So sorry I haven't posted anything lately. My wife and I have been up in central California this weekend. I'll try to crop some interesting pictures of tow-in surfing at a spot just south of Pebble Beach later. A Reformed brother of Mexican descent saw the discussion "Black, White, and Reformed" over on the Heidelblog and wrote in to comment:

I found your link via The HB. I wanted to comment on two things that you were addressing with Dr. Clark. First, I know I do not know you, but I do know you are a professing Christian (Reformed) like myself. As a Mexican-American (Hispanic, whatever!) I wanted to let you know that I agreed with most of your assessment about Mexicans in the US. I also wanted to let you know that, contrary to popular belief expulsion of Mexicans from Mexico is and has been occurring. The well paying jobs in Mexico are being taken up by Hispanic whites. This is not rare in Mexico. It is common thing for a Spaniard, or someone from Argentina to migrate to Mexico and get a well paying job. For this reason, the rich in Mexico are White, Mexican White. Like many of my families members. I know more millionaires personally in Mexico than I do here in the US. But this is not the problem.
The truth about Mexicans who have invaded the US are either Indian look alike (Antonio Villaraigoza, George Lopez,etc.) who are brown skin, ranchy type, Catholic, uneducated, etc. The problem Mexico is facing is the same problem the US is facing with Mexicans Illegals. That is, they do not want or have not been proper normal citizens. Why? I think a lot has to do with our Culture which has change in the last fifty years. In specific, the Roman Mexican Church which has influence most Mexicans.

Basically, what I wanted to say is that the problem Mexico has been going through in the last forty and fifty years is the SAME problem the US or better yet Anglo-Americans are facing with illegal mexican immigrates. The problem is the failure of Mexicans who are reluctant or are not aware that living in a country means learning the language (whether Spanish in Mexico or English in America), being educated, assimilating to its modern culture while knowing the past like its history, behaving like proper citizens, being productive, contributing to the society, economic, etc. If you ask me why? I think it has to do with most of its roman catholic culture. For example, if your job is that of a farmer, manufacturer worker, lawnmower then that is what you are and the Catholic thinking prevails which like the Biblical teaching of being content with what we have. Why study to be a corrupt lawyer when you can do Gods mandate of providing for your family and of raising a family. Especially when the state is perceived to be an enemy of the church (Roman Church). Therefore, who cares if they come across illegal when there thought is that they are trying to feed themselves or their families. Another problem is what happens when they arrived but that I can talk about at another time. This does not mean that I endorse this type of thinking as a Mexican-American. I, as a Reformed Christian, have come to believe and know the Puritan work ethic. And this I hold to be the proper biblical understanding. In my opinion the best thing a Reformed Christian can do after communicating the gospel with our lives is to bring this understanding to all people.

The major cultural difference between Britain, the progenitor of the US, and Spain, the progenitor of Mexico, is a difference in faith. As far as I know, the Reformation never came to Spain, (though there are quite a few Reformed mission works there now), but Britain was a thoroughly Protestant country when it founded the US. This fact can't be overlooked in terms of cultural influence upon this republic. I have heard other Mexican Christians speak ill of the Roman Catholic church in Mexico, who seemed to believe that it was a source of many of the cultural problems there. My intention at this point is not to beat up on Catholics, as my own mother was raised Irish Catholic. But I do think the Roman Catholic church's belief in sola ecclesia and the authority of tradition can easily lead to an overly powerful, badly-behaved clergy, and the clergy often set the behavioral examples in a society and provide its spiritual guidance. When the church, which is composed of sinners (including the pope), is given an authority equal to that of Scripture to determine the rule of faith and practice, the clergy can often be assumed by the laity to be above reproach, whether or not it is so. According to the pastoral letters, I think, church elders are to meet behavioral standards before and during their service, and that the church body has the right to hold their leadership to those standards if the elders won't do so. We would also argue that all of the church traditions relevant to Christian faith and practice (2 Timothy) have been enscripturated in the writing of the New Testament, thus making Scripture the only rule (_sola Scriptura_).