Priests threatened with arrest if they minister to military during shutdown

[John Mundinger]

Tim simply observes: You know John, you sound a lot like me and a lot of other folks from 30+ years ago singing the "Lib Theo" anthem (you can learn it in a weekend). Fortunately many of us have lived enough life and continued to grow such as to move beyond such simplistic (and historically naive) thinking.

How do you define "grow", Tim?

[Matt Hummel]

Tim simply observes: You know John, you sound a lot like me and a lot of other folks from 30+ years ago singing the "Lib Theo" anthem (you can learn it in a weekend). Fortunately many of us have lived enough life and continued to grow such as to move beyond such simplistic (and historically naive) thinking.

How do you define "grow", Tim?

It's simple John- we have evolved from lower to higher... 

[John Mundinger]

Tim simply observes: You know John, you sound a lot like me and a lot of other folks from 30+ years ago singing the "Lib Theo" anthem (you can learn it in a weekend). Fortunately many of us have lived enough life and continued to grow such as to move beyond such simplistic (and historically naive) thinking.

How do you define "grow", Tim?

It's simple John- we have evolved from lower to higher... 

Matt - I do not consider concession to our dominant culture a constructive evolution.

[Norman Teigen]

Here is an interesting read on the role of apocalyptic Christian theology in the current government shutdown.

http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/antheabutler/7352/apocalyptic_christian_theology_s_role_in_gov_shutdown/

"the Republican Party is a new religious movement: A religion that relies on a Jesus that says affordable health care is wrong, being poor is your own fault, and that anyone who says otherwise doesn’t believe in Freedom, the founders, or the American People.

"Toss in limited government and states rights, and you have the foundation for a fundamentalist religion that has America sitting on a precipice. The government shutdown may be averted, but the ramifications of Republican Religion will be with us for years to come."

Amen.  And all the congregation said, 'Amen.'

[MaddogLutheran]

Here is an interesting read on the role of apocalyptic Christian theology in the current government shutdown.

http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/antheabutler/7352/apocalyptic_christian_theology_s_role_in_gov_shutdown/

"the Republican Party is a new religious movement: A religion that relies on a Jesus that says affordable health care is wrong, being poor is your own fault, and that anyone who says otherwise doesn’t believe in Freedom, the founders, or the American People.

"Toss in limited government and states rights, and you have the foundation for a fundamentalist religion that has America sitting on a precipice. The government shutdown may be averted, but the ramifications of Republican Religion will be with us for years to come."

Amen.  And all the congregation said, 'Amen.'

That's tendentious at a new level, even for you Mr. Teigen.  And I did just read it, and failed to find anything that could be called a fact--though plenty of guilt by association.  The quotes you provide are mere assertion of opinion.  And to think you once criticized me for linking to Wikipedia.

Sterling Spatz 

[Norman Teigen]

I confess to the sin of tendentiousness.  MEA CULPA.  I still have the remnants of being a teacher although it was nearly fifty years ago.

 ten·den·tious
adjective \ten-ˈden(t)-shəs\

: strongly favoring a particular point of view in a way that may cause argument : expressing a strong opinion

Still smarting from the WIKIPEDIA thing?  I apologize for that.  I won't do that again.  Here is link on the subject of tendentious editing:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tendentious_editing

[MaddogLutheran]

I confess to the sin of tendentiousness.  MEA CULPA.  I still have the remnants of being a teacher although it was nearly fifty years ago.

 ten·den·tious
adjective \ten-ˈden(t)-shəs\

: strongly favoring a particular point of view in a way that may cause argument : expressing a strong opinion

Still smarting from the WIKIPEDIA thing?  I apologize for that.  I won't do that again.

The Wikipedia thing doesn't bother me, Norman.  I'm just objecting to ANY opinion being authoritatively presented as fact.  I could go out and find all sorts of fringe Democratic Party craziness and quote it here, that make it appear it is in favor of creating a socialist workers' paradise by confiscating from the wealthy.  But that would not necessarily be representative of that party, or further any useful discussion.  Any more than suggesting the Republican Party, a collection of competing/overlapping interests and ideas trying to elect candidates to public office, is totally beholden to a particular right wing Christian philosophy.  Let's not forget that a founding element of the Republican party were religious zealots, some of whom were even willing to take up arms to end slavery and free slaves, whether countenanced by the government or not.  Is religious zeal in government always bad?  Or only when we disagree with it.  It's a difficult question.

I don't deny that there are Republicans who believe as you suggest, but there are also plenty of libertarian Republicans who believe abortion and gay marriage should be legal.  The one thing that Republicans, religious or libertarian, tend to have in common is a respect for the rule of law.  (Not that there aren't Democrats who also believe this.)  But it's a foundational philosophical principle, which is why the Tea Party likes to talk about the limitations of constitutional government, and why in particular the implementation (or arbitrary non-implementation) of Obamacare has them so riled up.

Sterling Spatz

[Norman Teigen]

Thank you for this thoughtful response.  For what it's worth, I have been for the most part of my 71 years an  Independent voter, but cognizant that I was more Republican than Democrat.  That, for me,  changed in 2008 when Sarah Palin was nominated for VP. I felt that Palin was eminently unqualified for the position.  Now I consider myself a moderate Democrat, and a confessional Lutheran.   I currently find it extremely difficult to buy into the myth of government intrusion into all phases of life, that the current administration wants to mandate abortion, that the current administration would deprive Christians of their 1st Amendment liberties, that the current administration wants to take away guns, that Christians need to express their confession of faith so that it corresponds with the  life movement, that the Doctrine of the Two Kingdoms doesn't apply anymore.

I think, and this isn't original, that there is a disease in the public mind.  Faithful Christians are not exempt from this public mind disease as many of the posts on this forum indicate.   

[Coach-Rev]

  That, for me,  changed in 2008 when Sarah Palin was nominated for VP. I felt that Palin was eminently unqualified for the position.

I fail to see how you can say that Sarah Palin was "eminently unqualified" as a governor of a state, when Barack Obama is apparently qualified, after only  4 years of being a state senator (where he demonstrated complete mediocrity amidst Chicago style politics - he disqualified everyone else running against him which is how he got elected in the first place) and 2 years as a US senator?  Wow.

[MaddogLutheran]

A Catholic priest has gone to court about this very issue.  I see in the Volokh comments section, someone has highlighted one of the very issue I have been suggesting on this thread:  According to a summary of the lawsuit, the chapel remains open, and presumably active duty chaplains are able to hold services there.  The contract priest may not, because of the interpretation of the Anti-Deficiency Act.  It is suggested that the stronger support for the suing priests's position may be the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, rather than any underlying constitutional argument, though I think that could be equally compelling.  Because, as I said previously, another priest who for whatever reasons has legal access to the base might be able to do what the contracted priest cannot under this ADA application.

Sterling Spatz

[Norman Teigen]

The RFRA has been declared unconstitutional. 

[Steven Tibbetts]

The RFRA has been declared unconstitutional.

Recognizing that it is not necessarily a fully reliable source, the Wikipedia article on RFRA observes that it was ruled unconstitutional with regard to state and local jurisdictions, but not with regard to federal jurisdictions -- which would be the situation in this thread.

[Mel Harris]

A Catholic priest has gone to court about this very issue.  I see in the Volokh comments section, someone has highlighted one of the very issue I have been suggesting on this thread:  According to a summary of the lawsuit, the chapel remains open, and presumably active duty chaplains are able to hold services there.  The contract priest may not, because of the interpretation of the Anti-Deficiency Act.  It is suggested that the stronger support for the suing priests's position may be the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, rather than any underlying constitutional argument, though I think that could be equally compelling.  Because, as I said previously, another priest who for whatever reasons has legal access to the base might be able to do what the contracted priest cannot under this ADA application.

Sterling Spatz

        According to this article

the Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, on January 6, 2014 filed an amended complaint in their original federal lawsuit to prevent further retaliation against Father Leonard for exercising his constitutional rights.  The amended complaint added a claim against the government for its retaliation toward Father Leonard which occurred after the filing of the initial complaint.