Social Media Censoring Christianity?

Today I found a startling article at The Christian Post -- Is it possible that Facebook, Google, and Apple are on a campaign to stamp out religious free speech?  Here's the story from Stephanie Samuel (emphasis added):

Facebook, Google, Apple Censoring Religious Speech?

WASHINGTON – The National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) group sounded the alarm Thursday about new media outlets such as Facebook, Google and Apple, which they say have written policies that violate the fundamental rules of free expression, particularly concerning religious free speech.

The NRB released a report at the National Press Club Thursday analyzing the various content policies of social networking websites. What they found was disturbing: new media platforms Facebook, Apple, Comcast, AT&T and Google have adopted policies to censor lawful viewpoints expressing Christian views or controversial ideas on “hot button issues.” Some platforms, such as Apple’s iTunes App Store and Google’s search engine, have already started to use those policies to remove orthodox Christian viewpoints considered “offensive” or too controversial.

Former Federal Communications Commission Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth said, “The irony is the companies listed in this report are some of the most open companies in the world.”

In a January 2010 interview with TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington, Facebook Founder Mark Zuckerberg praised social networking for opening people up to share “more information and different kinds, but more openly and with more people.”

However, Zuckerberg’s social network has removed content deemed “anti-gay,” according to the NRB report. It is unclear whether that censored material contained any religious expression. However, the NRB report warns, “The position of Facebook on the issue of homosexuality and its collaboration with gay right group the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination (GLAAD), coupled with its troublesome written policies, are all strong indicators that its social networking platform poses a high index of risk for anti-Christian discrimination.”

The Associated Press caught Comcast blocking or at least delaying peer-to-peer file sharing of the King James Bible.

Google has also committed a number of free speech violations, the NRB report alleges. The world’s most powerful search engine initially prohibited the English Christian Institute from purchasing space for an advertisement about abortion. It also allegedly blocked a Massachusetts pro-family website because of its conservative Christian content. Google also has also excluded churches and other faith groups from free or discounted use of its web tool Google for nonprofits.

Colby May, senior counsel and director for the American Center for Law and Justice, said of new media’s apparent split personality, “Something else is in play.” He and others attending a panel discussion of the report suggested that social networking platforms are under a tremendous amount of pressure from various special interest groups.

For example, Google removed pages of a Norwegian anti-Church of Scientology site after it was pressured to do so by Church of Scientology lawyers.

And when Facebook, citing its outlined responsibility policies, abruptly yanked a fairly innocuous photo of two fully clothed male actors kissing from the blog post of gay rights activist Richard Metzger, it sparked criticism in the gay community, leading Facebook to repost the photo.

Facebook issued a formal apology and reposted the picture. The report contrasts this incident with several others where Facebook “has permanently and unapologetically removed sexual content.”
The grossest act of anti-Christian censorship, according to the report, is Apple’s removal of the Exodus International and Manhattan Declaration apps.

Gay rights protesters demonized Exodus’ app as the “gay cure app,” although the app primarily advertised the date, times and locations of its upcoming events. They rallied more than 107,000 sign petitions asking Apple to remove the app from the iTunes store. Gay activists also successfully petitioned the removal of the Manhattan Declaration.

May lamented Apple’s skewed judgment, saying it rejected an app for a document that upholds the sanctity of life and marriage as “offensive,” but maintains an app for the violent videogame Grand Theft Auto.

The panelists all expressed the fear that selective censorship may silence not just Christianity, but all religions.

May stated that the religious community must demand that companies such as Google and Facebook open their media platforms to more kinds of speech. “When we say ‘open,’ we mean open ... don’t give the heckler veto,” he urged.

Roth urged the religious community to educate the public about the importance of free speech. He said those in academia – millennials such as Zuckerman and the early makers of Google who launched their companies while attending college – may not be aware of why censorship, however small, is problematic.

NRB Senior Vice President and General Counsel Craig Parshall told The Christian Post it plans to send the report to the offending companies along with an invitation for dialogue and discussion. Parshall and others on the Thursday panel made clear their preference for change through dialogue rather than resorting to legislative or regulatory means. However, if the companies do not respond, Parshall says the NRB reserves the right to begin talks with the FCC.

Wow ... and all the Apple products I've bought over the years ... I don't to, but if this Big Brother behavior continues, I may have to take my business elsewhere ... I don't wanna have to buy a PC!

Campus Crusade for Christ Drops "Christ" from Name

Is this a case of political correctness, a "new and improved"re-make, or  another instance of our ever-changing language? ... from FoxNews (emphasis added):

Campus Ministry Drops 'Christ' from Name

One of the nation’s most prominent Christian ministries has decided to take Christ out of its name – a move that has generated cries of political correctness from within the evangelical community.

Campus Crusade for Christ International announced this week that it will change the name of its U.S. Operations to “Cru” in early 2012.

“We felt like our name was getting in the way of accomplishing our mission,” said Steve Sellers, the vice president for Campus Crusade, noting that the ministry will still be committed to “proclaiming Christ around the world.”

Sellers said researchers found that 9 percent of Christians and 20 percent of non-Christians were alienated by the name Campus Crusade for Christ.

The organization was founded in 1951 by Bill and Vonette Bright and today has 25,000 staff members serving in 191 countries. Bright died in 2003, but his widow offered support for the name change in a video posted online.

“When Bill Bright started the organization, he told his wife that someday they would have to change the name,” Sellers said. “As early as the late '70s and '80s he was looking at making the name change.”
Sellers said several factors were involved in the name change – including overseas sensitivities.

“Our name was becoming more and more of a hindrance,” he told Fox News Radio. He specifically mentioned the word crusade.

“It’s reverted back to some of its meaning related to the Middle Ages – forcing Christianity on different parts of the world,” he said.

As for removing Christ from their name, the Campus Crusade for Christ website states:

“We were not trying to eliminate the word Christ from our name. We were looking for a name that would most effectively serve our mission and help us take the gospel to the world. Our mission has not changed. Cru enables us to have discussions about Christ with people who might initially be turned off by a more overtly Christian name. We believe that our interaction and our communication with the world will be what ultimately honors and glorifies Christ.”

But that decision has created controversy within the evangelical Christian community – some taking to social networking sites and the organization’s website to voice their displeasure.

“Take Christ out, and you become just another crusade,” one critic wrote on the Campus Crusade website. “How repulsive can you get?” Another person wrote, “We are both appalled that you think you have to remove the name Christ from your name.”

“It is sad that an organization like Campus Crusade at least appears to have allowed themselves to be taken by the politically correct environment instead of acting counter culturally as Christ’s followers are called to do,” said Richard Hornsby, of Kansas City. “For an institution like Crusade to appear to cave to the same cultural pressure that leads school principals to harass or try to ban Christian groups from meeting on campus is incredibly sad. We expect the ACLU to intimidate small towns and schools by threatening to sue them. We don’t expect long-standing pillars of the Christian community to fold like this.”

Hornsby was actively involved with Campus Crusade at The Ohio State University when he was a college student. He said he was surprised by the name change.

“I immediately thought of Paul’s letter to the Romans, ‘I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ,’” he said. “It may be that CCCI has good intentions behind the change, but on its face, this decision to drop ‘Christ’ seems like an attempt to hide or mask the core identity of the group.”

But Sellers defended the removal of Christ’s name from the title – and denied that political correctness was involved.

“It has nothing to do with political correctness,” he said. “It has everything to do with how we can be effective at what God has called us to do.”

“Most churches don’t have Christ in their name,” he said. “Hardly any other Christian organization has Christ in their name. People are making an issue out of something that isn’t the intent at all.”

Sellers said it is “more important that the organization is effective at proclaiming Jesus than it is important to have the name of Jesus in the name of the organization.”

And he stressed that the mission of the organization has not changed.

“We are an evangelistic organization that is committed and has been committed and will be committed to proclaiming Christ around the world,” he said.

The new name, Cru, has long been used as a nickname for the organization on university campuses. Other than that, Sellers said Cru does not have a definition.

“Much like lots of brand names they don’t necessarily have meaning in and of themselves,” he said. “It is a name we intend to give meaning so that when people hear it they know that it’s a caring group of Christians who are passionate about lifting up the name of Jesus.”

Sarah Pulliam Bailey of Christianity Today offers more to the story (emphasis added) -- 

With the name Crusade, Sellers said people might conjure images of people being forced into something.

"We think the name of Jesus and his love is the most attractive thing on the planet, and to do anything to make it seem forced or that we're trying to cram it down anyone's throat is just not necessary," Sellers said. "We're constantly trying to eliminate things that are a barrier or obstacle.

...

"Since Cru began as a nickname at the local level in the mid-90s it has taken on much of the positive equity of the organization without any of the negatives," the organization said in a FAQ  posted on its website. "Like Google, Starbucks, and other abstract names, we expect to fill Cru with meaning as it embodies all that we are as we go to the world with the gospel." 

Campus Crusade is not the first organization to distance itself from the term. In 2000, Wheaton College removed its Crusader mascot and eventually became the Thunder. Only this year, the school unveiled a physical mascot, "Stertorous 'Tor' Thunder," a 2-person mastodon costume weighing 99 pounds (the largest mascot in the NCAA). In 2002, evangelist Billy Graham began using the word "mission" to describe what he always called "crusades." His son Franklin Graham and evangelist Luis Palau call their gatherings "festivals," while Greg Laurie uses "crusade."

This word "crusade", I think, makes all of us recall the ruckus President Bush (W) stirred up when he used the term in addressing the nation following the 9/11 attacks.  He said: "this crusade, this war on terror is going to take a while."  [Click here for transcript.] At the time of hearing his speech, I didn't even flinch at the word, interpreting the word as I think most people use it today: a heroic, monumental undertaking, campaign or struggle.

So, how does Merriam-Webster define "crusade?":

1: any of the military expeditions undertaken by Christian powers in the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries to win the Holy Land from the Muslims

2: a remedial enterprise undertaken with zeal and enthusiasm

Examples of CRUSADE

1. crusade for spending more money on our public schools>

Origin of CRUSADE

blend of Middle French croisade & Spanish cruzada; both ultimately from Latin cruc-, crux cross

First Known Use: circa 1708

Related to CRUSADE

Synonyms:  bandwagon, blitz, cause, campaign, drive, juggernaut, movement, push

But, Bush's use of "crusade" unleashed a firestorm of political correctness.  Here's a brief history lesson on it from Wikipedia in its entry of "Tenth Crusade":

The use of this figure of speech was criticized in Europe, and Arabic-speaking countries. Supporters of the President's usage of "crusade" argue that from context Bush had used the word in a military, non-religious sense, such as "The Great Crusade" which was the phrase used by General Dwight D. Eisenhower to describe the D-Day invasion of Europe to the Allied troops in his order of the day broadcast.^[2]
 
They point to many modern dictionaries which define crusade (not capitalized) to include any vigorous action aimed at achieving a particular noble goal.^[3][4] However, particularly in predominantly Muslim parts of the world, the term crusade produces the same sort of negative reaction as the term jihad does in much of the West.

Tenth Crusade

In the September 7, 2002 issue of CounterPunch,^[5] columnist Alexander Cockburn authored an opinion column titled "The Tenth Crusade"^[6] in which he numbered the conflict to follow nine medieval Crusades. In a Newsday article issued December 4, 2003, political commentator James Pinkerton cited two intermediate wars also called "Tenth Crusade." Pinkerton's renumbering of the conflict as the "Twelfth Crusade" has been overshadowed by references to the title of the Cockburn column.^[7] Cockburn is thus usually credited with coining the term, which is almost exclusively used by critics of the US operations.

Who knew such a tiny, two-syllable word could ignite such an explosive argument discussion!  I guess Campus Crusade doesn't want to get pulled into the boiling cauldron.  "Crusade" is yet another word whose meaning has transmuted these days into something different.  Or, is it simply wanting a name that's hip?

Christianity and Its Role in the Revolution

Happy 4th of July, everybody!

I just finished posting over at my political blog Hummers & Cigarettes a piece by Peter Lillback of Townhall "This Fourth of July Remember the Role of Christianity."  Lillback addresses the common myth that George Washington was a Deist and, instead, dismisses this common revisionist fallacy and offers proof of Washington's Christian faith.

At the time that I found this article on Townhall, I also spied some interesting reading about George Whitefield, the famous evangelist preacher involved in The Great Awakening, spreading the Gospel throughout England and North America.

Here's David Stokes' piece (emphasis added):

The Forgotten Old SOUTH Church of the American Revolution

In September of 1775, five months after the battles of Lexington and Concord, and while the shot heard ‘round the world later immortalized by Ralph Waldo Emerson still echoed, some Continental Army volunteers gathered at a church in the small coastal Massachusetts town of Newburyport, located almost 30 miles northeast of Boston. They were about to go to battle—an initiative led by, of all people, Benedict Arnold. The men decided that a little prayer accompanied by an extemporaneous sermon might be a good idea.

The town’s Old South Church had found a bit of recent fame as people proudly pointed out that the bell in its clock tower had been cast by a fellow named Paul Revere, who had just months before made a name for himself on horseback. Revere, of course, is better known for his connection to a certain Old North Church. But some of the citizen-soldiers listening to Chaplain Samuel Spring’s challenge that day knew that they were also in the presence of another important bit of history—something they saw as very relevant to the emerging War of Independence.

As they listened to the sermon that day, many of them couldn’t help but be preoccupied with the pulpit itself. On the Sunday immediately following the battles of Lexington and Concord, the local minister, Dr. Jonathan Parsons, spoke fervently about liberty. His passion prompted a man named Ezra Hunt to step into the church’s aisle to form a company of 60 fighting men on the spot—said to be the first such group to attach itself to the fledgling Continental Army.

But as if those two connections to the greater cause weren’t enough, there was a third even more compelling reason many of the men found the venue so fascinating.

It was what was under the pulpit that inspired them.

Five years earlier, during another Bay State September, someone who had actually founded the Old South Church back in yet another September—in 1740—had been scheduled to preach a sermon. He was America’s most famous clergyman, although his preferred appellation was—“revivalist.”

George Whitefield was back in town and a great crowd was anticipated at church in Newburyport that day. But it was a sermon, one of his more than 18,000, he would never preach. Reverend Whitefield died that morning in the church parsonage. The great voice that had cried out in the wilderness of colonial America fell silent. A few days later, with much grief and ceremony, the revivalist was buried in a crypt directly beneath that pulpit at Old South Church—where his grave remains to this day.

Many of the men sitting in the church on September 16, 1775, preparing to go to war, were restless. No disrespect was intended for the chaplain, they just wanted him to be done with his remarks so they could see Whitefield’s tomb. They wanted to make a connection—not only with history and fame: but with what we might now refer to as the DNA of faith.

Lost to many Americans today via the whitewash of history that has led to a bit of a cultural brainwash when it comes to the founding era, is the story of Whitefield and the Great Awakening he helped spark. The common revisionist narrative today places faith and matters of religion on the periphery of history—an enduring lunatic fringe encompassing past and present. This better fits the secularist worldview espoused by those who want us to see government, statism, and struggles for social justice as not only the way to move boldly into the future, but also as consistent with our past.

Sadly, such a future may, in fact, be ours if enough people don’t wake up, but no amount of tinkering with textbooks can actually change what really happened way back when. The enlightenment and passion that burned so bright during the epochal moments of our national gestation nearly two and a half centuries ago on these shores were fueled by something quite spiritual and profound.

There will be reenactments this weekend illustrating Revere’s ride, volleys fired, and a declaration proclaimed, but what will be missing as America rounds up its usual respects this 4th of July will be a cultural revisit to the seeds planted in the hearts and minds of men and women in the decades before 1775-1776.

If America was born 234 years ago this weekend, the case can be made that she was conceived 35 years earlier. Long before men named Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Hancock, and Franklin became notable and influential, there were a few clergymen—preachers—who meteorically blazed across the colonial sky.

Chief among these preacher-cultural celebrities was George Whitefield.

Ordained in the Church of England at the tender age of 22 in 1736, he quickly became well known for his voice—it was loud and commanding, but never shrill and off-putting. It was said that he could speak to 30,000 people (Benjamin Franklin counted them once) and that all could hear him, even in the open air. His diction and flair for dramatics had audiences hanging on every word. Historian George Marsden suggests that Whitefield’s communication gifts were so remarkable that even uttering the word “Mesopotamia” could bring people to tears. The preacher spoke with “Much Flame, Clearness, and Power.”

Whitefield emphasized personal conversion with his powerful messages on the new birth from Jesus’ words in the Gospel of John. The converted formed new churches—hundreds of them—and revived existing churches that had long been spiritually moribund.

Interestingly, George Whitefield was not without his critics. Much of his opposition came from clergymen. The preacher was adept at using the media of his day (e.g., among the first to understand the power of newspapers) and he was certainly a showman. Biographers have regularly referred to him as “Divine Dramatist” and “Pedlar (variant of “peddler”) in Divinity.” One Boston cleric of the day complained that Whitefield “used his utmost craft and cunning to stoke the passions and engage the affections of the people.” But Whitefield not only took it all in stride, he saw the criticism as, in fact, drawing attention to his work and helping his cause. He was the first modern preacher to bring innovation, marketing savvy, and advertising to ministry.

The chronological locus for the Great Awakening was the period of 1740-1742, but the residual and enduring effects lasted into the revolutionary period. And this is where the history being taught in schools today—and that most of us grew up hearing—misses the boat.

In their book, God Is Back: How The Global Revival Of Faith Is Changing The World, John Micklethwait (editor in chief of The Economist) and Adrian Woolridge (Washington bureau chief of The Economist)—both men Oxford-trained secular journalists—argue for the obvious connection between the Great Awakening and the American Revolution. They see our struggle back then, in contrast to the French Revolution, as “a unique event in modern history—a revolution against an earthly regime that was not also an exercise in anti-clericalism.”

While revolutionary France “defined itself by its hostility to religion,” they contend “Americans saw no contradiction between embracing the values of the Enlightenment and republicanism while at the same time clinging to their religious principles.”

And we have the Reverend George Whitefield, among many others, to thank for this.

When the sermon was finally done at Old South Church that September day in 1775, some of the citizen-soldiers sought out the church’s sexton and asked to see where Whitefield was buried. The sexton actually opened the coffin and a few of the officers obtained tiny bits of material from the dead preacher’s collar and wristband, carrying them into battle as good luck charms.

Of course, I am not all that into amulets and such, but I find myself cutting these men some slack. Their simple excision of fabric was really an exercise in remembrance and connection. They knew that what they were going to do soon in battle was somehow, someway tied to what Whitefield and others had been part of years before.

Some years ago, a member of my congregation visited that church in Newburyport and brought me back some pictures of the scene. The crypt was still there, but it was surrounded by half-empty paint cans, buckets, and other typical church basement stuff (I am sure it’s been cleaned up since). It was almost like some had forgotten the significance of what they had down in that basement.

Then again, reading much of the history written about the 18th century these days, it’s pretty clear that America, for the most part, has long-since forgotten the spiritual roots of the revolution we’ll all sort of remember this weekend.

Oh—and here’s a Newburyport footnote. The town was back then associated with great preaching and in 1805 another future visionary and liberator was born to grow up there—William Lloyd Garrison, the famous abolitionist. There may, in fact, be something to faith DNA.

The "Whitefield" always grabs my attention, because my grandfather, a Methodist minister, was given the middle name of "Whitefield" (pronounced 'whit-field').  Reading about George Whitefield is fascinating ... check his story out at Wikipedia.

I endeavor to learn more about our nation's "faith DNA" -- something being whitewashed out of American history these days by the revisionists.

SHOCKWAVE: Global Prayer for Persecuted Christians Starts Today!

From Ethan Cole and the Christian Post --

Christian Youths 'Cry Out' for Persecuted Believers

Christian youths on Friday kicked off a time-zone crossing prayer chain for persecuted believers that began in New Zealand and will go around to about 50 countries.

The ninth annual SHOCKWAVE global prayer for the persecuted is scheduled to take place March 5-7. The prayer event is organized by the Underground, a youth and student ministry of Open Doors, an organization that supports persecuted believers worldwide.

“Shockwave is a movement of prayer that allows the passion of young people’s hearts to be heard by God as we cry out and join together across the world in solidarity with our persecuted brothers and sisters,” said Scott Ahern, director of innovative strategies for Open Doors USA.

An estimated 100 million Christians worldwide suffer different forms of persecution, including interrogation, arrest and even death for their faith in Jesus Christ. Millions more face discrimination and alienation.

Organizers point to Hebrews 13:3, “remember those in prison as if you were their fellow prisoners, and those who are mistreated as if you yourselves were suffering,” as the inspiration for SHOCKWAVE.

During the 72-hour event, prayers will take place in SHOCKWAVE chat rooms, prayer meetings, churches, homes and other places in dozens of countries. In some locations, participants are holding all-night events or prayer breakfasts.

This year’s participating countries include the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Netherlands, India, Malaysia, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Canada and Brazil.

“This is truly a witness of the unity of the body of Christ when youth from different cultures, ethnic backgrounds and regions of the world join to pray for one cause – to lift up and support through prayer God’s suffering children,” Ahern said.

Last year, thousands of young Christians joined in prayer for the persecuted.

The ten countries with the worst persecution of Christians, according to Open Doors’ 2010 World Watch List, are:

1. North Korea
2. Iran
3. Saudi Arabia
4. Somalia
5. Maldives
6. Afghanistan
7. Yemen
8. Mauritania
9. Laos
10. Uzbekistan

On the Web: http://www.odshockwave.org