Manhattan Declaration: Religious Leaders Unite on Political Issues

From the NY Times:

They say they also want to speak to younger Christians who have become engaged in issues like climate change and global poverty, and who are more accepting of homosexuality than their elders. They say they want to remind them that abortion, homosexuality and religious freedom are still paramount issues.

“We argue that there is a hierarchy of issues,” said Charles Colson, a prominent evangelical who founded Prison Fellowship after serving time in prison for his role in the Watergate scandal. “A lot of the younger evangelicals say they’re all alike. We’re hoping to educate them that these are the three most important issues.”

What is so provocative within this Manhattan Declaration?

“We will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other antilife act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent.”



---

Commenting at the Crosstalk Blog is not a right, it is a privilege. Crosstalk Blog staff reserves the right to reject any comment that is found to be offensive or otherwise unaccaeptable for any reason. We will not tolerate the following: abusive or profane language, objectionable links, off-topic remarks, and bickering with other commenters. Thank you for respecting this policy.

6 Responses to “Manhattan Declaration: Religious Leaders Unite on Political Issues”

1. RayinVA says:

   November 25, 2009 at 12:26 pm

   I was disapponted, but not surprised, by John MacArthur's opposition to signing this document. I believe Al Mohler and Tim Keller have the right spirit in supporting it.

   Reply
2. Bill says:

   November 30, 2009 at 10:27 am

   This document makes no bones about declaring itself and the principles it stands upon to be “Christian”. Therefore, would it not be necessary to correctly define what a Christian is? (A depraved sinner saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone). I'm guessing that these distinctions were omitted to allow Roman Catholics and other “christians” to lend their support. After all, the ends justifies the means, right?

   The ONLY remedy for each of the issues that this declaration raises is a clear presentation of the true gospel and the working of the Holy Spirit in people's lives.

   Reply
3. "reformed" says:

   November 30, 2009 at 2:07 pm

   RayinVA,
   Perhaps you should take a look at the e-mail from Jim Daly of Focus on the Family at: http://bit.ly/7LQ6aA. Then see my and others more extensive comments at the other post area on this topic. Many are beginning to see the MD as an ecumenical joining at the hip with papal romanism, despite strong theological differences. Al Mohler has never addressed Freemasonry inside the SBC, and Tim Keller recently supported a class on contemplative at Redeemer Pres. They would naturally have no problem with this traitorous document, being traitors to the true faith themselves.

   Reply
4. wearymom2 says:

   November 30, 2009 at 6:50 pm

   Perhaps this article at Whittenburg Church Door will help you understand what is missing in the Declaration. The writer of the article suggests an amendment to the document.
   The Manhattan Declaration-The Marshall Amendment: http://crninfo.wordpress.com/2009/11/28/the-man...

   Reply
5. "reformed" says:

   November 30, 2009 at 9:07 pm

   RayinVA,
   Perhaps you should take a look at the e-mail from Jim Daly of Focus on the Family at: http://bit.ly/7LQ6aA. Then see my and others more extensive comments at the other post area on this topic. Many are beginning to see the MD as an ecumenical joining at the hip with papal romanism, despite strong theological differences. Al Mohler has never addressed Freemasonry inside the SBC, and Tim Keller recently supported a class on contemplative at Redeemer Pres. They would naturally have no problem with this traitorous document, being traitors to the true faith themselves.

   Reply
6. wearymom2 says:

   December 1, 2009 at 1:50 am

   Perhaps this article at Whittenburg Church Door will help you understand what is missing in the Declaration. The writer of the article suggests an amendment to the document.
   The Manhattan Declaration-The Marshall Amendment: http://crninfo.wordpress.com/2009/11/28/the-man...

   Reply