#thefederalist

[raymondrroberts]

Should Churches Ditch Screens?

I have an article before me titled, “Why Churches Should Ditch the Projector Screens and Bring Back the Hymnals.”  

I find SO MUCH WRONG WITH this article that I barely know where to begin. But before I do share my misgivings, let me put to rest a possible misimpression my negative response could give. I do not hate “traditional worship. In fact. I love it. It has blessed my life. This does not change the fact that this article is wrong to the point of being unhelpful. 

1) “THE SCREENS ARE UGLY.”  I love beautiful sacred spaces, but the church of Jesus Christ has often gathered in unlovely sacred spaces:  store-front churches, village huts, homes in Capernum, Catacombs, and (gasp!) gymnasiums. Even when screens are used they are not left blank during worship, but are illuminated, often in ways that could be said to be digital stained glass.  They can enhance worship, particularly for visual learners. Finally, I thought we weren’t gathered to worship the building, but God’s glory. 

2) “PROJECTOR SCREENS REFLECT OUR TECH OBSESSED CULTURE.” The author never considers that most Christians have never used a hymnal, or that hymnals reflect a technology, or that the earliest hymnals had no notes, or that the rise of hymnals revolutionized church music, creating controversies such as whether people should just sing the psalms or whether they could sing songs of “human invention” in worship.  

3) “HYMNALS PROVIDE DEEP THEOLOGICALLY RICH WORSHIP.” Maybe.  As someone who has sung hymns out of hymnals that contain speculation and sometimes rank heresy, count me unpersuaded that technology, in itself, determines whether a song is deep or theologically rich. 

I do grant that having a community of theologians and musicians curating music has many advantages. That this doesn’t happen with contemporary music speaks to the failure of denominations to support “contemporary music” in a changing society.  If I am honest, this is resistance is raised by people who are heavily invested in the status quo.  And if I am more honest, I observe that too many of these folks dismiss contemporary music’s repetition as boring (except when it is Taizé) and consider the adoption of the cultural vernacular as vulgar (except when 3rd world Christians do it).  Like this article, many objections reflect a certain certain blindness. 4) “TO SAVE WORSHIP WE MUST REDISCOVER HYMNALS.” This is silly. It is as silly as saying that “to save worship we must adopt new technology.”  The future of worship does not depend on either.  It depends on our ability to lead people to praise God’s glory.  Maybe if the author considered the demographic trends he bemoans, he’d have offered a more creative response. “The heavens are declaring the glory of God” (Psalm 19:1) They have no hymnals or screens and their praise extends to the heavens.

[insidethethinblueline]

VICE SQUAD: Guardians Of Suburbia

[scholarshipja]

It’s almost unheard of that schools would ever say no to a large financial donation, especially when it aims to help economically disadvantaged children to go to college. However, Dulwich College and Winchester College, two private universities in the United Kingdom, recently denied such a donation. Both turned down more than £1 million for poor white boys, out of the concern the donation might fall afoul of Britain’s Equality Act of 2010. The generous donor was 96-year-old Professor Sir Bryan Thwaites, who attended both schools on scholarships, and taught at Winchester for decades. He learned from his experiences that a good education is the best means to uplift children from disadvantaged backgrounds and provide upward economic mobility. He wanted to help poor white boys especially, because they are disproportionately at the bottom of Britain’s education system. Read more https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/03/universities-turn-down-scholarship-donation-for-poor-white-boys/ Credit @HRaleighspeaks in the Federalist. #thefederalist #studyinuk #studyinlondon #scholarshipjamaica #bryanthwaites #DulwichCollege and #WinchesterCollege @winchestercollege @dulwichcollege (at ScholarshipJamaica.com) https://www.instagram.com/p/B63ZSKlhodn/?igshid=10b5774ja0jbv

[scarrow]

Regarding ectopic pregnancies, The Federalist writes: ‘putting one’s life at risk is preferable to “purposely destroying your own child.”’

Are they fucking serious?

[middayninja]

So these two guys... We will start off with the Federalist. I love it. From Ben Franklin on the label to the last drop this was a full bodied red. This Cabernet Sauvignon has hints of smoke and spice. It is smooth the tannins are there but subtle. It was a great wine. It's friend here, Trapiche Malbec, is a good wine as well. The Malbec is little less complex. It is a solid easy drinking wine. Not overly sweet, not very acidic, not so complex. It is fresh, rich and fruity. Two great, but very different reds. #reds #red #wine #redwine #vino #malbec #trapiche #thefederalist #benfranklin #tasting #drinking #winewithjen (at Chilton, Wisconsin) https://www.instagram.com/p/BzDeWzyhI0m/?igshid=bf9b2wy95b2j

[mithliya]

T__T I was trying to find that article written by a radfem with tons of sources about who was funding the TRA movement & Medium banned her & removed her article.. I'm gonna try to see if there's a backup on archive later. Meanwhile here's this article about the funding part: thefederalist(.)com/2018/02/20/rich-white-men-institutionalizing-transgender-ideology/

idk if i wanna click that link bc i don’t wanna give them any traffic becauseeee..

another link would be better if possible

[classic-liberal-today-blog]

#classicliberal #thinkforyourself #brithume #thefederalist #santa #waronchristmas https://www.instagram.com/p/Br0J4KdgyIr/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=52uie5u812qf

[jeffkirsch]

Time for much needed relaxation. #itsnotsaturdaynightwithoutwine #thefederalist #bourbonbarrelaged

[revolutionrosen]

Content Notice: Disenfranchisement of sociopolitical and numerical minorities; hxtory revisionism and contemporary erasure; hypocrisy. End of Content Notice. Image Text: [The formatting is of a Chicago-Turabian style title page.] Eastern Florida State College. Tena Gordon. Reflection 1: The Federalist Papers # 10 and # 51. POS 2041 Fall 2015: American National Government. August 31, 2015. End of Image Text. Credit: "Reflection 1: The Federalist Papers # 10 and # 51" by Tena Gordon (@reformistrevolutionaryrose on Insta). End of Credit. Part 4, the Final Part: Evident from analyzing Federalist Papers #10 and #51, James Madison and the other framers did not consider racial, gender, sexual, neurological, psychological, or other oppressed minorities when drafting the Constitution. Their main concern was for socioeconomic-class and ideological differences to not stalemate the government. To avoid this, they advocated for a semi-autonomous system run by branches of public officials who represent the general public.Thus, current public policies are geared toward the benefit of privileged, white, middle- to upper-class, cisgender, heterosexual, neurotypical men. Consequently, they are the ones who make-up the [political] majority of the United States and who actually run the government. Bibliography Madison, James. The Federalist Paper #10: The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard against    Domestic Faction and Insurrection (continued). New York: Daily Advertiser, 1787. Madison, James. The Federalist Paper #51: The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances between the Different Departments. New York: Independent Journal, 1788. End of Part 4, the Final Part. Hashtags: #thefederalist #thefederalistpapers #federalistpapers #JamesMadison #PresidentMadison #FoundingFathers #constitution #usconstitution #checkyourprivilege End of Hashtags.

[johnnyraven-26]

#UnitedStatesofAmerica #USConstitution #BillOfRights #Federalist #Antifederalist #Papers #TheFederalist #PlatosRepublic #JohnLocke #LessRepublican #LessDemocrat #MoreConstitution #ONLY #Legal #Immigration #NoIllegalImmigration posted from #SanDiego #CA #California #Inland

[offkiltercatholic-blog]

Vatican Condones Death Panels?

I’m sure you’ve read about the sad story of Charlie Gard, a baby whose parents are fighting the English courts to keep him on life support. Perhaps you’ve also seen articles outraged over the Vatican response, like ones from National Review or The Federalist. But, whenever someone cries foul concerning something the Church said or did, it’s always a good idea to dig deeper to get the full story.

First of all, let's emphasize that the outrage stems from the fact that the English courts are able to intervene and take Charlie off life support against the wishes of his parents. Does the phrase “Death Panels” ring a bell? There is no disputing that this decision should belong solely to the parents. Let’s look at what the Vatican had to say concerning this aspect of the case:

“Likewise, the wishes of parents must be heard and respected, but they too must be helped to understand the unique difficulty of their situation and not be left to face their painful decisions alone. If the relationship between doctor and patient (or parents as in Charlie’s case) is interfered with, everything becomes more difficult and legal action becomes a last resort, with the accompanying risk of ideological or political manipulation, which is always to be avoided, or of media sensationalism, which can be sadly superficial.”

So, the Vatican stresses that there should be no interference between doctor and patient and even cites “ideological or political manipulation” that could result from any interference. The real reason people are upset by this statement is because they wanted the Vatican to come out with a political thrashing of the English courts. Who doesn’t love a good verbal lashing? After all, that’s what the media thrive on.

But, the Academy isn’t a political organization, and they prudently recognize their own limitations in commenting on a specific medical case they know little about, aside from the “sensationalism” presented in the media. Rather, the Academy took the opportunity to comment on the end of life issue, which is kinda why the Pontifical Academy for Life even exists. The Vatican simply reminded us of Church teaching on excessive means to prolong life:

“What are the best interests of the patient? We must do what advances the health of the patient, but we must also accept the limits of medicine and, as stated in paragraph 65 of the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, avoid aggressive medical procedures that are disproportionate to any expected results or excessively burdensome to the patient or the family.”

I can’t imagine the pain and desperation these parents must feel, and I’d want to do everything in my power to keep my child alive too. But, as Christians, we believe God has the ultimate say on matters of life and death. At some point, when attempting to prolong life at any cost, we find ourselves fighting against God Himself. However, the point at which efforts become “disproportionate” ought to be decided by the patient (or patient’s parents) with the advice of their doctors.

It’s also important to note that God isn’t a cruel master wishing death on people. Death is certainly an evil, the result of sin; but, Christ came to redeem us and conquered death with His resurrection. He made it so death could be an entrance into a new life where there’s no more sorrow or pain. For this reason, extreme measures to sustain life are discouraged. Hence, the Vatican isn’t “siding with the English court.” It is simply doing the job of reminding us of the reality that God alone has the power over life and death and sustaining life at all costs is not the best course of action. The Vatican made very clear that this was a decision for the parents to make and very gently offered a reminder that while we always respect life, we also have to respect natural death. This is why St. Paul tells us not to mourn as the Pagans do:

“But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep… and so we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words.” (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18)

Ultimately, the Vatican statement perhaps could have more clearly condemned the intervention of the courts. It could have been more spiritually explicit about the hope for eternal life that awaits us after death. But, was this a “disgraceful” statement by the Vatican or “horrifying” as some have reported it? Nope. What’s really horrifying is the state of journalism today: a headline-grabbing, agenda-pushing disgrace. What’s even more sad is that Catholic sites (like Regina) don’t fact-check before sharing this garbage. 

[thirteenseventyseven]

Suggested reading #inauguration2017 #commonsense #thomaspaine #thefederalist #alexanderhamilton #johnjay #jamesmadison #candide #voltaire

[rosed1st]

[americanmysticom]

Sen. Mazie Hirono Pauses Obamacare Rant To Ask Amy Coney Barrett If She’s A Rapist

OCTOBER 13, 2020 By Jordan Davidson - THE FEDERALIST

While many Democrat senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee focused their 30 minutes of public questioning time for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett on attacking her for signing a pro-life document or political posturing about pre-existing conditions within Obamacare, one senator pivoted from the coordinated narrative to ask Barrett an unprecedented question.

Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii paused lecturing Barrett about the dangers of the Supreme Court overruling the Affordable Care Act to ask her if she has a history with sexual harassment and assault.

“I asked each nominee these two questions, and I will ask them of you,” said Hirono. “Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?”

“No, Senator Hirono,” Barrett replied.

Hirono continued the interrogation by asking if Barrett had been ever legally involved as a party in a case concerning sexual assault.

“Have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?” Hirono asked.

“No, senator,” Barrett replied again.

Sen. Mazie Hirono asks ACB "since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?" pic.twitter.com/6JgLkoIXIF

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) October 13, 2020

While Hirono’s questioning seemed to be out of place and unnecessary, Barrett acknowledged earlier in the hearing that she knew the judicial confirmation process would be “excruciating.”

“I don’t think it’s any secret to any of you or to the American people that this is a really difficult, some might say excruciating, process,” Barrett told Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham. “And Jesse and I had a very brief amount of time to make a decision with momentous consequences for our family. We knew that our lives would be combed over for any negative detail, we knew that our face would be a caricature and we knew our family would be attacked.”

Hirono’s unprecedented questions come just two years after now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh was accused of sexual assault by Christine Blasey Ford. In 2018, Democratic senators including Sen. Kamala Harris, the current Democratic vice presidential nominee, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein attempted to smear Kavanaugh’s character and reputation as a judge over sexual assault allegations that not only lack evidence but that the available evidence indicates are false.

#thefederalist #congressionalcorruption #progressivetotalitarianism #constitution #assult 

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/13/sen-mazie-hirono-pauses-obamacare-rant-to-ask-amy-coney-barrett-if-shes-a-rapist/

[yallarewild]

UHHH the fact that this post hasn’t even been deleted despite the article being proven to be a homophobic fucking mess says all u rly need to kno tbh

like ..... damn despite the fact that it takes literally 2 secs to find out thefederalist is a trash homophobic publication, and you’d think that if OP (somehow) didn’t realize that, it’d be deleted at this point... buttttt apparently OP STILL agrees with the sentiments reflected in the article ????

*takes notes*

[rarecoindealer]

https://t.co/FLuHYvDkLp #internationalmonetaryreset #money #timetohedge #thefederalist

https://t.co/FLuHYvDkLp#internationalmonetaryreset #money #timetohedge #thefederalist

— Brett Edgell (@mplsbrettsr) April 27, 2019

from Twitter https://twitter.com/mplsbrettsr April 27, 2019 at 11:58PM via IFTTT