Ok, I know I'm far behind on this "War '06," or as others call it, The War on Christmas, but I have an excellent excuse: poverty. I have limited access to a computer for some time now and I haven't had time to keep up with my blog. I'm sure that you all haven't noticed... but, hey, it's all good :P

Anyways, I figure if Bush gets to have his silly war we get to have one too, damnit! For too long we have let Caesar have his way with our sacred feasts. I can't even remember a time when someone mentioned "Christmas" without Santa, snow, candy canes, gifts, food, family, "little baby Jeezus" in the next breath. It's sickening, really.

As self-appointed head of the Idaho division of the Anti-Christmas Corps, I hereby propose a plan of action. As people in America having citizenship in a Higher Government and belonging to a different society, we will not give in to the demands of traditional American consumerism. Rather, we will celebrate in frugality and worship in solemnity.

Does this mean we aren't going to buy gifts, decorations, cards, or christmas trees? No. There is nothing wrong with celebrating a national holiday. In fact, I encourage all of you to spend time with friends and family this season. This is a good thing. God doesn't hate the blue spruce with some electric lights on it anymore than he does the turkey with stuffing in it we all ate last month, regardless of the sketchy origins of both feasts.

What God does hate is idolatry. When Jesus is mentioned in a sermon being compared to Santa (gifting us with the riches of his glory, assisted by little guardian angel-elves, of course) and a pagan festival is more noticeable than one of the highest feasts on the christian calendar, then we have a bit of a problem.

Anyways, I wanted to throw in a bit of my own thoughts on this war. I'll be back later with more, for sure.

Yes everyone, the time has come. I will finish moving the rest of my stuff in tonight and stay overnight for the first time in my new place. It will be amazing. I am having a few friends over to hang out. For all you Kentuckians, you should fly out this morning and be with me tonight... m'kay?
Well, just email me for my new address if you want it. Postcards, letters, and such.

Adios!

I have Google ads. What a loser.

Anyways, I have listed a few of my books on Half.Com. Not nearly as extensive as I'd like it to be, but you know how it goes. I hope to have a much wider selection up soon. Check out my profile. Buy my books. Help me pay my rent.

I was praying the office tonight (I'm becoming more regular) and I was thinking of Bishop Schorri's statement of how we, the church, are to become a holy community. In the intercession, we prayed these words,

"Father and Lord of all, you sent your son into the world, that your name might be glorified in every place,
-strengthen the witness of the Church among the nations.
Make us obedient to the teachings of your apostles,
-and bound to the truth of our faith.
As you love the innocent,
-render justice to those who are wronged.
Free those in bondage and give sight to the blind,
-raise up the fallen and protect the stranger.
Fulfill your promise to those who already sleep in your peace,
-through your Son grant them a blessed resurrection."

Now, I understand that many of you, my dear readers, don't care much for The Episcopal Church. I'm so very sorry. I used to not like it much myself, but I am growing to not only enjoy it but allow it to form me. Life has been hectic the past couple months, so my shared-life of community has been a bit deprived but it will soon stabalize.

What does it mean to be a Holy Community? I'm not super convinced that it's those things that so much of the American Church admires, e.g., voting republican, tract machine-gunning, idolizing the family, listening to christian rock, reading christian literature (ick), etc. All of these things make me want to run away and never come back again... If this isn't it, then how are we to become holy?

To be holy, in our communities, we must hold true to those doctrines handed down from the apostles (the creeds, people) These are more than abstract statements of faith and principle, they are the very essence of christian being! These are truths that have turned the world upside down and can do it again.

To be holy, in our communities, we must allow God to set the world to rights, by us, his vessels. We are to not sit and allow evil pass us by, indifferent and apathetic. We are to boldly, in the name of Christ, challenge wickedness and injustice with everything that is in us.

To be holy, in our communities, we must not allow the ourselves and others to pass through life blinded by sinful perversion and listless lethargy. We are to facilitate Spirit's working in us, renewing our sight and loosening our chains.

This is what our prayers tell us about Holy Community. This is what we pray. How many of us are living it? Hmmm... Well, I'm off to bed. God be with us all.

Hey everyone! As many of you already know, I am engaged and going to be married in June 2nd, '07. She's an amazing girl and I couldn't be happier with my relationship situation. God has blessed us both with supportive families and a good community of common friends.

Right now we are both trying to work out everything at different schools. It's a little tough but not terrible. She will move down to Kimberly this December. We will then both attend the College of Southern Idaho.

I am going to be renting a house soon in Twin Falls. I will live in it (maybe alone) and be there until Lynlea moves in after we are married. We are most likely going to stay in Idaho until we get our degrees then take off for Kentucky. We think this will work out the best for both of us.

Right now we are both in tight financial situations. It's going to tough here in about a month. We both want to make sure it all works out so we are doing what we can to raise money both in and outside of our workplaces.

I have created a PayPal donation button over on the left side of my page. I wanted to put that over both as an active practice of learning how to accept things from others and also as a way to make things a little easier for Lynlea and I. If you feel like you could help us out, we would appreciate it so very much! We are trying to think of everything we can do to start off our new life together. A house seems like a good place to start.

Thank you very much for reading. Pray about it and do whatever God leads you to.

Grace and Peace

Hey everyone. Looks like things turned out well on the national level with yesterday's elections. Here in backwards Idaho we learned just how ignorant many people are. Oh well, they're entitled to their own stupid opinions...

I wanted to say a couple things about Kyle's post. I haven't said much because I wanted to see what sort of reaction it would get. First off, it was never an argument against Calvinism. It was a serious yet humorous look at encouters with Reformed theology. I'll agree with him, not all Calvinists I have met were jerks and not some either but most were. I too have many friends who are Calvinists. I mean, I went to Boyce College for crying out loud! I have also met many asshole-ish Arminians too. Does this ring a bell? Or how about for you SBTS people, "Baptist Fire." Anyways, we have worthless people on either side of any debate.

There is nothing bad in telling someone you think they are wrong. I think that Calvinism is wrong. Obviously Kyle does too. That's not to say Reformed Calvinists are bad people. And that's also not to say that there's nothing good or helpful in that particular theological view. I'm not Roman Catholic precisely from some lessons I learned from looking at the Protestant Reformation! Blake had some good words when he said this,

This leads me to think that the problem is not one of Calvinism, Arminianism, Othodoxy, or what have you. The problem is actually much deeper than that: sinfulness. We all desire to be right over loving one another and the only way we will ever find a way out of this problem is to Abide in Christ and bear the fruits of a Christ-follower.

I would agree. See, I think that the point of theology is to remind people that they are to pray. And it is in prayer that we seek to know the will of God and repent of our un-godliness. Sin is the problem. If a theology fosters prayer and repentence, than I'm fine with it. But so many times, with my own personal encounters, Calvinists say that they don't need to worry about it because they are the "elect." If a theology is capable of promoting such arrogance than I can't be a part of it.

Anywho, I just wanted to add my two cents. I'll have a post up soon. I'm thinking about what should masculintiy look like in a postmodern america... I think it is problem but I'm not buying the answers certain conservative groups would like me to. Well, I'm out.

Hey everybody! Today is the first Tuesday of November; the day we vote. I know that many others have been posting short writings on whether one should remain neutral in the voting process (especially those in Christian leadership positions) choose to not vote or take part in the political process whatsoever, vote for not against candidates for office, or just get out and vote no matter what political stripe you are.

This will be my first time voting. I'm a little nervous/excited/afraid/happy/apprehensive/wary/doubtful/optimistic/pessimistic/etc. I'm sure everyone who keeps up with this silly blog will know that I plan on voting and I plan on voting Democrat. That's not simply because I find myself against many of the Republican propositions in the state of Idaho but rather because I am for many of Brady's reforms for our state. I like that he wants to raise minimum wage. I like that he is dedicated to education at the local level. I like that he isn't going to give big oil companies tax breaks. I like that he wants to provide Idahoans with good healthcare and that he has the balls to say so. I like him.

I think that it is right for me to vote. I know many of the more anabaptist brand won't be joining me at the polls. That is fine. It is their conviction and I don't have the right to interfere with that. But others of you who are just to lazy or apathetic to even educate yourselves on the issues - I have no respect for that. It is everyone's duty to know what's going on and then decide what is right for them.

As a Christian, I am not so blind as to say that I see American secular politics bringing about the Kingdom of God. I'm not one of those. But I do see that my participation in the political process will help improve the quality of life on the local scale. It isn't heaven but it is a better earth.

Anyways, I'm done ranting. All of you who choose not to vote out of conviction, educate yourselves so people will take you seriously. Those of you who haven't educated yourselves and now you won't vote, get a life.

Kyle mentioned sometime ago that he would be interested in posting a little mini-essay on Calvinism and Truth on my blog. Of course I said I would host it and now you all can see the fruits of his labors. I liked it and thought it to be both true and humorous. Not everyone will agree. If you want to leave a comment that is rude or mean, don't. If you really feel it neccesary to do so, email it to me. Ok, now that that's through, here's our favorite (kinda') Anglican, Kyle!

The ancient theologians of the Church believed that Truth was a Person, and that knowing truth was part and parcel of knowing the Triune God. Knowing truth is a great deal more than acknowledging and agreeing with some abstract propositions about a god. Christian truth rather enables learners to engage with the Christian god both cognitively and emotionally - this kind of knowledge is healing and healthful for the whole person, and the Body of Christ at large. Theology as a true vision of the Christian God and the revelation of that God's own self will bring with it the hope that a "life with the triune god facilitates dignity and excellence" (see Ellen Charry, By the Renewing of Your Minds: The Pastoral Function of Christian Doctrine, Oxford University Press, 1997, pp. 4, 18ff.)

I try to engage and appropriate the ancient, "little c" catholic Christian vision of the Church because I believe that the Triune God has revealed the truth about God's own self and the life of the Church in that. I say "engage and appropriate" because the learning of Tradition is a critical work. It is that conviction that keeps me from becoming a Roman Catholic, and it is the determination to do the work of engagement that makes it very clear that I am not a "Protestant," either.

Learning ancient Christianity will make me a better person and disciple of Jesus.

I don't believe that fawning over Reformed doctrine will do the same thing. I think there may be something true about God and about us in some aspects of it, but I am not panting after that whole system because I don't think it will make me a better disciple of Jesus - I don't think there's much Truth or much of God in it. These things are connected.

I believe this because most Calvinists I've come across have been assholes. Not all. Not some. Most. Many of them think they're appropriation of the "truth" of Reformed doctrine requires them to behave like assholes.

I know that this is offensive to many people, but it needs to be said.

I want to offer you this example, this e-mail exchange between me and a Christian pastor in Florida. I am printing it here in its entirety. The emphases in bold type are mine, and I have of course removed the man's name and web links.

Here is the gentleman's initial e-mail.

Kyle, I'm happy that you became an Anglican. I think the baptist liturgy is boring at best and places too much emphasis on the charismatic personality of the preacher, though preaching is and should be a major focus leading up to the Lord's Supper.

However, I'm greatly troubled that you seem to have no idea about the Protestant Reformation, the English Reformation, the five solas, including justification by faith alone, or anything Evangelical. I'm also troubled that you don't see any problem with the "emergent" church movement, which is basically a capitulation to postmodernism, relativism, and anything else that compromises the essentials of the apostolic, Protestant, and catholic Christian faith.

I'm a former pentecostal myself. I came from an Assemblies of God background. Then I discovered the doctrines of God's sovereign grace and became a Calvinist. It was then that I discovered the Anglican prayer book and the 39 Articles of Religion, which are decidedly Calvinistic and Protestant. Here was a perfect union between intellectually stimulating worship, reverence, and emotionally moving worship that didn't eventually dwindle into a superficial experience with no roots. I have grown to love the 1928 Book of Common Prayer and the Anglican way of worship.

Anyway, I would hope that others in the Anglican communion would find their roots in the English Reformation and the Gospel of Jesus Christ as it is understood from the Protestant confessions of faith, particularly the 39 Articles of Religion. You might want to browse my blog, [withheld], at [withheld].

The peace of God be with you,

[withheld]

Clearly this guy had me pegged. See also my "What is the Emerging Church?"

I ought to have ignored this, but I responded:

[Withheld],

Thanks for your interest, and your kind note.

In regard to evangelicalism and the Protestant Reformation, I am not well-versed in the Reformed theologians, and probably not what you call "Evangelical." Maybe I should pick up "Reform Theology for Dummies" if it's ever published; I probably haven't tried to delve into that aspect of the Christian tradition because I usually wander into the polemics before finding something quite positive. Do you have any book recommendations for me? I might add something to my reading list.

In regard to the "emergent church movement," I don't think there's a "movement," and I'm certainly not part of it if there is. I can talk about my opinions, my practices, and those of my community, and how we seek to appropriate the apostolic faith, but not about any movement. You probably glanced at the essays listed under "On the Emerging Churches" on my right sidebar; I certainly don't claim any affinity for "emergence" outside my own definitions of it.

I would note in regard to "postmodernism" and "relativism" (other than the fact that these are too often "shut-down" words) that modernism and foundationalism are not helpful alternatives. I would consider myself "postmodern" (after glancing around to see who's looking!) but only in terms of critiqing the assumptions of modernist rationalism. Whose rationality, after all, gets to describe the truth of the Gospel, which should start outside and above either modernity or postmodernity?

As N.T. Wright has said, "Post-modernity preaches the reality of the fall to arrogant modernity," letting it know that all its righteousness is as filthy rags. Modernity's competing eschatology of "salvation through rationality" in either it's atheistic materialist or religious fundamentalist forms has come to the end of itself. It's time for some humility in our epistemologies!

Blessings,
Kyle

He responded,

Wow. You have the most sophisticated line of bull I've ever heard:) I guess seminary can make it sound good at least.

I'm one of those stupid enough to believe that classical theology is good enough. I don't buy into modern prejudices against traditional, orthodox theology. Who's rationality should we follow? God's rationality, of course. He invented logic. Guess what? God is much smarter than finite creatures. Immanuel Kant was wrong in my opinion. We can know divine revelation from God. Revelation is not so transcendent that we can know nothing about God at all.

I thought my original post was crystal clear. Are you unfamiliar with the 39 Articles of Religion? How about the Heidelberg Catechism? Or the Westminster Longer and Shorter Catechisms? These are all available online. The Protestant Confessions of Faith are an excellent summary of Reformed theology.

Don't you even know that the Roman Catholic Church condemned the Gospel that Protestants are preaching? The canons of the Council of Trent basically curses all Protestants to hell. These anathemas have never been removed.

It truly amazes me that seminary graduates can be so ignorant of even the basic doctrines of the Bible and the Protestant Reformation. And you say you grew up in a Southern Baptist Church? Maybe the baptists have forgotten where they came from?

As for polemics, don't be afraid of a fight. The Gospel is worth fighting over. Irenaeus fought the gnostics. Augustine fought the pelagians. Athanasius fought the Arians. Paul fought against the Judaizers and even rebuked Peter for siding with them. The gospel of Jesus Christ is the same one that Protestants gave their lives defending. It is the gospel taught by Augustine and Aquinas and Athanasias. It is the same Gospel that was further clarified by Martin Luther, John Calvin, Philip Melancthon and Ulrich Zwingli.

If you really want to understand Reformed theology I would suggest that you give The Institutes of the Christian Religion a serious read. While you're at it, you might want to read J.I. Packer's translation of Martin Luther's The Bondage of the Will. Lutheran theology is not exactly "Reformed" because it's not "calvinistic."

And for a serious critique of modern theology from a Reformed and Evangelical position? There is no greater systematic theology than Carl F. H. Henry's God, Revelation and Authority. It's 6 volumes but well worth the read. Henry isn't Anglican but he is an excellent scholar and gives the best critique of neo-orthodoxy and liberal theology that I have ever read.

I hope you'll forgive me for being blunt but I think you're full of pride because of the whole seminary education thing. Have you ever considered that you might not be a Christian at all? Having a seminary education, belonging to a church or being ordained as a minister with some mainline church doesn't make you a Christian. Only God can make you a Christian.

I graduated from a Wesleyan holiness seminary over ten years ago. [I learned from his blog that it was Asbury Theology Seminary. How embarrassing for them.] I have learned much more AFTER leaving seminary than I learned during seminary. Why? Because I use my time now to explore the areas of interest to me. I enjoy reading classical theology much more than modernist and liberal and neo-orthodox theology, though I have read my share of that stuff as well. But the bottom line is this: you can't spot the counterfeit until you have known the genuine article. When you really understand the law and the Gospel you will recognize that which is false right away.

May God show you the way back to the doctrines of grace and the same Gospel that the Apostle Paul preached.

Sincerely,

[Withheld]

I realized after receiving this loving correspondence that I should convert to Calvinism immediately. Or not. I wrote back:

Well, that was more than a little rude. I consider our correspondence closed.

May Christ's peace be upon you.
Kyle

And I let him have his final shot before putting him on my "block" list.

I thought your response was both ignorant and rude. Christianity is indeed in trouble.

If you were offended, consider how offended "I" was.

All I've got to say is, what a bloody baby! He's the associate minister at an REC church in Florida. I could even tell you which one.

This joker is not the reason I'm so uninterested in Calvinism. Why Roger Jasper is a Calvinist, and I'll listen to him anytime. But this e-mail exchange is far more representative of my encounters with Calvinists than the ones I've had with those who are kind, caring Christians.

In short, nobody's going to believe you know the truth if it doesn't make you a better person.

I originally sought to put out these posts once per week until we had finished the series. Obviously, I would have finished them by this time but circumstances have prohibited me from doing so. In this time I have been able to reflect more on what it means to be the church of the baptized (as well as of the non-baptized) and how we are to live with one another in the world (read point four of the essay) As elections draw near, I have been thinking even more so than usual, "What place does the Christian have in politics?" I obviously believe that it is the responsibility of the citizen to vote. But to what extent do we, those baptized in a heavenly state, partake in the politics of this present state? Well, I am still thinking about it. But with that sort of background you can see what influences these posts a bit.

In this, the second post, I want to examine the baptizer and his/her role in sacrament of holy baptism. Who can baptize a person into communion with the church Catholic? Well, as we we began in the first post with a quote from the catechism, I think it only consistent to pick-up there:

The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon. In case of necessity, any person, even someone not baptized, can baptize, if he has the required intention. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes, and to apply the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.

Any person may baptize. Now for those of us who are or have been in denominations who are extremely particular about baptism, perhaps even named after such beliefs, the concept of just anyone performing a baptism seems a bit... taboo. One thing I wish to point out is that the catechism says, "In the case of necessity." I believe that a clergy person (one who receives ordination from a spiritual communion) ought to be the baptizer, in most cases.

I would be not only hesitant to perform a baptism myself (as my informal ordination has no substance anymore) but even resistant! I would do all that I could to find a priest or a deacon who would willingly perform a "right" ceremony rather than do it myself in a swimming pool. It's hard to be serious when chlorine is burning your eyes. This goes beyond a matter of respect for some imagined hierarchal order but rather it is knowing and accepting one's role in the church of Christ and in turn the part to be played in the communal salvation of the baptized.

Then whose orders are valid? From the high-church end of the historic sects of the faith we may see some resistance to, say, +Alan baptizing rather than a local parish priest or deacon. I think that's just stupid. I myself am working out my own beliefs in regards to ordination. Right now I find myself influenced by my more baptistic history in that I think it ought to be the local visible body of believers who calls the priest into the community and gives him the right (the ordination) to proclaim the word and administer the sacraments. I may be wrong but that's my current position.

I was asked by John Meade, a student at my former seminary, to investigate the relationship of faith to baptism. What John means, I am assuming, is that he wants me to become a bit more of a Baptist. There's nothing wrong with that. I would like him to become a bit more of a catholic, I guess, so there's no problem with just saying it. I appreciate his interaction even though we disagree.

I believe coming to faith is a process. That was my belief as a child and it is my belief again, as a (very) young adult. Salvation isn't praying the sinner's prayer after reading a tract but it is a life-long journey of becoming like Christ. The first institutional rite of that process is the sacrament of holy baptism. It is essential to complete and full salvation. Without baptism there are no sacraments. Without sacraments there is no binding to the church catholic. Like I said before, it is the entrance to the church and the logical outworking of faith in Christ. In the waters of baptism our old nature is crucified with Christ and we are raised with him in to a new life. It is how we become Christians.

I want to avoid this whole justification by grace through faith argument. I am sure someone wants to leave a comment talking about it but I think it best to just email that type of thing to me. Jesus obviously didn't care much about it so I don't say much about it either.

Well, that's about it for post 2. Leave some thoughts, objections, criticisms, complements, or whatever else you want to. I want to see some good thoughtful comments, everybody! I'll be sure to interact more that last time...

We were not friends but I join with the mourning as one who also mourns. Life is such a delicate thing so often taken for granted. May those of us who go on take this and meditate on it. Live life and love all. We never know how long it's going to last... One was hurt deeply by this (we know who you are) and she will need us all to be understanding with her. We all love you; be strong.

God be with his family and those hurt by his tragic passing.

In an effort to both promote my own cleverness and wit as well as point to great words of another I hereby post the following amendements to American Christianity, as found on Kyle's blog:

1. No more TV preachers. I am convinced that no good comes of them. And even if it did, Joel Osteen burns my nostrils so badly that I don't think it even makes up for it.

2. Protestant rapprochement with Rome. Most of the Protestants I know only think of the Catholic Church in terms of medieval stereotypes. It's perfectly valid and even needful to have calm, fair, accurate criticisms of another church, but at least base it on something real.

3. Halting of religious activities. I'd like to see church-going people stop all of their religious activities and vet them all according to one single, all-important question: will the thing I'm doing really make me (and us!) more like Jesus?

4. No more labels. Most of these people out there don't know what liberal really means, or what a heretic really is.

5. Quit insisting that people affirm certain code words as a litmus test for biblical orthodoxy. Instead, let's look at the lived practice of the Christian commitment, and then ask whether somebody seems to have a high view of Scripture or not.

Mabley offered this:

6. No more "altar calls." Encourage more emphasis on communal accountability.

And I offered this gem:

7: No more evangelism tracts. Ever. Seriously, if you really want to go out and make disciples of all people it's probably a good idea to have one person over for dinner at a time. Casual evangelism is like casual sex. It might make you feel good at the time but in the end it not only leaves you empty but cheapens both of you as human beings. Real relationships change lives not 4 spiritual laws.

Anyways, go read the whole post and the follow up discussion. It's worth it. Seriously.

I am kinda' working through what exactly I believe in different situations politically and I was wondering if I'm alone in that. I have (slowly) been converted to thinking a small state is better than a larger one. With that I have lost many beliefs I once held as defaults according to my faith.

Anywho, I'm writing a paper on libertarian socialism focusing on anarcho-syndicalism. Go wiki it. I wouldn't mind some tips or ideas from people on here as to where I should go with it...

BTW, if you're in Idaho, don't vote for Otter. He's an idiot.

Or "Pro-Life" Richardson. Because the only thing's he ever says is "you're going to hell" or "abortion is murder." I want to slap him.

Hell, while I'm at adding random points read Brian McManus.

Hey everybody! Many of you received an email from me a day or so ago with an attached file. That was my chapter I am writing for The Collective. Others of you didn't receive this but the only reason was is that I don't have your email address. Not trying to offend anyone. If you know me and think I'd be comfortable letting you read something a bit more personal than let me know you want a copy. If you don't know me and you're just curious, let me know. I want as much feedback as possible. Yep. That's about it from me.