In his condemnation of Christmas,
Pastor Jason Cooley suggests that parents in general and fathers in
particular not impose an outright prohibition against the holiday
cold turkey.
Instead, the minister suggests it might
be better to phase things out gradually over time.
If so, then what is so wrong with these
traditions and practices to begin with?
Applying this methodology to other so
called “sins”, instead of dropping his three extra wives all at
once, would the polygamist be allowed to release them back into the
singles pool one at a time in elimination ceremonies reminiscent of
the tribal council on Survivor?
Or what if someone has a mistress?
Is it being suggested that instead of
romping with her three times per week, that the philanderer merely
cut back to once per week for a whole followed by a period where she
is still wined and dined but simply not bedded before the
relationship is cut off entirely?
In his opposition to Christmas, Pastor
Jason Cooley on a SermonAudio podcast remarked how he was trying to
get his church to fast that day.
However, isn't elevating that to an
implied obligation just as pagan or Romanish as the other traditions
that this fanatic rails against?
For even if Baptists of this hardline
variety insist that what they are doing is voluntary, the
authenticity of your individual faith will be drawn into question if
you fail to hop on board and go along with them.
Matthew 6:17-18 says, “But thou, when
thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; That thou appear
not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and
they Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.”
If a church body has the authority to
shame or guilt trip people into semi-compulsory fasts, what's so
wrong with the season of Lent?
And is not one of the condemnations of
Christmas that no human, only God, has the authority to implement a
mandatory religious observance such as a festival or holy day?
By Frederick Meekins