Monday, November 24
Sunday, November 23
Should Churches Be Subsidized For Preaching Politically Correct Propaganda?
In compliance with the state mandate to curb storm water run off, the Prince George's County Department of the Environment is considering a proposal that would waive the unpopular impervious surface property tax assessment for their properties if churches agree to preach environmentally friendly sermons or engage in other forms of mental conditioning.
What's the big deal, some will ask.
After all, does the Bible not teach us to be good stewards of God's creation?
God's word also instructs the believer to be on guard against wolves in sheep's clothing.
If governments grant tax code favors to religious organizations for ideological compliance in regards to one issue, what is to prevent them from doing so in regards to more controversial matters?
In the name tolerance and diversity, what if governments granted tax and regulatory relief to congregations supporting gay marriage?
What if a government wanted to promote pluralism and inclusion by lavishing all manner of benefits upon a church that agreed not to lift the name of Jesus above all names but instead only reference a nondescript generic God or no God at all but rather just the Ultimate Concern as formulated by Paul Tillich?
How about putting the shoe on the other foot for a moment?
What if to bolster declining birthrates a government lavished tax favors upon churches promising to preach prolife messages?
It is said that the power to tax is the power to destroy.
Advocates insist that that the program is strictly voluntary.
However, government programs that start off voluntary can easily end up becoming mandatory.
Anybody remember the assurances of if you like your healthcare plan you can keep your healthcare plan?
From one perspective, the program is completely voluntary with no government shocktroops raiding churches failing to put in the environmental upgrades or enunciating church dogma in such a way to win the approval of the state (at least not yet anyway).
Yet from another perspective, aren't churches that refuse to have their very thoughts policed in this manner punished by having to pay the tax?
Courts have forbidden graduation prayers for being less of a mental intrusion.
By Frederick Meekins
Pastor Badgers Congregation To Boycott C.S. Lewis
So why is it not wrong for the pastor to have either read these works or to have familiarized himself with this material?
At one point in the sermon, Pastor Cooley shouts like a lunatic asking if anyone in the congregation still wants to read the disputed books or watch movies inspired by these particular texts.
And what if someone responded back “YES!”
In this series of sermons, Pastor Cooley insisted that the title alone of “The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe” ought to be enough to get the believing Christian to avoid the book.
So if witches are evil, what is wrong with casting one in the role of the villain?
Maybe that role should instead, as in the case of many of Stephen King's works of speculative literature, be reserved for ultralegalistic ministers attempting to assert too much control over their congregations and parishioners.
From the sermons, it becomes increasingly apparent that, while Pastor Cooley has a commendable grasp of these areas where caution regarding Lewis would be prudent, the minister does not have much appreciation for the techniques of the literary arts.
This is particularly evident in regards to the scenes Cooley analyzes of Lucy's encounter with the fawn Mr.Tumnus.
For example, Rev. Cooley insists that, since fawns are noted in mythology for their seductive powers, that what Lewis is advocating are indecent carnal relations between underage minors and demoniac spirit beings.
Instead, the greater truth Lewis could be attempting to convey might be for the need to be cautious of that which we might initially find appealing if we consider the literary motif associated with the fawn and how the narrative plays itself out with Mr. Tumnus wanting to capitalize on his initial encounter with Lucy by handing her over to the White Witch.
Sometimes these unsettling realities that we are reluctant to face can be easier to grapple with or stick in the brain in the form of an engaging story rather than be constantly hollered at alone.
However, apparently Pastor Cooley is not much of a proponent of the old adage about a spoonful of sugar getting the medicine to go down.
In his tirades against C.S. Lewis, Pastor Cooley remarked that science fiction is nothing but witchcraft.
As justification for such a claim, Pastor Cooley posits that witchcraft consists of any power that does not come from God.
Once again, what Pastor Cooley possesses in terms of a desire to preserve sound doctrine he sadly lacks in literary understanding.
Admittedly, magic is often an intrinsic component of many forms of fantasy.
However, though science fiction can contain certain mystical elements such as the Force in Star Wars, over all, the genre attempts to provide a technological basis for the impressive wonders described in these works of imagination.
As such, though science fiction can be utilized to promote questionable philosophies, science fiction is morally neutral like most other forms of technology.
As such, does Pastor Cooley condemn the use of electricity or the internal combustion engine?
For though these are based upon natural forces set into motion by God's sustaining power, as in the case of literary speculation in conjecture like science fiction, these are the result of the human mind reflecting upon a fact or a concept and extrapolating from these to configure them in such a way as to result in an until then unrealized application or insight.
Interestingly, developers of these technologies expressed affinities towards ideas and affiliations perhaps even more questionable than those to which C.S. Lewis was drawn.
Henry Ford disseminated “The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion” to promote his particular brand of anti-Semiticism.
Thomas Edison wasn't just at one time a member of Theosophical Society; his research into electricity was intermingled with speculation regarding spiritualist phenomena and communication.
Therefore, does that mean that to remain consistent with Pastor Cooley's call for a radical degree of separation, that Pastor Cooley must repent of his electronic ministries and instead must in faith rely only on those methods utilized by the Apostles in the early days of the Church?
By Frederick Meekins
Thursday, November 20
Wednesday, November 19
Tuesday, November 18
Episcopals Forge Alliance With Islamists To Destroy America
Of the Muslim prayers allowed in the structure on 11/11/14, the National Cathedral posted on its Facebook page that the service was open only to attendees and interfaith guests.
So apparently the National Cathedral doesn't have a problem with religious exclusion when doing so promotes that institution's anti-Christian and anti-American agendas.
Would a radical Christian sect that opposed homosexuality be allowed to promote their particular theological viewpoint within that particular edifice with the vestry's blessing, especially if the sponsors or participants advocated the use of violence or extend moral approval to those utilizing such to achieve their socioreligious objectives?
Then why is this privilege being extended to Muslims having participated in such outrages?
Monday, November 17
Are Stores Open Thanksgiving Deserving Of Wide Scale Divine Retribution?
In particular, one such condemnation intoned that from this alteration in commercial operational policy that America is an evil nation worthy of God's judgment.
So because Walmart was either open on Thanksgiving or opened their doors later that evening, nuclear destruction and annihilation or something comparable should rain down across the nation. That is, of course, what is usually meant by the euphemism of “God's judgment”.
To justify this hardline response to opening stores on Thanksgiving beyond simply frowning upon the decision to actively wanting to see lives ruined because of it, Biblical prohibitions regarding the Sabbath are often invoked.
The intentions might possess a nobility in that these sentiments attempt to construe all of reality through the light of God's word and theology derived from it. However, in terms of religious jurisprudence, the position falls a bit short in terms of serving as a platform upon which one can stand to look righteous in calling for blatant ruination and upheaval.
God no doubt delights when His children offer up gratitude for what He has provided and is angered when this appreciation is not evident. However, it does not follow that one cannot express gratitude in a scheduled ritualized manner prior to engaging in orderly commerce later that same day.
One might even claim that God does not really care one way or another to a great degree about the statutory observance of Thanksgiving Day. It may come as a surprise, but there is nothing found within the pages of the canon of Scripture demanding the observance be commemorated a particular Thursday in November.
It must also be asked to what extent do those enforcing Thanksgiving Day under the Mosaic regulations upholding the Sabbath want these punishments and prohibitions enforced? From Exodus 20:9-11, it is learned that the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week. Jehovah is quite explicit about this.
In our system of chronometric tabulation, Saturday is the Sabbath. What the vast majority of Christians celebrate each Sunday (especially in the morning) is technically not the Sabbath but rather the Lord's Day to commemorate the bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
These have been conflated in the minds of many, especially those under the sway of a strict legalism. However, these days are not the same.
So are those demanding compulsory observance of the Sabbath willing to turn themselves over for execution should they find themselves violating the extensive prohibitions regulating the day? For according to Exodus 31:14, that is the stipulated punishment for those failing to observe the Sabbath of the seventh day if such a regulation still applies beyond Deuteronomical Israel.
When those attending compulsory Sabbath observations return home, do they intend to walk rather than operate a vehicle? For that is the extent to which the most observant Orthodox Jews adhere to the exactness of that divine decree. Senator Joseph Lieberman would not even place his own subway fair card into the electronic ticket-taker.
Furthermore, do those deliberating to make such a chore of relaxation intend to only eat leftovers from the night before or unheated prepackaged foods? Because if the true believing Christian must abide by every Biblical decree in excruciating detail for fear of befalling God's indignation, the preparation of consumables is forbidden as well.
Those more interested in ruining everyone else's celebration rather than simply maximizing their own will respond that simply pointing out what is said plainly in certain passages of Scripture downplayed as a result of those advocating them not wanting a greater majority of Christians to grapple with what is being said actually obscures the greater truth of the principle that is being conveyed. Fair enough.
If not for the principles conveyed by God to the Hebrew forefathers of the need for rest and reflection, mankind might have never comprehended the need for a work environment beneficial for all sides of the economic transaction. Before this revelation, for the most part laborers were little more than fodder to be worked until they dropped and quickly discarded.
However, are those insisting up a slavish adherence to the letter of the law really getting that point across when their homiletical formulations cause the listeners to stop and wonder if what really gets the motors of these scriptural exegetes running is rather body counts, the destruction of property, and overall social upheaval. For are not these in some form or another what is meant by the phrase “God's judgment”?
In these times of widespread debauchery and systematic subversion of Western culture, one usually tries to distance oneself from feminist critiques and condemnation of traditional religion. However, if one desires to be an honest observer of the human condition, one is forced to admit that only a man sitting back with his feet propped up would construe Thanksgiving Day as a Sabbath free from labor.
On the classic sitcom “Home Improvement” starring Tim Allen, one of the wittiest lines ever uttered on the series was verbalized when his sidekick Al Borlin quipped that dinner does not make itself. The remark was very similar to an observation made by my own mother.
If a man fails to realize that Thanksgiving is not some magical occasion where one of the most delicious dinners of the year just sprouts fully formed on the table in a manner akin to manna from Heaven, it is most likely that a woman in either the form of a wife, mother or even unwed concubine has spent much of the day laboring away in preparation.
Interestingly, those often complaining the loudest about the growing irreverence with which the day is treated are not absent from the kitchen because they are given over to the higher spiritual pursuits such as prayer, Bible study, or theological contemplation. Instead, they are plopped in an easy chair or on the sofa watching the most typical of entertainments. And I am not talking about the Westminster Kennel Club but rather NFL football.
The conspicuously religious claim that they are opposed to retailers being opened on Thanksgiving because their delicate consciences are disturbed by something so crass and base as mere commerce being transacted on such a solemn occasion. Then why do they have their peepers glued to the boob tube?
It is quite instructive that this contempt for free market exchange is limited to when it is engaged in by the laboring and servile classes. For the last time I checked, it is doubtful that the players, assorted team personnel, or the media conglomerates were putting on a complimentary exhibition game.
No doubt, millions upon millions of dollars exchange hands to orchestrate whatever number of games take place on this particular day. I am not really aware of the exact number. I usually watch the dog show while eating canned pasta just so I can say I had spaghetti for Thanksgiving.
So why are those deciding to go shopping on Thanksgiving more worthy of having death and misery inflicted upon them more so than those instead either attending the football game or even watching the event on television? Confronted so boldly about what it is that they are advocating, those previously enunciating a desire to see God's wrath dispensed over something as commonplace as going to the mall might attempt to linguistically backpedal by claiming that, in their call for judgment, they did not mean to wish misery or death upon those participating in a disputed activity or behavior.
I've pretty much been in or around Christian circles my entire life even if I don't feel welcomed within them entirely. The phrase “God's judgment” rarely has connotation other than that of sorrow and lamentation unless in rare instances where one is referencing the rewards that will be bestowed upon the believer for the good deeds they did honoring to Christ.
Furthermore, in the vast majority of instances, it's not like those participating one way or the other were prevented from enjoying the primary festivities of the Thanksgiving celebration or were not duly compensated in some manner.
For example, though likely not a universal beneficence bestowed on all employees, most laboring to make the sales happen were probably paid some kind of overtime. If not, such personnel were probably not compelled to work beyond their normal allotment of hours for that particular week. As such, they were payed with their scheduled adjusted to be off at another time.
Of even less moral concern ought to be the ones deciding to participate in these sales events on the consumer side of the transaction. For example, many of these sales were designated to commence well after the customary dinner hour.
As such, by that point in the evening, most would have already cogitated upon whatever thoughts of gratitude would have otherwise fired within their respective synapses. Most are in a turkey-induced catatonia, bloated and passing intestinal gas as they glare in a stupor into the television.
Interestingly, if we are raising the opposition to the opening of retailers on Thanksgiving to the level of Biblical law worthy of incurring divine retribution for violating, it must be pointed out that the commencement of these sales technically aren't even occurring on Thanksgiving. In the context of Hebrew culture and religious jurisprudence, the rendering of the day is not determined from midnight to midnight as occurs in the contemporary system. The day is instead rendered from sundown to sundown.
If one wants to be a stickler to Biblical detail, it must be noted that many of these Thanksgiving sales often commence well after dark. Therefore, under Sabbath prohibitions, it is no more immoral to shop from the disputed 8 to 11:59 PM than it would be during the 8 to 11:59 AM period Black Friday morning.
Those wanting to impose the Old Testament as binding civil legislation insist such must be done because God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. So if Americans deserve nuclear annihilation, plague, or whatever manifestation of the Apocalypse tickles your particular eschatological fancy for simply going to the store on Thanksgiving, should our nation also be destroyed for altering the method of rendering the days in compliance with the interpretative principle just enunciated?
It can indeed be upsetting to see what one perceives as our culture moving away from Godly foundations. However, enunciating a desire to see lives ruined and destroyed for such is probably a greater violation of explicit Biblical imperatives (such as the careful invocation of judgment) than the modification of a practice that (though commendable and worthy of continuation) is more of an interpretive application of the divine imperatives to begin with.
By Frederick Meekins