A New Song for the PCUSA

Since 14F has passed, we all know where to go if you:
1) Are married, but don't think your sex life should be confined to your spouse.
2) Can't abide being married to just one person at a time.
3) Are single and want to "test the milk" before you "buy the cow."
4) Reject the basics of human biological gender.



Let's face it. Gay clergy isn't the problem. Making the fundamentals of the faith optional is the disease...confusion over the sexes is just a symptom. As professor Alice Linsley reminds us: "Dialogue with revisionists is impossible."

“Not to oppose error is to approve it; and not to defend truth is to suppress it, and, indeed, to neglect to confound evil men - when we can do it - is no less a sin than to encourage them”
St. Felix III, Bishop of Rome, 483-492

Best wishes, though, to all my friends of evangelical persuasion still on that ship. May you find a lifeboat soon.

Episcopal Church General Convention Same Sex Blessing

Sometimes I just can't help myself! They make it too easy.

Sermon for Proper12C

Proper12C Knowing God, Pleading with God from Fr. Chris Larimer on Vimeo.

A sermon preached at Holy Apostles in Elizabethtown, KY. The texts are Genesis 18, Colossians 2, and Luke 11. It begins with a 2 minute childrens message. The sermon is 26 minutes long (there's some unnecessary space at the end).

Faith and Disorder - the Odd Couple

Okay, I'm about to make claims that the Anglican Communion is - as a branch of the catholic church - not able to futz around with faith and order. I know that it'll make Vicky Gene cry, but it's true.

This is from the most recent Anglican SPREAD communique. They (or, I should say, we) are the Society for the Propagation of Reformed Evangelical Anglican Doctrine (‘as classically expressed in the Anglican Formularies: the Thirty-nine Articles, the 1662 Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal’).

Rowan Williams own comments would have supported this perception. Only twelve months previously, on 22 July 2001, the London Sunday Telegraph, in a report entitled ‘Archbishop hits out at ban on gay clergy’ Dr Williams, then Archbishop of Wales, claimed that the 1991 ‘Issues in Human Sexuality’ report’s bar on the ordination of active homosexuals was incoherent and “this unwillingness to come clean can’t last. It is a contradiction.”

However, on his translation to the See of Canterbury, Williams’ enthusiasm for ‘coming clean’ seemed to be much dampened. He minimised his commitments to the gay lobby and wrote to reassure the Anglican Primates, saying ‘I have to distinguish plainly between personal theories and interpretations and the majority conviction of my Church.’ He has continued to emphasise this distinction between his personal (and in fact widely disseminated) views on the one hand and his official responsibility on the other.

You think if he says that with a pretty enough grin, we'll just give him a pass on that?

Oooh! Nice try. No...this is the standard Kantian retreat from integrity. It might work in a philosophy class, maybe even politics. But do you really believe that creedal, confessional Christians can be held together by someone who does not have convictions as to the trustworthiness of the Church's truth claims?

Hold on to your hat, Archbishop. Somebody is going to call you on that.

Superficially, this may seem generous, even sacrificial, but the consequences for the Church’s commitment to truth are serious. As Gerald Bray has observed, ‘Not to believe the teachings he is expected to defend is not a sign of superior holiness, as some have alleged, but the very opposite – it is deceitfulness taken to a higher level of deception.’ (Churchman Vol.122 No.4 2008 p293)

DOH!!! Too late!

This ‘higher level of deception’ is serious because, as a principle, it has the potential to downgrade Christian truth across the board. If the Archbishop of Canterbury himself can publicly treat the upholding of the plain teaching of Scripture as a formal duty rather than a personal commitment, the door is open to a kind of institutionalised hypocrisy in which it is acceptable to observe the formalities of orthodoxy while at the same time dissolving the substance of orthodoxy by conceding its provisionality. It is not difficult to see where this is leading; for instance Richard Holloway, former Primus (Primate) of Scotland cheerfully described himself in yesterday’s Sydney Morning Herald as an agnostic and yet can see no reason why he should stop ministering in the Scottish Episcopal Church.

I have no idea where national churches think that they get the authority to change the catholic faith and trivialize such essentials as the resurrection (which Mr. Holloway denies as a member of the Westar Institute) yet still keep less catholic traditions (such as liturgies, ideas of ministry & order, etc) in play. And they of course claim some sort of ethical high ground (while defending the ‘right’ to kill babies). Nonsense! (John Spong, et al...I’m talking to you!)

And this is why the Anglican Covenant will not work. Its minimal doctrine and diluted disciplinary provisions are simply inadequate in a Communion where we can no longer be certain what people mean by the words they use and whether they believe the words they use. Dr Williams by no means bears sole responsibility for this culture, but he presides over it and has lent it respectability.

It is said that the partisan nature of his appointment contained the seeds of Speaker Martin’s downfall and this week he has suffered the sudden death of his political career. The partisan nature of Dr Williams’ appointment also contains the seeds of his downfall, but his is likely to be a slow death as the confusion he has sown theologically gradually manifests itself in practice, as most recently in Jamaica. And in this light, we can see that GAFCON’s great contribution to the Anglican Communion has been to begin the process of restoring confessional confidence so that, as one body, Anglicans can speak of God and the gospel truthfully and clearly.

WE ARE NOT AMUSED!!!

Read the rest here. I try to cut the poor guy some slack...after all, there are rumours that he's already looking for a way out of office.

Oh yeah...have a wonderful Feast of the Ascension!

Dr. Schori asks: “Is that the feast where everybody assents to our modifications of catholic faith and order?”

No...it’s where the whole Church remembers that Christ is King, he rules in his Church. We don't have the authority to change things that he instituted. And we acknowledge that he will grow his Church when we do his will.

Dr. Schori adds: “Hmmm....I wonder why we’re not growing?”

Yeah...keep telling yourself it’s that because of demographic shifts and your sterling education.

Nope...can’t possibly have anything to do with not disciplining heretical clergy or trying to consecrate Buddhists as bishops.

Myopia

Does your church make long-term mistakes in doctrine & practice for short-term payoff?


Don't expect them to be around much longer. Especially when they call killing off the next generation 'a blessing'!!!

Ministers of Molech

In case you're wondering why the Episcopal Church USA is shrinking at an alarming rate, you might want to check the rantings...er, “sermons” of the woman they just elected president of the Episcopal Divinity School at Harvard. Katherine Hancock Ragsdale has lots to say about her favorite axe to grind - abortion. (After serving nearly two decades on the national board of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice the board of NARAL Pro-Choice America, she'd better.)

When a woman finds herself pregnant due to violence and chooses an abortion, it is the violence that is the tragedy; the abortion is a blessing.

PLEASE NOTE, less than 1% of abortions are sought for rape (and most of the incest cases are covered up by the abortion industry)! You'd think a policy-wonk would know that. Oh well...Romans 1:18-23, I suppose.

When a woman finds that the fetus she is carrying has anomalies incompatible with life, that it will not live and that she requires an abortion – often a late-term abortion – to protect her life, her health, or her fertility, it is the shattering of her hopes and dreams for that pregnancy that is the tragedy; the abortion is a blessing.

When a woman wants a child but can’t afford one because she hasn’t the education necessary for a sustainable job, or access to health care, or day care, or adequate food, it is the abysmal priorities of our nation, the lack of social supports, the absence of justice that are the tragedies; the abortion is a blessing.

And when a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe, affordable abortion – there is not a tragedy in sight -- only blessing. The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply blessing.

These are the two things I want you, please, to remember – abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you say it: abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done.

Did you catch that. It's not that she doesn't want to impose her morality on someone else. It's not that she sees this as a tragic consequence of living in a fallen and unjust world. No...abortion is - in her words - a blessing.

Well...isn't the Episcopal Church blessed.

I really appreciate how she ends it:

God bless you all.

Don't you mean to say: “God abort you all.”

EDS trustee, The Rt. Rev. M. Thomas Shaw stated in a press release, “I am thrilled with the appointment of Katharine Ragsdale as the president and dean of EDS. She brings a wealth of small parish ministry to her new position and it is critical that the new president and dean be able to train and form parish priests for the growth of progressive parishes across the country. She brings a wealth of experience, talent and creativity to this new position.”

Small parishes, indeed. Ms. Ragsdale most recently served as vicar of St. David's Church. For non-Anglicans, that may sound impressive. But you need to understand what it means to be a vicar. Vicar - a shortened form of vicarious - means someone who stands in place of the bishop. Since the bishop is responsible for all ministry within his diocese, a vicar is sent when the representation does not need or cannot support a rector (viz, a full-time priest). For instance, a campus minister can be a vicar - even though it's often a full-time job. Other public but non-parish functions can have a vicar. But when a vicar is in a parish setting, it is for one of two reasons: a) the church is a mission / plant and cannot yet support a rector; or b) the church is in such steep decline that it can no longer support a rector. Care to geuss which category applies to St. David's?

A telling article from the Boston Globe uses words like “tiny.” They had this to say: “Ragsdale's parishioners love her, aside from a few who have left because of her politics...”

Aside from being incapable of teaching seminarians how to grow a church,based on her practical experience, she's not capable of teaching them any academic subject either - seeing as her own doctorate is the professional vocational degree, the Doctor of Ministry (abbrev. D.Min.). Not to DMin-ize the board of trustees, but...srsly? Were all the PhD's taken? I mean...this woman is being put forward as the president of a seminary that is affiliated with HARVARD UNIVERSITY (not to mention Episcopalianism...the Cadillac of progressive Americanity). Is she expected to be taken seriously by the scholars in the religion department? Or by fundraisers?

Wow....well, at least she'll be eager to admit this guy for study.
Yes... I know he's joking.

BTW - I was going to post this yesterday, but I didn't want anyone to get it confused with a National Atheist's Day prank. (Psalm 14:1)

h/t Reformed Pastor and MCJ

Remembering John Donne

“The Scriptures are God's Voice, The Church is His echo.”

John Donne 17th C, commemorated this past Tuesday.

Almighty God, the root and fountain of all being: Open our eyes to see, with your servant John Donne, that whatever has any being is a mirror in which we may behold you; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

Fundamental to serving God in the Church is an acceptance of the authority of Holy Scripture. Perhaps the choice of the opening word “fundamental” seems ill advised, but I am not talking about biblical literalism - which is opposed to the Reformational hermeneutic of grammatico-historical analysis - but about the fundamentals of our faith. Without a firm foundation on God’s self-revelation in Holy Scripture; in God’s word, and in the Word made flesh, Christ Jesus Himself, there are no fundamentals and no place to stand. The two are linked together in my mind, because they are linked together in the mind of Jesus who came “not to abolish the Law or the Prophets; …but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17).

Neither am I talking about simplistic proof texting, yet the texts are indeed important. There is such a thing as biblical theology, and both Jesus and Paul, and the other New Testament writers model that for us in their treatment of the Old Testament. From a classic Anglican position we also go back to the biblical theology of the Early Church Fathers. The Lord warns us in Isaiah that if we are not firm in our faith, we will not be firm at all (Isaiah 7:9b). There is no firm foothold, no possibility of establishing “fundamentals” if you take your stand on the quick sand of the world and human philosophy.

The fundamentals of the faith are first of all reflected in Holy Scripture itself, and then secondarily, in the writings of the Fathers. There is no argument there over what the fundamentals are. True, much of the writing of the Fathers was a defense of the faith against heretical opinions that were springing up everywhere. That is the point. There is a difference between what is theologically true, and what is a lie. The lie was always characterized as heresy, or apostasy. You either believe Holy Scripture, or you don’t. There is no valid half-way point.

You either believe the creeds, or you don’t. You can''s say you affirm them as true, only in so far as you can modify their plain (and historic) sense. You either believe...or you do not.

You either believe and respond to God’s call to personal holiness, or you don’t. Thus says the Lord, “You shall be holy, for I am holy” (1 Peter 1:16). If you don’t understand holiness as Scripture and the Fathers understand holiness, you don’t understand holiness at all. There is no real question in the Church today regarding what Scripture, the Fathers, or the Church catholic has always taught, and teaches still, about the fundamentals, or about sexual morality. Morality is after all an essential part of our walk before the Living God.

The question before mainline churches today is simply this: The text says what it says; no-one is really disagreeing, there are no varying interpretations, no one is really disagreeing over what Holy Scripture actually says. The disagreement is over whether or not the texts, Holy Scripture itself, and the ongoing teaching of the Church, are relevant at all. From the viewpoint of the tradition of the Church we believe what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all (The Vincentian Canon - more about that in 3 weeks). What is being said in some quarters today is that those fundamentals, and those moral teaching are no longer relevant in modern society.

Over the last several years bishops and high-placed leaders in the Church have disavowed specific fundamentals. They tell us that the physical resurrection did not happen, that Christ did not die for our sins, and that he is no longer the way, the truth and the life and that it is not true that no man comes to the Father except through him (John 14:6). According to them, it doesn’t matter what Jesus said in John 14:6, because he probably didn’t say it anyway.

Unfortunately there is no common ground between our small group revisionists and the Church catholic. For them, there is nothing that can be discussed on the basis of Holy Scripture. They tell us that the moral teachings of the Sermon on the Mount, the teachings of Paul and Peter on holiness, and the teachings of the Law and the Prophets on these issues, are no longer relevant in modern society. They reject the teaching of both Scripture and the Church and take their stand on sinking sand, on an antique humanism that is already going out of fashion in this post-modern age.

You either build your house on the Rock, or you build your house on the sand. They prefer the sand, probably because in their mind it is closer to the water. “The waters that you saw, where the prostitute is seated, are the peoples and multitudes and nations and languages” (Revelation 17:15). I should probably apologize for the use of that text because certainly in the minds of some The Book of Revelation is almost the very last place we ought to look for a word from God.

The truly relevant question is not what they believe, or don’t believe. The truly relevant question is: What do you believe? Do you stand on solid ground, or do you stand on sinking sand? These questions are not a matter of airy-fairy theological debate. They are in fact questions about life and death. A seminary professor of mine taught that miracles didn’t happen, that the physical resurrection of Christ did not happen. So what!?

The so what happens when their students go to a parish and undermine faith in the resurrection, and in so doing destroy the faith of a woman who was dying of cancer.

The so what happens when we hear teaching on “Situation Ethics” - that it doesn’t matter what you do as long as you do it lovingly - and see it lived out. Clergy begin to say that premarital sex is perfectly O.K. (which happened in the 1960s). That attitude was a contributing factor to the free-love movement of the late sixties and early seventies and has laid countless young people in America vulnerable to a variety of venereal diseases, including HIV/AIDS - not to mention the broken hearts, shattered lives, and destroyed families left in the path! Paul calls sex before marriage, “fornication.” Why? There are after all several very valid reasons.

As Christians we believe that “The Scriptures are God’s Voice, The Church is His echo.” We believe it, in part for some very practical reasons. The teachings of Scripture guide us on our journey preserving our mental and physical health, preserving the integrity of our families, and leading us to the Door to Eternal Life, Christ Himself, The Living Word. Jesus Himself was well aware of the antipathy people had towards His teaching and asked “Do you take offense at this? … The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe” (John 6:61-64). The direct result was that many of his disciples turned away and no longer walked with Him. The question is: Will you walk with Him? Peter’s response was this, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life” (John 6:68).

Presbypiscopal or Episcopresbyter?

I'm catching some flack from a numpty (not this numpty, but one of his devotees) about my having switched teams (left the PCUSA and joined the Anglican Communion). He's very upset that I "have decided to renounce not only the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church, but the presbyterian form of government itself in favor of the papacy" and "ditching Westminster and the presbyterian form of church government."

I see. So broad swaths of the PCUSA can ditch Westminster as a whole (which it did in C-67) and let presbyterian government largely be undermined in favor of denominational lackeys (when it's not being ignored by "non-schismatic pastors" that choose to abandon constitutional restraint - acting as though their local congregations and presbyteries are able to act without waiting for GA to ratify constitutional ammendments) - but if I hold to the essence of the Reformed faith as put forward in Westminster and seek an ecclesial structure where the highest-ranking clergy seek the consent of their subordinate clergy and the laity, while acting in concert within a college of equals, then I'm apostate and abandoning biblical polity? (Excuse me...he actually lumps me with "orthodox schismatics" ilk.)

Let's set the record straight. I know that there's a lot of history between the Presbyterian Church (i.e., the Reformed Church as it developed in English-speaking countries) and the Anglican Communion (i.e., the Protestant Church that continued some form of episcopal succession). It's generated no small amount of animosity. In fact, the Reformed Episcopal Church seceded from the Protestant Episcopal Church precisely because the latter - taking on Anglo-catholic leanings - began impeding the cooperation that had marked Presbyterian and Episcopalian relationships for the preceding 150 years. But we should echo the cry of the Reformers - Ad fontes! - and go back to our sources if we are to see clearly the challenges of the present.

Presbyterianism is a creature of the supreme orthodoxy shown in the Westminster Confession of Faith and the rejection of monarchical claims (whether by kings or by bishops). Its political history is checkered with moments of assent to and dissent from an episcopal polity. John Calvin and Thomas Cranmer were corresponding about the restoration of the historic episcopate to the Church of Geneva. "Power-mad" Calvin declined episcopacy for himself, and his successors and the successors to the archepiscopacy of Canterbury lost touch in the ensuing decades of turmoil. Eventually, both parties hardened into positions that their founders eschewed. Calvin's objection was to a sacerdotal system* - not to rule by bishops. We should also note that Calvin was not objecting to a sacramental system - but insisted on the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist (cf. B. A. Gerrish's Grace and Gratitude: The Eucharistic Theology of John Calvin).

Father of Presbyterianism, John Knox, gave assent to bishops in the Convention of Leith in 1572 (cf. Ian Haslett's The Reformation in Britain and Ireland for brief analysis). The Reformed (Presbyterian) Church in Hungary continues to be headed by synodical bishops who have a non-pressed but very real succession from the historic episcopate. The Reformed Church in France (Calvin's homeland) also uses bishops to maintain their synodical government - though they do not claim an unbroken succession. Similarly, the Churches of Sweden and Finland (Lutherans) maintain an unbroken episcopal succession - just as the Church of England did.

An excellent study of the many issues involved in church polity - from biblical, theological, historical, and practical perspectives - is given in a book called Who Runs the Church. Therein, representatives of episcopal, presbyterian, and congregational systems give their side and graciously critique the positions of the others. I'll let you decide who wins....

For what it's worth, I'm an Anglican because I think that it has the greatest chance of bringing about catholic unity - not by bridging the divide between Rome and the Protestants, but by reuniting every Christian Church with the past and the present (including the Eastern churches) in practice and polity, as well as in barebones orthodoxy (via the Nicene Creed) - without the dogmatism on developments after the first ecumenical councils. And I'm proud to stand next to defenders of the faith like these guys.

* Don't let the English word priest be confused with the sacrificing priest pictured in the Roman sacerdotal system. The word priest is just the Old English pronunciation of presbytĕrātus, the Latin transliteration of the Greek presbys (πρέσβῠς ). It refers to one holding the office of the ministry of Word and Sacrament. It is emphatically not a translation of the Latin sacerdos or the Greek ἱερεύς!

Three Catholic Universities Give Up Catholic Ethics for Lent

Folks...you just can't make this up.

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: From February 23 to 28, Georgetown University is hosting “Sex Positive Week,” sponsored by feminist and homosexual student clubs.

On Monday, the event “Sex Positive…What’s That?” featured a speaker from Black Rose, an organization “which provides a forum for the many different expressions of power in love and play. This can include dominance & submission, bondage & discipline, fetishism, cross-dressing, to name a few.”

Yesterday’s talk, on Ash Wednesday, “Torn About Porn?” was advertised to include “discussion about arguably alternative forms of pornography that are not supposed to be exploitative, but rather radical and empowering.”

On Saturday, February 28, pornographic film director Tristan Taormino will speak on “Relationships Beyond Monogamy”—one day after speaking in downtown Washington, D.C., about “Anal Pleasure 101”. She will discuss her book Opening Up: A Guide to Creating and Sustaining Open Relationships with Jenny Block, author of Open: Love, Sex, and Life in an Open Marriage. Taormino is also the author of True Lust: Adventures in Sex, Porn and Perversion.

LOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: On Tuesday, the Student Diversity and Cultural Affairs Office of Loyola University Chicago presented the film Brother to Brother about a homosexual African-American who is transported in time to cavort with the allegedly homosexual writer Langston Hughes.

The film is part of a semester-long “Color of Queer Film Series” sponsored by the university. Upcoming films include Blossoming of Maximo Oliveros about a 12 year-old boy who falls in love with a male police officer, and I Exist: Voices from the Lesbian and Gay Middle Eastern Community in the U.S.

SEATTLE UNIVERSITY: This week is “Transgender Awareness Week” at Seattle University, including a session on allegedly transgender Bible heroes and heroines and “Criss-Cross Day,” where students are encouraged to “come dressed for the day in your best gender-bending outfit.” The events are sponsored by the university’s Office of Multicultural Affairs and the student Trans and Allies Club.

“That Catholic universities would permit these events on their campuses at any time of the year is unthinkable, but to do so during the holy season of Lent is unconscionable,” said Reilly.

“The saddest part of this story is that there is no indication that these universities are ashamed or embarrassed by what is taking place on their Catholic campuses. Parents and potential students might begin to wonder how these universities can in good conscience consider themselves Catholic when they allow such perverse distortions of Catholic values to take place.”

h/t Cardinal Newman Society

Why I'm not in the PCUSA

Some people still don't understand why I set aside over a decade of preparation for ministry and official status in the high-paying PCUSA. It is fundamentally this: the PCUSA refuses to provide basic care to the people in the pew, especially when it comes to giving pulpits to false-shepherds who actively undermine the confidence God's people should have in God's Word. While I should have seen it long before I did, it took the flagrant scorn towards the Scriptures evidenced by an ordained clergyman in my (now former) presbytery of care to show me that even the best presbyteries were unwilling to do anything about the spreading cancer.

I am so sick and tired of these people pretending to have some sort of humility while also standing up, shaking their fists at the heavens and saying: "My God wouldn't do X or Y or Z like the God of the Old Testament does, so obviously the Bible is wrong!!!"

The best part is when these pretenders to the pastorate claim that an orthodox view of Scriptures is - at best - juvenile and naive. Of course, it doesn't take long for them to jump on the "okay...it's just a white male heterosexualist power trip in disguise, you meanie!"

To them, I'll say this: I've been deeply wounded by the words of Scripture. But those wounds were for my good. My pride has been pommeled. My lust has been lambasted. My sloth has been slapped. My avarice assailed and my gluttony gored. My wrath routed and my envy immolated.

Yes...Scripture hurts us. Scripture wounds people.

If it didn't, we couldn't be healed.

“Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” John 6

H is for Hypocrisy

On Wednesdays, I try to blog on a worship topic. However, my seminary has decided that the worship of perverse sexual acts and child rape is appropriate, so I'm interrupting my regular schedule.

(Sort-of...they promote it with the title V is for Venite. And venite is a legitimate liturgical topic which I'll need to return to at some point.)

Q is for Questionable Judgment

Here's the link to their site discussing the upcoming campus-sponsored production of Eve Ensler's The Vagina Monologues.

R is for Risible

Here's my response (which may or may not be on the site...they moderate, and I was censored in public discourse throughout parts of my seminary career):

I'm personally saddened to see the Women's Center sponsoring this play. In a notorious section, "The Little Coochi Snorcher that Could," a woman recounts how as a 13 yr old girl she is given alcohol and then seduced by a 24 yr old woman. In the original form (which has been unsatisfactorily redacted to omit it and change the age from 13 to 16), she dismisses the substance abuse and statutory violation by saying: "Now people say it was a kind of rape.... Well, I say if it was rape, it was a good rape...." In another segment, a six year old is queried about her genitalia (smells, names, etc.). As the father of beautiful little girl, I would be hard pressed to stay in my seat through such a performance.

The rest of the play wavers between diatribes against men and male-female sex as inherently violent, or about sexual practices that really deserve to stay in the bedroom. How this play actually addresses violence against women (especially when it is celebrated in the above scene), or opens frank conversations about the role men - and women - have in the sexualization of children and women (objectification is a prologue to rape and oppression) is perhaps beyond the scope of Wimminwise to answer. But it would be helpful to reflect on why this play at this seminary - of all the venues and content available - is appropriate and effective.

O is for Objection

Beyond the politicization of a day that Christians should remember for martyrs, they overturn a divinely-ordained institution (heterosexual marriage). Worse, marriage is meant to be a mysterious - almost sacramental - expression of the union of Christ and His Church. What are we to make of this from a seminary?

B is for Bias

Why is homosexual rape given a pass by an event promoted as anti-violence-against-women?

H is for Hypocrisy

We have a mandate to reform the culture to the Scriptural norm (the norming norm), not let culture corrupt the message of the Scriptures.

E is for End!!!

U is for Update: They posted my response. It was the same old "You don't know what you're talking about." However, I have it from an eyewitness that the attendance at these events has been blissfully low. As some one once termed roughly 1/3 of the campus population: "middle-aged bitter divorcees and their dogs."

Sad, really. Men need to be molded by their interactions with the pain of women....this just stops with scolding.

Born-Again Baptized Buddhist Bishop?

Stand Firm and The Living Church are reporting that an ordained priest in the ECUSA, who has described himself as having undergone Buddhist 'lay ordination,' is now positioned to run for bishop of the diocese in an unusual election. The others have covered both sides of the issue well enough. All that's left for me is small-minded snark...so here goes.

If you meet the bishop, kill him.

Oh wait…that’s not a Koan from Buddhism. It’s the Koran and Islam.

PRAY IT AIN'T SO!

Authentic Christian Living under Obama

I ran across this excellent post on how to live as a politically conservative Christian under the Obama presidency. It's written by the Rev'd Dcn. Bart Martin, oa chaplain in the REC. Here are the bullet points.

1. Pray like a Saint Augustine
2. Know the times like an Edmund Burke
3. Love the law of God like a King Josiah

For an explication, see the whole blog post.

Wolves in Sheepdog Clothing

Is your pastor leading you? Or just watching the show?



You should know what you believe, why you believe it, and why it makes a difference.

h/t ReverendFun

John Stott on Solving World Problems

"I sometimes wonder if the comparatively slow progress towards world peace, world equity and world evangelization is not due, more than anything else, to the prayerlessness of the people of God."

--From The Message of Thessalonians (The Bible Speaks Today series: Leicester: IVP, 1991), p. 125.

How about it, folks? Got some time this morning? Not that much time? Okay, go here.

Late to the party? No problem.

Modern Seminarians’ Dictionary

I saw this once back when I was in college and have regretted not keeping a copy ever since. I have sought it high and low and have finally had it come across my desk again. It is both hilarious and stunningly accurate. Read them all, you’ll recognize some of them especially if you’re a frequent visitor here.

A MODERN SEMINARIANS’ DICTIONARY
Published in “Fidelity”, September 1987, pp. 23-25.
Brother seminarians! Are you troubled by the non-judgmental expectations of the seminary? Are you confused by their concerns? Fear not. Before your eyes you have the key to ordination in this person’s seminary. Add these terms to your theological lexicon and believe me, you could well be ordained one or two years early!

PASTORAL: Effeminate; an attribute lacking in a man who demonstrates overt masculine attributes of clarity, decisiveness, and orthodoxy: G.K. Chesterton was not pastoral.

RIGID: Your view is not my view; normally, the rigid person has a simplistic view of Catholic doctrine (see SIMPLISTIC); for example, a rigid person holds that the ordination of women is not possible; a flexible person holds that to fail to ordain women is an example of sexism. Evelyn Waugh was rigid: “It is better to be narrow-minded than to have no mind, to hold limited and rigid principles than to have none at all. That is the danger which faces so many people today ‚ to have no considered opinions on any subject, to put up with what is wasteful and harmful with the excuse that there ‘is good in everything’ ‚ which in most cases means an inability to distinguish between good and bad.”

VISION: The quality of agreeing with me.

JUDGMENTAL: A person who judges the sin but not the sinner. A non-judgmental person utters not a word on the morality of the usual sexual sins, but tries to determine “where a person’s at” so that the person’s motives can be judged accordingly; a non-judgmental person judges the sinner but not the sin.

SIMPLISTIC: Having to do with common sense.

CATHOLIC FUNDAMENTALIST: A simplistic person who tries to live the Faith in a docile and pious way; also a Catholic who frequently prays the Rosary.

FLEXIBLE: You agree with me; a flexible person is open and dialogues on any issue, smiles knowingly and does precisely what he started out to do.

CHALLENGE: To recognize that my views are better than your views.

GROWTH: For you to assimilate my way of thinking into your life.

ENABLE: An essential attribute of a priest whereby he is able to convince others to do things his way without parishioners catching on to the deception.

NETWORKING: Allowing nuns to run parishes.

I HEAR YOU: A clever way of telling you that I don’t agree with you but I don†t want to sound dogmatic, rigid or inflexible.

WE HAVE NO RIGHT ANSWERS/WE DON’T HAVE MANY ANSWERS: Except this one (cf. Archbishop Rembert Weakland on homosexuality: “...I would like to state that I do not have all the answers on this highly complex issue…” (The Catholic Herald, July19, 1980.)

YOU’RE NOT LISTENING: The way a flexible, non-judgmental person expresses disappointment that a rigid, dogmatic person doesn’t agree with him; example: the Pope is “not listening” to the American Church.

OPEN AND HONEST: Telling religious superiors what they want to hear.

WOUNDED HEALER: The term used to convince a person who doesn’t “feel good about himself” to feel good about himself without Confession.

WHERE YOU’RE AT: Your psychological condition when you’re in the state of mortal sin calling for acceptance and a non-judgmental attitude.

WHERE ARE THOSE TEARS COMING FROM?: The standard question to ask troubled or sick persons when you have nothing else to fill up the unnerving silence.

COMPLEX TECHNOLOGICAL WORLD: The reason for resisting one’s conscience when opposing the teaching of the Catholic Church; also, the standard response a flexible person uses when a rigid person seems to be winning an argument.

VALUING YOUR SEXUALITY: Obsession with the usual adolescent preoccupations.

WE ARE ALL SEXUAL BEINGS: The reason to overlook sexual misbehavior in seminaries.

CELIBACY: Refraining from heterosexual genital activity.

PROCESS: The spontaneous movement in the dialogue of group therapy sessions never to be disrupted by thinking.

FEELING: The highest faculty of the human person left fully untouched by original sin.

ORIGINAL SIN: See SEXISM.

LOVE: A nice feeling.

THINKING: The most dangerous activity in a seminary; cause for psychological counseling; those who think “disrupt the process”; see PROCESS.

TOUCH, MINISTRY OF: Physical contact to demonstrate that one has the capacity of intimacy; does not necessarily involve an exchange of bodily fluids.

IN TOUCH WITH FEELINGS: Using the intellect to explicitly identify what one is feeling so that speech patterns can be altered to communicate one’s sensitivity and compassion; not to be confused with “intellectualizing your feelings.”

INTELLECTUALIZING YOUR FEELINGS: Controlling one’s temper.

COMPASSION: The warm feeling one has for oneself at any given time; one who has compassion needs to tell others he/she has compassion, otherwise compassion isn’t present; see also IN TOUCH WITH FEELINGS.

COMPASSION BURNOUT: The loss of the warm feeling one has for oneself when charitable works become wearisome or otherwise costly.

SENSITIVITY: The ability to identify and agree with the conventional wisdom of left-wing political issues such as feminism, gay rights, dissent,etc. Tim Unsworth of the National Catholic Reporter describes a sensitive priest: “But Vince Connery also cries a lot. He cries openly and
unashamedly in private conversation and in public. He doesn’t cover his face or hide it in the crook of his elbow. He simply stands there and cries, letting the tears flow and the voice break; and if someone reaches out even slightly, Connery will share an embrace while he cries some more. It soon becomes clear that this is an emotionally healthy priest in an emotionally unhealthy church” (NCR April, 1987).

TOTAL COMMITMENT: The intensity of involvement in charitable works until one finds that one “doesn’t feel good” about oneself; total commitments usually last six months to a year.

LEGALISM: Accepting at face value and obediently implementing what a document, law, or guideline reads.

OBEDIENCE: A word which doesn’t exist.

RULES: A word that once was operative but was done away with by the Second Vatican Council.

EXPECTATIONS: Flexible guidelines which change as frequently as the feelings of the Rector; not to be confused with RULES or LEGALISM.

REPRESSED ANGER: If detected, a cause for dismissal from the seminary; probable cause of both world wars, the Holocaust, and the election of Ronald Reagan [and George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush]; a technique absolutely essential for an orthodox seminarian to get ordained.

FORMATION: Kindergarten.

AFFIRMATION: The flattery due to someone who is in a position of authority.

AUTHORITY: Cannot exist or be invoked unless vested in a sensitive, flexible, non-judgmental and compassionate person (see SENSITIVE, FLEXIBLE, and JUDGMENTAL).

SEXISM: The sin associated with being male.

MALE DOMINATION: The irritating interest men have in sports, cigars, and male-bonding, especially in the hierarchy of the Church; the only mortal personal sin.

FEMININITY: A word created by a sexist, male-dominated society to subjugate women in the maternal role; the presence of femininity in women religious is a cause to recommend psychological counseling.

GETTING IN TOUCH WITH ONE’S FEMININE SIDE: An essential requirement for ordination to the priesthood.

NEGATIVE: The bad attitude having to do with the recognition of personal sin; also, any disposition which is not happy with the policies and views of sensitive, flexible and non-judgmental people.

CHANGE: Mandated by the Second Vatican Council; must be open to all change unless instituted recently; see WE HAVE NO RIGHT ANSWERS.

CONCERN: The response that a sensitive, flexible, non-judgmental and compassionate people in authority have when someone doesn’t agree with them.

HUMANKIND: The human race free of sexism (see SEXISM).

PARENTING: The activity of humankind in begetting children (see HUMANKIND).

SPIRIT OF VATICAN II: Church activities and programs which have absolutely no relationship to the letter of the documents of Vatican II.

ONGOING: The period of time between the Second Vatican Council and the implementation of the Spirit of Vatican II (see SPIRIT OF VATICAN II).

RELEVANT: Anything to do with dissent from Church teaching.

PAIN: The focus of Church dissent; felt by the editors of the National Catholic Reporter and inflicted by the editors of The Wanderer.

REDEFINING THE CHURCH: Defining the Church according to the Spirit of Vatican II (see SPIRIT OF VATICAN II).

LIBERATION: The replacement of existing structures of constraint with new and improved structures of constraint.

CONSCIENCE: The final arbiter of the correctness of one†s action always to be guided by the latest in Church dissent.

PRE-VATICAN II: A person who accepts at face value the teaching of the Church and who reads the documents of the Second Vatican Council without reference to a commentary.

CHURCH: Me.

MACROCHURCH: The male-dominated, sexist, oppressive, authoritarian hierarchical Church.

MICROCHURCH: The pastoral, flexible, open and honest, compassionate, open-to-change, local Christian community.

COLLEGIALITY: The doctrine defined by the Spirit of Vatican II stating that bishops have exactly the same authority as the Bishop of Rome.

BISHOP OF ROME: The local ordinary of an obscure diocese in Italy.

RADICALLY CONSERVATIVE: Reason to ignore the current discipline of the Church.

THE FUTURE: The last and enduring hope of Church dissenters.

WE CAN’T GO BACK: An absolutely efficacious and disarming argument.

HUMANAE VITAE: The biggest mistake the Church has made since the Council of Trent.

COUNCIL OF TRENT: A convenient summary of medieval myths and superstitions.

ECUMENISM: The process of transforming the liturgical rites of the mainline Christian denominations into a single rite of coffee, donuts and dialogue.

TRADITION: A practice established before the Middle Ages or after the Second Vatican Council.

THE LAITY: The future of the Church; cannot be ignored unless associated with ultra-conservative groups.

ULTRA-CONSERVATIVE: Anyone who disagrees with the National Catholic Reporter.

TRADITIONAL NUN: Irrelevant; an embarrassment to women religious.

WOMEN RELIGIOUS: Feminist nun; an oxymoron.

SOCIAL JUSTICE: The realignment of social structures according to the platform of the Democratic Party.

PROGRESSIVE: Pouring the wine of old heresies into new wineskins.

CONSCIOUSNESS RAISING: The method of argumentation used by radical feminists moving adult males to action: “Better to live in a corner of the house-top than have a nagging wife and a brawling household” (Prov.21:9).

EXPERIENCE: The only valid way to substantiate one’s opinions and beliefs; there’s no such thing as a “bad experience.”

SPEAKOUT: The activity springing from the virtue of Social Justice whereby sensitive and compassionate persons, with great emotion, promote the platform of the Democratic Party.

SHRILL: The nasty habit rigid and judgmental people have when they dare to disagree with the demands of Social Justice (see SOCIAL JUSTICE).

PREFERENTIAL OPTION FOR THE POOR: Socialism.

MINISTRY: All human activity.

COMFORT, COMFORTABLE: The final cause and proper object of ministry.

PLURALISM: The acceptance of all points of view except those with a point of view which doesn’t accept all points of view.

CLERICALISM: The attitude of priests who knowingly and willingly practice the sacramental aspects of the priesthood with diligence, reverence and joy.

HOMOPHOBIC: The psychological condition of those who witness and report acts of homosexuality to seminary authorities.

GAY: Deeply sensitive person who naturally possesses the skills for effective pastoral ministry; oppressed minority; in no way connected with pederasty: cf. Fr. James L. Arimond: “Don’t confuse homosexual orientation with other sexual minorities: transexual; pederasty; bafoonery; etc.” from an Archdiocese of Milwaukee workshop in Gay Ministry.

SEXUAL PREFERENCE: Feeling good about some or all objects of desire whether animal, vegetable or mineral.

MISSION STATEMENT: A written objective or goal of a pastoral program upon which the success of the Gospel of Jesus Christ depends.

INTERFACE: A term, borrowed from computer technology, where sensitive and compassionate people dialogue among themselves; similar to the dialogue that the farmers and pigs engaged in in George Orwell’s Animal Farm.

ORDINATION: An archaic celebration in the Church still useful to mark the beginning of full-time ministry.

SEMINARY: School where men and women are prepared for full-time ministry.

OUTREACH: Any program for whatever reasons; also known as reach out; usually involves fundraising.

VOCATIONS CRISIS: Refers to the Church†s failure to relax the rules on celibacy and failure to ordain women.

SHARE: The practice of discussing the deepest intimacies of one’s life in front of complete strangers.

WORKSHOP: A church-sponsored meeting to ensure that the issues of optional celibacy, women’s ordination, the Sandinistas and leisure suits are still being addressed.

SELF-ACTUALIZATION: Salvation; no longer a mortal sin.

DIALOGUE: The deft use of banal clichés in conversation.

PROPHETIC/PROPHET: One who has the courage to speak out on one’s behalf; e.g., Charlie Curran.

CURRAN, CHARLIE: Twentieth century saint; went into debt defending his faith.

EMPOWER: To encourage others to think for themselves; cf., Evelyn Waugh: “Every effort was made to encourage the children at the public schools to think for themselves. When they should have been whipped and taught Greek paradigms, they were set arguing about birth control and nationalization. Their crude little opinions were treated with respect. Preachers in the school chapel week after week entrusted the future to their hands. It is hardly surprising that they were Bolshevik at 18 and bored at 20.”

POWERFUL: A spontaneous exclamation from hearing one†s own views restated in a more banal fashion.

LITURGISTS: “A society of men among us, bred from their youth in the art of proving by words multiplied for the purpose, that white is black, and black is white, according as they are paid” (Swift, Gulliver’s Travels).

EASTER DUTY: Annual sacrilege.

PSYCHOLOGIST: Infallible teaching authority in the Church.

OFFICIAL CHURCH TEACHING: “I don’t expect it to change anybody’s mind one way or another. Catholics today have learned what it means to be selectively obedient to the Church†s teaching” (Father Richard McBrien, Washington Post, December16,1981).

CHASTITY: Safe sex.

SAFE SEX: Taking appropriate precautions during high risk sexual activity; not to be confused with responsible love.

RESPONSIBLE LOVE: Sexual relations only within marriage with a spouse; an ideal impossible to sustain in a complex technological world.

HIGH RISK SEXUAL ACTIVITY: Sodomy; the term neo-Victorian Catholics use when referring to the kinds of sexual activity St. Paul warned against.

CLOWN MASS: Liturgical innovation comparable to the innovation of Gregorian chant; relevant: “A clown liturgy may sound sacrilegious but those who attended a special Mass at St. Agnes Church described it as moving, uplifting, spirited and colorful” (Catholic Herald, Milwaukee, February 16, 1984).

LITURGICAL DANCE: Liturgical innovation comparable to the innovation of Gregorian chant: “Today’s procession into the altar by the priest and some members of the laity was a dance in the early church” (Sister Barbara Linke); relevant: “For me, my body is my instrument - it’s my way of expressing myself,” she said, gesturing frequently with hand to convey her thoughts. “I feel free when I dance; it’s a natural expression.” (Sister Barbara Linke, quoted in the Milwaukee Sentinel, August 3, 1985).

AU's Audacity of Dopes

The atheists [erm...] freedom-preserving faithful at Americans United (against Churches oops, I keep doing that!) have issued a call to SC to ban an "I Believe" license plate.

[A] retired United Methodist minister served as lead plaintiff in Americans United’s lawsuit, Summers v. Adams, which asked the court to halt South Carolina from producing an auto tag favoring one religious group over others.

This plate, unlike those requested by private groups and organizations, originated in the South Carolina legislature and was passed by statute. The plate features a cross, a stained-glass window and the words “I Believe.” No other faith group has been offered a similar plate, let alone those who want a plate stating, “I Do Not Believe.”

Let's take a look at this link to SC DMV plates.

Secular Humanists of the Low Country Plate

Although Secular Humanist of the Low Country is a membership based organization the “In Reason We Trust” plate is available to all SC residents. The fee for the plate is $30.00 every two years in additional to the regular registration fee. As a non-profit organization, the Secular Humanists of the Low Country do not receive any portion of the funds generated from the license plate sales.

Call me crazy, but for the life of me that looks just like an “I Do Not Believe” license plate.

Plates promoting Fishing, Wildlife Conservation, Golf, NASCAR, Education, Home Ownership and even [gasp] the national motto of In God We Trust - all of these are okay. Same with any number of voluntary organizations like colleges, schools, Freemasons, etc. Heck...they even have one for squardancing and the Carolina Shag, the states official dance. Just don't have anything to do with the church.

They're also up in a dander about the Choose Life plate. (Doesn't that go hand in hand with the shag plate anyway?)

If the DMV chooses to appeal the decision, AU will be ready. The state already failed in its appeal defending a law allowing a “Choose Life” plate back in 2006. It’s astonishing, and a waste of taxpayer funds, that state officials would want to continue pushing this when it is clearly a violation of church-state separation, Khan said.

Absolutely right. It's a horrendous waste of taxpayer money to present a plate that raises money from voluntary contributors. (Willikers! Obama is going to make sure you can use that money to fund more abortions...sounds like a win to you dweebs.)

Let's get something straight. THE RIGHT TO LIFE IS A PROTECTION GRANTED BY NATURAL LAW AND GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION. Civilized countries know this. It's not a church-state issue.

“I wish our legislators would read the Constitution as avidly as they read public opinion polls,” Jones, a Unitarian minister, wrote in a column for The State, South Carolina’s largest newspaper (See “Illicit License.”)

Yeah, me too. Vide supra!

Summers and Knight, both Christian leaders, also saw the legislators’ decision to approve this plate as demeaning to the faith they cherish.

“They are taking a Christian symbol and using it for marketing and advertising purposes,” Summers said. “This is an abuse and misuse of the Christian cross.”

Okay, Summers. What should we do with people that take the Christian ministry and use that for agitating and political purposes?

John Piper on Impreccatory Psalms

During seminary, I studied the Psalms with a professor whose dissertation was on them. She was great fun to work with because you could count on her to fly off the handle if you mentioned a NT appropriation of the Psalmic material. Yeah... studying Psalm 22 with her was a riot.

(To her credit, she wanted us to appreciate them as Jewish religious artifacts...but I'm a Daily Office pray-er, so I'm forced to take them as Christian Scripture!)

The impreccatory psalms were clearly the hardest for my classmates to deal with. Most of them retreated into either the old stock German critic reply (elucidated by Dr. Piper) or talked about how it was a cry for justice from [fill in the blank oppressed group]. I didn't win any friends by reminding folks that God has no problem getting his hate on.

But a worship professor gave me a new avenue on approaching tough stuff like this in the psalms: "If you're going to bitch and moan, you're better off doing it to God. At least He can actually do something about it."

The Psalms let us know that it's okay to be fully human toward God. He can take it - He might even transform it! The Incarnation lets us know that our humanity is no barrier to true union with the Godhead. So pray a psalm (or 2 or 3) today!

Holy Hijinx!

Last month, US Border Agents seized a large shipment of Ketamine (or Special K, a "date-rape drug") that the perp claimed were Holy Water bottles.

(Hey...Canadian churches are so empty, who would know the difference. Right?)

Well...that explains some of those Marian apparitions!

False Gods and False Devils - The War on Christmas

G. K. Chesterton said "Idolatry is committed, not merely by setting up false gods, but by setting up false devils; by making men afraid of war or alcohol or economic law, when they should be afraid of spiritual corruption and cowardice." Building upon Chesterton’s epigram, there are two forms of moral blindness, blindness to actual evil and seeing evil where none exists.

The bias in the mainstream media about Islamic Supremacist terror (calling it "unrest" or "freedom fighters") is an example of moral blindness to an existing evil. The statement by Nelson Mandela that America wants a world holocaust is an example of false devils - seeing an evil where none exists. A young leftist on TV claimed that the CIA destroyed the twin towers in New York. Conspiracy theorists of this sort have a double moral blindness - blindness to an actual evil combined with delusional perceptions of false devils.

One false devil that needs to be slain is the whole "war on Christmas." I'm sure you've heard about it, so I needn't go into any great lengths describing it. Don't get me wrong: I love the traditions we've received in this country that are used to hallow the Feast of our Saviour's Birth. Christmas trees from Germany (through Victorian England), Caroling from the French (again, through England), Santa Claus from the Dutch, etc. These have become such a part of the fabric of our national life that it seems impossible to remove them.

However, if people call them "holiday trees" and play "holiday music," what is it to me? They were pre-existing cultural expressions that were taken up in the service of the culture's interest. From the Middle Ages to the late Modern Era, the culture's interest was tied to Christianity (in the West, at least). That is no longer the case. So these cultural artifacts go back to doing what they've always done: reflect the culture. (And serving the crumbling gods of this age: Mammon.)

But Christians (or at least churchy-folk) get so tied up in who's not displaying a nativity scene, or who is giving equal time to other religious winter-time traditions, that we have no time to deal with the real evil: the war on Christ's Mass. We demand that the stores have ol' Saint Nick (though we do not even recognize him as the sainted Bishop of Myra), play Christmas Carols (preferably in muzak so we needn't be haunted by the words), and say "Merry Christmas!"

But most of these Christmas Commandos (in America, at least) neglect the holy preparation of Advent. Many churches aren't even open on Christmas Day for services! Remember what happened in 2005, when Christmas was actually on a Sunday? ("It'd be such a burden when we have all the family in." Wait, didn't Jesus say something about family values?)

And then the season of Christmas is abruptly over on 12/26 (National Return-the-crap-you-got-for-that-XBoxGame/Sweater-you-really-wanted Day). Where is Holy Innocents (c'mon, Prolifers!!!)? Where is Holy Family? Where is Epiphany? Where is Candlemas?

If anybody has been waging a war on Christmas, it's the Christians...the people who cram so much secular stuff into our commemoration of Christ's Nativity that we fail to leave room to prepare our hearts, our families, and - dare I say it - our churches and communities to welcome the birth of the King who comes in humility. And the atheists know it.

Which brings me to my second point. Plato said that courage is a combination of knowing what not to fear, combined with perseverance in opposition to that which is harmful and evil. This is where our insistence on playing the game of the Christmas War has really cost the church a great deal. In November, video game sales increased 10% (nearly $3 BILLION dollars, adding to the previous $19BILLION spent in the preceding months).

Let's put that in perspective. While we're swilling away our eggnog and CokeZero, over 1.1 billion people on the planet (17% of the earth's human inhabitants) can't even drink the water they have locally. Every 8 seconds a child dies from a water-borne disease. Did you know that for less than $10 billion dollars, the entire world could be given safe, clean drinking water? Thank God some people still know what to do with our national largess.

You've still got a week. Make this Christmas count.