute faith in Mao has morphed the man into something of an omniscient and all-powerful God whose spirit still permeates the world. Following devastating tornadoes in the American Midwest during the summer of 2013, she wrote in a text message: "The spirit of Chairman Mao Zedong is always protecting the people he loves, the people of the world ... If the American government perpetrates evil, then the heavens will react! Bigger tornadoes, bigger volcanic eruptions!"

Her vision may be one of fire and brimstone, but ever since retiring from her job in the long-distance bus industry, Fan said she has been content engaging in more mundane acts of revolution by bringing her message to the people of Jingshan Park every Sunday. The one disappointment for Fan has been her son's indifference to Mao's message.

"To tell the truth, when I talk to my son about this, he just doesn't want to get involved in politics," Fan said while running her thumb over a Cultural Revolution-era Mao button. "He always tells me, 'That's all behind us, don't always bring it up.' But in my heart that really makes me sad.

"In China, society's influence is stronger than the family's. No matter what kind of education my son gets at home, as soon as he goes out the door he'll run into that kind of pollution from society."

BUDDHISM AS 'SOCIAL EDUCATION'

In the central Chinese city of Xi'an, home to the ancient terracotta warriors, Samantha Yang has had better luck in sharing her newfound spirituality with her son, Leo. Yang runs her own English training school in Xi'an, and the financial pressures from the school, combined with her struggles as a single mom, brought her to Buddhism.

Yang grew up with no strong spiritual influences in her life, and left her hometown of Xi'an after college to seek employment in the southern island province of Hainan. After working as a saleswoman for a cosmetics company, she founded her own English-language training school in 2002 for children back in her hometown.

"For a long time I thought I was a superwoman," Yang recalled. "I thought I could do anything.

"When I first started the school, there was just so much pressure in my life. In 2006 we ran a summer program and lost 200,000 yuan [about $25,000], which was really hard to deal with. I tried reading some philosophy and even looked at those Chicken Soup books, but none of it was for me."

Yang's spiritual breakthrough came when a friend brought her to a Buddhist monastery in a village outside of Xi'an. During some of her first meals at the monastery she was captivated by the practitioners' refusal to waste an ounce of food. When she left her mostly-eaten watermelon slices on a plate, the elderly woman collecting dishes chewed the last remaining hint of pink off Yang's white watermelon rinds.

That humility and simplicity won Yang over. She said she now practices Buddhism not only because it brings her peace, but because she views it as a "social education system" for Chinese society. The religion advocates a serenity and humility that stand in stark contrast to many people's frenzied desire to accumulate wealth at any cost. Its appeal has fueled what many say is a Buddhist revival in China, with surveys suggesting that up to one-third of Chinese now consider themselves Buddhists.

In Yang's assessment, traditional Chinese culture has been eroding since 1919, when nationalist student demonstrations known as the May Fourth Movement blamed China's Confucian tradition for the country's domination by colonial powers. She sees those attacks on China's ancient heritage as having destroyed something fundamental to the culture.

Yang and her son have approached Buddhism in different ways. While Leo rarely visits the monastery, Yang has noticed a new equanimity in her son despite the pressure-cooker environment in Chinese high schools. Yang has taken up chanting meditation at the monastery as a way to clear her mind of the "wild luxury ideas" that she feels permeate contemporary Chinese society.

Searching for the root of her own spiritual journey, Yang looks back to her grandmother, a peasant who never abandoned China's diverse array of folk religions.

"My grandmother was very open to belief," Yang said. "She was willing to worship almost anything, any God she thought had power. I think maybe she was a seed for my faith."

The simplicity and community Yang has found at her monastery give her hope that China can be saved from what she describes as its current state of ethical anarchy. Her faith has taken a different form from that of Luke and Fan, but in searching for a moral compass to navigate the tumult of modern China, they have all forged their own path toward personal salvation and social redemption.

"The fate of Western society is comedy, but in China it's tragedy: hopeless, aimless, meaningless," Luke said. "The fate of China can be changed to comedy."

Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/06/china-religion_n_4860813.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

Chick-Fil-A Surpasses KFC As Dominant US Fast Food Chicken Chain

Published on 17 July 2014 by Malaysian Digest.

It’s the fast food chicken chain that most consumers outside the US have never heard of. But inside America, the wild popularity of family-owned chain Chick-fil-A has been identified as a threat to major fast food behemoths like McDonald’s and has even surpassed chicken giant KFC.

The title of a recently released market report for McDonald’s says it all: Chick-fil-A a Serious and Growing Competitive Threat.

Written by financial services firm Janney, the report notes that the privately owned company held a 26 per cent market share of the fast food chicken industry in 2013 — up from nine per cent in 1999.

For comparison, in 1999, Yum! brand’s KFC enjoyed a comfortable lead with a 40 per cent share of the market. Today, that’s down to 22 per cent, several percentage points below Chick-fil-A and enough to make the Colonel turn in his grave.

The recently released results of Consumer Reports' annual fast food ranking corroborates the popularity of Chick-fil-A, as respondents gave the brand top billing in the category of chicken sandwiches.

KFC landed at the bottom of the heap, after other chains like Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen, Zaxby’s and Church’s Chicken. Chick-fil-A found success carving out a niche market selling deep-fried chicken sandwiches, nuggets and wraps since 1946.

The brand's success is all the more impressive given that KFC possesses more than double the number of outlets as its counterpart. While Chick-fil-A has 1,790 restaurants in 39 states and Washington DC, KFC has 4,500 outposts across the country.

Furthermore, all Chick-fil-A restaurants close system-wide close on Sundays — or “Lord’s Day” — as part of founder S. Truett Cathy’s religious beliefs.

Meanwhile, the Janney report issues some stern warnings to fast food giant McDonald’s, which also offers a slew of chicken-based items on its menu. While the chain is described as a relatively “small fry” compared to worldwide sales at McDonald’s, the report notes that KFC didn’t see Chick-fil-A's success coming a decade ago either.

In 2013, McDonald’s generated US$36 billion (RM115b) in systemwide sales, versus US$5 billion at Chick-fil-A. “While Chick-fil-A remains meaningfully smaller than McDonald’s US today, to the extent it could be ignored as a competitive threat ten years ago, we would argue that it can no longer be ignored as a long-term competitive threat today,” analysts write.

Here are the top 10 fast food brands in the US by sales in 2013:
1. McDonald's
2. Subway
3. Starbucks
4. Wendy's
5. Burger King
6.Taco Bell
7. Dunkin' Donuts
8. Pizza Hut
9. Chick-fil-A
10. Applebee's

- AFP-Relaxnews

Link: http://www.malaysiandigest.com/features/509503-chick-fil-a-surpasses-kfc-as-dominant-us-fast-food-chicken-chain.html

The members of the Cathy family have never made a secret of their religious faith. What they haven’t talked about nearly as much is the political implications of that faith. That changed on June 16, when Dan Cathy, having grown up from dwarf performer to Chick-fil-A’s president, went on a syndicated radio show and said, “I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage.’” Two weeks later an interview with Cathy was published in a North Carolina Baptist newsweekly called the Biblical Recorder. In it, he said his company was “very much supportive of the family—the biblical definition of the family unit.” For the younger Cathy, just as for the majority of the delegates to the Southern Baptist Convention, the biblical definition of the family unit meant one thing: a man, a woman, and their children. When Southern Baptist publications use the words “same-sex marriage” and “gay marriage,” they bracket them in quotes.

Link: 

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-08-02/chick-fil-a-deep-fried-civil-war#p1

The fast food restaurant of a thousand lands is the work of Erik DeVriendt, the owner/operator of this Chick-fil-A since June 2011. Since moving to Richmond in 2006, DeVriendt has wielded his vocational skills to address the needs of Richmond's refugee population: namely, steady and life-giving employment. Including Jirom, DeVriendt has employed some 13 refugees for his 67-employee team, often receiving referrals from Commonwealth Catholic Charities, the local resettlement agency. The agency helps with paperwork and training, but DeVriendt is not incented financially for hiring refugees. He simply wanted to "help them in the most tangible way possible, so we stepped up to the plate and took a swing."

Link: http://www.christianitytoday.com/thisisourcity/richmond/another-kind-of-christian-witness-at-chick-fil-a.html?paging=off

Mais has refused to comply with instruction of AG & state government

By Md Izwan. Published by The Malaysian Insider on 25 June 2014.

The Selangor Islamic Religious Council (Mais) today insisted it will continue to seize Bibles that contained the word Allah in the state, adding that it had every right to destroy the holy books it had already seized earlier this year from the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM).

Its chairman Datuk Mohamad Adzib Mohd Isa (pic) said operations to counter the distribution of such Bibles in Selangor will continue and warned that it will not hesitate to arrest those distributing it. "This process will go on and we will also make arrests," he said in his speech at an event in the Tabung Haji Complex in Kuala Lumpur today.

Adzib also stressed that Mais will not accept the decision of Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail in the seizure of the BSM Bibles, adding that it will not return them to the BSM. Gani decided to close the case against BSM after finding the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais) had erred in the seizure of the Bibles, which he said were not a threat to national security as alleged. However, Mais has refused to comply with instruction from the A-G and the state government but instead said that it would be getting a court order to dispose of the holy books.

The religious council said that it will not close the case as was ordered by Gani and insisted that there is a provision in the 1988 state enactment to charge BSM. Adzib today said that although the council would accept the A-G's decision not to prosecute BSM but it maintained that the reason given not to take action against the society was not valid. "We accept the decision not to prosecute as it is under the purview of the A-G. But we do not agree with the reasons he gave," he added.

"On the seized Bibles, actually Jais could dispose it themselves. But because we care about harmony and justice, we leave it to the prosecutor to decide."

On January 2 this year, Jais seized the 321 AlKitab (Bahasa Malaysia Bible) and Bup Kudus (Iban-language Bible) from the then BSM office in Damansara Kim, sparking an outcry and criticisms aimed at the religious authority.

Read more here: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/we-will-continue-to-seize-bibles-with-banned-words-says-muslim-body

Published by The Malay Mail Online on 23 June 2014.

Malaysian Christians are free to call their God “Allah” in churches, a government official said today, reiterating the Najib administration’s commitment to its 10-point solution from 2011... The official stressed that the Federal Court’s decision only upheld a ban on the Catholic Church from publishing the word in its newspaper, Herald. “Malaysia is a multi-faith country and it is important that we manage our differences peacefully, in accordance with the rule of law and through dialogue, mutual respect and compromise,” the statement added.

Christians make up about 10 per cent of the Malaysian population of 30 million. Almost two-thirds of the Christians are Bumiputera and live in Sabah and Sarawak, where they routinely use Bahasa Malaysia and indigenous languages in their religious practices, which include describing God as “Allah” in their prayers and holy book.

Christian groups and churches nationwide voiced concern today over the validity of the government’s 10-point solution allowing the distribution of Christian bibles containing the word “Allah” in the select states in the wake of the Federal Court’s refusal to hear an appeal on the usage of the word.

Bishop Datuk Dr Thomas Tsen, president of the Sabah Council of Churches, said the Federal Court’s decision in dismissing the Catholic church’s application to appeal the government ban on the word “Allah” in its weekly was a “huge disappointment”.

“People will bring this decision of the highest court and say no, even though the prime minister has the 10-point solution, the highest court still says you cannot freely use the term ‘Allah’ to address your God,” Tsen told The Malay Mail Online today.

“Even though the prime minister did say this will not affect East Malaysia, it’s no guarantee because this is the law. And we wanted the guarantee from the legal side,” he said. Tsen said Christians in Sabah and Sarawak have for centuries worshipped in the Malay language and have been using the Al-Kitab replete with the word Allah to refer to God. “Our freedom of religion is being restricted,” he said. “Since we were born, we have been using the term. That is our language,” Tsen added.

He also expressed concern that the Selangor Islamic authorities might use the Federal Court ruling to justify their seizure of 321 copies of the Malay and Iban-language bibles from the Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM) last January.

A seven-member bench at the country’s highest court decided by a 4-to-3 majority this morning to deny the Catholic Church the right to appeal a lower court decision preventing it from using the word ‘Allah’.

Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria, Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Md Raus Sharif, Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin and Federal Court judge Tan Sri Suriyadi Halim Omar had rejected the Catholic Church’s application.

The dissenting judges were Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Tan Sri Richard Malanjum, and Federal Court judges Datuk Zainun Ali and Tan Sri Jeffrey Tan.

Last year, the Court of Appeal ruled that “Allah” was not integral to the Christian faith and that the home minister was justified in banning the Herald from using the Arabic word on grounds of national security and public order... The Cabinet, through Minister Datuk Seri Idris Jala, stated in the resolution that the large Bumiputera Christian population in Sabah and Sarawak could use their holy books in the Malay, Indonesian, and indigenous languages.

Read more here: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/malaysian-christians-can-use-allah-in-church-putrajaya-says

US Supreme Court Permits Jesus Prayers at Government Meetings

By Ruth Moon. Published by Christianity Today on 5 May 2014.

A divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that explicitly Christian prayers at government meetings do not violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment. At least in the 94,000-person town of Greece, New York, which may continue to open its council meetings with sectarian prayer after the court's 5-4 reversal of an appeals court's ban on the tradition.

Requiring prayers to be nonsectarian would require courts to "act as supervisors and censors of religious speech," wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy for the majority opinion, "thus involving government in religious matters to a far greater degree than is the case under the town's current practice of neither editing nor approving prayers in advance nor criticizing their content after the fact."

Two residents of Greece had sued the town board for its practice of beginning meetings with prayer, saying the practice violated the establishment clause (full summary below). The Second Circuit Appeals Court agreed, saying that even though the town board allowed members of any faith to pray, functionally, a majority of the prayers contained "uniquely Christian language."

But the Supreme Court reversal highlights the difficulty of determining where the line is between sectarian and nonsectarian prayer. Phrases like "Lord of Lords," Kennedy points out, might seem ecumenical to many Christians but exclusive to practitioners of other religions. "The First Amendment is not a majority rule, and government may not seek to define permissible categories of religious speech," Kennedy said in the opinion. "Once it invites prayer into the public sphere, government must permit a prayer giver to address his or her own God or gods as conscience dictates, unfettered by what an administrator or judge considers to be nonsectarian." 

Such prayers might offend people, Kennedy acknowledged. "Offense, however, does not equate to coercion," he said. "Adults often encounter speech they find disagreeable; and an Establishment Clause violation is not made out any time a person experiences a sense of affront from the expression of contrary religious views in a legislative forum."

The court handed down several opinions: Kennedy wrote the court's opinion, which Chief Justice John Roberts and Samuel Alito joined. Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas joined in part and filed a partially concurring opinion; Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Sonia Sotomayor joined a dissenting opinion by Elena Kagan.

Kagan in the dissenting opinion said the Greece prayers were "more sectarian and less inclusive" than any allowed in the precedent case, Marsh v. Chambers. That 1983 case upheld the state of Nebraska's tradition of opening legislative sessions with a chaplain's prayer.

"When citizens of all faiths come to speak to each other and their elected representatives in a legislative session, the government must take especial care to ensure that the prayers they hear will seek to include, rather than serve to divide," Kagan said.

The Greece case, the first legislative prayer case taken by the Supreme Court since 1983, has been closely watched. CT, which previously examined whether Christians must pray in Jesus' name at public forums, noted how the Second Circuit ruled that the town didn't try hard enough to find non-Christians to give the invocations—even if that required recruiting beyond the town's borders. But many expected the Supreme Court to reverse the ruling, and wondered how narrow or broad the reversal would be.

Most of Kennedy's opinion "is devoted to refuting respondents' argument that the Establishment Clause requires legislative invocations to be non-sectarian," explains Religion Clause's Howard Friedman in his analysis, while most of Kagan's dissent "emphasiz[es] the differences between city council meetings and state legislatures" on religious equality.

"The Supreme Court has again affirmed that Americans are free to pray," said David Cortman, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which represented the town of Greece before the Supreme Court. "Opening public meetings with prayer is a cherished freedom that the authors of the Constitution themselves practiced. Speech censors should have no power to silence volunteers who pray for their communities just as the Founders did."

ADF believes the ruling has ramifications for similar cases in other courts, and "will seek to resolve those cases in light of the decision."

"Today's Supreme Court decision is a great victory for religious liberty," said Eric Rassbach, deputy general counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which filed an amicus brief in the case. "Prayers like these have been taking place in our nation's legislatures for over 200 years. They showcase our nation's religious diversity, highlight the fact that religion is a fundamental aspect of human culture, and reinforce the founding idea that our rights come from the Creator—not the legislature."

The decision highlights U.S. freedom to enjoy religious liberty, said Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, which also filed an amicus brief in the case. "I am very thankful the Court did the right thing," he said. "Prayer at the beginning of a meeting is a signal that we aren't ultimately just Americans. We are citizens of the State, yes, but the State isn't ultimate. There is some higher allegiance than simply political process."

Here is the Supreme Court's summary of Greece v. Galloway:

Since 1999, the monthly town board meetings in Greece, New York, have opened with a roll call, a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance, and a prayer given by clergy selected from the congregations listed in a local directory. While the prayer program is open to all creeds, nearly all of the local congregations are Christian; thus, nearly all of the participating prayer givers have been too. Respondents, citizens who attend meetings to speak on local issues, filed suit, alleging that the town violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause by preferring Christians over other prayer givers and by sponsoring sectarian prayers. They sought to limit the town to "inclusive and ecumenical" prayers that referred only to a "generic God." The District Court upheld the prayer practice on summary judgment, finding no impermissible preference for Christianity; concluding that the Christian identity of most of the prayer givers reflected the predominantly Christian character of the town's congregations, not an official policy or practice of discriminating against minority faiths; finding that the First Amendment did not require Greece to invite clergy from congregations beyond its borders to achieve religious diversity; and rejecting the theory that legislative prayer must be non-sectarian. The Second Circuit reversed, holding that some aspects of the prayer pro- gram, viewed in their totality by a reasonable observer, conveyed the message that Greece was endorsing Christianity.

Link: 

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/may/supreme-court-permits-jesus-prayers-at-government-greece.html

How God Became Jesus—and How I Came to Faith in Him

Published by Christianity Today on 16 April 2014.

Bart Ehrman, a professor of religion at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, is something of a celebrity skeptic. He's written a number of bestsellers exposing the alleged errors in traditional accounts of early Christianity. His book Misquoting Jesus (2007) asserts that the manuscripts used to compile the New Testament are corrupted and unreliable, deviant from original autographs. His book Forged (2011) claims that many of the New Testament writings were counterfeits written pseudonymously under the names of the apostles.

In his latest book, How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee, Ehrman argues that belief in Jesus' divinity evolved over the first few centuries and eventually crystallized into what we know today. Jesus didn't claim to be God; rather, his followers thought he was divine because they believed he rose from the dead. But even then, the understanding of Jesus' divinity was incredibly elastic, ranging from a man exalted to be God's vice-regent to a pre-existent person who was equal with God. Only much later was Jesus identified as the Almighty. You can read Ehrman's own summary of his book at The Huffington Post.

Ehrman has a famous de-conversion, turning from an evangelical Christian to an agnostic. And he loves to tell his story. Ehrman is a gifted communicator, never short of a provocative quote. He knows how to stir a crowd, and he does well in talk shows, conferences, presentations, and debates.

But I've got my own de-conversion story to match his.

From Skepticism to Faith

I grew up in a secular home in suburban Australia, where religion was categorically rejected—it was seen as a crutch, and people of faith were derided as morally deviant hypocrites. Rates for church attendance in Australia are some of the lowest in the Western world, and the country's political leaders feel no need to feign religious devotion. In fact, they think it's better to avoid religion altogether.

As a teenager, I wrote poetry mocking belief in God. My mother threw enough profanity at religious door knockers to make even a sailor blush.

Many years later, however, I read the New Testament for myself. The Jesus I encountered was far different from the deluded radical, even mythical character described to me. This Jesus—the Jesus of history—was real. He touched upon things that cut close to my heart, especially as I pondered the meaning of human existence. I was struck by the early church's testimony to Jesus: In Christ's death God has vanquished evil, and by his resurrection he has brought life and hope to all.

When I crossed from unbelief to belief, all the pieces suddenly began to fit together. I had always felt a strange unease about my disbelief. I had an acute suspicion that there might be something more, something transcendent, but I also knew that I was told not to think that. I "knew" that ethics were nothing more than aesthetics, a mere word game for things I liked and disliked. I felt conflicted when my heart ached over the injustice and cruelty in the world.

Faith grew from seeds of doubt, and I came upon a whole new world that, for the first time, actually made sense to me. To this day, I do not find faith stifling or constricting. Rather, faith has been liberating and transformative for me. It has opened a constellation of meaning, beauty, hope, and life that I had been indoctrinated to deny. And so began a lifelong quest to know, study, and teach about the one whom Christians called Lord.

As a biblical scholar with expertise in early Christian history, I spend most of my time teaching and writing about Jesus, the early church, and the development of Christian thought.

In many ways, I am the anti-type of Bart Ehrman—a biblical scholar with a university doctorate and a modest quiver of publications under my belt who has shifted from the secular to the sacred, transitioned from skepticism to faith. Consequently, I do not see Jesus as merely another man whom people later venerated as a god. No, when I look to Jesus, I see that God is with us and for us, because he became one of us. I believe that God became a man, Jesus of Nazareth.

Fighting for the Faith

When I heard Ehrman had a forthcoming book about how Jesus became God, my interest was piqued. I'm intimately familiar with Ehrman's earlier works—and I often enjoy them—so I had a pretty good idea where he was going with this topic.

I also knew that while Ehrman could be informative, his retelling of church history could also be wildly skewed in some places. So I teamed up with four colleagues (Craig Evans, Simon Gathercole, Chris Tilling, and Charles Hill), all leading authorities in their own fields, to publish an immediate response to Ehrman. We read Ehrman's manuscript over the winter and set out to write How God Became Jesus: The Real Origins of Belief in Jesus' Divine Nature. In this book, we challenge Ehrman on the when, where, how, and who of the origins of belief in Jesus as God incarnate.

For many secularists, Ehrman is a godsend who propagates common misconceptions about Jesus and the early church. He believes there was a spectrum of divinity between gods and humans in the ancient world. Therefore, he asserts that the early church's beliefs about Jesus evolved: from a man exalted to heaven to an angel who became human to a pre-existent "divine" person who became incarnate to a subordinated or lesser god to being declared one with God.

My faith and studies have led me to believe otherwise. First-century Jews and early Christians clearly demarcated God from all other reality, thus leading them to hold to a very strict monotheism. That said, Jesus was not seen as a Greek god like Zeus who trotted about earth or a human being who morphed into an angel at death. Rather, the first Christians redefined the concept of "one God" around the person and work of Jesus Christ. Not to mention the New Testament writers, especially Luke and Paul, consistently identify Jesus with the God of Israel.

Many people get the idea that Jesus was just a prophet and never claimed to be divine. But a careful look at the Gospels shows that the historical Jesus explicitly claimed to exercise divine prerogatives. He identified himself with God's activity in the world. He believed that in his own person, Israel's God was returning to Zion, just as the prophets had promised. And he claimed he would sit on God's throne. These claims, when studied up close, are de facto claims to divine personhood, the reasons religious leaders of the day were so outraged.

Evidence shows that Jesus claimed to be God incarnate, and within 20-some years after his death and resurrection, Christians were identifying him with the God of Israel, using the language and grammar of the Old Testament to do so.

Sure, some sects in the first few centuries held heretical beliefs about Jesus. But the mainstream, orthodox view of Christ's identity was always consistent with and rooted in the New Testament, though orthodox Christology became more refined in the following centuries.

Ehrman's book is genuinely informative and provocative in places, but he gets many things wrong. Modern secular audiences—who prefer provocative sound bites from Richard Dawkins and conspiracy theories from Dan Brown—love to hear Ehrman's message. He provides solace to secularists: the whole Jesus-is-God thing is a big mistake that has negatively affected human history. In our culture, unbelief is trendy and religion is passé; people of faith are often derided as superstitious yokels from the boonies.

Some have great confidence in skeptical scholarship, and I once did, perhaps more than anyone else. If anyone thinks they are assured in their unbelief, I was more committed: born of unbelieving parents, never baptized or dedicated; on scholarly credentials, a PhD from a secular university; as to zeal, mocking the church; as to ideological righteousness, totally radicalized. But whatever intellectual superiority I thought I had over Christians, I now count it as sheer ignorance. Indeed, I count everything in my former life as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing the historical Jesus who is also the risen Lord. For his sake, I have given up trying to be a hipster atheist. I consider that old chestnut pure filth, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a CV that will gain me tenure at an Ivy League school, but knowing that I've bound myself to Jesus—and where he is, there I shall also be.

The real story of Jesus Christ is good news, and it transformed my life. That's why I'm fighting to tell it amidst a cacophony of misguided voices.

Michael F. Bird is lecturer in theology at Ridley College in Melbourne and coauthor of How God Became Jesus: The Real Origins of Belief in Jesus' Divine Nature (Zondervan).

Link: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2014/april-web-only/how-god-became-jesus-and-how-i-came-to-faith-in-him.html?paging=off

He is not here; he has risen, just as he said

Painting by Simon Dewey entitled 'He Lives'. This sort of realistic painting, showing a triumphant Christ, is disparaged by the Art cognoscenti, but it is very popular, and in fact Simon Dewey is one of the most visible religious artists of the late 20th century. Its message is strong and direct: Christ is risen, he is the Saviour. The stone is rolled away, and darkness and death are behind him.

Matthew 28:1-10 

After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.

The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."

So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. Suddenly Jesus met them. "Greetings," he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshipped him. Then Jesus said to them, "Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me." (NIV)

See also Mark 16:1-8 and Luke 24:1-12.

World Vision's Decision to Hire Employees in Same-Sex Marriages

By Celeste Gracey and Jeremy Weber. Published on 24 March 2014.

World Vision's American branch will no longer require its more than 1,100 employees to restrict their sexual activity to marriage between one man and one woman.

Abstinence outside of marriage remains a rule. But a policy change announced Monday [March 24] will now permit gay Christians in legal same-sex marriages to be employed at one of America's largest Christian charities.

In an exclusive interview, World Vision U.S. president Richard Stearns explained to Christianity Today the rationale behind changing this "condition of employment," whether financial or legal pressures were involved, and whether other Christian organizations with faith-based hiring rules should follow World Vision's lead.

Stearns asserts that the "very narrow policy change" should be viewed by others as "symbolic not of compromise but of [Christian] unity." He even hopes it will inspire unity elsewhere among Christians.

[Editor's note: All subsequent references to "World Vision" refer to its U.S. branch only, not its international umbrella organization.]

In short, World Vision hopes to dodge the division currently "tearing churches apart" over same-sex relationships by solidifying its long-held philosophy as a parachurch organization: to defer to churches and denominations on theological issues, so that it can focus on uniting Christians around serving the poor.

Given that more churches and states are now permitting same-sex marriages (including World Vision's home state of Washington), the issue will join divorce/remarriage, baptism, and female pastors among the theological issues that the massive relief and development organization sits out on the sidelines.

World Vision's board was not unanimous, acknowledged Stearns, but was "overwhelmingly in favor" of the change.

"Changing the employee conduct policy to allow someone in a same-sex marriage who is a professed believer in Jesus Christ to work for us makes our policy more consistent with our practice on other divisive issues," he said. "It also allows us to treat all of our employees the same way: abstinence outside of marriage, and fidelity within marriage."

Stearns took pains to emphasize what World Vision is not communicating by the policy change.

"It's easy to read a lot more into this decision than is really there," he said. "This is not an endorsement of same-sex marriage. We have decided we are not going to get into that debate. Nor is this a rejection of traditional marriage, which we affirm and support."

"We're not caving to some kind of pressure. We're not on some slippery slope. There is no lawsuit threatening us. There is no employee group lobbying us," said Stearns. "This is not us compromising. It is us deferring to the authority of churches and denominations on theological issues. We're an operational arm of the global church, we're not a theological arm of the church.

"This is simply a decision about whether or not you are eligible for employment at World Vision U.S. based on this single issue, and nothing more."

Yet the decision is still likely to be regarded as noteworthy by other evangelical ministries. Aside from World Vision's influential size—it took in more than a billion dollars in revenue last year, serves an estimated 100 million people in 100 countries, and ranks among America's top 10 charities overall—World Vision also recently fought for the right of Christian organizations to hire and fire based on faith statements all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court—and won. It also opposed a 2012 attempt by USAID to "strongly encourage" faith-based contractors to stop discriminating against gays and lesbians in order to receive federal funds.

In other words, other Christian organizations look to World Vision for leadership on defending faith hiring practices. Stearns acknowledges this, but wants observers to understand why World Vision is voluntarily changing its own policy.

Stearns said World Vision has never asked about sexual orientation when interviewing job candidates. Instead, the organization screens employees for their Christian faith, asking if they can affirm the Apostles' Creed or World Vision's Trinitarian statement of faith.

Yet World Vision has long had a Christian conduct policy for employees that "holds a very high bar for all manner of conduct," said Stearns. Regarding sexuality activity, World Vision has required abstinence for all single employees, and fidelity for all married employees.

However, World Vision now has staff from more than 50 denominations—a handful of which have sanctioned same-sex marriages or unions in recent years, including the United Church of Christ, The Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the Presbyterian Church (USA). Meanwhile, same-sex marriage is now legal in 17 states plus the District of Columbia, and federal judges have struck down bans in five other states (Utah, Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia, and—most recently—Michigan) as well as required Kentucky to recognize such marriages performed in other states. (All six rulings are stayed until the appeals process is complete.)

Stearns said World Vision's board has faced a new question in recent years: "What do we do about someone who applies for a job at World Vision who is in a legal same-sex marriage that may have been sanctioned and performed by their church? Do we deny them employment?

"Under our old conduct policy, that would have been a violation," said Stearns. "The new policy will not exclude someone from employment if they are in a legal same-sex marriage." Stearns said the new policy reflects World Vision's parachurch and multi-denominational nature.

"Denominations disagree on many, many things: on divorce and remarriage, modes of baptism, women in leadership roles in the church, beliefs on evolution, etc.," he said. "So our practice has always been to defer to the authority and autonomy of local churches and denominational bodies on matters of doctrine that go beyond the Apostles' Creed and our statement of faith. We unite around our [Trinitarian beliefs], and we have always deferred to the local church on these other matters."

The reason the prohibition existed in the first place? "It's kind of a historical issue," said Stearns. "Same-sex marriage has only been a huge issue in the church in the last decade or so. There used to be much more unity among churches on this issue, and that's changed."

And the change has been painful to watch. "It's been heartbreaking to watch this issue rip through the church," he said. "It's tearing churches apart, tearing denominations apart, tearing Christian colleges apart, and even tearing families apart. Our board felt we cannot jump into the fight on one side or another on this issue. We've got to focus on our mission. We are determined to find unity in our diversity."

Highlighting the church/parachurch distinction: Board member and pastor John Crosby, who served as interim leader when a number of churches split off from the Presbyterian Church (USA) after the denomination dropped a celibacy requirement for gay clergy in 2011. At a conference that laid the foundation of the new Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians, the Minnesota megachurch pastor stated, "We have tried to create such a big tent trying to make everybody happy theologically. I fear the tent has collapsed without a center."

However, as a World Vision board member, Crosby didn't have a problem voting for the policy change. "It's a matter of trying to decide what the core mission of the organization is," he said.

Crosby, who leads Christ Presbyterian Church in Edina, Minnesota, told CT that the decision was about making sure that World Vision is focusing on its mission to eliminate poverty worldwide. World Vision stretches across countless cultural and theological divides in a hundred countries, and so the issue of theology and how to interpret Scripture should be left to the local church, he said.

"Many of us support World Vision specifically because of its Christian identity. While there are many other good relief organizations, it's the faith component of World Vision that makes it distinctive for us," said Crosby. "[But] how can we represent ourselves as a Christian organization in such a diverse world? That's what we're trying to work through on a daily basis."

Board member and seminary professor Soong-Chan Rah told CT the decision to leave theology to others "honors the church as a whole." "It is not a statement in a particular direction, but it is trying to acknowledge the proper relationship between the church and the parachurch," he said. "If there is something we can learn from [this], it is the value of having conversations and commitment to prayer, over not just this particular issue but all controversial issues that divide the church."

Stearns was adamant the change will not impact World Vision's identity or work in the field. "World Vision is committed to our Christian identity. We are absolutely resolute about every employee being followers of Jesus Christ. We are not wavering on that," he said.

"This is also not about compromising the authority of Scripture," said Stearns. "People can say, 'Scripture is very clear on this issue,' and my answer is, 'Well ask all the theologians and denominations that disagree with that statement.' The church is divided on this issue. And we are not the local church. We are an operational organization uniting Christians around a common mission to serve the poor in the name of Christ."

In recent years, World Vision and other evangelical organizations that partner with Uncle Sam to deliver humanitarian aid overseas voiced concern over USAID attempts to "strongly encourage" all contractors to develop anti-discrimination policies covering sexual orientation or risk losing federal funding.

"Concerns over government funding had no impact on this decision," said Stearns, noting that World Vision caps federal funding at 35 percent of its cash revenues. "We fought for the whole Christian community, reminding USAID that faith-based organizations have a religious exemption and are not required to follow government hiring guidelines.

"If the U.S. government ever requires us to give up our religious hiring rights in exchange for grants, we would walk away from U.S. grants. World Vision's ministry is not for sale."

World Vision's 2010 victory before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on faith-based hiring practices was watched closely by many Christian organizations (500 people signed up within 24 hours for a related ECFA webinar in April 2010). World Vision general counsel Steve McFarland later gave a series of ECFA webinars advising how other ministries could best structure their statements of faith to defend their hiring practices.

Yet Stearns said World Vision is not suggesting other ministries should now follow its lead.

"We made this decision for our organization based on who we are. Every organization has to come to its own conclusion," he said. "We are still passionate about protecting religious hiring rights—making sure that every Christian organization gets to decide this issue for themselves and not have the government decide it for them." (The latest example: World Vision's amicus brief on Hobby Lobby's Supreme Court case against Obamacare's contraceptive mandate.)

"We're not doing this for any legal reasons," he said. "If we wanted to, we would fight another battle on this all the way to the Supreme Court."

So the question becomes: Will supporters, particularly theologically conservative ones, let World Vision adopt a neutral stance on same-sex marriage? One of the first prominent voices out of the gate: Russell Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, who tweeted, "I'm glad Carl Henry didn't live to see this," and promptly penned a reaction, concluding: "World Vision is a good thing to have, unless the world is all you can see."

Maintaining neutrality on such divisive issues is proving increasingly tricky for Christian organizations with broad coalitions. The most recent example is Thrivent Financial for Lutherans, which has declared neutrality on abortion, same-sex marriage, and guns as it seeks to encompass more Christians yet preserve its diverging base of 2.5 million Lutherans. Yet Thrivent's theologically conservative wing has not been pleased.

And the policy change comes as World Vision has reduced its U.S. workforce by 10 percent over the past 15 months as expenses have risen and government grants have decreased, reports The News Tribune in nearby Tacoma, Wash. "The last 12 to 24 months have been among the most challenging of any we have ever faced," Stearns wrote to 408,000 donors in a January letter that marked "the first time Stearns had sent out a letter asking child sponsors to increase their giving due to cutbacks," the newspaper reported.

Stearns hopes World Vision will not experience similar division like Thrivent and risk losing conservative supporters as a result.

"I don't want to predict the reaction we will get," he said. "I think we've got a very persuasive series of reasons for why we're doing this, and it's my hope that all of our donors and partners will understand it, and will agree with our exhortation to unite around what unites us. But we do know this is an emotional issue in the American church. I'm hoping not to lose supporters over the change. We're hoping that they understand that what we've done is focused on church unity and our mission."

And Stearns believes that World Vision can successfully remain neutral on same-sex marriage.

"I think you have to be neutral on hundreds of doctrinal issues that could divide an organization like World Vision," he said. "One example: divorce and remarriage. Churches have different opinions on this. We've chosen not to make that a condition of employment at World Vision. If we were not deferring to local churches, we would have a long litmus test [for employees]. What do you believe about evolution? Have you been divorced and remarried? What is your opinion on women in leadership? Were you dunked or sprinkled? And at the end of the interview, how many candidates would still be standing?

"It is not our role to take a position on all these issues and make these issues a condition of employment."

Stearns said he doesn't expect any outcry among World Vision's 100 country affiliates, since World Vision International allows each country to set its own hiring policies appropriate to its local legal context. Even in Uganda, where a high-profile new law criminalizing gays and lesbians has been opposed by World Vision Uganda, it stated: "The issue of same-sex relationships will neither prevent us from serving children, families and communities around the world, nor obstruct our collaboration with one another and with our partner organizations."

The policy change will also not affect World Vision's partnership with ministries that maintain current faith-based bans on same-sex behavior. "This is a very narrow policy change. It's strictly about whether this issue should be a condition of employment at World Vision."

How would Stearns respond to critics who bemoan the decision as yet another Christian organization caving before the advancing gay rights movement?

"We're not trying to do anything that's symbolic for the rest of the church," he said. "But if we're making a statement at all, I hope it's a statement about unity.

"I hope it's a statement that says when Christ left, he gave us the Great Commission [to make disciples] and the Great Commandment [to love others as ourselves], and we're trying to do just that," said Stearns. "Bridging the differences we have, and coming together in our unity."

Stearns has even written books on this subject. "In some manner we haven't finished Christ's mission for the church because we've been divided and distracted by too many other things," he said. "We've got to find our way to unity beyond diversity in the Christian church.

"I know the Evil One would like nothing better than for World Vision to be hobbled and divided on this issue, so that we lose our focus on the Great Commandment and the Great Commission," said Stearns. "And the board is determined not to let that happen.

"I hope if it's symbolic of anything, it is symbolic of how we can come together even though we disagree. We—meaning other Christians—are not the enemy. We have to find way to come together around our core beliefs to accomplish the mission that Christ has given the church.

"We feel positive about what we've done. Our motives are pure," said Stearns. "We're not doing this because of any outside pressure. We're not doing this to get more revenue. We're really doing this because it's the right thing to do, and it's the right thing to do for unity within the church.

"I'm hoping this may inspire unity among others as well," he concluded. "To say how can we come together across some differences and still join together as brothers and sisters in Christ in our common mission of building the kingdom."

Read more here:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2014/march-web-only/world-vision-why-hiring-gay-christians-same-sex-marriage.html?paging=off

By Alex Murashko, CHRISTIAN POST Reporter. Published on 25 March 2014.

Christian leaders such as evangelist Franklin Graham and Russell D. Moore, who is president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, expressed outrage that Christian relief organization World Vision announced it would hire employees in same-sex marriages on Monday.

"I was shocked today to hear of World Vision's decision to hire employees in same-sex marriages," Graham, the son of renowned evangelist Billy Graham, said in his statement. "The Bible is clear that marriage is between a man and a woman.

"My dear friend, Bob Pierce, the founder of World Vision and Samaritan's Purse, would be heartbroken. He was an evangelist who believed in the inspired Word of God. World Vision maintains that their decision is based on unifying the church – which I find offensive – as if supporting sin and sinful behavior can unite the church. From the Old Testament to the New Testament, the Scriptures consistently teach that marriage is between a man and woman and any other marriage relationship is sin," Graham, who is the president and CEO of Samaritan's Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.

Moore also released a statement on Monday in which he pointed out that World Vision, one of the largest Christian relief organizations in the world, said its move was no capitulation, just a recognition that some groups supporting World Vision have differing views on sex and marriage.

"This is no surprise, on one level," Moore explained. "The constellation of parachurch evangelical ministries founded after World War II have been running headlong, with some notable exceptions, toward the very mainline liberalism to which they were founded as alternatives. Some think if we can just barter away Christian orthodoxy fast enough we can catch the wave of that Presbyterian Church (USA) church growth boom.

"But here's what's at stake. This isn't, as the World Vision statement (incredibly!) puts it, the equivalent of a big tent on baptism, church polity, and so forth," he writes. "At stake is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If sexual activity outside of a biblical definition of marriage is morally neutral, then, yes, we should avoid making an issue of it. If, though, what the Bible clearly teaches and what the church has held for 2000 years is true, then refusing to call for repentance is unspeakably cruel and, in fact, devilish."

Moore's statement includes his belief that the world has entered an era "where we will see who the Evangelicals really are, and by that I mean those who believe in the Gospel itself, in all of its truth and all of its grace." He continues, "And many will shrink back."

He writes that there's "an entire corps of people out there who make their living off of evangelicals but who are wanting to 'evolve' on the sexuality issue without alienating their base."

"I don't mind people switching sides and standing up for things that they believe in," Moore states. "But just be honest about what you want to do. Don't say, 'Hath God said?' and then tell us you're doing it to advance the gospel and the unity of the church."

He concludes, "Donor bases come and go. But the Gospel of Jesus Christ stands forever. World Vision is a good thing to have, unless the world is all you can see."

Trevin Wax, managing editor of The Gospel Project at LifeWay Christian Resources, said the decision by World Vision brings on a time to grieve for children everywhere.

"No matter what you think about this decision, I hope you feel a sense of grief…for the children," Wax wrote on The Gospel Coalition's blog. "This is a story of deep and lasting significance, because there are children's lives at stake in how we respond.

"Children will suffer as Evangelicals lose trust in and withdraw support from World Vision in the future. It will take time for evangelicals to start new organizations that maintain historic Christian concepts of sin, faith and repentance."

After listing reasons children suffer in so many ways, not just in decisions such as the one that World Vision made, and how Evangelicals will respond with grief, he writes. "But we also grieve for children here at home who are growing up in a culture in which sexual idolatry distorts the meaning of marriage and the beauty of God's original design."

Read more here:

http://www.christianpost.com/news/christian-leaders-shocked-grieved-by-world-visions-decision-to-hire-employees-in-same-sex-marriages-116730/cpt