I hope it’s not a copout to say that I’m just trying to be a follower of Jesus and I’ll let Him take care of all the ins and outs of imputation, permutation, etc., etc. To me, Federal Vision is something George Washington and the founding fathers had.

My family and I are members of a PCA church, but we remain adherents to credobaptism. The rest of the congregation is polite about it, and only make fun of us behind closed doors.

Michael keeps trying to tempt me with local Acts 29 offerings. We shall see..

Also, I think Alex belongs to a PCUSA church, doesn’t he? Or maybe he moved when he went off to grad school.

MOD: He was in a PCUSA, but is now CRC, but he still gets to be picked on.

Joel is now extremely offended now that I, with all my baptist heretical leanings, have been identified as PCA :)

Would somebody tell me what FV is? I’d like to know the horse’s affiliation before I start kicking the dirt.

I’m not PCA.  I’m SBC getting a PCA degree.

I don’t have a PhD, so the FV makes me say OMG and drink an ESB.

Doug Wilson takes on Hitchen’s new book on atheism.

It’s indicative to me of the quality of the FV controversy that I have read a book on it and kept up with it for a year and have no idea what it’s about.

Frankly, if it means Mark Horne can’t preach in someone’s church and Doug Wilson is heretic, it must be an amusement for people who find aluminum foil balls to be endlessly fascinating.

I do get it on the NPP: Nothing discovered about first century Judaism since the time of the reformers has any bearing on confessional Presbyterians. (jn)

Serious rookies, I think people come to the BHT to get away from the xxxx at Puritan boards, etc. Good fights in here are rare. Good when they happen. (We’re praying that Jack and Joel have it out in the alley sometime.) But very very rare.

The brightest part of the crazy trip home was that we were not out searching for a church in a ghost town whistle stop with a parsonage with chickens on the stoop.
We were just trying to find our way out of there.

One day I’ll write my chicken stoop memoirs. Writing a best seller might be the only way that I can pay off student loans that made this gig possible.

I will publish a list of PCA BHT fellows, and you can harass them. The rest of us are happy to be out of it.

Kurt, Alex, Joel, Travis, Mark, Brian….

Shea, we’re both newcomers around here, but I think this horse is asleep.  Not dead, but tired of it all….

Shea, I’m PCA, but not NPP.  I love NT Wright on the Resurrection, and appreciate other aspects, Christ’s cosmic triumph over the powers, the narrative of the salvation story, etc.  But I wrestled with justification and double imputation a long time, and a long time ago.  It is the standing or falling article for the church and for  my life.  I think Luther got that right. 

By the way, the first time I heard of NPP theology was in a Leon Morris commentary on Romans years ago as one piece of what’s going on in Romans.  The PCA is not budging on requiring a Westminster Confession understanding of Justification as a baseline.  PCA pastors have to affirm this, teach and preach this or in all honesty they must resign their charges.  What my friends who hold to NPP tell me is that they do agree with WCF theology but also see benefit in NPP.  My FV friends tell me the same.  NT Wright has affirmed this in different places also. 

  The FV stuff is more perplexing.  Tried to read Norm Shepherd, got nothing but dryer lint.   Covenant used with a hyphen is usually hyper-Covenantal-Covenantalism….

Wish I could be more controversial. (jn)  My first  skim read of the PCA  statement is that it is well done and not particularly controversial at all. 

So far every horse I’ve rode in here seems to be already dead.  But c’mon, this one is still hot off the presses, right?  I just finished reading the PCA study moments ago.  Now, I’m sure it is granted by everyone in this bar that fans of Douglas Wilson and NT Wright are good brothers and sisters in Christ, so let’s not get sidetracked by shrill accusations of censoriousness.  But isn’t there something important at stake here worthy of serious discussion?  If you were a FV person ordained in the PCA, how would you respond to this? 

Here’s a bone to the NPP folks.  I am sympathetic to the view that imputation is redundant because it’s included in union with Christ.  I agree that union with Christ is the “controlling paradigm”, whatever that means.  But just because imputation is redundant, doesn’t mean it’s wrong.  It’s just one more wonderful aspect of our union with Christ.  When you get married, your spouse is responsble for all your debts and you acquire all the assets of your spouse.  So when we are united with Christ, he pays all our debts and we get all his righteousness.  Redundant?  Stick in in your pie-hole, I’m singing hymns about it.

Ah, yes, good old Calhoun. Did some work at a couple of sites there in my former life. Like the old airfield with the grass strip next to the interstate. Some rusty old birds I should have photographed. It’s amazing how the sprawl of Atlanta reaches up that far. Cartersville is definitely exurb. When I worked in Kennesaw and Marietta, I had colleagues who commuted from Ringgold and Dalton. I’ll bet you’ll have ministry opportunities with the textile industry and various factories and plants. Lots of working class folk and rural, too. Some big employers there. Have you been to Barnsley Gardens down at Adairsville? Love the manor house ruins. Southern gothic. Looks like the dining has gone way upscale since I was there, though. Still, The Mister owes you.

Joel, it’s a really pretty part of the country. No doubt about that. I’ll be serving for the first time as an associate. It will be a great change of pace for me. I’ll be working with one of the nicest and most able pastors I’ve ever known on a new staff. They just hired a full time church musician and a full time youth guy. I’m doing primarily education and discipleship—preaching occasionally. I’ll certainly be busy. I’m glad for that. I’ll have to be very bright and shiny j/n and I’m not sure how that will work out. I want to be my very best. I also want to be myself. In a larger church there will be a lot of people to please—so bright and shiny it is—maybe the new and improved me.
The area is growing very fast—closer to Chattanooga than Atlanta. Still, very rural. My new senior pastor (as of June) said that it is the type of community that still expects the senior pastor to do the hospital and other pastoral care visits. That really tells me a lot. It also frees me to bear down on area ministry and I’ll have the energy of a thriving church community behind me. I’ve pushed those small church trains until I’m just burned. Not burned out or burned up but certainly ready for this change.

Y’all know I tried very hard to get appointed to a much more liberal, urban setting. But, I also prayed very hard to be ready to receive God’s best. I believe this is it. Praise God.

Procrastinating…

Medieval monks makeover moldy manuscripts. And imaging technology is revealing what lies beneath some of those prayer books. The latest discovery: an ancient commentary on Aristotle’s Categories, one of the texts in the Organon.

 Michael, yes, I agree in principle that the complementarian issue should not be elevated to Apostles’ Creed type status.   It’s hard to work out though, and each side struggles because it’s impossible to compromise the positions and split the difference. 

I’ve been writing explanations of some of the more misunderstood aspects of the Apostles’ Creed. 

Came across this quote by PCA

Pastor Richard Phillips discussing HE DESCENDED into Hell.

 ”At this point, many people complain of archaic language and formulations that require lengthy explanations.  Shouldn’t we have a new, modern, contemporary version of the Apostles’ Creed that changes the language to make it easier?  My answer to that is, “No!”  It is far better for us to get into the habit of asking questions and becoming educated about the history of our faith and the formulations of earlier generations, than it is for us to arrogantly package everything in bite-size meals that fit our appetites.  I for one, would rather have an ancient creed that makes me think about my faith, than a contemporary McCreed that makes everything a happy meal for our child-like minds.”

This class has ten girls and two boys. The boys are a Haitian-American and one of my Chinese kids. The girls regularly use their dominating numbers to be gross, exactly like boys would do in the reverse situation. Actually worse.

This kid has a family in ministry nearby, but they have sent her to us. ‘Nuff said.

Michael, I’m sorry about your experience today. I know for a fact that you are a marvelous teacher. Amazing the things that can unnerve us, huh?

But, hey. Girls can be gross. But, never boys, right? (Big jn) And, I think girls are getting grosser. Sort of an overall coarsening of the culture. Class has gone out of style. Not to mention manners. That girl was rude, rude, appallingly so. But, manners can be taught and class rubs off. You (and her women teachers) are still her best example.

Category: Joel’s BHT Santa list. Item: An Introduction to Planetary Defense: A Study of Modern Warfare Applied to Extra-Terrestrial Invasion. I think I’m compensating for my loss of faith during adolescence in pre-trib, pre-mil rapture “eschatology.”

Category: Joel’s Junk Mail. Item: Brochure for press discount on Sound Figures of Modernity: German Music and Philosophy. Siiiiiiiiigh. If I only had the time.

Tom, Richard: Word.

Sharon: Your new appointment? Do tell. We’ve taken many excursions into north Georgia. There are some wonderful stretches of the Trail up there.
Michael, you should know better than to make a Reds game your happy place. Your team is doing to Hamilton what Travis’s team is doing to A-Rod.

But then an angry woman told me I can’t teach today, so maybe I need to shut up (jn).

So, here I am, angry woman number TWO. What should have been a two hour trip (two and a half allowing for all this rain) was a FOUR hour trip because the Mr. and I disagreed on the route and BADLY marked Georgia highways.

I have NEVER referred to my husband as The Mister. Let me try Wonderful Husband, Holder of the Stoopit, Bad Map.

The trip started out to be just a jaunt into the city to get the topcase of my macbook replaced. It was my stupid idea to trek on up north to check out neighborhoods near my new appointment. What a stupid idea. It hasn’t rained in about a month and as soon as we headed north, buckets started falling.

I have a pain in my right eye and a twitch in my left.

I probably do NOT need to read Driscoll tonight.

One of my weekly pleasures is the Revolution 21 podcast. I’ve plugged it before, run the banner, etc. It’s a great one hour of eclectic music. The Mighty Favog (yes, that’s his name) does a high quality show that you would enjoy.

On April 21st, the show is totally in memoriam of the VT victims, and there is nothing but music and cuts from the live coverage.

You need to hear this.

Here’s the song list.

Noel writes about being named Noel. (We almost named her Casey.)

Bob: I invest a significant portion of my week in leading a men’s group twice a week. I preach to our young men specifically all the time. I get Driscoll too. But it’s not the Gospel. Driscoll is part of a group that wants complementarianism to become an essential. An Apostle’s Creed level doctrine. That’s out of balance, imo.

But then an angry woman told me I can’t teach today, so maybe I need to shut up (jn).

Michael, I get Driscoll.  Wouldn’t say it the same way, but women rule in the local church.   It’s over 60/40 percent women in evangelical circles.  Compute the volunteer hours, leadership in committees, etc. and I believe if we don’t focus on men and challenge them to rise to lead that it will be all women, all the time.  And the men, they like it that way.  Spirituality is just for the women folk….   That’s what I’ve seen for my 19 years in the pastorate….

TSK on Driscoll and Hybels intersecting at a conference he attended. Driscoll’s “It’s About Men” message is a serious rearranging of the gospel. I hope he gets some perspective on this.

Carl Olson has a good post. One reviews some excellent coverage of the MSM during the VT massacre. Blunt and necessary.

And First Things has this: Archbishop Charles Chaput with “Religion and the Common Good.”

Pimp your moleskine…..into a portable hard drive!

I’m with Tom on that FV thingy. Really!

John J. Miller on “The Writing Life.”

Now Joel, you know it’s ok for the conservative base to go “hatin’ on” and eating their own. But if the liberal base starts attacking them, they’ll get motivated, with the exception of one pulling a stupid stunt in the eyes of enough of the population that they must resign immediately. In that case, they let it go and never speak of it again.

Isn’t politics fun? (blech)

The left’s inherent belief that most of the country is actually liberal is an endless well of conservative political capital. Note how quickly Obama decried a SCOTUS decision that he should have simple not commented on at all. With one press announcement, he lost thousands of potential evangelical votes. Nothing but stupid. Another Democrat who never saw an abortion he didn’t like.

Whatever issues your team has, they won’t know what to do with them. Hillary may be the next POTUS, but not because the country likes her politics.

> [I]mpeachment will do more to fire up the conservative base than almost anything

Will it be more or less fired up than leftist base of the Democratic Party was after Clinton’s impeachment and trial? Let’s see, that would be the 2000 presidential election…

The VP is viewed favorably by only 48% of Republicans. What is that, about 20% of the electorate? Nah, I don’t see Cheney’s impeachment as much help at all to “conservatives.”

It was one of those days.

My first period class is mostly girls.

Within the first ten minutes I had to stop a conversation on….intimate female matters.

I was giving a test, which this late in the year violates the unwritten code of the jungle: “Show movies and don’t teach or we’ll hate you.”

A staff kid starts taunting me to my face that I have no right to give a test because I can’t teach.

The room gets awkwardly quiet. I say “What did you say?”

Repeat of the taunt. Other students tell the staff kid to be quiet.

I hand out the test and go to the hall to take deep breaths and have happy thoughts.

By the end of class the girls are talking about whether shaving your armpits makes a difference in BO.

The bell rings.

These days, when I don’t know if I want to be here, people tell me they want my job, new staff avoid me because I’m not [whatever] enough, no church has asked me to preach in four months, I miss my kids, my mom and the dog…..an in-your-face taunt by a student hurts. It disorients me.

My problem is that I have no discipline issues in my classes because I am a good teacher. A student who sleeps, ignores me, believes she knows it all and uses class time to catch up on other classes decides to taunt me for being a bad teacher. I should say “so what?” Instead, I’m doubting myself even more.

Somewhere in there- a couple of hours later- I threw my keys against a wall in disgust. A staff member friend picked them up and gave them back to me.

That’s how it works.

The Reds are ahead 4-1 and Josh Hamilton just throw some clown out at the plate. I’ll think about that.

Bill Clinton was charged with perjury and obstruction of justice. I’m pretty sure that no one denies he committed perjury; the argument was always more that perjury about sex isn’t all that bad. But as far as I know, both perjury and obstruction of justice are actually illegal. Rhetorical sabre-rattling isn’t, and furthermore is a basic diplomatic tool, and that’s why the third “charge” against Cheney is several orders of magnitude more stupid than any of the charges against Clinton. At least Clinton was charged with breaking the law. Cheney is being charged with not being a nice diplomat. That’s like bringing up a senator on charges because he didn’t make good on his campaign promises, or he threatened to withhold his vote on the nomination of a judge, or because he wouldn’t vote for a bill unless he got a pet project attached.

“I don’t like something” and “It’s against the law” are equivalent statements.

 Just a few years ago, my biggest fear was that if I didn’t overcome my selfishness, I was going to shipwreck my life and ministry by some outbreak of sinful passion. Now that my youthful passions are fading, my greatest fear is that if I don’t overcome my selfishness I’m going to die of boredom. I feel like I’m living in Ecclesiastes 2. None of my escapist hobbies are fun anymore. As Springsteen sang, “I’m just tired and bored of myself. Hey there, hey there, I could use just a little help.” I’m becoming convinced that the answer to this mid-life ennui is to start caring about some other people. That might mean some work and sacrifice, but at least it will decrease the chances of my being found catatonic in front of this screen.

Does anyone outside an exceedingly small, insignificant group even know what “Federal Vision” is or even care? The fact that the other name for it is a STREET, for gosh sakes, kind of gives it away.

How cool am I? I’m going to set up a virb page. It’s the next big thing.

Empeachment will do more to fire up the conservative base than almost anything short of a terror attack. Go right ahead, left. Make the day of the far right.

All I have to say is Waldo cannot comment on the current political debate because copyright laws dictate that he not speak.

From: The Department of That Joke’s Just Way Too Easy

To:  JS Bangs

Re: Tit for Tat

Dear Mr. Bangs:

Please refrain from using the word “tit” and Bill Clinton’s name in the same sentence.

Thank you,

TJJWTE Dept.

Point 3 is the stupidest stupidity I’ve ever seen passing for an impeachment charge.

Stupider than the charges brought against Clinton? Tit for tat.

Let’s see, point 1 is impossible to prove and would cause massive embarrassment for the Democrats as the nation is reminded that the Democrats made the decision to go to war based on the same intelligence the White House had access to, the same intelligence that was the occasion for much sabre-rattling by the Clinton administration as well. You’d have to prove that somehow, between the CIA and Congress, Cheney intercepted the information and manipulated it, so that Congress didn’t get the intelligence that the CIA actually had, since most of the intel was gathered under the Clinton administration. The fact that the Clinton administration interpreted the information the exact same way basically exonerates Cheney here. Testimony from Dave Gaubatz might be fun, too, but it would expose the ineptitude of the Bush administration regarding security in Iraq.

Point 2 has similar problems. The worst you can really accuse Cheney of if you follow the 9-11 commission’s report to the letter is overstating the relationship, which is hardly a crime, but Cheney could come back and possibly demonstrate that the 9-11 commission ignored some key pieces of evidence. You’re not going to get “manipulation of evidence.” I know this is hard to believe, but sometimes, government commissions make mistakes, even when they draw conclusions that fit your own ideas.

Point 3 is the stupidest stupidity I’ve ever seen passing for an impeachment charge. Sabre-rattling is a key component of American diplomacy and always has been.

However, whether or not charges stand is dependent on whether or not Congress votes for them. Since truth is ultimately subjugated to the will-to-power in government proceedings, there’s no telling what will happen. The Congress is controlled by Democrats, but I don’t think they have the 2/3 majority necessary to kick Cheney out. You can be assured that any possible impeachment proceedings will have little to do with finding the truth. I do think that supporting an impeachment bill based on anything other than the truth of the charges is a morally reprehensible position for a Christian to take, though. Or does the economic justice of environmental shalom transcend the justice of pursuing truth in the courts?

I take it Kucinich has at least circumstantial evidence to show that Cheney was indeed involved in all three points, right? Joel?

I’m the last in the Tavern to show support for Cheney (well, next to last) but this is just stupid and a waste of time. What is it going to prove? Probably nothing. The only thing it’s going to do is waste my tax dollars.

I hate politicians.

Fellow Kentuckian Michael Westmoreland-White, a fine voice in the Anabaptist tradition, notes that articles of impeachment have been introduced in the House against Dick Cheney. Anyone care to join me in supporting this legislation? Hello? Anyone…hey, put down that bottle…

Joel, yeah, I was a bit surprised by Mark’s reaction, too.  To me, it looks very much like they’re drawing a pretty hard line in the sand with this.  I contacted one of my elders, and he basically said, “Yeah, it’s going to get harder and harder to hold FV views in the PCA.”

I think this is going to get ugly (or ulgier, really).

This report will doubtlessly be met with outrage by FV proponents…but it seems to me and always has that they’re actually right.  A lot of what seems to go by the name of “FV theology” contradicts the Westminster Standards.  I’ve got no dog in this fight, because I don’t agree with either.

Travis, I just left a comment over at Mark’s blog. I’m not as encouraged as he is, but then again I wear tin foil hats. Like Nixon said, it ain’t paranoia if they really are out to get you. :-)

Our erstwhile honorary theologian updates his critique of 19th-century theology to a critique of contemporary American evangelicalism. All six points are good, but I especially appreciate #s 2, 3 and 4. (h/t Faith & Theology)

The PCA Study Report on the Federal Vision

No surprise, really…9 major points of FV theology were found to be “contrary to the [Westminster] Standards,” and Sessions and Presbyteries are recommended

that it is their duty “to exercise care over those subject to their authority” and “to condemn erroneous opinions which injure the purity or peace of the Church”

I wonder if this means I’ll get in trouble for liking N.T. Wright as I attempt to join the PCA and get licensed to preach.

Mark Horne is encouraged by it, actually.

It’s amazing what history coughs up every so often. GI’s had their own government regulated brothels in WWII.

I think bloggers giving each other awards is silly, but I am honored to be on this list. Cyberbrethren is a great blog.

An excellent poem by Clay.

Clay and I enjoy listening to the Relevant podcast. Funny and interesting.

Gadget love.

Anyone ever seen Adam O and Waldo in the same room at the same time?

I think not.

BTW- looks like Waldo is doing well with the ladies.

Jack: I guess this means you’re not going to return the bag of ‘shrooms I left in your car.

Michael: My read on the situation is, when Jesus comes back, those same people will likely kill Him again.

I find it interesting that “Islam” has replaced “Communists” as the enemy that we need to fight in order to make Jesus come back. In another few decades it’ll probably be something else again. It sure would have been nice if Jesus had just said the enemies we had to take out in order to convince him to rapture us. Or maybe just given us a day and an hour (JN).

I am listening to a Bible Answer Man from last week, and a twenty-something dispensationalist is openly saying that we need to encourage a war in the middle east in any way we can, including attacking the Dome of the Rock, racist/religion profiling in the Middle East, encouraging radical Jews who want to have war, etc. We need to do this because IT’S PREDETERMINED and WE NEED TO MAKE IT HAPPEN. If we try to stop war in the Middle East we are fighting against God. If we want Jesus to come home, we need to get Jews into Israel, encourage a war with Islam and watch for Jesus to come back.

Hank slam dunked this guy, but listening to him has really shaken me. I can’t believe there are people who actually think this way. God help us.

Just for the record, let me say that I won’t let Budweiser cross my lips. That stuff is dangerous.

It’s very interesting watching the evolution of a comment thread. When my IM commenters are talking, things are fairly civil. When someone picks up a post and passes it into other communities, things start getting nasty.

Is it the case that Jesus’ words to give, love, etc. leave us with no ability to respond to the addict, the criminal and the con artist any differently than we respond to anyone else? In my discussions with Mennonite friends this subject would come up over and over again: do Jesus’ words mean there is no such thing as law enforcement? There can be no discipline or punishment in society? Prisons must be emptied? All criminals forgiven? Do these people really mean that they would forgive a child abuser in a way no different from anyone else?

Well, the topic of church identity is certainly a hot-button issue.  Lutheranism used to just be the religion of the land.  You were Lutheran because your country was Lutheran.  The pluralistic situation in the USA forced kind of a confessional crisis, because you no longer have government or geography defining you.  But even then, it’s really easy to slip into American denominationalistic ways of thinking about the Church and about our own identity as Lutherans.  It’s certainly somethign we talk about a lot here at the seminary.

Some of you have been missing Jack and Jim. Seems they were on Willie Nelson’s tour bus.

A radio interview with Dawn Eden and her new book on chastity.

The Saddleback church “Drive Time” podcast is a 10 minute exposition and application going straight through books of the Bible. Very good. Get it on iTunes podcasts.

J.P. Moreland’s web site.

Rich Copley has a good story:

A little story: So, on the way home tonight, I stopped at the gas station that had not joined in g . . . I mean, had not raised the price of gas by 30 cents during the day, like most stations. There was a little line, and so I was waiting. The car, at the pump in in front of the car I was waiting behind (which was fueling) pulled away, but before I could react, a minivan zipped off the road, right past me and docked at the open pump. The nice touch was, the line-cutter’s van had the little fish symbol on the back, and the driver was wearing a T-shirt with “Jesus” emblazoned across the chest. Great witness.

It sort of reminds me of a time when I was a kid and I wanted my mom to put a Christian bumper sticker on her car. She said no, “because I wouldn’t want people to blame my bad driving on Jesus.”

Ah. Me understand now. I’ve been reading Lutheran and thinking “denomination.”

Jason, I mean “Lutheran” as a confession of faith, one the ELCA abandoned or at least made nonenforcable quite some time ago.  “Lutheran” as a historical-cultural genealogy, as a political entity, as one denomination among many, or even a sect has no currency among confessional Lutherans.  Such attitudes are purely sectarian.  Read Carl Braaten’s Mother Church for a good example of someone who sees Lutheranism as a sect rather than a confession.

So that said, everyone has a liturgy.  Your liturgy is your theology in action.  I suppose I could concede that RCC liturgy is better than megachurch liturgy in more than a few ways, but on the other hand, RCC liturgy doesn’t communicate the theology I outlined below, in large part because such theology was condemned at Trent.  That’s why I said “you can’t do better than Lutheran liturgy.”

I received a couple good emails about my observations and questions to Pirate. Thanks Adam M. for shedding some light on the various “flavors” of Lutherans (ELCA, LCMS, etc.). John H also listed the differences as he sees them, having been in both Anglican and Lutheran worship. (I’ll include that in the extended section for those who want to read it all.)

To clarify my initial response to Josh, my main point wasn’t so much to get into the merits of Lutheran liturgy compared to Anglican, RCC, EO, etc. as much as to point out that I think there is some common ground among them with respect to liturgy acting as a balance to evangelical worship’s potential for emotionalism, celebrity pastors, entertainment, lecture over word and sacrament, etc.

Anyway, here’s John’s response:

More »« Less

A potentially habitable extrasolar planet has been found.

K-MOD: Wow, another one???

Auth: Not fair! Joel updated his post to include that info after I had already read it.

Pirate, I defer to your knowledge of history, and I get what you’re saying about the various problems with Anglicans (esp. liberalism). I probably look at them with idealistic eyes, but their ability to hold together around the BCP while maintaining various cultural distinctives worldwide is a good thing. Still, I agree that the “good thing” isn’t so good when various whole sections of the global communion start to drift off to apostasy. (ECUSA/TEC/Whatever they’ll call themselves in the future)

As for Lutherans, again I will defer to your superior knowledge, but from the perspective of one on the outside (coming from evanjellyism), Lutherans don’t look so unified, either, and there is quite a liberal group in the ELCA. Around the upper Midwest, ELCA is the dominant strain, but I also see LCMS, Wisconsin Synod, Word Alone (what I’ve seen of that looks like generic evangelicalism). Is there one world-wide version of Lutheranism that rejects these other parts, or is it that splintered? I’m not asking to be snarky, only to be educated.

Jason, I would argue that what is best about Anglican liturgy is Lutheran in essence.  After all, Lutheranism is a confession of faith, not a political structure, and it is impossible to deny the Lutheran roots of Cranmer’s theology, even if he did wind up a Calvinist on the Lord’s Supper.  However, Anglicanism has proven to be inherently unstable.  You had fighting over Calvinism and Arminianism in the 18th century, the Lord’s Supper in the 19th century, and the Oxford movement in the latter part of the same century, which gave rise to both Anglo-Catholicism and liberalism.  And now you’ve got this Sydney Anglicanism, too!  Only by tenaciously holding onto the forms crystallized in the original BCP is there some semblance of unity, but the liturgy seems to be more born by cultural fidelity than the natural expression of dogma.

 Michael, I can’t argue with your question that something pernicious  has happened since 1965.  Pirate, you make me crave a Lutheran worship service. Kind of strange, like craving ”Liver and Onions” (at least that’s strange  for me!).  I think that if you crave “Liver” it shows an “iron” deficiency.   Hmm…................. 

While visiting Wheaton College I ran across a book that looks like a treasure in dealing with worship, music, culture, degrading loss of the value of words, etc. 

 The Book is by Harold Best, titled “Unceasing worship”  

I actually had a few quotes I was going to post, but the book is so rich that the quotes turn into paragraphs! After I finish it I hope to post a review at my website.

> I think that kind of language is destructive because it changes what the words themselves mean.

Needless to say, I disagree with you here, Pirate, but I understand the caution sign you’re pointing to, and I won’t argue with your conservatism on that point. I think it’s overplayed, and I think there are some countermanding ethical problems with indiscriminate discretion. But who’s going to trust someone who admires Derridean philosophy? You’ll win that argument every time (except when you talk about Derridean philosophy).

As for eschatological policies of the DMV, surely we can agree that queues have no place in the millennial kingdom.

I have had enormous trouble with my email this semester. I can’t even get into it right now. Last time I was able to, I found messages in my inbox from weeks and even months ago. If they are from readers and BHT friends, my apologies—I’ll respond as soon as I am able.

Oh, and a Goldilocks planet has been spotted outside our solar system. Earthlike, and in the right range from its star to support liquid water.

Joel, I didn’t actually say that you specifically said that good works are “the Gospel.”  However, you most certainly are prone to co-opting Gospel language for secular political agendas, like “economics of grace.”  I keep waiting for discussion to turn to an “agricultural policy of shalom” or an “eschatological policy at the DMV.”  I think that kind of language is destructive because it changes what the words themselves mean.  I wouldn’t accuse you of believing a different Gospel.  But I think I am most unlike you in that I am extremely careful and conservative about how theological language is used.  Indiscriminate use of theological language has been absolutely disastrous in the past, because such indiscretion results in changes of the meanings of the words themselves.

Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right. Goofy exegesis (all men in pairs are gay y’know) and juvenile defacing of a billboard.

The exegesis of that story is so flaky, it doesn’t deserve a sentence. Good grief.

Authors of Pierced for Our Transgressions respond to Wright’s criticism.

> it’s funny you should call me a secularist, because I thought the same thing about you.

That’s because I’m a philosopher. I’m supposed to sound like a secularist. But srsly, you accuse me of saying “things other than the Gospel” are the Gospel, and I don’t think that’s truthful (if leveling such claims is your bailiwick, I think I could hook you up to review the works of a certain Anglican bishop if you wanted to bag some bigger game—but you’ll have to take a number and get in line). If others in the bar share your assessment of what I’ve said or implied, then I’ll be glad to offer the appropriate retractions or clarifications, because I don’t recognize anything like my beliefs in your gloss. I accept that you and I differ on theology (but not that much), politics (heh), economics (sigh), the global effects of bovine flatulence, video games, and the best scifi—these make for a good bar fight. I philosophize about all these things (yes, including cow farting), which means I am trying to evaluate my reasons for my beliefs and making my apologiae.

I believe in the necessity of saving grace and the reality of common grace, and all grace as evidence of God’s extravagant love for His people and His creation. We obviously differ about the meaning, scope and limits of what being “salt and light” entails, and that’s fine. I adhere to the neocalvinist emphasis upon all vocations as possible sources of personal and institutional healing, justice and beauty. The ministry of the Word and sacraments is a necessity, but it does not diminish nor eliminate the goodness of all work and the necessity of asking ourselves “what is to be done?” when we’re not engaged in the divine liturgy. With those presuppositions stated, I think we can continue to dispute the facts about South African life and politics without accusing each other of holding to another Gospel, if you don’t mind.

I like your post on panhandling, Michael.  In the late 80s I “gave to whoever asked me”.  But then I spent a couple of summers in India.  When I started to give to the throng of physically handicapped children asking for money for food, the local Christians stopped me.  This distressed me and I asked them why when we got back to their home.  They explained that each block of children pleading for change was controlled by a pimp who took their money at the end of the day and gave them a handful of rice.  No matter how much you give, they just get the handful of rice.  Giving profits the oppressor and keeps them in bondage.

Internet Monk now has a post you may find interesting: Should I Give My Money To People On The Street Who Ask For It?

Kent, I wish I could give you a better answer on the BGC vs. SBC, but I know almost nothing about the SBC outside what I’ve heard on this site. As for BGC, all I know is that they’re popular here, and that I am trying to work out time and money to attend one of their schools in 2008 for an MDiv. I’m not too hung up on their denominational distinctives, though, as that degree can be put to use in many places, like the EFCA.

This thought at Reformed Catholicism is making me think a little more about it, though.

I feel like an EO arguing about the filioque here, so my apologies. Pirate’s last comment just hit one to the wall, but not quite out of the park. I will only quibble about one bit:

If worship is the place where God declares his words of Law &
Gospel, where Christ gives us his body & blood for the forgiveness
of sins, time and culture dissolve in baptism, and where the death and
resurrection of the Lord are declared to all people, if it is God
giving gifts and us responding, then nothing makes more sense than
Lutheran liturgy and hymnody. (emphasis mine)

I say this not as a knock against Lutheranism. I like Lutherans. A lot. LCMS specifically. However, allowing for debate among their differences, why not open that up to others, say, Anglicans? I’m not talking about the liberal Anglicans, just as Pirate’s not talking about the ELCA. I suppose I’m picking nits, because I think Pirate and I would be on the same side relating that statement to RCCs, though I expect he’d have a stronger opposition than I.

In offering this, I admit to a host of contradictions, knowing the kind of church I serve in, the kind of music I like, etc. But I think the important thing before getting bogged down in things like Rock vs. Bach is to ask what worship is all about in the first place. Consider it a peanut thrown across the bar in jest, rather than a broken bottle with malice.

Ha! Michael – I knew you knew more than your original post ;-)

Tanks!

Ya da Sweeds seem ta be at da root uh id all…doe dis seems ta rule out what ya said…(at least as understood by little ol’ lay me).

I like to have some idea of the denom roots as I believe they are influential over the long haul.  As the evangelical winds blow to and fro the history of a people or an organization can become an anchor.

Fine, I’ll be nice. :-P

Seriously though the whole music debate is just ignoring the larger issue of what worship is and what the Church is. If worship is the excitation of my emotions as I try to link up my soul with God, then by all means, bring out the chicks sighing into the microphone, skilled emcees, ridiculous numbers of candles, and so on. If worship is attracting people to the presence of the “preaching pastor” to hear some message, then the entertainment focus is right. Make it a big show. Spend all week planning it. Top yourself every time. Spend twenty grand or more on a sound system. You need it for worship. If worship is the rational contemplation of doctrinal truths, then you can’t do any better than some deeply theological hymns, a prayer, and a series of long-winded exegetical lectures on a single book of the Bible. If worship is the place where God declares his words of Law & Gospel, where Christ gives us his body & blood for the forgiveness of sins, time and culture dissolve in baptism, and where the death and resurrection of the Lord are declared to all people, if it is God giving gifts and us responding, then nothing makes more sense than Lutheran liturgy and hymnody.

Joel, it’s funny you should call me a secularist, because I thought the same thing about you.  I can’t ignore the two decades of guerilla warfare, which seems to have been pretty instrumental in wearing down the apartheid regime.  It’s like ignoring the role of the military defeat of the South in the end of slavery in America.  It’s not that I’m against Christians doing things motivated by the Gospel.  Not at all.  But I’m against calling any good work of a Christian “the Gospel,” and I’m especially against connecting anything an unbeliever does to the Gospel, as the end result of both is to take Christ out of the Gospel and ultimately bring salvation to no one.

Good grief, I’ll leave you to the lurkers Pirate. You sound like an outright secularist. Ignoring the role of the churches in the change in South Africa is like ignoring the role of Christians in the abolitionist movement and of African-American churches in the civil rights movement in America. Aren’t you the same guy that complains that some of your fellow Ludderans act as if

The Gospel means that I need no longer concern myself with how God wishes me to live

So kindly keep the social gospel albatross to yourself. I won’t wear it. If we’ve been raised to new life by the Gospel, then what? Obedience to commandments, maybe, say starting with the Great Commandment? Find something we really disagree about.

Kent: I don’t know anything about the BGC. Sorry.

There is some evidence the BGC is less conservative than Piper. He lost a doctrinal battle to specifically rule out open theism in confessional language. I know it was originally ethnically swedish.

The SBC is all about YOUR PARTICULAR CHURCH. Can’t predict much by the denominational label.