Announcing the “Shoot Terri Schiavo” campaign…
February 28, 2005
Dory at Wittenberg Gate makes a compelling point about the fitness of Michael Schiavo to be Terri’s guardian in this stage of her life (thanks to Blogdom of God for the tip):
Should Michael Schiavo Be Terry’s Guardian?
Can you say conflict of interest, boys and girls??? Could there be a much clearer case?
And yet, the courts seem hell-bent on ending this lady’s life. Therefore, I’d like to announce the commencement of the “Shoot Terri Schiavo” campaign. Let’s spread it around blogdom, so that the gutless wonders who believe that the solution to Terri’s situation is to remove her feeding tube (that’s called murder where I come from) will be brought face-to-face with what they are really advocating. After all, if we’re going to kill her by starvation, shouldn’t we at least act more humanely by shooting her? It’d be over with more quickly, sparing all possibility of suffering, and the end result will be the same: the death of Terri Schiavo.
So, let’s stand up for compassion, and demand that if they’re going to kill Terri, they have the compassion to put a quick, merciful slug into her brain…and let’s dare anyone bent on her death to object.
Should We Preachers Stop “Marrying” People?
February 28, 2005
This from religion editor Cody Lowe of the Roanoke Times (my hometown newspaper):
Attitudes toward marriage need a good, hard look
Now…Cody’s interviewee is an Episcopal priestess who comes from an angle pretty foreign to my own; some of her suggestions are well wide of the mark, of course. But I honestly wonder if she is on to something–because it’s something that the whole “gay marriage” debate has caused me to think about at length.
We have never questioned (well, at least not recently) the way of things when it comes to pastors acting as the agents of the state in the signing of marriage licences. This is because our society hadn’t until recently fallen so far into its state of depravity that we would actually consider calling a “union” between two people of the same sex “marriage”. Now, that is the law of the state of Massachusetts–and it is entirely conceivable that this abomination is coming soon to a state near you.
This being the case, how ought evangelical pastors to respond? To paraphrase that good native Virginian Patrick Henry, “I know not what course others may take, but as for me…I refuse to be the stooge of any state that would so preposterously redefine ‘marriage’”. Practically, what this means is that I will continue to engage in the blessing of Christian marriages, weddings between two people who, after counsel, I am convinced are committed to marriage as instituted in the Bible. I will do this in any state or country where I am called upon to do so. What I will not do, however, is to sign any marriage license in any state which has defined marriage in a manner contrary to my Biblical convictions. In other words, if a couple were to ask me to marry them in the state of Massachusetts, and if that couple were to meet the qualifications that I impose, my answer would be, “certainly! I will marry you! If, though, you want your marriage to be recognized by the state of Massachusetts, you’ll have to attend to that on your own; I will not sign a Massachusetts “marriage” license; since that state has chosen (illegally, by the way) to arrogate to itself the prerogative to redefine the very institution of marriage, and since that redefinition is an affront to all that is right and holy regarding the institution of marriage, I cannot in good conscience place myself in the position of lackey to that state in its folly.” Or something like that…
Ironically, I did perform a wedding in Massachusetts last year–my only one so far–about a week or two at the most after their law changed. I did sign the marriage license–but only because I had agreed to perform this wedding long before Massachusetts had the audacity to do what it did. I will not do it again–unless the voters of Massachusetts assert their constitutional prerogative to overturn the decision of their rogue Supreme Court.
My call to my fellow evangelical pastors is to establish a similar position. After all, if a state or nation is so arrogant as to tinker with the very foundation of marriage itself, we are under no obligation to act as accomplices…
7 Deadly Sins in Cancun
February 27, 2005
I was speaking with a friend in church today about how it seems to me that the extreme sanctification position taken by certain Holiness groups (that we can achieve sinless perfection on this earth) has the ironic consequence of not taking sin nearly seriously enough. I would add that the Wesleyan position, that one can lose one’s salvation, suffers from the same malady–which is probably the opposite of what we might expect at first blush. My reasoning is this: if we truly believe that sin is as insidious as the Bible pictures it to be, affecting everything about us, then it would seem we would be naive to try to claim that we have ever reached the state of being where every single action/thought/word is without any taint of sin. Someone, in speaking of the concept of total depravity, pictured it this way: imagine that sin is blue. Total depravity doesn’t suggest that I am necessarily as blue as I could be, but rather that I am some shade of blue all over. Every facet of my being is tainted by sin, so that I don’t speak right, think right, do right, do good with all the right motives, etc. Sin is insidious and pervasive, and my need for grace, regularly, continually, is absolute.
This is not a new thought for me, but it came to me afresh while in, of all places, about 4 feet of water in the Gulf of Mexico, playing in the waves. I got to thinking about how many of the “7 Deadly Sins” I was being tempted by in the space of a short period of time that day. Allow me to run down the list:
Pride – “Harv, you might just be the best body-surfer on the beach here in Cancun! Linger here after riding this wave all the way in…make sure that people have the chance to admire the fact that you’ve just brought this wave to its knees…”
Envy – “Sure wish I could afford what all these rich folks can, not to just get a free week on my father-in-law’s dime, but to be able to buy a few weeks worth of the timeshare here myself…”
Gluttony – “Another helping at the Breakfast Buffet would be all right with me!”
Lust – “It….was….an…itsybitsy teeny-weenie yellow-polka-dot bikini…”
Anger – OK, maybe I’m 1-for-5 in not being terribly tempted by the 7 Sins…
Greed – 2-for-6, maybe, but like anger, a temptation often…
Sloth – That’s sort of what a week in the sun in Cancun is all about, right?
In a short timespan, five of the seven assaulted me. I didn’t give in to the temptations every time, nor did I resist with full vigor on every occasion either! Point? All around us, temptation lurks…and in tiny ways, a little here and a little there, whether ever known by others or even by ourselves, we compromise our faith when we give in.
Grace, grace, God’s grace; grace that will pardon and cleanse within!
Grace, grace, God’s grace! Grace that is greater than all our sin!
Back from Cancun…
February 27, 2005
First off, a quick word of thanks to Dr. Warren Throckmorton, who blogviated a bit in my absence, as well as Paul Oyler, my webbie dude. I’m going to invite Dr. Throckmorton to continue to occasionally guest-blog for me. Sorry that Bill Truax couldn’t make it to help out, but it’s very possible that our military had his mind and body very occupied!
And you wouldn’t like Cancun. The weather is so monotonous there! Mid-80′s every single day, with sunshine reflecting off the azure sea and the coral white sand beaches…just no variety whatsoever! 
SteelerDirtFreak – Doing a Little Remodeling While The Pundit Is Away
February 23, 2005
As the keeper of all things ‘webbie’ for Byron, I’m doing a little remodeling to the site while he is gone. Let me know what you think of the new look – good or bad.
And I might also mention that if you have upgraded your WordPress to the new 1.5 (and if you haven’t, you really ought to, right now!), and you are using the wonderful default theme, you really need to check out this killer app which will generate a new header image for you that you just drop into place – everything is done for you.
SteelerDirtFreak – Guest Blogging on Constantine
February 20, 2005
I recently was invited to attend a pre-screening of the movie Constantine and to then review it in my blog. I did so, noting that, had I done even the least bit of research before hand, I would not have wasted my time in going to see this movie.
The reason that I did go was that I had been hearing rumblings that this was supposed to be another one of those ‘break-through‘ movies that would lead to wide open spiritual discussions with everyone and their brother. Even though I realize that any movie that comes with sort of advance hype is doomed to fall miserably short of it’s goal (possibly because that is it’s goal?) I thought it might be worth checking out so I would know what the chatter was all about.
Mrs Freak and I both thoroughly detested the movie, and from the sound of the packed theater and the conversations of those around us as we were leaving, so did everyone else in attendance that night. You can read my review to see what all I disliked about this movie (hint – everything). What I’d like to take up space here on Byron’s blog doing is to ponder whether my reaction was correct, or perhaps should I reconsider my response to this movie…
The afore-mentioned buzz has arrived and the noted and respected Hollywood Jesus website appears to be solidly on the Constantine bandwagon.
There are sometimes when we have to dig deep to find some spiritual connections with some movies; then there are some movies where we can’t escape them. Constantine is definitely the latter. Constantine present an entire theological/salvation message. If The Matrix trilogy is the story of Christ in allegory, this movie is the systematic theology.
Keep in mind that this is the movie whose “hero” slept with the Virgin Mary to taint her with demon blood…
At what point do we say that despite all of the post Christian religious mumbo jumbo hodge podge of ideas out there, that there is still only one ultimate Truth? And there is absolutely nothing in this movie to indicate that anyone connected with it has any idea what that Truth is. To the contrary, everything here is painted with such thick shades of gray, that the only message that manages to survive the horrendous directing and insipid acting is that there is NO truth, everything is relative.
I know we have to be culturally relevant to reach those around us. And I guess that is at the crux of what is bothering me. Have I become so culturally irrelevant that I’m missing some obvious openings presented by this film? Even Fuller Theological Seminary’s Reel Spirituality has released a Leader’s Guide Discussion Guide and Bible Study for this movie. So they obviously saw something in it.
I think when I started writing this post, my intent was to rant all big-headed like I was right and these other guys were way off the mark (you know – the ‘usual’ style here!) But the truth of the matter is, as I’ve been writing, I’m wondering if I’m the one who who’s missing something.
The Apostle Paul spent time wandering around in Athens. That city was filled, literally from one end to the other, with idols. Paul was pretty well steeped in Hebrew thought (Phil. 3:6) and all of these idols must have been absolutely revolting to him. But did he give a speech ranting about the futility of false idols and the wickedness of those who follow such idols?
Nope. He actually used one of the altars he had observed as a starting point for a speech (Acts 17:22-34) and built his conversation around that. He didn’t change his message, just his starting point.
So what is my point is all of this, in regards to Constantine? I’m still not sure. I still think it was one of the most poorly directed and acted movies I have ever seen. Perhaps if the movie had actually been good, it would have been easier for me to find conversation points in it. Or maybe I’ve just gotten to the point where I am old enough now to be completely out of touch with what is culturally relevant and I’d be better off to just go sit in my corner, put the headphones back on, and crank up Lynyrd Skynyrd.
Just a Post Before I Go…
February 16, 2005
This headline from USA Today appeared in the “Life†section yesterday:
Magazines Can’t Break Up with Brad and Jen
Have you noticed this? The checkout line fairly assaults us every week with the latest goings-on of Hollywood celebrities, as though these things mattered one whit. The latest “big thingâ€, of course, is the breakup of Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston. USA Today informs us that US magazine has featured the couple on the cover for five consecutive weeks (I haven’t opened an US magazine in at least a decade, I imagine–and then, I must have been sitting in an insanely boring muffler shop, with the TV tuned to Rikki Lake and the other magazines of choice being Ladies Home Journal–but I think that that statement tells me exactly everything I need to know about US magazine). The February 7 issue, we are told, sold 1.25 million copies. The article goes on to note a few other tidbits of interest…check that, “interest†is overspeak, such as the cost of their wedding four-plus years ago (a cool million) and the comparison in the public’s interest between this breakup and other celebrity breakups (and temporary stay-togethers, such as Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey—I say “temporary stay-togethersâ€, of course, because the chance of a long-term relationship flourishing between amoral Hollywood twenty-somethings approximates roughly the chance that Kim Jong Il will win a Nobel Peace Prize. Actually, check that, Kim’s chances are much greater, given the screwy choices that the Nobel committee has made in the past.).
Here’s my question: how utterly bad, how meaningless, how banal must your life have become, for the marital status between two inconsequential people to interest you to the point of purchasing a magazine to read about it?
This phrase comes from the 1978 "Jonestown massacre" in which most members of the Peoples Temple cult, blindly following their leader Jim Jones, committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid.
Osborne: A Contrarian's Guide to Knowing God
Schlossberg: Idols For Destruction
