Christians in Context: from orthodoxy to orthopraxy.

Here's the third and final post in my little series on the similarities between Christmas and Halloween.

There are positive aspects to both holidays.

Pros for Halloween include:

1. Neighbors spend time together and get to know each other as everyone opens up their homes for one night. It's a prime time to build relationships within the community.

2. Children experience the fun of planning their costumes and dressing up. It's a delightful tradition that they look forward to all year long.

3. Parents bond with their children as they take them trick or treating.

Pros for Christmas include:

1. It encourages people to reflect on Christ's birth, which is always a good thing.

2. In our frantic individualistic society, Christmas is a holiday when people actually spend extended time with their family and friends.

3. Christmas encourages the development of family traditions, which can bond families and bring joy to children.

4. Starbucks Peppermint Hot Chocolates.

There are also negative aspects to both holidays.

Cons for Halloween include:

1. The trivialization of witchcraft and the devil.

2. Frightening and evil images on television, in the movies, on people's front lawns, and on first graders.

3. Some people use this day to celebrate things that are evil.

Cons for Christmas include:

1. Disrespect for the Bible including: children's stories told from the donkey's point of view, countless Christmas cards with pictures of a lily white Jesus and angels that look nothing like their description in the Bible, the emphasis on three wise men, etc.

2. Rampant materialism and greed. We spend hundreds of dollars and rack up credit card debt on things we don't need or will soon throw away, often while ignoring the basic needs of others.

3. A confusing collection of traditions and stories combined into one holiday so Santa and Jesus have equal standing.

It seems that Christians often want to abandon Halloween while embracing Christmas. Yet both holidays share roots in paganism, a fairly secular history in America, and can at times blatantly disrespect God's Word. When both holidays have so much in common, it seems inconsistent to heap praise on one and condemnation on the other. I think we may need a more balanced approach - making sure we don't throw the baby out with the bath water in the case of Halloween and making sure the baby doesn't drown in the bath water in the case of Christmas.

For example, Halloween is a prime time to build relationships with our neighbors. Christians are called to share the gospel with their community and Halloween provides a fun and natural way to connect with others, whether by trick or treating together or greeting people at the door. Maybe Christians should stay in their homes, hand out candy, and get to know their neighbors on Halloween. (Disclaimer: While people often see Halloween as simply a fun evening for children, the holiday can have demonic connotations for others. Those whose consciences are troubled by involvement in Halloween activites should absolutely not participate.)

There are some Christmas traditions that we might want to rethink, such as overspending. Instead of going into debt for presents, what if Christians donated their money to people in need? I know of a family that adopted another family that was struggling financially. When the parents bought their children Christmas presents, they made sure to buy presents for the kids in their adopted family as well. We could also be more careful of how we communicate the Christmas story, especially to children. We can make sure we focus on the facts of the Bible (not adding extra characters like the mean innkeeper or the little drummer boy) and make Jesus the main character (as opposed to Mary, Joseph, the shepherds, the talking cow in the barn, the littlest angel, the star who could never do anything right but on one special night got the chance to shine . . .)

Halloween and Christmas share checkered pasts and some less than admirable traditions. They also present great opportunities to further God's Kingdom. I believe that if we approach each holiday with thought, care, and biblical conviction, we can use them to show love to our communities and bring honor to God.

[...READ ON!]

Welcome to Part 2 of my little series on the similarities between Halloween and Christmas. Here's another ghost of Halloween past. You've got to admit that the red crepe paper Raggedy Ann wig is pretty awesome.

There are several more similarities between Halloween and Christmas.
Neither is mentioned in the Bible.

Christians have opposed both holidays.

European immigrants brought their Halloween traditions to America during colonial times, but most of New England refused to celebrate the day due to Puritan influence in that area. Many Christians also oppose the celebration of Halloween today.


At the time of the Reformation, the Protestants refused to celebrate Christmas because they considered it a holiday concocted by the Catholic Church. The Puritans also opposed the celebration of Christmas and often with good reason. In England, people would dutifully go to church and then celebrate the holiday in a drunken, Mardi Gras like atmosphere. In 1645, Oliver Cromwell and the Puritans wanted to rid England of her decadence and Christmas was canceled until the reign of Charles II. The American Puritan settlers did not practice Christmas and the holiday was actually outlawed in Boston from 1659 to 1681. Anyone showing Christmas spirit would be fined five shillings.
The American incarnations of each holiday bear little resemblance to the original religious celebrations.

Interestingly, the American incarnations of each holiday were not embraced out of religious convictions, but rather because of their supposed benefits to the community.

European immigrants brought many of their Halloween customs to America and the flood of Irish immigrants in 1846 helped popularize the holiday. Americans began to dress up in costumes and go door to door asking for food and money. This practice waned during the nineteenth century when the holiday was primarily celebrated with parties in homes, but became popular again between the 1920's and 50's. By this time, Halloween had lost most of its religious undertones and became a secular and community centered holiday directed primarily at children. Today most children have no concept of the religious origins of dressing in costume or trick or treating.

The celebration of Christmas in America was not widespread until the 19th century (it wasn't even a federal holiday until 1870) and the celebration of the holiday was greatly influenced by two authors: Washington Irving and Charles Dickens. Both wrote Christmas stories which emphasized charity, goodwill, and kindness to the poor and evoked old English Christmas customs. This struck a chord in a time of great class conflict and the Victorians saw the benefit of celebrating the holiday.

Each holiday has its own heartwarming Peanuts special involving Linus discovering a great truth.

All right, this isn't really relevant. But it's true.

Check back on Monday to find out the problem with nativity sets.

[...READ ON!]

Say what you will about the sundry peculiarities of Ron Paul. His foresight regarding the current economic crisis is uncanny. Check out this quote from 2003.

The connection between the GSEs and the government helps isolate the GSE management from market discipline. This isolation from market discipline is the root cause of the recent reports of mismanagement occurring at Fannie and Freddie. After all, if Fannie and Freddie were not underwritten by the federal government, investors would demand Fannie and Freddie provide assurance that they follow accepted management and accounting practices.

Ironically, by transferring the risk of a widespread mortgage default, the government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges granted to Fannie and Freddie have distorted the housing market by allowing them to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive use into housing. This reduces the efficacy of the entire market and thus reduces the standard of living of all Americans…

Like all artificially-created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing.

Perhaps the Federal Reserve can stave off the day of reckoning by purchasing GSE debt and pumping liquidity into the housing market, but this cannot hold off the inevitable drop in the housing market forever. In fact, postponing the necessary, but painful market corrections will only deepen the inevitable fall. The more people invested in the market, the greater the effects across the economy when the bubble bursts….

I hope today’s hearing sheds light on how special privileges granted to GSEs distort the housing market and endanger American taxpayers. Congress should act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors who were misled by foolish government interference in the market

Ron Paul Revolution 2012!

HT: Joshua Sowin

[...READ ON!]

For anyone interested, I came across a ministry today that an offshoot of Covenant Theological Seminary which offers more than 20 Seminary level classes for free. Most classes include a transcript and a study guide. You'll find such classes as Calvin's Institutes, Youth Ministry, Christian Worship...even Christ Centered Preaching.

For more information, click here.

(HT: Monergism.com)

[...READ ON!]

Ephesians 6:14-15: Stand therefore, having fastened on the belt of truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and, as shoes for your feet, having put on the readiness given by the gospel of peace.

(ESV)

Isaiah 52:6-7: How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news, who publishes peace, who brings good news of happiness, who publishes salvation, who says to Zion, "Your God reigns."

(ESV)

According to St. Paul, the gospel offers a foundation for readiness. Whether or not we feel ready, God stands prepared to reconcile people to himself through our proclamation of the good news. Greg Arthur gets this.

Greg is one of my favorite people. When I grow up, I hope to be as cool as he is. He's an overseer at our church, with an acute perception of Christ's presence. He loves his wife like Jesus loves the church, and is raising his son in the fear and instruction of the Lord. By day, he's an engineer for the Environmental Protection Agency. He's freakishly smart, though he'd be the last person to tell you as much. By night and weekend, he plays mandolin in a blue grass band with his wife. They'll play anywhere; music festivals, churches, jails, you name it. They have a remarkable ministry.


Last week, Greg was asked by a former Stanford professor to give a talk on Environmentalism to a group of Chinese delegates. The conference room at Stanford was packed with mayors, provincial governors, and even a member of the presidential cabinet. Greg says he spoke about "apple pie American values," much to the delight of those gathered. Afterwards, Greg spoke with the Minister of Construction via a translator. This man is in the Chinese presidential cabinet. He is one of the most powerful people in China. He commented that Greg seemed to be a very happy man. The subject quickly turned to music, as both Greg and the Minister are musicians. "What kind of music do you play?" the Minister inquired. "Gospel," Greg forthrightly replied. The translator paused before trying to translate the response. The Minister's interest was picqued. He wanted to know more. Greg promised to send him a CD so he could listen the music for himself.

Funny how God works. In a few days, one of the most powerful men in a country that has done unconscionable evil to Christians will - Lord willing - be listening to gospel music. Greg was ready, and was faithful with the opportunity God put in front of him. May we do the same. Who knows who God will put right in front of us?

[...READ ON!]

That rather terrified looking three year old to the right is me on the night of my very first trick or treating excursion. (I think the pillow case treat bag adds a nice touch.) With Halloween coming up in just a few weeks and Christmas right on its heels, I thought I'd post some thoughts about our celebration of both holidays.

At first glance, it seems that Halloween and Christmas couldn't be more different. After all, Halloween appears to celebrate death, evil, and witchcraft while Christmas celebrates the birth of the perfect Savior of the world. But when you think about it, Halloween and Christmas share some striking similarities.

Both have roots in paganism.
The roots of Halloween date back to about two thousand years ago. The Celts celebrated their new year on November 1st. This heralded the beginning of winter, which was commonly associated with human death. The Celts believed that ghosts of the dead returned to earth on October 31st and their presence made it easier to predict the future. During this holiday the Druid priests made predictions and the Celts built huge bonfires where they sacrificed crops and animals and dressed in animal heads and skins. When the Romans conquered the Celtic territory in A.D. 43, they incorporated two of their festivals into Samhain.

For many years, people were frightened that they might encounter a ghost if they left their homes, so they wore masks after dark in hopes that the ghosts wouldn't recognize them and believe they were fellow spirits. People also placed bowls of food outside their homes to keep ghosts from entering.

Pagan midwinter festivals existed long before Christmas. The Romans celebrated Saturnalia the week before the winter solstice and the festival lasted an entire month. This holiday honored Saturn, the god of agriculture, and included drinking, feasting, and the closing of schools and businesses. The Romans decorated their homes with boughs of evergreen to illustrate how Saturn would soon make their land fruitful. The Germans celebrated the god Oden during this time and the Norse held a celebration called Yule.

Both were established by the Catholic Church.
The holiday known as Halloween was actually created by the established Church. Christianity eventually spread to the Celtic lands and in the seventh century, the Church instituted All Saints' Day or All-Hallows on November 1st. This day was set aside to honor saints and martyrs and some believe it was the pope's attempt to replace Samhain. October 31st was referred to as All-Hallows Eve, which eventually became Halloween. In A.D. 998, the Church designated November 2nd as All Souls' Day, a day to remember and pray for souls in purgatory. Some say that dressing up as devils, saints, and angels was a common practice on this day and the celebration also involved bonfires and parades.

The tradition of "trick or treating" most likely stems from All Souls' Day parades in England. During the celebration, poor citizens would beg for food and the wealthy would give them pastries called "soul cakes" in return for a promise to pray for the family's dead relatives in purgatory. Eventually, children took up this practice and traveled to different houses where they received food, ale, and money. This custom was referred to as "going a-souling."

Christmas was first celebrated in the fourth century when the Church chose December 25th as the date of Christ's birth. No one is sure why this particular date was chosen, but some believe it was due to the fact that this was already a public holiday for pagan celebrations. This would increase the chance that Christianity would be publicly embraced. The celebration spread to Egypt in A.D. 432, to England in the sixth century and to Scandinavia by the end of the eighth century.

Both can distort the truth.
Halloween turns witches and the devil into cute and cuddly characters and chubby cheeked toddlers seem to have no qualms about trick or treating dressed as Satan. Christmas takes the frightening, harsh, and beautiful story of Christ's birth and transforms it into a cozy little tale about a cheerful barn, some happy animals, and a little baby who didn't cry.

Check back in a few days for Part 2 and find out what else Halloween and Christmas have in common, including their connection to Linus Van Pelt.

[...READ ON!]

I love lyrics that use unexpected words. Like "For poor ornery sinners like you and like I" in "I Wonder As I Wander." Or "A love as pure as breath, as permanent as death, implacable as stone" in Stephen Sondheim's "I Wish I Could Forget You." Or "I want to tell her that I love her but the point is probably moot" in Rick Springfield's "Jesse's Girl." This great Charles Wesley hymn uses two seldom used words (at least in hymns): antepast and dragon. And the rest of the lyrics are pretty good too. Enjoy "Where Shall My Wondering Soul Begin?"

Where shall my wondering soul begin?
How shall I all to heaven aspire?
A slave redeemed from death and sin,
A brand plucked from eternal fire,
How shall I equal triumphs raise,
Or sing my great Deliverer’s praise?

O how shall I the goodness tell,
Father, which Thou to me hast showed?
That I, a child of wrath and hell,
I should be called a child of God,
Should know, should feel my sins forgiven,
Blessed with this antepast of Heaven!

And shall I slight my Father’s love?
Or basely fear His gifts to own?
Unmindful of His favors prove?
Shall I, the hallowed cross to shun,
Refuse His righteousness to impart,
By hiding it within my heart?

No! though the ancient dragon rage,
And call forth all his host to war,
Though earth’s self-righteous sons engage
Them and their god alike I dare;
Jesus, the sinner’s friend, proclaim;
Jesus, to sinners still the same.

Outcasts of men, to you I call,
Harlots, and publicans, and thieves!
He spreads His arms to embrace you all;
Sinners alone His grace receives;
No need of Him the righteous have;
He came the lost to seek and save.

Come, O my guilty brethren, come,
Groaning beneath your load of sin,
His bleeding heart shall make you room,
His open side shall take you in;
He calls you now, invites you home;
Come, O my guilty brethren, come!

For you the purple current flowed
In pardons from His wounded side,
Languished for you the eternal God,
For you the Prince of glory died:
Believe, and all your sin’s forgiven;
Only believe, and yours is Heaven!

[...READ ON!]

How Left is the Bush Administration? Here are some provocative thoughts from George Will;

The political left always aims to expand the permeation of economic life by politics. Today, the efficient means to that end is government control of capital. So, is not McCain’s party now conducting the most leftist administration in American history? The New Deal never acted so precipitously on such a scale. Treasury Secretary Paulson, asked about conservative complaints that his rescue program amounts to socialism, said, essentially: This is not socialism, this is necessary. That non sequitur might be politically necessary, but remember that government control of capital is government control of capitalism. Does McCain have qualms about this, or only quarrels?

HT: Gene Veith

[...READ ON!]

Andrew's excellent post inspired me to write some additional thoughts about worship in church. I resonate with his concern that worship services do not afford believers adequate space to minister to one another. Take the Lord's Supper as an example. In almost every worship service I've attended, believers have been encouraged to focus on their personal relationship with God during communion. The focus is personal meditation on the broken body of Christ. Of course it's tremendously important to reflect on Christ's death for us. However, is this what Paul had in mind when he spoke of "discerning the body" during communion (1Cor 11:29)? Robert Banks hits the proverbial nail on the head in his exegesis of this phrase;

Paul says that "all who eat and drink without discerning the body, eat and drink judgment against themselves" [1 Cor] (11:29, NRSV). Although this has been generally interpreted as a reference to Christ's crucified body, the community itself is almost certainly in view. Members of the community need to recognize their unity and "receive" one another...The fact that there are many members of the community should lead not to the assertion of individualistic attitudes, nor to the formation of cliques within it, but instead to a continuing affirmation of its solidarity.

- Paul's Idea of Community, rev ed. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994); 59.

The Corinthians are weak and dying because they aren't showing concern for the less esteemed members of their community during corporate meals. Failing to attend to the needs of said community members contradicts the very event the Lord's Supper embodies. This is why judgment has fallen over their gatherings.

Is the Lord's Supper a participatory event today? Do we proclaim the gospel in our gatherings; not simply by partaking of the elements, but by lavishing grace on the needy and broken in our churches? Are we looking to embody the message of the cross by meeting the economic/emotional/spiritual/physical needs of fellow believers? How do we do this better?

[...READ ON!]

Pardon a long post here, but a couple interesting posts have surfaced in the blogosphere on our approach to worship in church that I thought I actually might have something helpful to say about. The first is a brief thought from Andrew Jones, which was followed up on/responded to by Greg Peters of Scriptorium. Jones says that church worship should be a time of giving (which it typically isn't unless you are preaching, leading worship, or giving your money) rather than passive receiving. Peters agrees, but says that perhaps Jones' assumption (i.e. that we are all in churches where worship is passive) is unfairly generalized. Peters is an Anglican, and as such, worships liturgically. The liturgy, argues Peters, facilitates active response on the part of the worshipper especially through the prayer-book's responses to the officiant's calls.

I don't entirely disagree with Peters, and I do respect liturgical traditions generally. Most notably I appreciate the unity that is built in. But this very ecclesiological issue is one that has troubled me for a long time: in short, if we set aside Peters' exception for a moment, how come the only people who get to contribute vocally in church are the preacher and worship leader?

But before I get to my answer to that question, there is a prior one: is there a Biblical basis for Jones' felt need and Peters' suggested solution? Does the Bible indicate that we should in fact have more than just the preacher and worship leader contribute vocally in church?

The answer, I am convinced, is a resounding "yes" (indeed it is this conviction that has had me thinking about this for some time). Two passages come to mind.

First, 1 Cor. 12-14 on the whole give the impression that everyone should be contributing in church. Of course, these chapters are correctives to a chaotic, unordered, and thus unedifying church practice. Apparently tongues were overused and congregants spoke over one another. Nonetheless Paul repeatedly emphasizes that the church is a body, and as such the different functions performed by each member toward other members are all necessary for the sake of the whole body (e.g. 1 Cor. 12:7-25ff). The text gives the impression that this is actually a major part of what it means for the church to come together. Excess is possible and should be avoided, but the various contributions of individual members is important. Most of these contributions are specifically for the whole church's regular gathering.

Second, Eph. 5:18-20 indicates that congregational worship should contain both vertical and horizontal elements. Note both the elements of "singing and making melody...to the Lord" (vertical) and "speaking to one another..." (horizontal). What's more, I am convinced that the participles that follow the command to "be filled with the Holy Spirit" (v. 18) are participles of means (i.e. that the way that we are filled with the Holy Spirit is by "speaking to one another...singing and making melody...always giving thanks...submitting to one another...") When we do these things (which are variously directed to God and to each other), we take part in being filled with and filling each other with the Holy Spirit. And to those who would argue that these are participles of result (i.e. that being filled with the Holy Spirit results in those actions), I would ask how a command to "be filled with the Holy Spirit" makes any sense without some guidance as to how we carry that out.

These texts then speak to the need for mutual participation in congregational worship. Mutual participation is no less than the outworking of Spirit-enabled ministries and filling with the Holy Spirit, among other things. This is the give and take that all members of the congregation should come to church expecting to be a part of when the church gathers.

Which returns us to the original question(s): does the modern method of non-liturgical evangelical church allow for the lay congregant to "give" in church, and if not, does a liturgy adequately cover what's missing?

Taking the second question first, I think not. While there are numerous benefits to liturgical worship, one of them is not freeing up the congregation to give in the NT sense described above. Let me be clear that I am not suggesting that Dr. Peters (or anyone else) is insincere when he responds "And also with you." What I am saying is that, sincere or not, this comes well short of facilitating other members' ministries to one another- of Biblical "giving" in worship. For one thing, it does not matter how God is enabling me to minister when I give my response- I just respond. For another, it eliminates the Holy Spirit's more extemporaneous role in guiding us in our worship, which is apparent in 1 Cor. 12-14. Perhaps a liturgy could include a time for open sharing with one another, but I am guessing that most currently do not.

And this leads me back to the first part of the question. Clearly most (especially large) non-liturgical evangelical churches facilitate this sort of ministry even less. There is little if any space not taken up with some kind of planned presentation, whether for seeker sensitive or other reasons. And this deeply saddens and troubles me, considering the above-suggested weight of what is going on in that time.

There is at least one ecclesiological exception: the charismatic church. Sadly, many charismatic churches fail to heed the clear commands in 1 Cor. 12-14 about what sorts of restraints ought to be placed on mutually participatory worship. But I for one have grown up in a Vineyard Church that did not fail in that regard, so I know it is possible! What always stood out about going to that church was that most members of the congregation came not just to receive, but to give. Worship was anything but passive. There was allotted time for any member of the small congregation (and this is also an argument for keeping congregations small, as this would be frankly impossible in a large congregation) to share with the whole church. And if you wondered, this did not have to be a specifically "charismatic" piece- it could just as easily be a Scripture or a prayer, etc. This practice was consistently edifying to the whole congregation.

Of course if you are cessationist, this will not be a helpful example to you, and I do not mean to make this whole lengthy post an argument for charismatic church (though I certainly am an avid charismatic). But I do think that this is one area where all ecclesiologies could learn from the charismatic movement. Somehow church leaders should be actively making a way for members of the congregation to minister to one another, and I am convinced that this is best for the congregation if it can happen when the whole church is gathered on Sunday mornings.

[...READ ON!]