That was the title of an all-day conference I participated in yesterday here in Washington. It was a fascinating conversation, mostly about new research and statistics reflecting the important and incomparable effects of spirituality, religious traditions and belief systems on the well-being of the family. While I was impressed with the caliber of academicians, experts, cultural observers and statisticians who presented, at the same time I wanted to raise my hand and say, “Duh?” Well, you know it’s not my style to be so rude, but, it did seem at times a keen sense of the obvious. Still, the information was valuable because in the environment I live and work in, you need the hard numbers to back up your claims.

In my book on the Ten Commandments, Ten Words That Will Change A Nation (Washington, DC: Full Bible Publications, 2008), I explore at great length the connection between the Creator, God’s moral law,  spirituality and religiosity and the family. In the next release, I’ll include some of the findings revealed at this conference. For example:

Dr. W. Bradford Wilcox, Associate Professor of Sociology at the venerable University of Virginia, presented data from the General Social Survey, a study that “finds that the deep and enduring ties between religion and the family that have characterized mush of the nation’s history continue up to the present.” Interestingly, in turning around the data as it’s normally presented, Dr. Bradford said, “empirical support for the idea that the fortunes of American religion rise and fall . . . with the fortunes of the intact, married family . . . Thus, if the nation’s retreat from marriage continues apace, this study suggests that the fortunes of American religion are also likely to fall even more than they have since the 1960s.”

Dr. Annette Mahoney of the Department of Psychology at Bowling Green State University said, “[R]eligion generally promotes family formation and prevents family difficulties.”

Dr. Rand Conger of Ball State University presented on “Pathways of Religious Influence on family Relationships from One Generation to the Next.” In its precise, Dr. Conger’s colleague Sarah Spilman wrote, “[P]arents who are religious tend to use better parenting skills, showing greater warmth and support for their adolescent children and less hostility and anger. Children who experience such parenting in adolescence are more likely to parent their own children in the same way and have better interactions with their romantic partner or spouse.”

Dr. Richard Petts, also of Ball State, noted that children benefit greatly from the involvement of their fathers in parenting; religion encourages men to be involved in the family; and that this is done particularly well in Evangelical Protestant communities. (Score ONE for my club!)

I think you can find full reports on the conference at the Heritage Foundation website. It’s well worth checking out.

Below are a couple of videos capturing some interesting conversations I had with two of the participants. I was specifically curious about how academia and journalism is treating this new data. After all, “religion” has never been big in either of those camps, but I got some encouraging information from columnist Cheryl Wetzstein and sociologist Dan Lichter. Dr. Lichter’s comments are particularly important because, as he said during one of the panel discussions, sociology has for too long treated religion tangentially.

The greatest asset God gives to ministries like Faith & Action are the people He sends to help us through their prayers, personal involvement and generous financial support. More and more we depend on individuals, families, groups and whole church congregations who give of their time, talent and treasure to advance this Gospel outreach to our top elected and appointed officials. One such person is Lisa Giesler of Texas who volunteers her considerable time and talent right here at our ministry center on Capitol Hill. Lisa flies in at her own expense to loan her expertise as a professional, certified organizer. She’s been enormously helpful to us. We’re grateful to the Lord and to her for her extraordinary dedication. Speaking of . . .

We’re busy recruiting now for volunteer “work and service teams” that will help us with very practical needs next spring and summer. If you’re a licensed or experienced carpenter, painter, electrician, plumber, roofer, stone or brick mason, etc., etc, FAITH & ACTION NEEDS YOU! teams are currently being organized or you can form your own from your church, prayer or Bible study group or just among friends! Let us know of your interest and we’ll tell you more. Write to our program director, Peggy Nienaber, at peggy@faithandaction.org, and she’ll tell you more.

When you hear about a sold out show in Toronto, you don’t generally think of Moses and his famous tablets of stone, but, in this case . . .Well, not actually tablets of stone, but it was a papyrus scroll containing one of the oldest written versions of the Great Words of Sinai. The event was a very limited 80-hour showing of a true treasure among treasures, part of the Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit at the Royal Ontario Museum. The parchment is from find number 4Q41 discovered in 1952. It is the rendition of the Commandments from the Book of Deuteronomy. The fact that people of every walk of life would beat a path to the Canadian museum’s door is testimony to the enduring power of these timeless and universal words. It’s a pretty good record for a published piece to remain at the top of the charts 3500 years after its original release.

For more information click here.

This piece on marriage is written by my long-time friend and ally, Keith Fournier, an ordained permanent deacon in the Catholic Church. Once again, our Catholic friends form the most articulate and culturally relevant argument in their appeal to conscience and reason on this very consequential subject. Please take time to read, pray and learn.

U.S. Bishops Call Protecting Marriage a ‘Matter of Justice’

Catholic Online

‘The denial of the social and legal status of marriage to forms of cohabitation that are not and cannot be marital is not opposed to justice; on the contrary, justice requires it’.

WASHINGTON, D.C. (Catholic Online) – In a denigrating, dismissive and dissenting editorial entitled “On Marriage, the Bishops should Start Over”, the “National Catholic Reporter” begins with these words: “When the U.S. bishops meet next month in Baltimore they should scrap the entire text of the proposed pastoral letter on marriage and start fresh. The primary problem with the draft – obtained by NCR and available for viewing on our Web site – is that it is not, as advertised, pastoral. In fact, it reads as if it was written by someone who has never once engaged in a marriage preparation program, let alone actually ever been married.”

Well, I had to respond to that ridiculous assertion as someone who has been married for 33 years, with five children and six grandchildren, as well as a member of the Clergy, a Deacon. “National Catholic Reporter”, you are wrong, wrong, wrong! Millions of Catholics, other Christians and other people of faith and good will join me in rejoicing over this letter once they read “Marriage: Love and Life in the Divine Plan.”

This wonderful title summarizes the proposed “Pastoral Letter of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops” quite well. Its rich insights will be discussed and debated at the Novemeber Bishops meeting. It will be released in some form at the conclusion. It is a model of the teaching Church at its best, addressing at a critical time in history a very serious foundational cultural problem. We are desperately in need of this clear, wise and elegantly written instruction. Instead of denigrating the letter – and the Bishops – as the Editors of the “National Catholic Reporter” did, we should extend our deepest appreciation and redouble our prayer on their behalf.

I will return to this letter in several articles in the future. However, what is very clear is that the “National Catholic Reporter” particularly does not like that the US Bishops have reaffirmed the teaching of the Catholic Church concerning what the letter refers to as “Same Sex Unions.” Here is an excerpt:

Same-Sex Unions

“One of the most troubling developments in contemporary culture is the proposition that persons of the same sex can “marry.” This proposal redefines the nature of marriage and the family and, as a result, harms both the intrinsic dignity of every human person and the common good of society. Marriage is a unique union, a relationship different from all others. It is the permanent bond between one man and one woman whose two-in-one-flesh communion of persons is an indispensable good at the heart of every family and every society.

“Same-sex unions are incapable of realizing this specific communion of persons. Therefore, redefining marriage to include such relationships empties the term of its meaning, for it excludes the essential complementarity between man and woman, treating sexual difference as if it were irrelevant to what marriage is.

“Male-female complementarity is intrinsic to marriage. It is naturally ordered toward authentic union and the generation of new life. Children are meant to be the gift of the permanent and exclusive union of a husband and a wife. A child is meant to have a mother and a father. The true nature of marriage, lived in openness to life, is a witness to the precious gift of the child and to the unique roles of a mother and a father. Same-sex unions are incapable of such a witness. Consequently, making them equivalent to marriage disregards the very nature of marriage.

“When marriage is redefined so as to include or be made analogous with same sex partnerships, society is effectively stating that the permanent union of husband and wife, the unique pattern of spousal and familial love, and the generation of new life are now only of relative importance rather than being fundamental to the existence and well-being of society as a whole.

“Today, advocacy for the legal recognition of various same sex relationships is often equated with non-discrimination, fairness, equality, and civil rights. However, it is not unjust to oppose legal recognition of same-sex unions, because marriage and same-sex unions are essentially different realities. “The denial of the social and legal status of marriage to forms of cohabitation that are not and cannot be marital is not opposed to justice; on the contrary, justice requires it”. To promote and protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman is itself a matter of justice. In fact, it would be a grave injustice if the state ignored the unique and proper place of husbands and wives, the place of mothers and fathers, and the rights of the child”.

The Bishops have much more to offer in this letter and I encourage every one of our readers to read it and study it. The only worthwhile thing that the editors of the “National Catholic Reporter” have done is to make the draft available:click here.

We are involved in a clash between two competing visions of the human person, human flourishing, human dignity, human family and human society. This draft letter from our Bishops presents a stellar summary and synthesis of the teaching of the Catholic Church, the champion of true and authentic freedom; the defender of the dignity of the human person; the promoter of the primacy of authentic marriage and the family and society founded upon it; and about the only institution which can point a collapsing western culture to the path to rebuilding a genuinely just society.

As for the “National Catholic Reporter”, they all too often align themselves with a very different vision than the authentic Catholic vision as taught by the Magisterium. Sadly, they often seem to champion dissent. In this editorial, they have done just that. However, since my mother always taught me to try to find something good to say about everyone, they do have John Allen. At least he is worth reading.

The Reverend Dr. Edwin Elliott, long-time luminary in the Reformed churches in the United States and around the world, claimed his eternal reward this past Sunday. It was fitting, since Sunday—in Edwin’s book, “Sabbath”—was his favorite and most important day.

For as long as I knew this extraordinary man, he always gently nudged me toward appreciating more and more of God’s sovereignty over every aspect of our lives. Well, I’m more convinced now than ever that God orchestrates every small piece of our lives. After not having talked with Edwin in months, I gave him a call Friday morning, October 9. In our conversation, I told him how much better I was just for hearing his voice. That evening, Edwin suffered a massive heart attack. He went home to Heaven 48 hours later.

Yesterday I attended a viewing in the small sanctuary of the church he loved so much. His congregation was literally his family, and he talked of them like his children. Edwin was a true shepherd of souls. He nurtured, scolded, trained and indulged his spiritual offspring as he did his own flesh and blood. Yet Edwin’s considerable capacities—spiritual, intellectual and social—expanded far beyond the confines of a “local parish.” He was a leader among so many groups I can’t possibly recall all of them. One place his skills and wisdom were felt mightily was our own National Clergy Council. Edwin was the quintessential sage, offering insightful analysis, guidance and scriptural direction whenever we needed it.

Something not everyone appreciated about Edwin was his dry sense of humor. I found him as hilarious as a British situation comedy. His jokes were never simply jocularity, however. They always had deep meaning. I remember seeking his counsel as I did research for my book on the Ten Commandments. He commented on the importance of the first two commandments, telling me, “These are the bedrock for understanding the rest of them,” lecturing in his professorial tone. “If you don’t get these right, you won’t get the others right.’

I expected a complex exegesis from the original language. (Of which he was both a fan and proficient.) Instead, he said, “The first commandment, ‘I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt have no other God’s before me,’ can be reduced to two words, ‘I’m God.’

“The second commandment, ‘Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth,’ is even simpler.”

Here’s where I thought his usual academic profundity would kick in. Instead he said, “First Commandment: I’m God. Second Commandment: You’re not!” That’s the Edwin I will miss until I see him before that great and eternal throne in Heaven.

Thank you, dear Heavenly Father, for giving me Edwin Elliott as a friend, mentor and teacher.

So long, my friend! I shall see you soon!

It appears only one among countless numbers of people surprised by President Obama’s selection for a Nobel Prize was the recipient himself. He told the world he was “humbled” by the award and that, “I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many transformative figures that have been honored by this prize.”

I was happy to hear him say that. Just a cursory review of past prize winners reveals the sometimes incomprehensible cost of achieving such a distinction: beatings, imprisonment, universal scorn, threats of death, or, sadly, actual martyrdom. I celebrate whole-heartedly the long-awaited, too-long delayed achievement of our electing the first African-American chief executive—and all that goes along with it; I’ve seen the relief, affirmation and joy among my African-American friends, colleagues and congregations with whom I keep company. Our country needed this rectification. Still, I agree with the President.

I also understand why the Nobel Committee might find it important to further distinguish this historic, welcome and necessary moment. From my own micro-involvement in religious diplomacy through travels to Islamic countries and dialogues with Muslim leaders, I believe deeply that human interaction, personal relationships and bonds of friendship can move mountains that would impossible to accomplish in any other way. Still, as President Obama said himself, he feels undeserving of the distinction. Maybe that’s because he truly is. But wait–let me interrupt myself with a little story . . .

While recently preaching at a large church in Southern California, the pastor introduced me to the Orthodox Jewish contractor whose company installed the heating and cooling system in their extensive facility. The Israeli picked up on my background and invited the pastor and me to the Yom Kippur eve service at his synagogue. We accepted.

When we got to the service, which was held at the swank Ritz-Carlton Marina Del Rey, I learned our host had sponsored the sacred event, meaning he would get to pick one of only three men among the worshippers to go to the “bimah” or platform, to hold—and later process—one of the scrolls of Holy Scripture. He fingered me to do it. I was flabbergasted. There were many others among the congregants who were infinitely more worthy. In fact, as a non-member, a complete stranger—not to mention a “Jew for Jesus,” as he had earlier described me—it could have been for him a true scandal.

When I got to the platform and the scroll was handed to me, I told the rabbi, “I’m not worthy.” He chuckled and said, “It is a great honor, but because you are unworthy, you are worthy.” I felt “humbled” and offered the exercise in memory of my recently deceased father, who would have been so proud.

I tell the story to explain my understanding of President Obama’s reaction—and acceptance—of the Nobel Prize.

As a further aside, I’ll go on record saying I’m glad Mr. Obama was conferred this distinction. First, it’s always good for the United States to be recognized by such a prestigious body. (I guess I’m jingoistic enough to like it better when the US gets the prize rather than another country!) Second, because I agree, Mr. Obama is, by virtue of his race and generation, a transformative figure. After all, he did accomplish something we were unable as a country to do as little as a decade ago—that is, to elect an African-American to the highest office in the land.

There’s another angle here many conservative critics may miss: The Nobel Committee acknowledged this because Mr. Obama is the “face” of the United States. It’s for this reason, according to them, he has become the “spokesman” for a new approach to foreign policy and engagement. Had the nominee been the prime minister of Madagascar, he probably wouldn’t have been seen in that light and most certainly would have been passed over.

Having said all that, I’m back to Mr. Obama’s announced perspective: He doesn’t belong in the constellation of prior recipients, but he now has the challenge of living into the distinction. I will write him this week with a suggested way to “earn” his place. The real luminaries among Nobel winners paid a severe if not dire price for their medal. Doing what’s culturally au currant doesn’t cut it. “Hollywood Hip” causes like climate change, gay rights, or ending an unpopular war don’t exact the price that going against the cultural grain does.

My challenge to Mr. Obama will be to lead by going completely against the “hip parade.” Why not cut an uncompromising swath through the popular culture and champion the most basic and universal right for every single member of the human family–the fundamental right for every person to live ones life? Being a “world spokesman” for the weakest, most voiceless and invisible humans among us—the pre-born—won’t garner him a second Nobel, but it will give him an even greater award—a clear conscience.

Mr. Obama, you have seven good years—and many more beyond—to achieve the status graciously but prematurely bestowed upon you. My prayer is that you’ll make the most of it.

Next post: The President got a good start on this by assuring the American people “not one penny” of federal money will be used to fund abortion by way of new health care legislation. So far, every proposal fails his test. Bear down on this one, Mr. President,it will help you earn that medal!

Just finished radio show with good friends Jay and Jordon Sekulow. You’ve got to listen to this one: http://www.aclj.org/OntheRadio/

I had a nice conversation with our constitutional legal advisor, long-time attorney and Faith & Action supporter Bernie Reese, about what’s really at stake in tomorrow’s Mojave Desert Cross case at the U.S. Supreme Court. Bernie and I will be in the courtroom tomorrow and he authored the brief we submitted for the High Court’s consideration as they contemplate this very consequential issue. Below is the first installment of our two-part talk. I thought you may enjoy “listening in!” Watch for the second installment to post later tonight.