On a recent road trip, I listened to Elmer Gantry by Sinclair Lewis. I’d heard the lead character, Elmer Gantry, used as an insult about fraudulent clergy, Soon I heard something that almost caused me to swerve off the highway.
The leader stood condemned. He had acted unlawfully. He had tried to undermine the government. He had been caught. The testimony was clear, the evidence overwhelming. The only thing left was to offer punishment. But the politician bringing the verdict at the trial couldn’t do
Next week, “voting” will finally begin in the 2020 presidential election. I put voting in quote marks because it’s hard to call what happens in Iowa a vote. And having observed in person such, uh, let’s call it “candidate picking,” I also wonder if serves
As the U.S. Supreme Court today (Jan. 22) hears arguments in a critical church-state case, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, one problematic phrase the justices will likely hear a lot is “Blaine amendments." The problem? The phrase tells an inaccurate story.
Across the country, state lawmakers recently returned to their chambers to pass important matters like putting up little signs in schools to magically make our society better. We should post this phrase everywhere and watch the miraculous transformation!
At the Christmas Eve service I attended recently, the Christ candle in the Advent wreath wouldn’t light. The pastor tried and tried. Eventually, as giggles worked their way down the crowded pews, he said everyone should just pretend it was lit.
When my son was younger, he had a few verbal ticks where he would say one thing when he meant another. A common example of this verbal confusion pops up today as I frequently hear people say “political” when they really mean “partisan.”
On Tuesday (Dec. 17), the state of Missouri installed a false god on top of the Capitol building. Or, at least that’s what a state representative claimed. But I wonder if the case should remind us of the difference between influence and worship.
Dear Luke, I am writing to complain about the start to your book — the one that, according to you, is a “Gospel,” not the sequel on the acts of the apostles. It’s mostly good. Some good stories, clever lines, interesting characters. However, I take