Festivus and Two Kingdom Confusion (Re-Post)

I must admit to a certain amount of glee when I read that Washington State officials have added a "Festivus Pole" to the "Holiday Season" display in the state capitol (Click here: Coming to Capitol: 'Festivus' display | KOMO News - Seattle, Washington | Local & Regional).

The brouhaha began when a group of atheists demanded to be allowed to post a "Winter Solstice" rant against all forms of religion right next to the capitol's nativity scene.  Of course, Christians turned on Washington's governor for allowing the atheists to display their sign in the capitol during the Christmas season.

The State of Washington reasons that if you have one religious "holiday" display in the capitol building, then you can't turn away anyone else, including the pranksters who want a "Festivus Pole."  BTW--if you don't know what Festivus is, you are missing out on one of the great parodies of all time.

Of course, the more important question is what is a "holiday display" of any sort (including a nativity scene) doing in a state capitol in the first place?  And why all the Christian outrage at Washington's Governor for allowing other religions to be equally confused about the two kingdoms? 

If this were a case of local governments forbidding Christians from putting up nativity scenes on private or church property, well then, there is a real legal issue at stake.  But why is any religious display allowed in the state capitol?  The State of Washington's position on this is essentially, "if Christians are confused about the two kingdoms, when why shouldn't atheists (and others) be allowed such confusion as well?"

Meanwhile, I can't wait for December 23 when I can air all my grievances and undertake the feats of strength.

Update on Wednesday, December 22, 2010 at 08:34PM by Kim Riddlebarger

This years "feats of strength" will include picking up several trash cans filled with wet leaves (after the eight inches of rain we have received this week), and the "airing of grievances" will center around the Yankees poor showing during the winter baseball meetings.

As for my "festivus miracle" . . . I'll just have to wait and see.

Two Kingdoms Discussion

There have been a number of useful discussions of the two kingdoms doctrine of late and I thought it might be helpful to post links to them (in case you hadn't seen them).

First up is Kevin DeYoung's discussion of the pros and cons of the two kingdoms approach to Christianity and culture, as well as that of neo-Kuyperianism.

Click here: DeYoung, Restless, and Reformed: Two Kingdom Theology and Neo-Kuyperians

The White Horse Inn blog offers responses from Jason Stellman and Darryl Hart here (Click here: Why Two Kingdoms? » White Horse Inn Blog), and here (Click here: More on Two Kingdoms » White Horse Inn Blog).

Darryl Hart weighs in on the specious argument that the civil kingdom is neutral ground because it is common ground. Click here: Old Life Theological Society » Blog Archive » Neutrality, Schnootrality

A Call for a New Pentecost (from Christmas of 1964)

Here's a link to a fascinating article from December 25, 1964 (h. t. Greg Molin).

In calling for a "new" Pentecost, we find this gem. "New Pentecost.  The spirit of Christian renewal in 1964 is searching, questioning, critical—willing to challenge every doctrine and institution of the church.  If worship may perhaps be better expressed by folk singing, modern dance or drama, the churches are ready to try.  Yet a considerable body of Protestant and Catholic radicals, ranging from bishops to informed laymen and seminarians, believe that the present vitality of Christianity is simply a kind of spiritual Indian summer. Convinced that most of the structures of the church have outlived their usefulness, many of these all-out reformers want a new Pentecost—"a return to the womb and a new birth for the Christian community."

Well, every doctrine has been challenged, churches have tried folk (and rock--not the radar in 1964), liturgical dance, film, drama and just every thing else.  And still, there's been no new Pentecost.  But then that's what happens when you stop trusting in what happened on the first Pentecost. 

To read it, Click here: The Servant Church -- Printout -- TIME

The Huguenot Were the First to Celebrate Thanksgiving in the New World?

Given the fact that at least 100,000 Huguenot (French Calvinists) were killed in Paris alone during the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre in 1572, and given the fact Queen Elizabeth encouraged Huguenot immigration to the New World (even financing much of it), it would seem that those who escaped France before the Medici terror would have much for which to be thankful.

A good case can be made that French Calvinists, and not the Pilgrims, actually celebrated the first "thanksgiving" in North America. Only the year was 1564, and the location was near Jacksonville, FL.  Click here: Op-Ed Contributor - A French Connection - NYTimes.com

But this group of Huguenots' time in the New World was short.  They were wiped out by the Spanish ("who were looking for Lutherans to burn and hang") the next year.

New White Horse Inn Related Resources

Our friend John Hendrix over at Monergism.com has posted an informative review of Mike Horton's new book, Christless Christianity.  Check out the review and then be sure to get a copy of Christless Christianity, if you haven't already done so.  Click here: Book Review: Christless Christianity: The Alternative Gospel of the American Church

Also, Shane Rosenthal, White Horse Inn producer, has posted a great new video "The State of the Church" on the White Horse Inn web site.  Be sure to check this out! http://whitehorseinn.org/video/whistateofchurch.mov

Well done, Shane!

Update on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 11:42AM by Kim Riddlebarger

For those who wish to watch the video "The State of the Church" without having to download it first, click here and scroll down to watch the flash version.  http://whitehorseinn.org/

Eric Clapton's Autobiography

Eric Clapton's long-awaited autobiography, Clapton, will be interesting reading for those who grew up on Hendrix, Cream and Led Zeppelin.  To this day, I can't listen to a Cream song without thinking of old friends, good times and my 1965 El Camino complete with an eight-track tape player in the glove-box.  I spent many an hour with my Luxman amp and massive JBL speakers cranked up loud in my bedroom listening to Cream while I did homework.  My poor mother . . .

Clapton's life story is pretty much what you'd expect--drugs, girls and music.  The book is basically the story of Clapton's struggle with various addictions (primarily heroin, alcohol, and Pattie Boyd Harrison) and his never-ending quest to create the ultimate blues album.  Clapton is pretty straight-forward throughout.  No boasting about his conquests.  No repentance either.  He is remarkably humble about his talent and accomplishments and has played with about every rock and blues musician you can name.

While my interest in Clapton stems from his Cream days, Clapton looks upon that phase of his music as frustrating, drug-fueled and ego-driven.  The famous Cream jams (from their various "live" albums) were indeed chemically sustained.  This is an era which Clapton does not recall with fondness.  I guess it was better to listen to Clapton, than it was to be Clapton.

The turning point in Clapton's life came when he finally achieved sobriety about twenty-years ago.  Ironically, Clapton claims to have found no real happiness in life until some years later when he met and married his current wife who gave him three daughters.  Here's a guy who had everything the world tells us we need to have (more money than you can count, fame which secures whatever you want), and yet, who is not at all happy until he stops drinking, finds the love of his life and then settles down to raise his family.  Funny how that works.

There's no conversion story or happy ending.  Clapton was married and had his children baptized in the Church of England.  His "god" is the unknown higher-power of the twelve-step program.  But in light of the questions he raises, you certainly get the sense that if someone in his circle could only explain law-gospel to him, as well as explain to him that the power of music comes from the fact that we are divine-image bearers who will sing God's praises for all eternity, he just might listen.  Maybe the grace of God will reach him yet.

There are some minor surprises.  Clapton doesn't say as much about the tragic death of his son, Conor, as you might expect.  This tragedy occurred when Clapton was just finding himself after giving up alcohol.  He describes being completely numb to pretty much everything after so many years of heavy drinking.

Clapton also speaks about hanging out with his good friend Jimi Hendrix back in the day.  The two of them would go from club to club throughout London and then jam with whatever band happened to be playing.  Imagine a local garage band plugging away, only to be joined on stage by Clapton and Hendrix!  Now that would have been a blast for the band as well as for those lucky enough to have been in the audience.

All in all, a good read.  But know what you are getting in advance. 

Is Andy a "He" or an "It"?

Peta is at it again.  The animal rights Nazis are actually requesting that the editor of the Associated Press Stylebook (Norm Goldstein) revise current AP practice so that animals mentioned in news stories no longer be referred to by impersonal pronouns, "it" and "which," but by personal pronouns "she" "he" and "who."

According to Peta's letter (which can be found here: Click here: PETA Media Center > Recent News Releases : PETA CALLS ON AP STYLEBOOK GURUS TO STOP CALLING ANIMALS 'IT',) "As 'the essential global news network,' the Associated Press (AP) should take a progressive step and give animals the respect that they deserve by revising AP style guidelines to reflect the usage of personal pronouns for all animals.  While the world accelerates through the 21st century, progressive ideas are challenging and changing conventional perspectives.

Recently, the American legal system recognized that nonhuman animals deserve legal status beyond that of mere `property' and that abusive treatment of animals is more than simple vandalism.  The public now recognizes that whales, who sing across oceans; great apes, who share more than 98 percent of our DNA; sheep, who can recognize as many as 50 faces after not having seen them for two years; and pigs and chickens, who can learn to operate switches in order to control heat and light in factory-farm sheds, are feeling, intelligent individuals—not objects. Our language should reflect this."

You gotta be kidding me!  Yes, I am a dog-lover.  And yes, Andy's my buddy--even in his old decrepit state.  But he's also my property.  The proof is if he bites someone!  He's not liable, I am!  And while he's my buddy, he exists at my good pleasure.  I own him.  I pay city taxes to have him on my property.  I told him to get a job once, but to him, that means chasing cats off the property.

Only a society as wealthy and godless as ours could even dream of such nonsense as "animal rights" and the editorial use of personal pronouns for animals. 

On the one hand, Andy is clearly a "he."  He has a name (a human one at that). But legally speaking he's an "it"!  If Peta's willing to assume all liability for what he does, I'll consider giving him a few rights . . . Unless and until that happens, he's all mine.
 

Pray for Osama?

A number of churches in Australia (both Baptist and Anglican) are posting "Jesus loves Osama" on their church sign-boards. Prime Minister Howard is upset about it, even though he's fully aware that Christians are to love their enemies and to pray for those who persecute them. Click here: "Jesus Loves Osama" Signs Hit Australia, Baptist Church's Signs Draw Criticism Over Whether They Promote A Suitabl

These signs raise an interesting question (duly noting the trite nature of such slogans in the first place). As an American citizen, I would be thrilled if and when a Predator spots Osama and then launches a Hellfire missile in his direction, hopefully blowing him into little Osama bits. Justice would be served.

But as a Christian, I have been remiss in praying for my enemies (including Bin Laden). I am reminded that in my office as minister of Word and Sacrament, it is my sacred duty (should the occasion arise) to preach the law and the gospel to UBL and any like him, regardless.

Since I am a citizen of two kingdoms (one earthly and the other heavenly), and since my citizenship in the heavenly kingdom informs my earthly citizenship, I should, on the one hand, earnestly pray for UBL's conversion and repentance, and on the other, hope that he gets his. No contradiction here.  The two kingdoms fit together just fine.

As a minister, I should also be cognizant of the fact that my citizenship in the city of man not find its way into the pulpit at the expense of my charge to preach God's word. I must do what Scripture and the Canons of Dort command me to do--preach the gospel promiscuously to all who come within earshot, regardless of who and what they are.  My opinions about Predators and UBL are not part of that sacred calling.  OK to express them on a blog, but not in a sermon.

So, I'll pray for Osama's conversion and urge you to do the same, and at the same time I'll hope that our special forces find Osama and kill him.  Meanwhile, I will trust how that all works out to the grace and providence of God.

Your thoughts?

Great Architecture, Horrible Theology

Here's a link to a beautiful photo essay entitled, "The Age of the Megachurch."  Even the Mormons are building mega whatevers . . .  Click here: The Age of the Megachurch. 

Included are Joel Osteen's new digs in Houston, Willow Creek, the new Mormon Conference Center in Salt Lake, Our Lady of the Angels in Los Angeles, and Christ Reformed's neighbor, Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral.