Why Johnny Can't Preach

I just got an email from the Westminster Seminary bookstore that featured this book, which looks like it would be very interesting:

Why Johnny Can't Preach: The Media Have Shaped the Messengers

Christ the Ark

This morning's Old Testament reading from the Book of Common Prayer came from Genesis 8, which tells of the latter portion of the time that Noah, his family, and all the animals spent on the ark. What strikes me as interesting is the care that God gave in describing to us the sequence of events that took place leading up to and during the flood. Four chapters of Genesis are devoted to the story of Noah (ch. 6-9), which suggests that we do the story a disservice when we reduce it down to a tale about a big boat full of cuddly animals.

The passage is rife with typological symbolism. The tabernacle typology fills the passage, and seems to be the main imagery here. Just as Yahweh went into great detail in His prescriptions for the tabernacle, and then later the temple, He also here goes into great detail in His instructions to Noah. The measurements are detailed, as are the materials that the ark is to be made out of. Rooms are to be made in the ark (6:14), which are later echoed in the two rooms in the tabernacle, and even moreso in the various chambers of the temple (1 Kings 6:3-5). We might say, in other words, that, from the perspective of the flood, the ark prefigured the tabernacle and the temple. But from the perspective of the tabernacle and the temple, they were designed in part to resemble and hearken back to the ark. They were each, in themselves, arks, means of salvation from the judgment of God for sin.

Yahweh commands Noah to take seven pairs of each clean animal, which pointed forward to the Mosaic law and the animals prescribed in the Levitical offerings. And after the flood, we are told that Noah offered burnt offerings to Yahweh, a specific type of offering in the Levitical system (Lev. 1). As the ark pointed forward to the tabernacle and temple, so Noah functioned here as priest and pointed forward to the Levitical priesthood.

There are the details given regarding the days and months during the flood. The number seven makes several appearances in the story, pointing back to the Creation as well as forward to the foundation of the Levitical calendar, the Sabbath (Lev. 23:3). It also seems to be no coincidence that the ark came to rest on the 17th day of the 7th month, which date would later have been during the Feast of Booths (Lev. 23:33-36).

Leaving the matter of the Old Covenant liturgical system somewhat, we also see a parallel between the flood and the baptism of Jesus. Peter shows us the connection between the flood and the baptism of Christians (1 Peter 3:18-22), but when the details are considered, the connection with Christ's baptism (Mt. 3:13-17; Mk 1:9-11; Lk. 3:21-22) becomes apparent. Christ went into water, just as the ark did. We have reference to the opening of the heavens (Gen. 7:11), just as in the stories of Jesus' baptism. And there are the reports of the Holy Spirit being as a dove (even in the bodily form of a dove, as Luke records, vs. 22), which is a link to Noah's sending out of the dove from the ark (Gen. 8:8-12).

And so the ark, the tabernacle, and the temple, were all types of Christ. Or, in other words, Christ was the fullness of all that the ark, the tabernacle, and the temple, were mere shadows.

And now, for something completely different... a little pre-show music.

I decided a week or so ago that I would write some pieces about music and post them on my Facebook page. I'll be posting them here as well. They will rarely make Facebook references, but I don't really care to take the time to edit them for this blog. So here is the first one, as written for Facebook, and I trust the reader will be able to consider it without being to distracted by comments referring to the original intended context.


I think the one thing that comes up most often when I talk to people about worship is music. Obviously, music is an important part of worship, so it's natural that people would want to talk about it. Whether or not it's as important as most Christians think it is, however, is a whole other question.

The "worship wars" are gradually becoming old news, it seems to me. As the older generation of Christians are passing on, so is the music they were accustomed to hearing in church. And as the younger generation has grown up and is taking the reins of leadership, the default position now in most Evangelical churches seems to be contemporary worship. Generally, though, what is meant by "contemporary worship" is simply "worship with contemporary music". This isn't to say that there aren't other things that have changed in worship in recent decades. But let's be honest. People don't generally find themselves in the middle of huge church splits over whether or not to have a skit before the sermon on Sunday morning. Usually, the fights that take place over worship in the local church center around music. Of course, when the shift in music takes place, other things usually come with it. You don't find churches with worship bands where the seats are full of women in dresses and men in three-piece suits, after all.

Then there is the whole question of music outside of corporate worship. As a Christian, is music that falls under the heading "Christian" the only type of music I should listen to? Is all "secular" music bad? I'm always intrigued by the different answers to these questions that are bandied about in Evangelical circles.

When I signed up on Facebook a couple of months ago, I didn't really anticipate reconnecting with so many people from earlier in my life. As I've interacted with old friends through email and online, music usually comes up, since I'm a musician of sorts. For what it's worth, I must confess that I don't play guitar much anymore. I'd rather listen to others play these days. And the photo with the headstock of my guitar? I was just trying to get an artsy picture for my profile.

Nonetheless, people who haven't seen me in years still think of me, I guess, as a musician. For those who have only known me recently, it used to be that my guitar and I were practically joined at the hip. Much of my identity was wrapped up in it. These days, I'd rather be reading. The world is full of things to learn, and I want to learn all I can, hopefully for my own good, for the good of others, and, especially, for God's glory. I find the masses, however, aren't as interested in knowledge. For most people, armchair polymath apparently holds less mystique than guitarist. If you play a song people like, they love you. If you tell them some sort of insight you gained from Scripture, or from reflecting on the world around you, they generally seem, shall we say, less than impressed. Alas.

But I still consider myself a musician. I've been a sort of musical jack of all trades, master of none. I sang in choirs and choruses in school and church from elementary school on up through high school, and even one semester in college. I played in a garage band in high school. I sang with a southern gospel group briefly. I led singing in youth group, and daily worship for a ministry I served at for a couple of years. I've sung solo in churches and in coffee shops. I've dabbled in everything from barber shop to Bach to the Beatles. So, though I may not be classically trained, in light of my experience I believe I have some views on the topic of music that are worth sharing.

So my plans at this point are to post occasional thoughts on music, both inside and outside the church, and this is the introductory post. As always, I welcome any interaction on what I'm writing.

Irony with a vengeance

Many of you will be familiar with Ben Stein. He is probably best known for his appearance as the dead-pan teacher in Ferris Bueller's Day Off, or maybe for his now defunct game show "Win Ben Stein's Money". He happens to be an all-around brilliant guy, being also an economist, as well as a political commentator and speech writer. His most recent fame, however, has come from his movie "Expelled", which was released last year and which highlighted the bias of the scientific community against anything but Evolutionary theory.

Well, his exposé of Darwinianism has come to be a personal reality for him. Originally asked to give the commencement address at the University of Vermont this Spring, a huge backlash erupted, based off of his criticisms of Evolution. As a result, Stein has declined the invitation to speak.

On the Big Hollywood website, Andrew Leigh notes the irony in this. The whole point of "Expelled" was to show the unwillingness within academia to be open to theories of origins other than Evolution. Now, the thesis of the movie has been confirmed. Plus, the Darwinists have shown that they are as hypocritical as they often accuse Christians of being. So who's closed minded now?

Relevant links:

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20090203/NEWS02/902030316
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20090203/NEWS02/90203038&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/aleigh/2009/02/04/ben-steins-commencement-day-off/

HT: Gary DeMar

The Real Abraham Lincoln

http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo167.html

A creative way to sell your children into slavery to the State.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/nyregion/08schools.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

The U. S. government, helping to spread democracy throughout the world.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/07/world/africa/07congo.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

The Modern State, a False God

(W)ithout a sound faith, men will trust almost anything and anyone rather than God. Having denied God, men will then proceed to deify themselves, their own creations (including the state) and almost anything other than the living God (Rom. 1:18-23). Chief among these man-made idols or gods is the state. As St. Augustine pointed out, in The City of God, when men forsake God, and when a civil order becomes godless, it is soon no more than a larger band of thieves, a super-mafia, whose victims are the citizens. This evil situation is compounded by the fact that the people insist on trusting this false god, the idol state. The more it oppresses them, the more they turn on state-created scapegoats, and each of them in turn becomes a scapegoat. But this is not all: to relieve themselves of a state-created oppression, they vote still greater powers to the state, crying in effect, "O Baal, hear us" and save us (I Kings 18:26).

As we view the modern state, it is important to recognize one central fact: the major enemy of the humanistic state is its own people. The U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R. have their differences, and they may go to war, but both have been in continuous war against their own peoples from 1918 to the present. Savage as the treatment by the U.S.S.R. of Germany was, after World War II, it never equalled its savagery towards its own peoples. The U.S.A. has been generous to its enemies, and to all the world, except its own people. In the name of the public welfare, it has robbed, abused, and mistreated its own citizenry, and it is waging war against all segments of society, behind a facade of subsidies, and, with President Carter, began a war against Christianity as well.

People should have been forewarned. Early in the modern era, city planners, as soon as they came into existence, began to think of straight streets, not for the convenience of the public, but for the control of the people. An angry populace could be handled more easily by cannons shooting down straight streets, and rebellious peoples could be easily subdued by a cavalry charge up and down a straight street.

The first principle of the modern state is to protect itself against its own people, and to control them. Its second and lesser principle is to protect itself against foreign enemies. Foreign enemies are a periodic problem; the people are a state's permanent problem.

Thus, to entrust the state to control our lives, our families, our education, religion, and economics is to ask for our destruction.

The goal of state-controlled economics is the increase of statist powers, and the control of money is basic to that goal. To trust the state with money is to ensure, virtually always in history, the debauchery of money.

--Rousas John Rushdooney, The Roots of Inflation, pp. 41-42 (1982)

New Links

I just added a couple of new links. Two of them are to pages by my friend William Chad Newsom. He is the author of Polycarp: Crown of Fire and Talking of Dragons, both of which are published by Christian Focus. A third link is to a page called Net Right Nation. It is a news site that serves as a portal to numerous Conservative blogs. I just found them the other day, and discovered they had linked me. I always try to return the favour if I can, so you'll find them in the side bar as well. That goes for other sites as well. If you have a site and have linked me, let me know. Unless I have a good reason not to (promotion of any sort of false doctrine or rank immorality would serve as examples of "good reasons"), I'll add a link to your page.

Fr. Richard John Neuhaus

I just learned that Fr. Richard John Neuhaus died this past January 8. He was a convert to Roman Catholicism from Lutheranism. He was the author of numerous books, a political activist, an EWTN commentator, and editor of First Things Journal.

There were many things on which I differed with Fr. Neuhaus, his Romanism being the first to come to mind, and his defense of the neoconservative approach to politics being another. Nonetheless, I appreciated his work, particularly his regular commentary called "The Public Square". His occasions on EWTN, which usually involved a special event in the life of the church, as he was flanked by commentator Raymond Arroyo, were also quite enjoyable. He was a well read and intelligent man, and will be missed.

If We Had Only Listened

Economies throughout the world are collapsing. And Ron Paul said it would happen, but no one listened. Even now, almost no one in Washington wants to do what it will take to fix it.

New Pastor of Coral Ridge

This piece of news almost slipped past me. Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, which was founded by the late D. James Kennedy (known for his radio and TV ministries, political involvement, and the creation of the Evangelism Explosion training program), has finally chosen a new pastor. Interestingly enough, they have chosen one of Billy Graham's grandsons. His name is William Graham Tullian Tchividjian. The "Tullian" part comes from the early church father Tertullian, apparently. Here are a couple of articles about the choice of Pastor Tchividjian:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/sfl-coralridge0118,0,7957788.story

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/broward/story/861948.html

The most important aspect of this, of course, is that Tchividjian has a tan to rival that of his predecessor, Dr. Kennedy. I say this facetiously, of course, but it highlights a couple of concerns it raises in my own mind. The articles note that Coral Ridge considered about 150 potential pastors in their search, but also that they approached Tchividjian on three different occasions. Apparently they wanted this guy pretty bad. But why? I listened to one of his sermons today to get an idea of his teaching. The content was pretty good. And he preached for over forty minutes, so at least he doesn't preach sermonettes like so many contemporary ministers. But the shape of his preaching was very contemporary. His choice of words and his vocal inflections were all very contemporary.

This might seem a rather ridiculous observation on the face of it. But aesthetics matter, and everybody lives like they do, whether or not they realize it.

Prior to now, Coral Ridge's approach to ministry was very 20th century. Their corporate worship (at least, what they showed of it on TV week by week) was a mixture of tradition liturgical worship and American Revivalism. There were liturgical elements, like the procession of the choir, the traditional hymnody, the organ, and the robes that the choir and Dr. Kennedy wore. And yet a measure of the aesthetics of it, such as the slick production of the service, were of the Revivalistic tradition. While I believe that there is a need for liturgical change in every generation, some forms are somehow less bound to particular time periods, and carry more of a sense of transcendence about them. Liturgical robes, for instance, have been used in the church for most of the church's history, and this isn't simply because the church doesn't like change. Some art forms serve the worship of God better, which is simply to say that Relativism doesn't exist in the realm of art any more than it exists in the realm of morals. And, as R. C. Sproul says, all forms are art forms. This includes the shape of the songs we sing and the clothes we wear, not to mention the way we speak.

While Coral Ridge's worship needed some fixing, it was better than what goes on in most contemporary churches today. Tchividjian's approach, as of that of his current church, is more contemporary, however. If taking Tchividjian on as pastor means a further move away from traditional liturgy towards a contemporary worship approach, then things don't bode well for Coral Ridge. We can talk about being counter cultural all we want, and even criticize the culture on specific issues. But if the shape of the worship of the local church isn't counter cultural in some sense, then all of are criticisms will be in vain.

But this raises another issue. Dr. Kennedy often mixed church and politics in an improper way. His sermons in which he tried to prove that certain historical American figures, such as George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, were faithful Christians (at times dubious, especially regarding the latter figure) were inappropriate for the pulpit of the Christian church. Nonetheless, his speaking out on certain political issues, such as abortion, not to mention his political activism outside of the pulpit, were generally something to be admired and emulated. Tchividjian, on the other hand, wants to pull away from the "culture war" approach that Kennedy took. In one of the articles I linked above, the reporter states that Tchividjian "would not answer questions on current political issues, such as same-sex marriage." If he is simply steering away from a blind allegiance to Americanism, and seeking instead for local reformation, particularly by focusing on community within the church and the way that stretches out to the community around the church, then that's great. But as a Christian, one can't not speak out against the wicked decisions of the government over them. When God says something is evil, I don't then have the option to say, "no, I won't talk about that." When the opportunity arises, I must speak. I can understand how people can get worn out by the culture wars. But perhaps this weariness is just a sign that we need to reassess how we address the culture. It isn't a sign that we need to start acting like our differences don't matter. Considering the direction our country is going, this isn't the time to start getting sheepish about things.

Then there is the issue of the merger of the two churches. In order for Tchividjian to take the position, he wants his church to merge with Coral Ridge. But while Coral Ridge is in the PCA, Tchividjian's church, New City Church, is in the EPC, which is the PCA's slightly more liberal cousin. The EPC (Evangelical Presbyterian Church) holds tenuously to the Westminster Standards, allowing for departures from it even in regards to the Doctrines of Grace. It also allows for the ordination of women. The PCA isn't in the best shape itself, but Coral Ridge would be worse off going into the EPC. On the other hand, unless Tchividjian is willing to publicly renounce the EPC's stance on women's ordination, I don't think he should be let into the PCA. As of yet, it has not been announced which denomination the merged church would be in.

And then there's the celebrityism. He's the grandson of Billy Graham, and has "William Graham" as part of his own name. The news reports haven't hesitated to use his full name to highlight this, though he actually goes by the name "Tullian Tchividjian". But what is the likelihood of Coral Ridge choosing a no-name for the pastorate?

So, basically, Coral Ridge is choosing the grandson of a Christian celebrity, with soap star good looks, who is hip and surfs and listens to cool music, and who doesn't want to address contemporary moral issues when asked about them. As one of the articles above states, "Gasps, then applause, greeted Tchividjian's name as Dr. Dan Westphal, head of Coral Ridge's search committee, announced it during the morning service." Gasps? I hope Tchividjian is a godly man and a good pastor. But all of the above factors combined make me think that the motives behind choosing him should be suspect at the very least.

Ron Paul on Fox

Fox News, I am glad to say, has proved me wrong... for the moment, at least:

Freedom

The relevant statement comes at the 2:46 mark:

What Lincoln Really Thought About Slavery

Today's event at the Lincoln memorial is more than a little ironic, in light of the following quote, which I wish was more well-known than it is:

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume V, "Letter to Horace Greeley" (August 22, 1862), p. 388.

I lifted the quote from here: http://home.att.net/~rjnorton/Lincoln78.html

Lincoln could have cared less about freeing slaves. The War Between the States was about States' Rights versus Centralism, not slavery.

Beck Beckoned By Fox

I just learned that Glenn Beck has officially moved from CNN to Fox News, and I must admit my feelings are a bit mixed. Glenn Beck was about the only conservative television commentator to give Ron Paul, the only major candidate worthy of election this last cycle, a reasonable hearing. Meanwhile, Fox News commentators ridiculed him at times, while at other times shutting him out completely. They supported the other Republican candidates, all fairly incompetent, and none of whom had a chance, in a nation obsessed with smooth speech and celebrity good-looks, against that great Socialist bearer of empty rhetoric, our new president Barack Obama (whom Doug Wilson has aptly dubbed "the Shining One", no doubt based on the Messianic aura that surrounds him).

I haven't made any attempt to find out why Beck made the change. But there was something nice about finding a conservative commentator on CNN. And now that he's on Fox, I can't help but wonder if he will be allowed the freedom to speak against the neo-cons that he had on CNN. Based on Fox's track record, I have my doubts.

Inauguration Inflation

Fox news notes that the tradition of the Presidential Inaugural Ball began with the inauguration of James Madison in 1809. The tickets for the Ball were $4. Today, they go into the hundreds of dollars. And remind me again why we elected Obama to the presidency? The cost of things isn't going up; the value of the dollar is going down. And Obama won't be doing what's necessary to fix this.

Historical Deconstruction Silliness

Greensboro's favourite Mormon science fiction writer, Orson Scott Card, tells of one of the latest manifestations of historical ignorance:

Just in case you had any doubt about the ignorance of "educated" Americans, I'd like to quote a line to you from a review in the Publishers Weekly of Dec. 8, 2008.

PW is the news-and-reviews magazine of the publishing and bookselling trade – reviews in PW are quite influential in helping booksellers decide which books to order and stock in their stores.

So I'm reading a review of the historical mystery The Bellini Card by Jason Goodwin, and the reviewer refers to "a portrait of Mehmet the Conqueror (who reclaimed Constantinople from the Christians in 1453), painted by the legendary artist Gentile Bellini."

What matters here is the parenthetical phrase, in which the reviewer actually makes the appalling claim that the Muslim conquest of Constantinople in 1453 somehow represented a reclaiming – which implies that Constantinople had once been Muslim and was being retrieved from Christian rule.

Here are the facts – which once were known to every college graduate, if not to every schoolchild: Constantinople was never Muslim until the Turks flat-out conquered it in a naked act of aggression in 1453.

Read the rest here:

http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/Articles-i-2009-01-08-190020.112113_PC_History_Ambiguous_Fiction_Best_Books.html

L. A. Story

Out of the numerous gifts I received for Christmas, one friend gave me a copy of the Steve Martin film "L. A. Story". I had actually just remembered it a couple of months ago, and subsequently added it to my Amazon wish list.

Sometimes you think back with fondness on a movie that you enjoyed at an earlier point in your life, but upon watching it again, realize that your enjoyment was determined by and confined by the point you were at in your life when you saw it. One can grow out of a movie, just like one grows out of other things.

I found this wasn't the case for me with L. A. Story. It was released in 1991, and so the clothes and music are dated. But if one can get past this, the film is brilliant. It is essentially a comedic love story set in Los Angeles, but it is far deeper than most films that would fit into that category. The first thing I noticed in re-watching the film was the many quotes and allusions to Shakespeare. I am fairly unread in Shakespeare, but I'm knowledgeable enough to pick up on some of the allusions. After watching the film again, I skimmed through the IMDB discussion board about the film and learned that it is essentially based off of A Midsummer Night's Dream, though there are references to several other Shakespeare plays present.

The film is full of absurd moments, intended in part to highlight the eccentricities of L. A. life. And it is also full of details that only emerge upon repeated watchings, which make it a much richer film.

There are aspects that one should beware of. There is some profanity, a moment of brief nudity, and a couple of sexual scenes, though not graphic. So it's a film for adults. But if one is okay with these, the film is well worth the watching.

The Anniversary of My Father's Death

Today is Epiphany, as I mentioned before, though the day is almost over. It didn't occur to me until a year or two ago, however, that Epiphany, January 6th, is also the anniversary of my father's death. Having grown up without the church calendar, I always thought of it as the anniversary of my father's death rather than Epiphany. He died on January 6, 1985, which happened also to be Sunday, the Christian Sabbath. To add even further to significance of the dates of his life, I might note that he was born on St. Valentine's Day.

I sure there are plenty of fortune tellers and mystics that would love to read things into the convergence of these dates. I note them simply as a matter of curiosity. Nonetheless, they are a God-ordained curiosity, and an illustration of how strangely, from our perspective, God works at times.

And were it not past eleven o'clock, I'm sure I would have more to say about that. But I can't seem to muster any more energy by which to do so.

The Hornes on AFV?

So I was just flipping around on the TV and passed by America's Funniest Home Video when, lo and behold, there was a picture of Mark & Jennifer Horne with their little ones on the screen. I think maybe they won some contest or something - they cut to a commercial just as I passed the show. Anyway, I've seen their pictures online before, but I didn't expect I'd see them on my TV screen any time soon:

http://www.hornes.org/mark/

http://www.hornes.org/jennsblog/

It's Still Christmas

It is now January 3, and most people are glad to be able to forget the busyness of Christmas, and to get on with life, whatever "getting on with life" may mean. But contrary to popular conception, we're still in the Christmas season. According to the traditional Western Church calendar, this is the Tenth Day of Christmas (you know, with those Lords a-Leaping). Christmas officially ends with January 6th, which is Epiphany, the celebration of the visitation of the Wise Men to Jesus.

There are, in our time and place, two ways of ordering time. One is the secular calendar. It begins its calendar year on January 1st, and is a blending of sacred and secular holidays, all of which exist to serve the interests of the State. Then there is the traditional Church calendar. It begins with Advent, the season preceding Christmas.

It is commonly thought that Christmas season is the time after Thanksgiving, leading up to Christmas Day, and ending with December 25. Accordingly, it is common for radio and TV stations broadcasting special Christmas programming to cease doing so the day after Christmas. But this approach to the season has been dictated by the marketing gurus of our society. Their interests intersect our own only insofar as they can benefit monetarily off of us.

Sadly, the church calendar has at times been used in a similar way. Rather than educating the laity in Scripture's teaching on Christian devotion, sub-Biblical devotional practices often arose, sometimes merely as a way to keep the people in line. It's much easier to control people when they are ignorant, after all. Some teachings contrary to Scripture, such as the notion of the canonization of certain individuals as saints, supererogatory works and the treasury of merits, linked closely with a faulty notion of salvation, were tied in to the idea of days devoted to certain saints. Observance of certain days were required for salvation, and observance of other days served as an aid for a quicker escape from Purgatory.

Let me state clearly that I oppose all such notions. As a son of the Reformation, the observance of the church calendar is something I consider to be optional. But I also believe throwing the baby out with the bath water is out of order here, too. There are certain benefits to observing a church calendar that I think should be preserved. And it is perfectly possible to observe the calendar on some level without resulting in the false teachings of the medieval church. It is even possible to observe days dedicated to certain godly men and women of church history without holding to the false notions of salvation linked to them. We celebrate birthdays, not only of those who are living, but also of those who are dead (such as Presidents' Day). Why is it not even more appropriate to celebrate the history of those saints who have died before us?

One of the key questions in my mind has to do with what defines us as individuals. Am I, first and foremost, a servant of the State? Or am I, above all else, a child of God, and therefore united to all saints, in both heaven and earth? To the Christian, this should be an easy question. Why, then, do we allow the Civil calendar to be the primary way our consciousness is shaped regarding time? Nations rise and fall, but the kingdom of our God and of his Christ will last forever. And our enjoyment of this kingdom begins now, for realm over which Jesus reigns includes both heaven and earth (Matthew 28:18).

Another key question is this: why do we let those who market their wares to us dictate our lives? Now, it's true that we need things to survive. And there's nothing wrong with desiring something we don't have, so long as it doesn't become an idol and so lead to covetousness. But our approach to the Christmas season has come to be largely determined by material possessions, such that Christ birth becomes an appendage to the season. Buying gifts for others is a good Christmas practice, and a demonstration of Christ's love. But we have become enslaved by greedy corporations, and this is something I think we need to examine more carefully.

And both these masters - the State and Corporate America - cooperate with one another in order to benefit off of us. As sales increase, so do the tax revenues that pour into the pockets of the State. And as the Government is benefited, so it makes decisions that benefit the executives of Corporate America. If recent events in our economic crisis hasn't made that obvious, then we haven't been paying attention.

So one of the best ways we can counter those that would seek to enslave us, I would suggest, is to observe the Church calendar. In so doing, we proclaim that Christ has authority over all things. He owns me, both body and soul, and that includes my time.

Lastly, one other practical outworking of observing the Church calendar, it would seem to me, would be as a means of creating, for lack of a better term, "psychological well-being". I think of this particularly with regard to the sort of "post-Christmas depression" that many struggle with. We are creatures bound by time, and as such are defined in our identity in part by the succession of time and the meaning of those days which we inhabit. When one observes a truncated calendar, such as is done in secular America, it isn't surprising when a person finds himself looking for purpose after investing so much time and emotion in a holiday. But if all of time is sacred, and this fact is manifested in regular church calendar, then one may find comfort in the practical celebration of this reality. And one may practically celebrate this reality, I would suggest, in the observance of the Church calendar.

Obama Plans to Meet With Presidents

According to news reports, Barack Obama, in his plan to visit with congressional leaders in Washington in the next few days, is also planning to meet with George W. Bush and the three living former presidents. Rumor has it that an intern suggested also bringing in the remains of Peyton Randolph for the meeting, but neither the current president, the incumbent, nor the former presidents knew who Peyton Randolph was.

God Rest Ye, Merry Gentlemen - Annie Moses Band

A jazzy rendition of the song. A version appears on their recent Christmas cd, also featuring a dvd, both of which feature a better sound mix. This is a practically the same arrangement, however. The violin - viola trade-off toward the end of the song is amazing.

Lo, How a Rose E'er Blooming

I was checking out different choral performances of Christmas hymns on Youtube when I ran across this. Quite a different take on the hymn, but pretty cool nonetheless.

The Manger and the Cross

How proper it is that Christmas should follow Advent. For him who looks toward the future, the manger is situated on Golgotha, and the cross has already been raised in Bethlehem.

-- Dag Hammarskjold

The whole life of Christ was a continual Passion; others die martyrs but Christ was born a martyr. He found a Golgotha (where he was crucified) even in Bethlehem, where he was born; for to his tenderness then the straws were almost as sharp as the thorns after, and the manger as uneasy at first as his cross at last. His birth and his death were but one continual act, and his Christmas day and his Good Friday are but the evening and morning of one and the same day.

-- John Donne

Eleven

Her growing stomach struck me as grotesque.
Some other seed than mine engendered this:
Some stolen love, some alien, wretched bliss
Raped all integrity, all trust suppressed.
To consummate my pledge, by honor pressed,
Would violate that honor, transform kiss
To custom, love to duty, prove remiss
In truth, and make of joy a jest.
Exhausted by despair's fatigue, I slept
The torment of the God-forsaken dead.
I tossed and turned, or when I woke, I wept,
Until an angel stilled my fears, and said:
"Abandon doubt, and take this quiet boast:
The child she bears is by the Holy Ghost."

-- D. A. Carson, Sonnet Eleven, Holy Sonnets of the Twentieth Century

There are three types of people in the world...

...those who can count, and those who can't.

American Multiculturalism At Its Finest

My Greek Orthodox neighbors have a Moravian star over their front stoop.

Porky Pig sings Blue Christmas

We were listening to Christmas music on the radio today at work and I was reminded of the following. They used to play it on the top 40 radio stations around here when I was a teenager. It had me in stitches every time I heard it back then, so I Googled it and found the following on Youtube. I like the montage this person did, especially the appearance of the blue kazoo at the beginning of the kazoo solo.

WMAG

I was listening to one of our local radio stations, WMAG, during lunch today, because they have been playing all Christmas music. (Those of you familiar with the station, fear not - I don't normally listen to it.) I was surprised to hear the announcer, in between songs, read the passage in Luke 2 that describes the appearance of the angels to the shepherds. It may be Christmas, but I wouldn't have expected a secular station to openly read Scripture on air.

Throughout the year, when this station isn't playing Christmas music, they're playing what they call "pop-rock" - though there's nothing "rock" about it. The contrast in style is itself noticeable. For instance, when I was a teenager and listened to the station (way back in the 80's), it wasn't uncommon to hear Johnny Mathis's song "Chances Are". Now I hear them playing Johnny Mathis's Christmas songs, but they wouldn't play him the rest of the year. Why the change, I wonder? It certainly isn't because there has been lots of better music made since then. Something about Christmas makes the difference in the popular imagination.

I like the fact that I can listen to Christmas music at work and hear styles that are normally ignored by secular radio the rest of the year. Not only does this include jazz styles, but also classical choral and hymn styles. It's because our Christmas practice is rooted in history, and therefore carries with it the musical styles that gave shape to our celebration. And our Christmas practice is rooted in history because Christianity isn't a religion comprised mainly of abstract concepts, but it is an historical religion. History is key to understanding God's working in the world. Of course, I doubt the average nominal Christian or pagan running a radio station could articulate that. Nonetheless, the change in music is a welcome change, and it sure beats the garbage that secular radio plays most of the time.

Perhaps the biggest contrast, however, is in the lyrics. I like Christmas time, in part, because secular stations by default find themselves proclaiming the Gospel. The rest of the year, however, they proclaim a delight in those things that stand opposed to the Law of God, most specifically in their promotion of adultery and sexual immorality. They don't seem to notice the contradiction, no doubt because they are holding to an American religion that contains elements of Christianity, but believes that God doesn't really take His own Law that seriously. Whatever way the Church goes, so goes the broader culture, and that includes the cheesiest of radio stations. So long as the churches in our community preach a watered down "gospel", so long will the Gospel be misinterpreted by those outside the Church.

And so we continue to have reason for concern. Nonetheless, the Gospel is being preached, however imperfectly. So often we complain, and rightly so, about the state of our nation or communities. But at this time of year, I find myself encouraged. We are in a bad way. But we still live in a place and time when the Gospel can be proclaimed publicly. In fact, we still have a national celebration in honor of the Saviour of the world taking on flesh and blood, no matter how many people celebrate for the wrong reason. With Paul, we can rejoice that, no matter the motivation, Christ is still proclaimed (Philippians 1:18).

Isaac Watts

It is the end of the day. But as of right now, it is still November 25, 2008, which means it is still the 260th anniversary of the death of English minister and hymn writer Isaac Watts. Here is one of my favourite hymns by him.

HOW SWEET AND AWEFUL IS THIS PLACE

How sweet and aweful is this place
With Christ within the doors,
While everlasting love displays
The choicest of her stores!

Here every bowel of our God
With soft compassion rolls;
Here peace and pardon bought with blood
Is food for dying souls.

While all our hearts and all our songs
Join to admire the feast,
Each of us cry, with thankful tongues,
“Lord, why was I a guest?

“Why was I made to hear Thy voice,
And enter while there’s room,
When thousands make a wretched choice,
And rather starve than come?”

’Twas the same love that spread the feast
That sweetly drew us in;
Else we had still refused to taste,
And perished in our sin.

Pity the nations, O our God!
Constrain the earth to come;
Send Thy victorious Word abroad,
And bring the strangers home.

We long to see Thy churches full,
That all the chosen race
May with one voice, and heart and soul,
Sing Thy redeeming grace.

http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/h/s/hsweetaw.htm

More Church Crime

I mentioned on here a couple of weeks ago about attending a Lutheran church with my friends, and their van being broken into while at the church that day. Sadly, it appears that the crime at the church hasn't stopped with that. In the two weeks since, an individual has gone into the men's bathroom on a couple of occasions and scribbled profanity all over the walls of the stall, some of which was political in nature. Then, this morning someone snuck into the church and stole some items. That person was followed and subsequently arrested. The person who committed the vandalism is still on the loose.

I can't figure out why this church would be the target of so much crime. It isn't a church that takes a public political stand. In fact, traditional Lutherans are known to make a very strong distinction between church and state. I've attended this particular congregation on and off for many years. In fact, I consider it sort of a second church home. The pastors there have always made very explicit, especially in their sermons, that they believe the church is completely separate from the civil government. I know the head pastor personally, and consider him a good friend. But he is so good at keeping his political views to himself that I couldn't tell you who he voted for. I couldn't tell you what political party he's registered with, or where he stands on any issue. There are members of the congregation from various political parties, and one could find both Obama supporters and McCain supporters there.

So, while I don't know the nature of the political graffiti in the bathroom, the fact that there was any is bizarre to me. And whatever the reason for all of this, this church needs our prayers. In fact, all of Greensboro needs prayer. As I mentioned a couple of weeks ago, these things are just reminders of the sad spiritual condition of our city.

The Reformed Have a Strange Sense of Brevity

In the great tradition of Reformed theology, P & R Publishing has released a new work by J. van Genderen and W. H. Velema called Concise Reformed Dogmatics. How concise is it? Just over 900 pages.

Did I mention it's supposed to be concise?

http://www.wtsbooks.com/product-exec/product_id/6004/nm/Concise_Reformed_Dogmatics_Hardcover_

Andrew Peterson, etc.

I just learned this past weekend that Andrew Peterson will be doing a Christmas concert at Westover Church on December 16. Lord willing, I'll be attending. I've seen him twice before, but it's been a few years, so I'm looking forward to it. That said, thinking of Andrew Peterson reminds me of a story.

A few years back we had a couple of Contemporary Christian radio stations in the area. I was riding in my car one day and listening to one of them when Andrew's song "Nothing To Say" came on. Here are the lyrics:

Hey, Jamie would you mind driving down this road awhile
Arizona's waiting on these eyes
Rich is on the radio, and I think we ought to take it slow
Arizona's caught me by surprise

Hey, Jamie, have you heard, 'A picture paints a thousand words'
But the photographs don't tell it all
I see the eagle swim the canyon sea, creation yawns in front of me
Oh Lord, I never felt so small

And I don't believe that I believed in You as deeply as today
I reckon what I'm saying is there's nothing more, nothing more to say

And the mountains sing Your glory, hallelujah
The canyons echo sweet amazing grace
My spirit sails, the mighty gales are bellowing Your name
And I've gotten nothing to say
No, I've got nothing to say

Hey, Jamie, do you see I'm broken by this majesty
So much glory in so little time
So turn off the radio, let's listen to the songs we know
All praise to Him who reigns on high

And I don't believe that I believed in You as deeply as today
I reckon what I'm saying is there's nothing more, nothing more to say

And the mountains sing Your glory, hallelujah
The canyons echo sweet amazing grace
My spirit sails, the mighty gales are bellowingYour name
And I've gotten nothing to say
No, I've got nothing to say

Glory, glory hallelujah
Glory, glory hallelujah
Glory, glory hallelujah
hallelujah

And the mountains sing Your glory, hallelujah
The canyons echo sweet amazing grace
My spirit sails, the mighty gales are bellowing Your name
And I've gotten nothing to say
No, I've got nothing to say

Hey Jamie would you mind driving down this road awhile
Arizona's caught me by surprise

It's a beautiful song of rejoicing in God's creation. But the lyrics weren't there in the radio version in full. Someone, in process of preparing the track for play on air, had edited out a couple of lines:

So turn off the radio, let's listen to the songs we know
All praise to Him who reigns on high

Having the CD, and having listened to the song many times, I recognized the change immediately. Could it have been a one time thing? No, I heard this station play the song many times after this, and it was the same version each time. The two lines had been cut from the original version of the song.

And why? It was obvious. They didn't want anyone to get the idea to "turn off the radio". Not if it was to glory in God's creation, or for any other reason. CCM radio stations are businesses. And if you aren't listening, they can't sell commercial time slots. Worship, shmorship. Time is money.

Socialism is unbiblical. And yet there are places where certain approaches to Capitalism clash with Christianity, and this is one of those places. If Christ is not the center, then Capitalism just descends into another form of idolatry. And Christian marketing has, in many ways, become a haven of idolatry.

I am reminded of the choice, made about five years ago, on the part of the higher ups of Family Christian Stores, to start opening their stores on Sundays. Now, the days of Sabbath observance are long gone in our country, and so it was only natural that if Christians weren't going to observe the Lord's Day, then the businesses that cater to them would soon follow suit. But what got to me the most was the sale flyer I received from Family Christian around that time. In the place where the hours of the stores were listed, there was a bold announcement: "Now open in between services!"

"Who do they think they are fooling," I thought to myself. But it was soon clear to me. They were fooling darn near everyone. We worship Christian celebrities - they are above blemish in our eyes. Our worship music sounds, not like rock (if it did it would be better), but like the music made for TV commercials. And our church buildings look like office buildings.

We worship the Culture of Commerce. It should be no surprise to us that God has allowed us to get into such an economic mess.

But, in this mess, maybe it is the best time to take Andrew Peterson's advice. Maybe we should turn our eyes back to the wonders of creation and, through it, to the God of Creation. Maybe God has slowed us down in order that we may return to Him, the Author of all blessings. Maybe, just as Israel was sent into captivity due to their violation of the Sabbath, and in order that their hearts may return to Yahweh, He has done the same to us that we may return from our captivity.

We may call it a crisis, and it is, in some sense. But God calls it an opportunity, and so we should treat it as such.

Yahweh is Above the State

In his commentary on the Book of Judges, James Jordan discusses the accusations made by many modern commentators against Jael for her actions in deceiving and killing Sisera. Her behaviour, apparently, offends modern sensibilities, and therefore must have been wrong. Alas, Scripture usually cares little for modern sensibilities, and often seems to go out of its way to offend us.

Jael's actions, in fact, were fully justified. But shouldn't she have submitted to the ruling authorities, no matter who they were or what they had done? Some Christians seem to think this is the way we should relate to the government today. But Scripture nowhere teaches this, and in fact teaches the contrary. Knowing exactly when to resist the governing authorities is a difficult thing. But based on cases such as Jael, Ehud, and Daniel, it is clear that we are not only allowed to disobey the government at times. Scripture requires it.

Jordan, writing his commentary twenty years ago, makes some comments that are as relevant today as then:

“As the war of humanistic Satanism against Christianity grows more and more severe in our day, especially in the attacks on Christian schools, serious Christians need to consider ways to deceive the enemy. Vigilante-style lynchings, assassinations, and murders are not permitted in the Bible; killing, such as Ehud’s and Jael’s, is permissible in time of war, but not in vigilante form. On the other hand, deception and lying are authorized in Scripture any time God’s kingdom is under attack. The Protestant Reformers travelled throughout Europe under false names and with faked papers. They were not the first or the last Christian preachers to deceive tyrants, either. If we have to deceive and lie to bureaucrats in order to keep our churches and schools running, we must do so freely and with relish, enjoying the opportunity to fight for the Lord.”

For those who voted for he-who-shall-not-be-named, and think that this is far-fetched, an honest re-examination of the Socialistic governments throughout the world, both past and present, should clear up any confusion. Or maybe a re-watching of The Sound of Music will suffice. Nonetheless, we have been heading this way for some time - in fact, both major political parties have been - and we are stuck for another four years. Hopefully we will learn our lesson this time, though I have my doubts. Meanwhile, those who recognize the totalitarian agenda of the State will have to consider what to do as the Nanny State claims more of their lives and the lives of their children.

The Dangers of Meteorology

I have posted the following on here a couple of times before, but here it is again, if you haven't read it.

We have come once again to that time of year when all wise weathermen hide in their TV stations and decline to show their faces in public until the first breath of Spring. It is their part in a local annual tradition known as Meteorologist Bashing. Here in Guilford County, North Carolina, it is the primary way in which we release our frustration over not living in a place that has more snow. It works like this. At some point when the weather begins to get colder, local meteorologists uniformly announce the possibility of something resembling what people in more northern parts of the country call "snow". Subsequent to this announcement, when it does not snow, the general populace, both in public and in private, begin pronouncing curses upon the heads of these metorologists, in disappointment over the reality that they are not, in fact, either deities or fortune tellers, and therefore unable to perfectly predict the weather. Ritual stonings to appease the snow gods, no doubt, would be a regular part of this celebration, were the locals able to lay their hands upon the meteorologists. I am pretty certain, however, that the meteorologists actually move to Florida for the winter, from which they broadcast until about March, when they move back to Guilford County until the following November, when the whole cycle begins again. It’s an unusual sort of tradition, but there it is.

Insofar as the meteorologists dared to utter the word “flurries” tonight with regard to tomorrow’s forecast, and in honor of this tradition, I felt this would be a good time to post the following fake newspaper report, which I wrote a couple of years ago.

*********************************************

LOCAL WEATHERMAN MENTIONS “SNOW” IN FORECAST, NEARLY BEATEN TO DEATH WITH FISHING POLE

GREENSBORO, NC (AR NEWSWIRE) Skip Schlopfenheimer, weatherman for local news affiliate WUSS, nearly died after being beaten hundreds of times with a fishing pole, police reported Sunday evening. The suspect, Joe Bob Wilson of Randleman, allegedly attacked Schlopfenheimer in the parking lot of WUSS Sunday afternoon. Wilson, who was caught in the act, has pled “no contest” to the charge.

“I was just crossing the parking lot, when he pulled in front of me in his pickup. He pulled his fishing rod off of the gun rack, jumped out of the truck, and started cursing at me and flogging me,” said Schlopfenheimer.

“Damn weatherman had it coming,” said Wilson. “I speak for all the people ‘round here. We’re sick of these people making promises. Skippy’s a pansy anyhows. He needed a good whipping.”

“I only mentioned “snow” once,” said Schlopfenheimer. “It was a slip. I swear it was.”

Police report that Schlopfenheimer would be dead, if his co-worker Sandy Hoffman hadn’t pulled into the parking lot a few minutes later. “Sandy’s a strong woman. She held Wilson down on the icy asphalt until we could get there.”

“All I heard when I got out of my SUV was, ‘Snow, huh, WUSS boy? Does this feel like snow to you?’”, reported Hoffman. “I knew immediately what was happening. I’ve been expecting something like this to happen for years now. Other weathermen have been smart enough to move away, to Phoenix or Chicago or something. Somewhere where the weather’s more predictable. Not Skip, though.”

Police say they have impounded Wilson’s truck, which had a snow shovel and a brand new sled in the back. The receipt was found in the glove box. “We think we know now why he was so upset,” said police.

“I would have spent that money on ice melt if I knew we were going to get this crap,” said Wilson.

After recovering, Schlopfenheimer is planning on taking a vacation, he says. “I’ll probably go to Hawaii. Volcanos are much safer than a Piedmont native’s temper.”

Ecclesiastical Latin Term of the Week

Baptisticus terror versuum tertiorum

-- the Baptistic fear of third verses

Douglas Wilson and Christopher Hitchens

It began as a debate on the Christianity Today website. The debate has been compiled into a book, which has led to a book tour featuring both men. And lastly, there will be a movie about the book tour released next March. Here is a link to a page on the Christianity Today website featuring the trailer to the movie, along with some other things. Apparently there are more videos over on Youtube with Wilson and Hitchens as well:

http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2008/11/a_collision_of.html

Doug Wilson is a more patient man than me. But it's amazing how kind Hitchens is. As an Englishman, he has a large measure of social grace. However, he still doesn't seem to understand that he is that way because he came from a Christian culture. By being kind, he is borrowing from Christianity. His atheism offers no reason for him to be kind to anyone.

Some Brief Thoughts About Thanksgiving

Thanksgiving Day is a couple of weeks away, so this seems like a good time to write a brief thought about it.

I think the thing that grates on me most about the current treatment of Thanksgiving is the way many have come to calling it "Turkey Day". It's true that the Pilgrims and the American Indians ate turkey. But when the day was first instituted as a yearly national holiday by Abraham Lincoln, the point was to take a day of expressing gratitude toward God for His goodness towards us as a nation. (For those of you who know your political history, let me say that I recognize that this last statement raises all sorts of questions, particularly regarding Lincoln himself, the idea of nationhood, and the idea of nationally sanctioned holidays. Suffice it to say I feel your pain, but I won't take the time to address those things now.) Despite what we may think of the current status of our nation, God has been good to us, and He deserves nothing less than our sincere gratitude. While turkey is an important part of the day, the point of the day is to feast and celebrate before God with thanksgiving. To call the day “Turkey Day” strikes me as a bit dismissive toward God, whether or not intentionally so, and the person who is uncomfortable with calling it “Thanksgiving Day”, I would suspect, has some deeper issues causing this behavior that it would be wise for them to consider. Nobility is one issue, and those who would conduct their lives in a noble way won’t make a habit of reducing everything to a common and ignoble level, whether in speech or conduct. The other issue, it seems, would simply be one of ingratitude toward God.

Secondly, it is in vogue these days to place the blame of the ills of the whole world upon the shoulders white Europeans, particularly males, and this by extension includes the United States. One way this has manifested itself has been in the demonization of those who came to “the New World”, as they called it. Much untruth has been spread in this way, and those who have bought into whatever their Leftist university professors have taught them without question need to understand that those professors often are far more concerned with towing the party line and appearing cool to their students than they are with conveying the truth about a particular matter. No one is sinless, and that includes those who came to the New World from Europe. But many interpretations of the history conveyed these days are simply false. And while the American Indians have been sinned against on many occasions (such as in the Trail of Tears), this shouldn’t lead us to villianize the Pilgrims. So far as my reference to the American Indians as such, rather than as Native Americans, goes, I’m allowed. I’m part Cherokee. Plus, scholars all agree that there was a time when the American Indians weren’t here, and so the first generation wasn‘t native. Those who have been born here since are native, but so are those of European or other descent who have been born here. So the name “Native American” strikes me as a bit of a misnomer. This, I know, isn’t politically correct, but that isn’t my concern.

The Pilgrims were a godly people, seeking to find refuge from the religious persecution of the English monarchy. While we might not agree with all they believed, or even all they did, we have much to learn from them, and we owe them immense gratitude for fighting against tyranny, and for opening up the way to freedom of worship for us, their children.

Lastly, a quite appropriate thing to do on Thanksgiving Day, I think, is to join with one’s local church in worship before God. This should include, in particular, partaking of the Holy Eucharist, or what we call the Lord’s Supper. The word “eucharist”, in fact, means “thanksgiving”. And so even as we feast with family and friends that day, it makes sense to me that we should also feast with God in partaking of His Sacrament. Few churches have worship that day, unfortunately, but there will be a couple in our area, so I hope to attend one. Seek one out, if you can. It is a good way to set apart the day to God’s glory.

We Once Were Free; God Has Judged Us; We Have Returned to Egypt

"O LORD, I have heard thy speech, and was afraid: O LORD, revive thy work in the midst of the years, in the midst of the years make known; in wrath, remember mercy."

--Habakkuk 3:2

Election Rhyming

A few interesting election rhymes over at Doug Wilson's blog:

http://www.dougwils.com/index.asp?Action=Anchor&CategoryID=1&BlogID=6016

The Necessity of the Church

I won't be baptized, and I will be a Christian. I'll be a Christian in my own way.

-- Clarence Day, Life With Father

Last Saturday, a very friendly couple in our neighborhood had a Halloween party, which I dutifully attended. I hadn't met the couple, and I don't know my neighbors very well, so it was an opportunity to become acquainted with some and reacquainted with others. They did a fantastic job, decorating their house and yard about as creatively and scarily as they could. Their generosity was something to be imitated, as they provided hamburgers and hot dogs from the grill, numerous sides, desserts, and drinks, without asking a penny of compensation for it all.

One couple from the neighborhood who was there I find particularly interesting, in that they attend a local Greek Orthodox church. While recent years have shown an increase of Orthodox believers in the area, with a couple of new parishes from different dioceses starting up, Eastern Orthodoxy is still a strange bird in North Carolina.

I'm a convinced Protestant, and so there are definite areas in which I disagree with the Orthodox. Nonetheless, I find they often have insights, normally due to their strong understanding of tradition, that Protestants would do well to hear and, in some cases, recover from their Catholic roots. So I'm interested in what Orthodox people have to say, especially about the church.

In talking with the wife of this couple, we discussed what her kids were up to, and whether they had followed in her Orthodox footsteps. One of her sons, she told me, claims that he is Eastern Orthodox, though he never attends the worship services of the church. He says that he and his family pray at home, and that, he thinks, is good enough. But she responded as good Orthodox would, telling him, "If you don't go to church, you're not Orthodox." Her son, it seems, wasn't especially appreciative of her response, but I was. The statement reflected what it seems to me to be the Biblical view of what a Christian is.

I think one of the most devastating notions that pervades the American church today is the idea that one can be a Christian without ever attending church. It has often been called "Lone Ranger Christianity" (though some have wisely commented that even the Lone Ranger had Tonto). There have been those since the inception of the church that believe that the organized church is an unnecessary institution. But nothing could be farther from the truth. From its beginning in the Book of Acts, the church has been an organized group, with defined leadership, and regular corporate worship.

But then the question is raised as to whether one outside the church can be saved. The most famous statement in church history about this came from Cyprian of Carthage, who said, "Nullus salus extra ecclasiam", or, "There is no salvation outside of the church." This has been debated inside and out since, and various responses have been given to the question. One can even detect some differences within Reformed circles, between the Belgic Confession and the Westminster Confession of Faith.

As a Calvinist, I assert that God's hands are never tied in this matter. If He wants to save someone outside of the church, He can. But to think that one can live in defiance of God's requirement to join with the visible body of Christ and still be a Christian is a foolish presumption. The matter is simple: Christians go to church. Those who don't have reason to doubt their salvation.

And...

...a Happy Reformation Day to all! Be sure and thank God for Martin Luther in your prayers today.

Medieval Christmas

I've loved Kemper Crabb's music since a friend introduced me to his "Vigil" album a couple of years ago. Apparently, PBS station KQED is releasing and airing a video featuring Kemper and friends performing Medieval Christmas music. Here's an excerpt. Also see http://www.kempercrabb.net/ for more of Kemper's music.

The Thief on the Cross WAS Baptized

Everyone assumes that the thief on the cross who repented wasn't baptized (Luke 23:39-43). But who's to say he wasn't? John's baptism came a few years prior to this (as recent as three years prior, as Scripture tells us). And Scripture also tells us that "Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region about the Jordan were going out to him" (that is, John), and that “they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins“ (Matthew 3:5-6). Now we may reasonably assert that “all” doesn’t mean “all” in a fully inclusive sense here (unless one disagrees with limited atonement and therefore realizes the consequence of agreeing with this assertion). But Matthew is using hyperbole here, in order to indicate that the vast majority of people from these places went out to be baptized by John. So how do we know that the thief on the cross wasn't also baptized by John? And if we insist on taking “all” in a wooden, literalistic sense here, thus ignoring the standard conventions of normal language, then the thief on the cross must have been baptized.

Some scholars, however, propose that John's baptism wasn't the same as Christian baptism, which Jesus instituted at His ascension. While this may be true, I don't think one can reasonably argue that there wasn't a continuity between the two. Even then, one may reasonably assume that the thief was a Jew, and therefore would have been circumcised. As Colossians 2 tells us, baptism is the New Covenant sign of initiation into God‘s people, replacing circumcision, which was the Old Covenant sign (Col. 2:11-15). If he wasn’t a Jew, then how did he know who the Messiah was to be, or that Jesus was going to come into His Kingdom (Lk. 23:39-42)? Such, it seems, would have required more than a passing knowledge with the Jewish Scriptures, and therefore he must have had a Jewish upbringing. Therefore, whether he had the New Covenant sign, or just the Old Covenant sign, it appears the thief on the cross had the sign of the covenant.

It seems to me, then, that we paedobaptists have simply copped to the argument of the Believers baptists. They say that baptism isn’t necessary for salvation, noting that the thief on the cross wasn’t yet “born again”. But for us to use the same argument is simply to consent to the idea that one must be regenerated before he is baptized. I see no place where Scripture requires this, and it seems the thief on the cross is actually irrelevant to the discussion after all.

Concerning Halloween

This Friday I am planning, Lord willing, to celebrate Reformation Day with some Presbyterian friends. But, in contrast with many Evangelical Christians, I won't be doing so as some sort of protest against Halloween. All Hallows' Eve is a Christian holiday, and though some observe it in an anti-Christian way, the holiday itself is not by any means inherently bad. For a more in depth consideration of the holiday, see this article by James Jordan:

http://www.biblicalhorizons.com/open-book/no-28-concerning-halloween/

"We are obviously separated by denominational differences."

"It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown" is on TV right now, and I just found out, a little bit late. I have it on DVD, so it's no big loss. I still enjoy it, even as an adult. But beyond being fun, I find it to be an interesting commentary on the nature of belief and unbelief. Next time you watch it, think about this, and listen out for the line above, stated by Charlie Brown, in reaction to Linus's belief in the Great Pumpkin. What Charles Schulz, himself a liberal Presbyterian, was getting at in this story, I don't entirely know. But it's apparent that he intended it as some sort of religious commentary.

The Beauty of Worship

Churches are best for Prayer, that have least light:
To see God only, I go out of sight:
And to 'scape stormy days, I choose
An Everlasting night.

--John Donne, A Hymn to Christ, At the Author's Last Going to Germany


I was off work today, so I spent the afternoon running errands. Amidst necessary stops, I took the time to drop by a couple of Christian stores (formerly known as Christian book stores) and check out their wares. Christmas merchandise was already in abundance, of course, for those who might be ready to skip past any Holy Days between now and that most covetous of days, December 25th.

Christmas and all its trappings are an interesting mixture of good and bad. There's the cheesy and sentimental, and then there are those things that reflect the greatest elements of Christian art through the centuries. And yet the things I saw for sale simply reflects Christianity in our time. The Christian church today is a mixture of good and bad in all areas, just as it is of beautiful art and ugly art. At Christmas, however, good art tends to step out of the shadows a bit more than it does the rest of the year, and this always strikes me as a bit strange. Why do we turn to traditional music more at this time of year, and ignore it the rest of the year? Why do we mail out Christmas cards featuring traditional, Renaissance-type paintings of the Nativity, but live in the realm of cheesy contemporary Christian art the rest of the year?

I think there are various things that have led to our practices. Dickens's A Christmas Carol has so captured the American mind that we immediately identify things Victorian with Christmas. Also, there's still some consciousness, thankfully, that Christmas is a special time of year, being the celebration of our Lord's birth. If only we celebrated His resurrection with such fanfare!

And while the Christmas hymns we are familiar with are generally good hymns, the other hymns most of us grew up with in the church were derived from the Revivalism of the 19th century, and were therefore pretty hokey. No wonder Contemporary Christian music has become the norm, as hymns are on the out. Sadly, the best hymns, which come from the Lutheran, Reformed, and Anglican traditions, are fairly unknown.

We also live with the results of the iconoclasm and anti-aestheticism that emerged from some parts of the Reformation. And then there's the Rationalism of Modernism, that sees Propositionalism as the only reasonable way of attaining truth, therefore looking down on artistic forms of expression.

There's also the fact that Christmas really is a High Holyday, and actually should be celebrated in a grander fashion than the Lower Holydays. But while this is true, I'm amazed at how little visual art there actually is in Evangelical churches throughout the year. I think, for instance, of the megachurch where I attend Bible study once a week with some friends. The building is large, and looks like a business building. (A Chinese exchange student I met there, who was visiting the church for the first time, even commented on this to me. "This doesn't look like a church to me," he said. To think someone from Communist China knows this, and we don't!) As one walks down the hallways, one is struck by just how bare the walls are. Now if this were based on some sort of Puritan commitment to the Second Commandment, then I would understand it. But based on my experience with Evangelicals, I have my doubts that this has anything to do with it. There are sometimes feelings of anti-Catholicism, no doubt, based on some individuals' Catholic upbringing, along with a general anti-traditionalism. But I generally find that Evangelicals have never even considered such things. The determining factors, it seems to me, are Christian Commercialism and Pragmatism. And if Christmas is any indication, then this in fact is the case. For as soon as the season arrives, wreaths and Christmas trees are in abundance in the church building.

While I still struggle myself with certain implications of the Second Commandment, I still believe there is a great need for a return to beauty in the Church. While this should take place in part in the Christian home, it should also return in a significant way to our church buildings. Catholic and Orthodox churches still lead the way in maintaining the great artistic heritage of the Church, but, sadly, there have even been failures in these two bodies (in Catholicism more than Orthodoxy). We need to reacquaint ourselves with the history of art in the church, and, drawing off of that history, to reintroduce beauty to our worship, as well as the rest of our lives. I long for a recovery of the church building as a place of reverent worship, full of beauty, not only on Sunday mornings, but throughout the week.

I used to go occasionally to a local Catholic church after work to pray, until one evening when I found the doors locked. I later found out that, due to the increase in crime in our city, the church had had to begin locking the doors at six o'clock. I had gone to the Catholic church because its doors were open at unusual hours, unlike the rest of the churches in the city. But its beauty was still a factor. If a Baptist church had had its doors unlocked as well, I doubt I would have gone to pray in it.

Our God is the Author of All Beauty, and is Himself a Beautiful God. Therefore He should be worshiped in a beautiful way. But since these things are true, then man has an inborn desire, though marred by sin, for beauty. More than something superficial and secondary, beauty is something man needs. When we force believers to worship in an ugly way, we deprive them of an important part of their sanctification. For the sake of the whole church, then, a return to beauty is a must. But so long as we take Christian Commercialism as our cue, we will end up with mixed results at best.

Facebook

I had tried Facebook once before, and didn't care for it. But as it seems most of my friends are on there, I caved in and joined again. If you, the reader, are on there as well, shoot me an add request.

What Would Jigsaw Do?

I'm a fairly squeamish person, and so horror movies don't generally figure into my regular media consumption. I have seen the trailer for the latest SAW movie, however, and was a bit surprised at the rather daring nature of it. The trailer doesn't show much, of course, as there is little in the film that could legally be shown on broadcast TV. The part that caught my attention was that the letters "WWJD" appear at the end of the trailer, and the viewer is made to know that this stands for "What Would Jigsaw Do?"

Of course, the "What Would Jesus Do?" marketing phenomenon happened about ten years ago, and as far as I know, is fairly dead in Contemporary Christian circles. And we're the better off now that it's dead. Others before me have rightly pointed out that the movement was a mere calling people to the Law at best, and to self-salvation at its worst. But the fact that we are so far past that part of Evangelical history, and that the makers of the latest SAW movie are using it for their advertising, suggests that the SAW creators don't have a clue of what's going on in Evangelical circles. On one hand, this could mean that the SAW creators are living somewhere that Christians are fairly rare. This, of course, would mean Hollywood. On the other hand, this also suggests that Evangelicals haven't done anything really significant in about ten years to cause people such as the SAW creators think that they've moved beyond this fad.

So this is another case where the Church is to blame. The SAW creators are smart. They know that if they piss off Evangelicals, then we'll raise a fuss that will find its way into the mainstream media. That will bring free advertising, and they'll sell more movie tickets as a result. I'm not particularly interested in giving them that kind of attention. But I'm sure I don't have to. Some Evangelicals somewhere who think they can save the world through brewing controversy over this will do it themselves. Meanwhile, the Evangelical Church is still shown to have little impact on the world around it. In this case, I don't think we're being made fun of because we are making an impact, though that may be true in some small way. It seems to me we're being made fun of moreso because we're silly and immature, and therefore we invite the mockery.

But I'm not angry that they're making fun of Evangelicals in doing this. Heck, I make fun of Evangelicals myself, and that on a regular basis. (The point may be made, however, that it's a little different for me to do it. It's the difference between making fun of one's own brother, and somebody outside of the family making fun of him. The former can; the latter better be careful.) I am angry, however, at the replacement of the name of Jesus with "Jigsaw". That is blasphemy, though it might not have been intended as such. Whoever came up with the idea of using the “WWJD” logo for the movie is blind, foolish, and dead in their sins. So one can hardly take them seriously. It may be best that, as Elijah did at Mount Carmel and the Psalmist spoke of God doing in Psalm 2, we simply laugh at the stupidity of the SAW creators and mock them in return. They think they know what true terror is. But the truth is that they don’t even have a clue. And unless they repent, they will one day find themselves victims in the most terrifying horror movie of all.

Ecclesia Reformata, Semper Reformanda

It means "the Church Reformed, and always reforming". It is a regular statement by those of us who consider ourselves to follow in the footsteps of the 16th and 17th century Reformers. Within the Reformed church, however, there's a fair bit of difference on what the "always reforming" part means. For some, I'm sure it simply has reference to moral reformation. For them, the idea of any sort of theological change is mostly if not entirely out of the question. As one Congregational Puritan friend said to me recently, "It's not as if we can have a new Reformation every generation!" And to some degree, that's a true statement. It would be incredibly strange to have a theological and cultural change of such a grand scale every forty years or so. Nonetheless, there have been constant shifts ever since the Reformation in the Western Church, and to pretend that the Western Church hasn't changed since then is simply historical ignorance.

And then there's the whole question of who's truly Reformed. This can be witnessed taking place not only in Christendom more broadly, but in any social order. A general consensus is formed on a set of beliefs, but before long differences arise, forming two or more new factions. A split takes place, and whoever is the largest group left gets to keep the name, irrespective of whether or not they are the ones who truly embodied the principles originally set forth.

It seems clear to me that the question of who's truly Reformed has never ceased being asked since the 16th century. Whether it's debates over the Lord's Supper (as took place between the early Reformers), debates over Ecclesiology (as took place at the Westminster Assembly), debates over the Atonement (as took place in Scotland and Wales in the 19th century), or debates over paedocommunion (as have taken place in our day), disagreement over what it is to be truly Reformed seems to be inevitable. And to hearken back to a glorious pristine time early in the Reformation is to engage in mythmaking.

Having said all of that, I recognize that there has historically been a general understanding of what it means to be Reformed. The standard has been the Confessions and Catechisms first and foremost, as expressions of what the Reformed churches believed Holy Scripture to teach. If one can for the moment put to the side the constant disagreements between the Reformed on various matters, not to mention the differences between the Continental Reformed standards and the Westminster Standards, and the changes made to the Westminster Standards by the American church - one can still find a general consensus that can be called "Reformed".

It's something of a constant struggle for me. I've been a member of the Anglican Church for two years. For some, that would be enough to consider me Reformed. But then, the theological positions of most of the clergy in my denomination is Anglo-Catholic. And even though I'm not Anglo-Catholic, and even though Anglo-Catholic teachings and practices are rarely visible in my parish, many would at that point count me as non-Reformed. I personally (at this point, at least) believe Presbyterian ecclesiology to be the most faithful to Scripture, eventhough I'm technically an Anglican. And then there are my other “non-Reformed” views, such as my belief in paedocommunion, and my sympathies with the Federal Vision and New Perspective theologies. There’s the whole question of liturgy. And that’s only part of it. My church friends and acquaintances have no idea all the weird stuff I think about, as I question whether or not we’re missing the boat on some issue or another.

In one sense, I wish I could be plain-vanilla Reformed. John Owen’s theology, passed down from the mount to him by the hand of the Apostle Paul himself. It would be so much easier. I could join a Presbyterian church, and question nothing again for the rest of my life. (Of course, Owen wasn’t a Presbyterian. He was a Congregationalist. But don’t tell the Presbyterians that.) But that would be the lazy way out. God hasn’t allowed me to go that route, and He hasn’t told me why He’s chosen the route for me that He has.

I have a great love of the stories of the struggles of the Scottish Covenanters. One of my favourite books is Jock Purves’s studies of some of the Covenanting martyrs, called Fair Sunshine. When I first read the book, I was more Reformed, and I sided with the Covenanters against the oppressive and murderous Anglican clergy. And now that I’m an Anglican, I still side with the Covenanters. I side with the Covenanters, because I believe they had a right to worship in the way they believed Scripture taught them to. They were the faithful believing party in the conflict, I believe, and not the Anglicans. And yet, in spite of my siding with them, I believe their approach to worship was incorrect. It’s a messy thing. But looking back to the 17th century, I consider myself a Covenanter.

And yet the same is true when looking to the church prior to the Reformation. The early and Medieval church was as full of faulty theology and practice as it was of faithfulness . And this is true of those we would consider heroes of the church. I would have sided with Augustine in his various battles. I would have been a Catholic, in line with the Bishops with their allegiance to the Pope. But I couldn’t side today with certain elements of Augustine’s ecclesiology.

It’s a crisis of identity. When I first became Reformed, I knew what I was. I had a specific theology, specific aesthetics, specific fathers. Now, I’m watching the church and hoping for the best, as I float between various traditions, unwilling to pretend any one group has everything right. I have a theology, which I believe to be in accord with Scripture and the consensus of the Church, even when others disagree with me. I have certain things from various traditions that draw me aesthetically, though the various traditions often aren’t as appreciative of one another as I am with all of them. And I have many fathers, though were they all to live here today, they would have a hard time sitting down to have a beer together without turning their friendly encounter into a brawl. It isn’t a comfortable position to be in. But idolatry of one’s father is still idolatry, and as the first commandment forbids the worship of any other god than Yahweh, discomfort must be my lot for now. The church is ever reforming, according to God’s Providential hand, and so must I.

V. P. Debate

The Vice-Presidential debate is about halfway through as I write this. I was a big Ron Paul supporter, as the regular readers know, and still would be, were he still running for President. As the months wore on, however, I found myself swayed toward voting for John McCain, not so much because I would be voting for him, as much as I would be voting against Barack Obama. When Sarah Palin was chosen as McCain's VP, that raised other questions, particularly in regard to the question of women in office. Doug Wilson has made several comments about this on his weblog, though I haven't had a chance to read much of what he's said. I'm not as of yet convinced that I should vote for a woman for office. And so I still haven't made up my mind whether or not to vote for McCain. But if I decide I can vote for him with a good conscience, it will be more of a vote for Palin, because of her strong anti-abortion stance. I've been pleased in some of what she's said tonight, particularly those comments that call for less governmental interference in individuals' lives. Nonetheless, she is still a pro-war candidate, supporting a foreign policy that has the U. S. meddling where it has no business to do so. And in one breath she will call for a cut in taxes, while in the next breath she will call for ramping up government education and paying school teachers more. You can't have it both ways, Governor Palin.

But watching the debate right now is a bit of a painful experience. To some degree, it seems to be little more than a big brown nosing session for the prospective VP's respective Presidential candidates. "My candidate rocks, and he rocks more than your candidate!" Also, the debate is so stiff. What happened to the good ole days, when the candidates actually debated (which would actually require them addressing one another directly)? This debate is so formal I feel like I'm watching an extended version of one of their cheesy campaign commercials.

I love, too, how Palin gives these little linguistic tip-offs that she's heavily imbibed on the American Evangelical subculture. My favourite phrase that she's used over and over again is "near and dear to my heart". The only reason I'm still watching the debate is to see if they end it by standing and singing "Shine Jesus Shine".

Holy Humor, Batman!

One of my favourite shows as a child was the 1960's live action Batman TV show. It was campy, and full of adult humor that I didn't get at the time, but I still loved it. Sadly, it hasn't been released on DVD, and from what I've read on the web, it doesn't appear it will be in the near future.

But in doing a little web searching, I ran across this page on a web forum where someone had posted a number of hilarious quotes from the show. (I haven't checked the website out thoroughly on which these are located, so beware. From what I've seen, however, the site looks to be safe. Also, those of you with more delicate sensibilities should beware of the numerous double entendres for which the show was so famous.) Here are a few of my favourites:


Robin: If we close our eyes, we can't see anything.
Batman: A sound observation, Robin.

Batman: Nobody wants war.
Robin: Gee, Batman. Belgravia's such a small country. We'd beat them in a few hours.
Batman: Yes, and then we'd have to support them for years.

Robin: You can't get away from Batman that easy!
Batman: Easily.
Robin: Easily.
Batman: Good grammar is essential, Robin.
Robin: Thank you.
Batman: You're welcome.

Batman: You're a rare lady, Catwoman, you're right on time.

Robin: How about rushing the place, Batman?
Batman: Shh. I think not, Robin. All they've done so far is stolen a few items, attempted to kill you, me, and Batgirl. No, I think they plan something really big.

Robin: [After the Black Widow has hypnotized Batman] Batman, I need you to sing a song! That way I can free you from the Black Widow's evil thrall!
Batman: Very well, Robin. I think a little Gilbert & Sullivan... [Picks up flower] I'm called Little... Buttercup... Poor Little... Buttercup... Though I could... never tell... why...

Batman: It is the duty of every good citizen of Gotham City to report meeting a man from Mars in a public park.

Gordon: Batman, you unscrambled that safe's combination in five seconds flat! How did you do it?
Batman: With my Bat-Five-Seconds-Flat-Combination-Unscrambler, Commissioner.

Batman: Just a second while I retrieve my beanie, my hair, my tweezers, and my notes.

Shame: Your mother wore Army shoes.
Batman: Yes, she did. As I recall, she found them quite comfortable.

Robin: Aren't you even going to try and get loose?
Batman: What's the cube root of pi, Robin?

Batman to Joker: Shall we go into the men's locker room and put on our baggies?

Batman (presenting his case in court): We are gathered here today to prove that Catwoman, Joker, and their men are guilty of several major offenses. To wit: robbery, attempted murder, assault.....and battery! Mayhem, and overtime parking.

Batman: Come on, Robin. Let's help a little old lady across the street, and into the penitentiary.

Barbara: I'm afraid I'm still naive enough to believe the impossible can't be done.

Riddler's henchman: Want a piece of cheese?
King Boris: Not without a good vintage port, you lackey.

Commissioner Gordon: You know I'm violently opposed to police brutality.

Batman: Planting a timebomb in a local library is a felony.

Paul Newman

A gentleman at my church attended Kenyon College at the same time that Paul Newman did. And while he wasn't good friends with Newman, he did know him as an acquaintance, as they traveled in somewhat the same circles. Newman, he told me once, hated small talk. In fact, he used to carry a telephone receiver around on his belt. Whenever he was around people who began to engage in small talk, Newman would take the telephone receiver from his belt and pretend he was talking to someone on it. As this was a long time before cell phones were invented, I'm sure it was a hilarious sight, if not an irritating and obvious insult to whoever Newman was reacting to when he did this. As one who hates small talk myself, I have a great appreciation for such a response to mindless babble.

Paul Newman died yesterday after a bout with lung cancer. He was 83.

Liberty

One magazine that I buy on a regular basis is Liberty. Liberty is, in its own words, "a libertarian and classical liberal review of thought, culture, and politics, published... by the Liberty Foundation." Like any other magazine, I don't agree with everything written in it. Nonetheless, it is unique in its perspective, its closest cousin (so far as I know) being Pat Buchanan's The American Conservative, not withstanding the degrees of separation between the two. The latest issue (October) has an article which serves as a good, short introduction to the Calvinistic roots of modern libertarian thought, for any who aren't familiar with libertarian history. Even if such an article would be old news for you, the magazine is worth checking out. Both our local Barnes & Noble and Border's carries the magazine, and I presume this would be true for most locations of these stores. For their website, click here.

Hari Puttar

From BBC News:

A court in India has postponed the release of a film entitled Hari Puttar, after complaints from the makers of the blockbuster Harry Potter films.

Hollywood company Warner Bros has filed a lawsuit against all parties involved in the production and distribution of the Hari Puttar film.

It has been quoted as saying the the title of the Indian movie is confusing.

That last line in the quote is what got me, and it's too funny on its own to merit further comment. For the whole story, go here.

At a Temple Somewhere in Minnesota...

As I type this, Sarah Palin is making her speech at the Republican National Convention. It is playing on the TV nearby, but I'm only halfway paying attention. And I only caught snippets of the Democratic National Convention last week. I thought about watching it, but I thought to myself, "Why watch it? I can lie to myself."

At both conventions, the attendees responded regularly with thunderous applause, especially to the keynote speakers. Seeing this has made me think it's worth repeating something I've said on this blog several times before: Politics won't save you. Politicians won't save you. The civil government, no matter who is running it, won't save you. Only Jesus saves. To look to anything but Him is to engage in idolatry. And based on what I've witnessed in both conventions, it is apparent that many people in the two parties fail to understand this.