Christocentric

Pastor Miles McPherson

This is the one year anniversary of the Rock Church San Diego with Miles McPherson head pastor (my current church home). He preaches this day’s sermon from the comfort of lounge chairs while interviewing:

• a young man who wins souls through his surfing ministry
• another young man who found that letting go of his “chicks” to seek sexual purity with “one chick” was the way to go
• and a former stripper who now leads women into strip clubs with the mission of leading women to Christ and out of the stripper/call girl business.

This was very, very special as the testimonies of these young adults brought tears to my eyes. Very befitting for the celebration of our new building, which was drawing hundreds of people to Christ each Sunday!

This is a very powerful video so please listen to it and share! See video here and select 8/24, One Year Anniversary.

News Alert: Just received an alert through church email that our Pastor has been invited to speak at the Republican National Convention on September 2, at 5:20pm (PST) on C-Span! Woo Hoo!!!! Pray for Pastor Miles!

Technical Alert: Due to heavy traffic to this site for info on Miles McPherson, and heavy traffic to the church website since his announcement to the RNC, the message videos may be difficult at times to get to. Just keep trying!

Thank you,
CM

Update 10/23: My original fears about Sarah Palin appear to be coming true.  I hope the polls are wrong as she seems to be dragging the McCain campaign down.

Update 8/31: This is a link to an Alaskan who’s very familiar with the politics of Sarah Palin and the allegations she’s facing. This should give this article more balance as consider all that’s going on with our Republican VP candidate. Check it out here: What is McCain thinking? One Alaskan’s Perspective.

_________________________________________

That’s it. I’m through with presidential politics for now. I know I wasn’t voting for Obama, but now McCain chooses this unknown? Isn’t she still under some kind of investigation?

Does he really believe he can persuade Hillary followers because he has this WOMAN?

I’m not voting for ANYONE! If anyone can persuade me otherwise, please do!

And congratulations to Obama. He’s just been assured the presidency!

I’m out!

Addendum: Well, after calming down a bit and hearing Sarah Palin’s speech I really do like this lady! She’s a wife, mother of five children and runs Alaska with an 80% favorability rating! Her issues she supports are mostly in line with most of us conservatives, more so than McCain’s. So far so good.

I just spoke to my staunch Obama supporter journalist sister in Florida and she’s worried for the Obama camp. She says this was a smart move by McCain and the races are on!

This will be by far one of the most exciting presidential races ever!

Addendum II: More I’m finding out about Sarah Palin the more I’m liking her! She’s all of the following:

1. Strong evangelical Christian
2. Mother of a soldier deployed to Iraq
3. Decided to choose life rather than abort her baby upon news that he will be born with Down’s Syndrome
4. Fought corruption in Alaska and won

I will add more specifics on her as they come to my attention.

There are so many men (and women) who are trying to claim hold of the title of “pastor” and call themselves holding church but how many are truly qualified for that position? Some think they have been called by God to preach as one of God’s anointed, but are they?

As far as women pastors, that’s another post in itself, but I don’t think we women are designed for the purpose of leading churches. The hierarchy of the church was created to resemble the family, to resemble the Trinity. When women take the place of leadership, it breaks that hierarchy. So with that in mind, this post is strictly as it relates to “men’ holding the office of pastor.

I borrowed this post from another website that I first featured in my post below, “Has Tonex 4Gotten God,” but I wanted to highlight this because of the proliferation of false teachers or men just ill equipped to handle this very godly office of God’s church.

I chose this particular article because of its excellent use of the Greek language to explain the meaning of relevant words. It clears up any misunderstanding for those who may think that Pastor, Bishop, Overseer and etc. are different in meaning. This article does show the differences, but also explains how the qualifications relates to all positions.

This article is broken into four sections:

1. The Personal Qualifications of a Pastor – as far as their desire for this office and their character
2. The Public Qualifications of a Pastor – his treatment of the public, how is perceived by the public
3. Family Qualifications of a Pastor – whether or not he’s married to one woman, and how he rules his children
4. Ministry Qualifications of a Pastor – his ability to teach and hold fast to the truths of scripture

From the © Eternal Ministries, Inc. website, here is:

The Qualifications of a Pastor

The pastoral Epistles were written to Timothy and Titus. However, the delegation “pastoral Epistles” is somewhat misleading. The letters offer valuable assistance in understanding the qualifications of Christian leaders, but neither Timothy nor Titus were pastors, that is, in the modern sense of the term. It is justifiable, therefore, to use these letters to set forth the qualifications of leaders, who may or may not be directly involved in the pastoral office.1

Paul writes that anyone that desires to be an ejpiskoph’” desires an excellent, but laborious work (1 Tim. 3:1). As used in the New Testament, ejpiskoph’” refers to those who bear the responsibility of spiritual oversight, shepherding, and watchfulness over the believers in a local church (cf. Acts 20:17, 28; Tit. 1:5, 7; 1 Pet. 2:25; 5:1, 2).

Both Greek words, ejpivskopo”2 and presbuvtero”, are used quite synonymously in the New Testament. It is true that overseers and elders bear the responsibility of shepherding the flock of God in the local church. It is in the above referenced passages that presbuvtero” primarily refers to those within the church who are more mature and older, whereas ejpivskopo” refers more to the specific office and work of elders. The primary work of the elders is that of shepherding and governing (1 Tim. 5:17). Paul does not provide readers with separate qualifications for overseers and elders, rather he supplies the same list for both which would suggest that elders commonly held the role of being an overseer (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Tit. 1:5-9). Since the apostle draws a distinction between those who rule and teach elders this would then indicate that the elders bore different responsibilities within the local church setting (1 Tim. 5:17).3

Literally, the word “pastor” means “shepherd.” The word itself is used of Christ (cf. Jn. 10:11, 14, 16; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 2:25). It is used of a specific person only once in Ephesians 4:11. In the Ephesian passage, the gift of poimhvn is listed as a sovereign gift of the Spirit rather than a specific office. It is true that any Christian who exercises the gift of shepherding in relation to believers is exercising the spiritual gift of a pastor. It is in the pastoral Epistles that the qualifications are given for those who occupy places of leadership within the local church as shepherds (pastors) of God’s flock. The elders of the church at Ephesus are referred to as ejpivskopo” and given the responsibility to feed (shepherd; pastor) the flock of God.4 It is in this context that the qualifications of ejpivskopo” is referring to those who are gifted as pastors.

Therefore, the apostle says, that he may be capable of pastoral ministry the following qualifications must be evident. There are numerous qualifications concerning a pastor’s character, which can be grouped into four different categories: personal qualifications, public qualifications, family qualifications, and ministry qualifications.

Personal Qualifications of Pastors

The first qualification of a pastor is that he must possess a desire to serve (1 Tim. 3:1). The Greek words, ojrevgw and ejpiqumiva, indicate one who has a holy desire to serve and is not motivated by ungodly desires.

Secondly, pastors must be vigilant (1 Tim. 3:2). The idea here is that of prudence. Nhfavlion comes from nhv, which is a “particle of strong affirmation,”5 hence emphasizing watchfulness. The contrast of this is pivw, which means “to drink.” One who drinks is not watchful and neglects his work. A pastor is to be watchful over those he leads.

Thirdly, pastors must be sober, just, holy, and temperate (1Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:8). The idea here is of showing good judgment in holiness of character. The etymology of the word is sw’”, “sound,” and frhvn, “mind.” Therefore, swvfrona indicates one who has a “sound mind.” The one who has a “sound mind” is naturally the result of being vigilant. Both vigilance and soberness go together in Scripture; they are assistants to one another.

Pastors are also to be just (divkaion), or fair, with others because he has sound judgment. He is holy (o{sion), or pure in heart; this is the practical result of being temperate (ejgkrath’), denying worldly or personal ambitions. He seeks to glorify his Lord.

Fourthly, pastors must be of good behavior (1 Tim. 3:2). The practical result of vigilance and soberness is good behavior. Kovsmion conveys the idea of orderliness, decentness, graveness, and correctness as a whole.6 Whereas swvfrona refers to the inward character; kovsmion refers to the external character. Titus (1:7) also takes into account that pastors must not be self-willed (mhÉ aujqavdh) or soon angry (mhÉ ojrgivlon). His good behavior means he is one who controls his passions before God and others.

Fifthly, pastors must not be given to wine (1 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 1:7). Those who shepherd the church must not be addicted to wine (mhÉ pavroinon). He must not indulge in much wine, and neither is given into excessive drinking of alcoholic beverages. Pastors should be temperate in contrast to those who allow the effects of alcohol contribute to perversion and impudence. All pastors should be filled with the Spirit of God, not excesses of intoxicating drinks (Eph. 5:18).

Pastors are not to be a striker or brawler, but are to be patient with others (1 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 1:7). All pastors must be certain that a quick temper does not control them, but rather they are to be meek and gentle with others. MhÉ plhvkthn also indicates one who is not quarrelsome. A pastor who is a striker is in complete contrast to ejpieikh’. Pastors must not strike a person who displeases them, neither should they slander verbally or exert physical force. To not be a brawler (a[macon) means one is peaceful, and not contentious.

Seventhly, a pastor must not be greedy of filthy lucre or covetous (1 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 1:7). Shepherds of the flock should not be investing his time in ministry for monetary gain. The basic meaning of mhÉ aijscrokerdh'7 is not to be one who is “eager for dishonorable gain.”8 The idea would be that the gifts of God should not be marketed according to misleading or secular strategies. Such devilish motivations would be dishonorable for a pastor.

Lastly, a pastor must not be a novice (1 Tim. 3:6). He is not to be a new convert. The word tufwqeiv" means to be filled with air or wind,9 that is, to be full of nothing. It is for his own good that he should be mature and have demonstrated spiritual maturity in the faith, so that he is not filled with pride.

Public Qualifications of Pastors

Pastors are to be blameless (1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:6). His public and private life must be consistent before God and others. This does not mean pastors are without faults, but men against whom no wickedness can be proven. Apparently, ajnepivlhmpton is a metaphor used to imply vulnerability. The idea is of a skillful pugilist who defends every part of his body so that it is impossible for an adversary to bring an accusation. Pastors must be irreproachable in order that they can reprove others without being reproved themselves.

Secondly, pastors must be given to hospitality, as a lover of good men (1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:8). He is to be receptive and open to others. Literally, the word filovxenon means “a lover of strangers.” The word means that a pastor receives every stranger as a friend. A Christian that confesses love for God reveals the evidence of that love by demonstrating his love towards others. Hospitality, or works of charity, is prevalent in his life.

Thirdly, pastors are to have a good report with others (1 Tim. 3:7). Having a good report with others is the result of all the other qualifications. Although non-Christians may not agree with him, he has a good reputation among them. This would be particularly relevant today as many in ministries profess to be “God’s anointed,” but yet their ministries are in constant watch not for godliness but for the appearance of evil.

Family Qualifications of Pastors

In this category, pastors must first be the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:6). Literally, a pastor is to be “a one-woman type of man.” This does not necessarily mean that he needs to be a married man, but if so he is not to be a polygamist. To have one wife means to have one wife at one time. If a pastor’s wife dies he may remarry, but he is not to be a man who has divorced his wife to marry another. Whereas polygamy and divorce were common among both the Jews and Gentiles, pastors are to stay especially clear of those sins.

Second, a pastor is to rule his house well as the spiritual leader of his family (1 Tim. 3:4). He is the head of the household both by nature and will of God (Eph. 5:22). He does not rule over his household, but governs the affairs of his home.

Thirdly, pastors have their children in subjection (1 Tim. 3:4) and are not accused of riot or being unruly (Tit. 1:6). His children are in submission, not in sternness but in gravity. Each child knows his responsibilities and when and how to carry them out from beginning to end. If he cannot rule his own house, he cannot rule the church of God (1 Tim. 3:5).

Ministry Qualifications of Pastors

Pastors must be apt to teach (1 Tim. 3:2), that is, the ability to instruct in doctrine. Didaktikovn means one that is capable of teaching.10 A man that is prudent and of sound mind should naturally be able to communicate the Word of God. His delight should be instructing the unknowledgeable and correcting those who stray away from the truth of God’s Word.

Secondly, pastors are to hold fast the faithful word (Tit. 1:9). They are not to introduce new revelations or doctrines contrary to what Scripture teaches. It is because he is a mature man of God that he should not compromise Scripture, but to study with great care and diligence.

Pastors must teach sound doctrine both to exhort and convince the gainsayers (Tit. 1:9). Not only is the pastor to encourage and disciple other believers by means of sound doctrine, but also he is to correct and rebuke those who are teaching falsely. It is not enough that he teaches sound doctrine; if he is aware of false teaching being taught among the church of God he is to stop and correct those who are spreading lies.

It is worthy of note that none of the qualifications for pastors are optional. This is proved by the word “must” before each of the qualifications. The reason for pastors to meet these requirements is that they may “purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 3:13).

1 Whether or not one occupies a precise office in his service to the Lord, this does not affect the qualifications of those involved in ministry. The similarities for ejpiskoph'" and diakovnou" in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 supports this conclusion. In order then to set forth the biblical qualifications for church leadership the texts of 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:6-9 are appropriately referenced.

2 Mounce notes that ejpiskophv comes from the Hebrew meaning “charge, function (Acts 1:20)” (William D. Mounce, The Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993], p. 209).

3 Ernest R. Campbell, First Timothy (Silverton: Canyonview Press, 1983), pp. 101-102.

4 Charles C. Ryrie, “Christian pastor,” Wycliffe Bible Dictionary, ed. by Charles F. Pfeiffer, Howard F. Vos, and John Rea (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1998); 1284.

5 William F. Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2nd ed., rev. F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), p. 537.

6 Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985), p. 356.

7 Whereas 1 Timothy 3:8 and Titus 1:7 use mhÉ aijscrokerdh’, the words do not appear in many manuscripts (Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. [Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994], p. 573). Due to the similarities between ejpiskoph’” and diakovnou”, and the close mention in 1 Timothy 3:8, the words may have been added when they should have been omitted. Certainly, the warning to not be covetous would carry the same meaning and hence the apostle would not need to repeat himself twice in one sentence.

8 Mounce, Analytical Lexicon, p. 56.

9 Bauer, Greek-English Lexicon, p. 831.

10 Mounce, Analytical Lexicon, p. 143.

Had a wonderful bible study on praise this past weekend. I was thinking to myself, “oh, okay on praise.” I wasn’t too thrilled at first because I really wanted get into the “deeper” things of God. But the bible study leader is pretty consistent in teaching us these deep things of God so I remained patient.

I was not disappointed.

Psalm 150 was one of several scriptures used describing praising God, but this one I want to focus on because of its use of musical instruments, something that is sometimes controversial in the Church. But here it is with its entire chapter – all six verses of it!

Psalm 150

Let All Things Praise the LORD

1 Praise the LORD!

Praise God in His sanctuary;
Praise Him in His mighty firmament!

2 Praise Him for His mighty acts;
Praise Him according to His excellent greatness!

3 Praise Him with the sound of the trumpet;
Praise Him with the lute and harp!
4 Praise Him with the timbrel and dance;
Praise Him with stringed instruments and flutes!
5 Praise Him with loud cymbals;
Praise Him with clashing cymbals!

6 Let everything that has breath praise the LORD.

Praise the LORD!

Praise him with the trumpet, the lute, the harp, timbrel and dance, stringed intruments and flutes, loud cymbals, clashing cymbals! Wow, all instruments to God’s glory!

When I was young and went to grandma and grandpa’s church (we weren’t church goers in my home with dad an agnostic), I remember distinctively the talk of guitars and drums as being sinful. These days, that has been replaced with hip hoppers, rappers and praise dancers as being sinful by some.

But as I’ve glanced through some videos of today’s Christian rappers and hip hoppers they are using instruments in the praise of God. These days the instruments can even include the fascinating use of computers in music. Take a look from this scene in the “Fighting Temptations,” a movie that although wasn’t high on my list of good movies, but this scene caught my attention when it came to the mixture of old time gospel and modern synthesized hip hop music. Very interesting!

“To Da River” T-Bone, Lil Zane, Eddie Levert, Montel Jordan in Fighting Temptations

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/v/Mr0fkzeBzuU&hl=en&fs=1]

Read the rest of this entry »

Interesting video about Oprah in a CNN interview with Larry King.
The person who made this video is noticing that Oprah is forgetting something…or someone!

(Be sure to check out brother Speaking Truth’s post on Oprah here.)

Those of us familiar with R&B, Jazz and Funk Gospel know Tonéx very well. I confess that I was a HUGE fan of his with at least three of his CD’s, until he clearly started going through some very confusing and ungodly episodes in his life – episodes expressed vividly in his music (The Naked Truth).

Because he is still showing hints that he’s still wallowing in ungodliness, I refuse to write Tonex’s name with what he calls the “new and improved” spelled “Ton3x” because he’s really not new and improved at all. This was evident in an article found in VesselVibe.com titled “Introducing the New and Improved TON3X.” (Aug 12)

The writer, Mandi, was barely into the interview with Tonéx when he let a four lettered expletive out of his mouth. He was explaining to Mandi his style of music (which is what I fell in love with when I first heard it – except with lyrics uplifting Christ) when he said the following:

I got exposed to Prince and Rick James and Parliament.” He laughs. “Upstairs was all the gospel stuff and in the basement [where my brother had his studio] is where I got exposed to the real sh*t, and it was like uh-oh.” Uh-oh is right. What did he just say?

Well, he said it and although Mandi questioned his use of the word to herself, Tonéx himself wasn’t questioned by Mandi who goes on to describe Tonéx as being “the realest in the game,” and “He’s real. He’s an actor, a mogul in the making.”

Have Christians lost site of what’s truly REAL these days? Being “Real” appears to be measured by worldy standards to many. Being a mogul is what he’s being congratuled for pursuing to be rather than holiness which is what God wants us to pursue:

“Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord:” Hebrews 12:14″

Mandi exposes more of her worldy adulation of Tonéx when she accepts his reasons for entertaining on a cruise for Black Gay and Lesbians later in October of this year. He was the only Christian singer that accepted their invitation (wonder why) and told her he knows he going to catch a lot of flack for it too but responds:

“Yeah I’m going to catch a lot of flack,”. . .“But I’m going to catch a lot of record sales and new fans too. No one is condoning anything. I’m just saying that if they spend money they’re just like any other consumer. And if they need a breakthrough they’re just like any other soul.”

He’s going to catch a lot of record sales and new fans too? They’re just like any other soul? That’s his concern about attending this cruise? Although Mandi claims she likes reading Charles Spurgeon, she had nothing but praise for Tonéx’s new album following his remarks for performing on this cruise. Where is the sisterly rebuke of this man? Tonéx was clearly in need of admonishment and not praise! Even if he had godly intentions of performing to Gays and Lesbians, what does the appearance of being on a cruise ship with them represent?

Now if Tonéx was truly trying to show a rebirth or a recommittment to Christ, why would he package his “sin” in the form of a profanity laced CD and sell it? This CD is still being sold in his store complete with a Parental Advisory label.

We never want to judge anyone for their past ungodly lifestyle and sins, but Tonéx is showing that he is still hanging on to the old. There is no new Tonéx at all, just a repackaging with the purpose of the goal of “making money” to be accepted by the world’s standard of success.

Many Christians are so enamored with this man that they are turning a blind eye to his current lifestyle and accepting nearly everything that Tonéx does as “genious” or even “spiritual.” Spiritual it is, but not godly spirituality.

If Tonéx remembers anything about God at all, he would remember these things:

1. One does not glory in their sin – 1 Corinthians 5:1-8
2. Profanity should not be a part of a Christian’s language - James 1:26, James 3:1-9
3. Abstain from sexual immorality – Romans 1:18-32
4. Do not love the pursuit of money – 2 Timothy 3:1-5, 1Timothy 6:9
5. Do not get caught up loving the things of this world – 1 John 2:15-17
6. Show Jesus real love by obeying Him – John 14:15, 21

There’s no doubt God loves Tonéx, but the real question is whether or not Tonéx loves God! Do the songs from his new CD prove his love for the Lord? If his songs do not match his actions, they are mere empty musical pieces.

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’ Matthew 7:21-23

Sadly, great music with scriptural messages is not enough. His actions will speak louder than his words and I’m praying that one day, the REAL Tonéx will have a walk that matches his talk and song.

See other articles by fellow Christians: (NEW: See Qualifications of Pastor)

Tonex’s Gay Church Gig – Pastor DL at Gay Christian Movement Watch
Tonex Claims That Michael Jackson And Benny Hinn Have The Same Anointing – Brother Job at Jesus Christology
Tonex’s Apology for the Naked Truth – (He apologizes and then sells a CD about it?) – added 8/15
“I’m Just Keepin it Real” – Brother Alan Wiggins at Real Christianity on Tonex’s language and gay friends – added 8/16. (also, check out his post on some godly hip hop musicians on the “Unashamed Tour London”)
Ex-Wife of Tonex: Gay Marriage Part of Satan’s Agenda – Pastor DL At Gay Christian Movement Watch – added 8/19
The Qualifications of a Pastor – Tonex calls himself Pastor. Here is a breakdown of what a Pastor should be.

Comments are now closed! (eff. 3/4/09)

Thank you!

La Shawn Barber has written a post titled: “Question for Obama: Who Do You Say Jesus Is?” In this article she provides a link to a transcripted interview by a Religion columnist, Cathleen Falsani.

Now, based upon what Obama has said in this transcript and past things he has said, I’m already convinced he’s not a Christian. Check out this interview and the video below and come to your own conclusions.

Now is it important that a President be a Christian? To me it is, but it is more important to me that ANY one who professes to know Christ as their Savior know what it means to BE a Christian and can give a correct answer for the “hope that is within” them!

Sadly, for now, Obama doesn’t believe Christ’s words in John 14:6, that He is the Only Way to the Father!

And that’s why I pray for his salvation.

From WorldNetDaily.com

By Bob Unruh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Homeschooling OK – even in California

An appeals court in California has ruled that state law does permit homeschooling “as a species of private school education” but that statutory permission for parents to teach their own children could be “overridden in order to protect the safety of a child who has been declared dependent.”

The long-awaited case resolves many of the questions that had developed in homeschooling circles across the nation when the same court earlier found that parents had no such rights – statutorily or constitutionally – in California.

The ruling released this morning by the 2nd Appellate District in Los Angeles said the dispute came out of juvenile court proceedings in which court-appointed lawyers for two children demanded “an order that they be sent to private or public school, rather than educated at home by their mother.”

The dependency court did not agree, “primarily based on its view that parents have an absolute constitutional right to homeschool their children,” the appeals court said. The lawyers then advanced their case to the appeals level, which earlier granted the order.

“We filed our original opinion on Feb. 28, 2008, granting the petition on the bases that: (1) California statutory law does not permit homeschooling; and (2) this prohibition does not violate the U.S. Constitution,” the opinion said.

WND broke the story then when the judges literally ordered the homeschoolers into a government-approved education program.

But the judges granted a request for rehearing “in order to provide an opportunity for further argument on the multiple complex issues involved in this case, including, but not limited to: (1) additional California statutes that might bear upon the issue; and (2) potentially applicable provisions of the California Constitution.”

“This is a great victory for homeschool freedom,” said Micheal Farris, who is chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association and was one of the attorneys who had argued the case. “I have never seen such an impressive array of people and organizations coming to the defense of homeschooling.”

“Tens of thousands of California parents teaching over 166,000 homeschooled children are now breathing easier,” he said.

The opinion said the judges were not deciding whether homeschool should be allowed. “That job is for the Legislature,” they said.

“Homeschooling was initially expressly permitted in California, when the compulsory education law was enacted in 1903,” the court said. “In 1929, however, homeschool was amended out of the law, and children who were not educated in public or private schools could be taught privately only by a credentialed tutor.”

However, since then, “subsequent developments in the law call this conclusion into question. Although the Legislature did not amend the statutory scheme so as to expressly permit homeschooling, more recent enactments demonstrate an apparent acceptance by the Legislature of the proposition that homeschooling is taking place in California, with homeschools allowed as private schools,” the court ruling said.

“Recent statutes indicate that the Legislature is aware that some parents in California homeschool their children by declaring their homes to be private schools. Moreover, several statutory enactments indicate a legislative approval of homeschooling, by exempting homeschools from requirements otherwise applicable to private schools.”

The court said, “it is our view that the proper course of action is to interpret the earlier statutes in light of the later ones, and to recognize, as controlling, the Legislature’s apparent acceptance of the proposition that homeschools are permissible in California when conducted as a private school.”

The opinion was authored by H. Walter Croskey, who had written the earlier opinion as well. He was joined by Joan Klein and Patti Kitching.

The case had been brought to the appeals court by the Children’s Law Center of Los Angeles, and the father’s request for rehearing had been handled by Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation, lawyers with the Alliance Defense Fund and others.

Participating on behalf of Sunland Christian School, which oversaw the children’s home education, were officials with the Pacific Justice Institute.

Others participating in the briefs included the Pacific Legal Foundation, the American Center for Law and Justice and the Western Center for Law and Policy.

The case also attracted comments from the American Civil Liberties Union, Jewish Homeschoolers of Napa and Sonoma counties, the California Homeschool Network, the Homeschool Association of California, the Christian Home Educators Association of California, the Gifted Homeschoolers Forum, Grace Christian Academy, the Northern California African American Homeschoolers Association, the Home School Legal Defense Association, Focus on the Family and Liberty Counsel.

Also commenting were the California Teachers Association, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr., the state superintendent of public instruction and the California Department of Education

The court found multiple specific provisions in state law, including one that exempts “a parent or guardian working exclusively with his or her children” from fingerprinting requirements, that support the legitimacy of homeschooling.

“We therefore conclude that home schools may constitute private schools,” the opinion said.

In the specific case that prompted the questions, however, the court said state law permits a dependency court “to issue any reasonable orders for the care of a dependent child, including orders limiting the right of the parents to make educational decisions for the child.”

“Because the United States Supreme Court has held that parents possess a constitutional right to direct the education of their children, it is argued that any restriction on homeschooling is a violation of this constitutional right. We disagree. We conclude that an order requiring a dependent child to attend school outside the home in order to protect that child’s safety is not an unconstitutional violation of the parents’ right to direct the education of their children,” the judges wrote.

“Parents possess a constitutional liberty interest in directing the education of their children, but the right must yield to state interests in certain circumstances,” the court said.

“In this case, the restriction on homeschooling would arise in a proceeding in which the children have already been found dependent due to abuse and neglect of a sibling,” the court said. “Should a dependency court conclude, in the proper exercise of its discretion, that due to the history of abuse and neglect in the family, requiring a dependent child to have regular contact with mandated reporters is necessary to guarantee the child’s safety, that order would satisfy strict scrutiny. There can be no dispute that the child’s safety is a compelling governmental interest. Restricting homeschooling also appears to be narrowly tailored to achieving that goal. Without contact with mandated reporters, it may well be that the child’s safety cannot be guaranteed without removing the child from the parents’ custody. As such, the restriction on homeschooling would be the least restrictive means of achieving the goal of protecting the children; they would be permitted to continue to live at home with their parents, but their educators would change in order to provide them an extra layer of protection.”

The judges’ earlier opinion had ruled in the case the family failed to demonstrate “that mother has a teaching credential such that the children can be said to be receiving an education from a credentialed tutor,” and that their involvement and supervision by Sunland Christian School’s independent study programs was of no value.

Nor did the family’s religious beliefs matter to the court.

Their “sincerely held religious beliefs” are “not the quality of evidence that permits us to say that application of California’s compulsory public school education law to them violates their First Amendment rights.”

“Such sparse representations are too easily asserted by any parent who wishes to homeschool his or her child,” the court concluded.

The parents of the children talked with WND as the case developed about the situation over the education being provided to two of their eight children.

The father said the family objects to public school because of the pro-homosexual, pro-bisexual, pro-transgender agenda of California’s public schools, on which WND previously has reported. Just yesterday, California lawmakers decided to mandate a day of celebration and honor for Harvey Milk, the late San Francisco supervisor who was an activist for homosexuality.

“We just don’t want them teaching our children,” he told WND. “They teach things that are totally contrary to what we believe. They put questions in our children’s minds we don’t feel they’re ready for.

“When they are much more mature, they can deal with these issues, alternative lifestyles, and such, or whether they came from primordial slop. At the present time it’s my job to teach them the correct way of thinking,” he said.

That was the court opinion, however, that was vacated by the appeals court prior to the newest ruling. And while today’s decision was pending, a judge ended the juvenile court case that had established jurisdiction over the two children, opening the door for the demand for public school enrollment.

The Home School Legal Defense Association said, “the juvenile court judge terminated jurisdiction over the two young L. children in a hearing held on July 10, 2008.”

An estimated 166,000 children are being homeschooled in California, and their parents and advocates had expressed concern that the court’s original ruling would leave parents who educate their children at home open to criminal truancy charges and civil charges for child neglect.

A number of groups already have assembled in California under the Rescue Your Child slogan to encourage parents to withdraw their children from the state’s public school system.

The Discover Christian Schools website reports getting thousands of hits daily from parents and others seeking information about alternatives to California’s public schools.

WND reported leaders of the campaign called California Exodus say they hope to encourage parents of 600,000 children to withdraw them from the public districts.

UPDATE! Governor Schwarzenegger vetos AB 2567!

There will be NO Harvey Milk Day! Thank you Lord!
Thanks for the heads up commenter chadabshier! (Check out this newest Faith Defender, “Living with Proof” on my blogroll)

Stories here:
California governor vetoes Harvey Milk bill
‘Gay Day’ Bill Vetoed in California

(Original post below)
___________________________________

Read the rest of this entry »

(Rehash of my 5/22 post titled “Homosexuality and Black, Not the Same Thing”)

After discussing civil rights not equaled to homosexual rights with a gay man named Kevin on Christine’s blog, Talk Wisdom, I’ve decided to post an article in its entirety that appeared in the Toledo Free Press. I had shared with Kevin how disgusting to me it was to compare being black to being homosexual. I told him basically that being black is not immoral where being homosexual is so there is no comparison and no equality.

This article below is about a woman who was suspended from her job as an administrator at the University of Toledo, after she wrote a column explaining that being black was different than being homosexual. Cyrstal Dixon wrote in response to another article by the newspaper editor that was complaining about Ohio’s discrimination against gay couples. (see below)

But here’s the article that you can also go directly to here: Gay Rights and Wrong, Another Perspective, by Crystal Dixon.

_________________________________________________

Gay rights and wrongs: another perspective – Crystal Dixon
The Toledo Free Press, 4/18/2008

I read with great interest Michael Miller’s April 6 column, “Gay Rights and Wrongs.

I respectfully submit a different perspective for Miller and Toledo Free Press readers to consider.

First, human beings, regardless of their choices in life, are of ultimate value to God and should be viewed the same by others. At the same time, one’s personal choices lead to outcomes either positive or negative.

As a Black woman who happens to be an alumnus of the University of Toledo’s Graduate School, an employee and business owner, I take great umbrage at the notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are “civil rights victims.” Here’s why. I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a Black woman. I am genetically and biologically a Black woman and very pleased to be so as my Creator intended. Daily, thousands of homosexuals make a life decision to leave the gay lifestyle evidenced by the growing population of PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex Gays) and Exodus International just to name a few. Frequently, the individuals report that the impetus to their change of heart and lifestyle was a transformative experience with God; a realization that their choice of same-sex practices wreaked havoc in their psychological and physical lives. Charlene E. Cothran, publisher of Venus Magazine, was an aggressive, strategic supporter of gay rights and a practicing lesbian for 29 years, before she renounced her sexuality and gave Jesus Christ stewardship of her life. The gay community vilified her angrily and withdrew financial support from her magazine, upon her announcement that she was leaving the lesbian lifestyle. Rev. Carla Thomas Royster, a highly respected New Jersey educator and founder and pastor of Blessed Redeemer Church in Burlington, NJ, married to husband Mark with two sons, bravely exposed her previous life as a lesbian in a tell-all book. When asked why she wrote the book, she responded “to set people free… I finally obeyed God.”

Economic data is irrefutable: The normative statistics for a homosexual in the USA include a Bachelor’s degree: For gay men, the median household income is $83,000/yr. (Gay singles $62,000; gay couples living together $130,000), almost 80% above the median U.S. household income of $46,326, per census data. For lesbians, the median household income is $80,000/yr. (Lesbian singles $52,000; Lesbian couples living together $96,000); 36% of lesbians reported household incomes in excess of $100,000/yr. Compare that to the median income of the non-college educated Black male of $30,539. The data speaks for itself.

The reference to the alleged benefits disparity at the University of Toledo was rather misleading. When the University of Toledo and former Medical University of Ohio merged, both entities had multiple contracts for different benefit plans at substantially different employee cost sharing levels. To suggest that homosexual employees on one campus are being denied benefits avoids the fact that ALL employees across the two campuses regardless of their sexual orientation, have different benefit plans. The university is working diligently to address this issue in a reasonable and cost-efficient manner, for all employees, not just one segment.

My final and most important point. There is a divine order. God created human kind male and female (Genesis 1:27). God created humans with an inalienable right to choose. There are consequences for each of our choices, including those who violate God’s divine order. It is base human nature to revolt and become indignant when the world or even God Himself, disagrees with our choice that violates His divine order. Jesus Christ loves the sinner but hates the sin (John 8:1-11.) Daily, Jesus Christ is radically transforming the lives of both straight and gay folks and bringing them into a life of wholeness: spiritually, psychologically, physically and even economically. That is the ultimate right.

Crystal Dixon lives in Maumee.

_________________________

See also the Protect Biblical Marriage article on “Black Leaders Reject Same Sex Marriage Act”