Greetings all in blogland. I'm not trying to ignore you. Really, I'm not. Especially with the helpful comments by Mike, Jefe and Remy. I have responses to type, but I haven't typed them. And neither have I done much work on what I'd hoped to type: Wright, Postman, et. al. Joffre is trying to get me to make him look intellectual by typing some thoughts for his church's web page. Being the pitying friend that I am, I have offered to do so. But this of course takes time. That and I just received NT Wright's book on the Resurrection. cotton pickin' Turretin

What I have also done is drink some cognac, smoke my pipe and take my wife out on the town a couple of times. Which is really what its about anyway, wouldn't you say? This afternoon the wife and I spent the day in Stillwater, Minnesota. The name of the town made me think of StillWater Revivals and their anti-Douggie comments. After viewing their web page, I'm reminded of a line from Pirates of the Carribean. "You've got to find yourself a girl, mate." Unless of course they're eunuchs, in which case I feel sorry for them an understand their misguided attempts at masculinity.

All in all it was a very nice, snowy, wet day. It started with a luncheon at a masculine restaurant: The Freighthouse. Wood and brick adorned the setting, as did the river running through a snow covered valley. Yeah. Very nice and reasonably priced, too. One beer and two very tasty lunches for $20. Alaina said she could picture gentlemen in bowler hats smoking after dinner pipes gesticulating extravigantly about the latest political rave. She must have been talking about Mike and Joffre.

After lunch we went to Loomes bookstore, whose lore I have communicated to you before. Lest I make the re-hearing a chore, I'll tell you a bit more. It has two campuses, the used theological bookstore and what might as well be called the used classics bookstore. After imprinting the oils from my hands on some first editions of Chesterton, Lewis and Belloc, I decided not to purchase any for one reason and one alone. No, not finances. I think I shall not pursue the whole first edition thing merely because I don't want to spend $45 on a book that I can't read, thumb through, smoke, drink coffee or brandy with. Anyway . . .

The Used Theological bookstore is much more Big C Catholic than I remembered. Just who are Rahner and Schliebeeckx anyway? Their collection on Mary was a site to behold. Tim Enloe! Where the heck are you? I really could have used you this afternoon. I was trying to find some books on Catholic thoughts on the continuity of priesthood into their system of the priesthood. That or books on the Jesus Questers. Or something.

I picked up a copy that included Chesterton's Orthodoxy and Heretics, the Anglo Saxon Chronicler, some poetry, some business leadership books and an Anchor Bible Commentary on Ezekiel (which was a steal at $3!). I lusted after a couple of Psalters that would have sent Dr. Schuler to the Board demanding that, "If Mr. Struble can have his telescope . . . " Wow. Fifteenth century if the very kind lady helping us was correct. Leather and steel binding. Very cool.

After Loomes, the wife and I went to a coffeeshop that held court in some caves. Kinda cool, but not the greatest. The coffee drinks were good, but the caves were cold. Oh well. Wish you were here.

Enough about Stillwater, MN and let me see if I can offer some responses. First, to Mike - and again, thank you all for posting - first, the aforementioned "rants" were more in reference to other blogs, not to the three of you fine gentlemen and our friendly little disagreement; far from it. Second, I understand the concern with the sin around us. For example, I would find it immensely difficult to live in San Francisco right now. In an attempt to clarify, I do not think that participating in governmental actions is necessarily wrong, merely futile - with which it seems that you agree with me. There is a concern over some in the Christian right who seem more concerned about being politically conservative than Christian, but that applies naught to we four. I think the statement where you and I find disagreement is that I think that attempting to regulate non-regenerate behavior is futile apart from Grace, which it is, any effort lent to such a quest is wasted.

Your statement about not being able "in good conscience" to ignore the apostastizing of the country is telling, both of your concern for souls and for a desire to partake in changing things. Well and good! But the citizens of our country cannot be redeemed through the enacting of righteous legislation and I have yet to be convinced that there is another righteous reason for passing anti-sin legislation. This area I am curious about. If the three of you, or any newcomers can provide an argument for this, I'm honestly very interested to hear it. As for the declaration of God's law, we all affirm that it is the duty of the church to declare it and to declare the eternal penalties for such law and further to declare that salvation from said penalties is available through Christ alone, and not by mandating obedience to the law.

And I said some things that apply to you both, Remy and Joffre. As for Christian legislation, yeah, I affirm that as the country is Christianized the legislation will be more Christian, but that this will be an effect and not a cause of the furthering of the gospel.

Now, is Bush better than Gore? No. He is only better if you assume that who is President will affect divine judgement, of which I am not certain. Do I feel safer with Bush than Gore after 9-11? Yes. Do I think Bush is aiding the proclamation of the Gospel? The only case in which I can think the answer is yes to this question is that Gore would have made the Christian right more political. Having Bush as president may have allowed the Christians in the Republican party to pursue the Gospel, where Gore would have drawn their attention as Clinton did.

Lets put flesh on this conversation and take a direct issue: gay marriage.

Is it the Christian concern to legally oppose it?

It is the duty of the Church to condemn all sins. Dorothy Sayers has written some excellent things about the Church's recent obsession with sex. There are seven deadly sins, after all, and people go to hell for each one of them. Nevertheless, we are grossed out by homosexuality, so we find it to be a sin to particularly oppose through legislation. How curious that the Biblical stance seems to indicate that adultery and Moloch worship are the greatest sins since they involves covenant breaking, typologically or actually demonstrating violation of the covenant with YHWH. Homosexuality on the other hand involves hierarchy violation, with a male behaving submissively when he ought not - a grave sin to be sure, but on the same level as defying the Elders of your local congegation. These are sins, and there are Biblical consequences, to which the Church must address. But the political ramifications of those consequences eludes me, unless, again, we return to the covenant connection we have with the rest of Americans, in which we cannot change their sinful ways by legislating against the evils of sin. We do not replace their eternal damnation with legislation. For legislation, even if it were heeded, would not change their souls.

W~
  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 6:47 PM

  As with most of you, I too, am a theologian.

"God will not suffer man to have the knowledge of things to come; for if he had prescience of his prosperity he would be careless; and understanding of his adversity he would be senseless."

You are Augustine! You love to study tough issues and don't mind it if you lose sleep over them. Everyone loves you and wants to talk to you and hear your views, you even get things like "nice debating with you." Yep, you are super smart, even if you are still trying to figure it all out. You're also very honest, something people admire, even when you do stupid things.

What theologian are you?

A creation of Henderson



I'm wondering how most of you answered the "Significant Other" question.

The Wife is Martin Luther.

"Sin is incurable by the strength of man, nor does free will have any validity here, so that even the saints say: 'The evil which I do not wish, this I do.' 'You are not doing the things which you wish.' 'Since my loins are filled with illusions,' etc."

You are Martin Luther! Yeah, you have a way of letting everyone know how you feel, usually with Bible quotes attached, and will think your way through the issues, although sometimes you make no sense! You aren't always sure of yourself, and you can change your mind about things, something you actually consider a strength. You can take solitude, especially with some music.

What theologian are you?

A creation of Henderson
  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 7:43 AM

  Last night the lovely wife and I visited a local hangout called the Village Grind. Since our Valentines celebrations this evening will likely be alcohol free as it is at my parent's house we enjoyed a fine bottle of wine: 1998 McLaren Vale (a region of Australia) Reserve Shiraz entitled The Gate Keeper. The aroma of old books freshly opened accompanied by strawberries, newly mown grass and eucalyptus came from my glass. More and more I am realizing that many associations I have with wine are summoned forth from previous experiences I have had. The "mown grass" was at my parents newer house and not the one I had as a child. The strawberries were at my Grandparents cabin in Wisonsin. The old books were from a collection I bought from Mr. Beauchamp. The eucalyptus sits on my bookshelf right now. If you are looking for advice about tasting wine, think about what events the smells and tastes bring to mind. The smell of strawberries crossed over into the tasting and hit the sides of my tongue with a nice tartness. Alaina said she tasted cedar pencils. As with most Shiraz and Cabernet types, there was some dark berry flavors also. This is the second of three bottles I have tasted of this. The third should remain in my cellar for another three to five - if I can keep my hands off it, 'cuz it's pretty tasty. Maybe when Charles P. graduates from New St. Andys we'll open it, eh? The second wine tip of the day is to find a good importer and follow his label. Especially for those of you in Moscow, I like Peter Weygandt (who imported this wine) and North Berkely Importers. Usually these wines are inexpensive and fun to drink.

The Village Blend is a coffeehouse wine bar. Much less of a pub than Bucer's and the music was more eclectic. Last night our ears were treated to Overdue, an Accoustic Reggae Blend Band. There was a lot of Bob Marley and some black Christian folk thrown in for good measure. Their rendition of "Rivers of Babylon" was great. They played what I might call a few Christian praise songs, but perhaps what, how and where they played them was the most appropriate locale for such songs: interspersed with some great songs played in a reggae style on a Friday night at a watering hole.

I am going to choose a new topic for the coming week: N.T. Wright, Umberto Eco, John Frame and Neil Postman: Literary Criticism and their commonality against the Deconstructionists. I'm currently reading Wright 'The NT & the People of God" after reading Postman's Amusing for the second or third time, Frame's Doctrine of the Knowledge of God for the second, and recalling some papers I wrote on Eco a few months back. I might post one of those papers here. Maybe. Anyway, they all seem to be seeking for meaning by context with each taking a different approach. Postman wants to import the context of great thoughts discussed throughout time. Eco wants both the author and the reader to bring something to each story making each a new event. Frame (applying this criticism to Theology) wants to look at each epistemology, specifically rationalism, empiricism and existentialism categorically, but working toward a unification of the three. Wright uses some of the same categories as Frame but his use is different, reaching for an Einsteinian approach to rationalism and objectivity.

Wright's approach to objectivity is like the first of Einstein's postulates, in that objectivity exists but it cannot be known because we, being human, are bound to perspectivalism. We might have an interesting debate on this because Frame - I think - argues for a presuppositional approach to objectivity. And perhaps like Einstein presupposing that there is a uniform speed for light and time but denying our knowledge of it, we are left to presuppose certain things about it from the commonality of our presuppositions. Maybe. I have to think through that again.

My wife gave me a Valentine's card in which she says she loves me a thousand Leoville Bartons. That's quite a bit. I'm in awe of you, dear and I love you every Father Brown mystery.

W~  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 8:21 AM

  Remy: thanks for posting. Yes, I have heard your thoughts on taking out the garbage and the relationship this has to voting or other political duties. I admit that Daniel and Joseph were placed in positions of power for powers over the then specific people of God. They were given duties and fulfilled them to the glory of God. Though, as I recall, neither sought such positions but were rather given them irrespective of their will.

The position I am advocating (and, I repeat as I have alluded to in all three posts on this topic, of which I am not fully convinced) is neither one of sabatoge nor withdrawal. Ignoring would be a better term. There are Postman-esque reasons for this, to be sure. Tonight at my Grandparents the NBC nightly news started with a lead story, "So what about the President's National Guard service record?" The point of the story was that there was apparently no story, but "stay tuned because that might change." Another creation of news by the media. Although another long discussion could rave on the media and their political slants, I desire to ignore that, too.

I'm not advocating attacking or withdrawing. If you are a Christian in politics, I might have some doubts about the effects on your sanctification but you are there. Why are you there? How did you get there? Looking at both Joseph and Daniel we see that both were servants of the state - or slaves of the state might communicate the truth with better ethos.

Now, addressing the issue of reformation and not revolution - I'm on board, I just fail to see the role politics plays in effecting a reformation because I fail to see a political end result apart from the church. If I'm going to take two steps today in a journey to your house, it does me no good to head to Washington. Thus, its not that I want instant results, a Christian nation, whatever. The goal is a world in the Church under the subjection of Christ. I'm arguing that as a political bodies, the United States and the Church are ultimately at odds, and not because of the immorality of either. Our duty, our love, our affection should be for the church, the other is irrelevant. Only in one is our covenant with Christ kept.

I hope I answered your points. I feel that I am still looking to justify the Christianization of a national body. Let me ask some more pointed questions: Is legislating the law a Christian duty? There are reconstruction elements and assumptions here. I am pushing for the law being used in the church. Does it have a place outside of it? That's the first question. Second, we affirm that keeping the law is impossible apart from Christ. Thus, if the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, are we not in essence seeking to legally mandate the gospel? The follow up question to that is whether that is permitted.

Now I'm going to visit all your blogs and read your rants.

W~

  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 4:25 PM

  Alright! A wine posting tonight.
2002 Louis Jadot Beaujolais-Villages. Yeah, yeah, appellation controlee and all that jazz. Lemme see. It's tart but not offensive. Herby, sort of like the love bug. No, seriously more like licorice. The aroma from this wine is floral with a hint of muskiness. The floral aroma is very rose like. Perhaps this would make a great Valentines' day wine. The body of the wine is thin and the taste is delicious. I love it. A complex red which is so unCalifornian which is something I really appreciate. Most Californian wines are like the Governor of the state - unmistakeable, unavoidable. It's a clean taste but not simple. And a bargain at around $10.00 at your local alcohol pusher's.

Click here if you want more information on the impressive Loius along with great words to say like "Négociant."

W~  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 5:03 PM

  Wasting time on the net, I tell you people . . . Oh! And speaking of coffee.

W~  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 8:38 AM

  Finally! No double dipping on the advertising.

W~  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 8:28 AM

  On to other matters. A few days ago I posted some things for which I have been dragged before the Council on Un-American thinking. I gave as good as I got and ended with pride intact and knuckles not so intact.

Thanks again to The Crew who posted in response to my thoughts. Some further thinking here, I hope. Here are some points around which I will focus. I'll try to maintain the point that participation in American politics is irrelevant, carrying the weight akin to a hobby for Christians. I'm not sure this is correct, but if I attempt to maintain this argument against all comers, perhaps we, the noble group, might accomplish something even if I am ultimately proven wrong.

First, some presuppositions I think we can all rally around. We are Christians, and that means our allegiance is to YHWH the Triune God through His covenant people, the church. Any other allegiance must be secondary. We might place family and individual churches on that second tier of allegiance. Whether country should be placed there is open for debate with me unapologetically opposing such a placement.

Where should national politics be placed in a prioritization? If we are covenantally connected to the nation, as I asked and Joffre suggested then we are bound by their conduct. If we were a worshipper of YHWH living in Canaan prior to the Jewish entrance into the promised land, we would be subject to the discipline which would befall that area. Perhaps YHWH would save us as He did Lot, but that would be his prerogative. We are connected to the United States and if it suffers judgement, then we will also bear it. In some sense, we are no more righteous than the apostate living around us.

I also agree with Mike that the things non-Christians do are contrary to the will of God. But what do we do with that? It is the nature of sinners to sin and they are sinners, therefore they will sin. Does prohibiting their wickedness at a legal level or through some other means such as force (and this, taken to its natural conclusion is in opposition to those who kill abortion doctors) mean the sin will cease? I do not believe this to be the case. I suppose that none of us here would seek to outlaw idolatry. Or perhaps you would, but I doubt it. If so, make the case. Each of us sees idolatry as the demarcation line between serving Christ and not serving Christ. You cannot be an idolater and serve Christ, neither can you serve Christ and be an idolater. And, denying neutrality, I submit that you cannot serve neither. Thus, a legal prohibition of idolatry would be a legal obligation to serve Christ. Is that possible? If you want to legally oppose gay marriage or pass legislation that the Ten Commandments be on display in an American Courthouse, you must also strive to outlaw idolatry and mandate Christianity. Or do you wish to divorce the two?

To divorce the two, to mandate God's law be kept in an American courthouse, to oppose infant pre-birth murder and gay marriage is to legislate morality apart from Christ. To be sure, I admit, that Leviticus declares that child murder, homosexuality, and idolatry will bring judgement on non-covenant people groups. But if we legislate these things, we are attempting to enforce the law apart from Christ. Can the law be kept apart from Christ? No! Why then would we legislate that our fellow Americans keep a covenant which is impossible to keep? It is folly. They cannot keep the law apart from Christ. Working to legislate such action will neither aid our witness nor protect us from the consequences of their sin.

Or, perhaps you wish to legally mandate Christianity. Perhaps we should require worship of Christ for a people group where those who abort, sodomize, and commit idolatry would be removed. In this people group we would mandate the worship of Christ as king. For this, I am in support, only let us call this group the Church.

What do we do with this second-tier covenant connection? I believe we treat it as Paul treated his Roman Citizenship: a tool. We do not stand up and proclaim the godliness of the founders, we do not mandate righteous living that we live quiet and peacable lives. Rather, we should use the freedoms and tools of our national citizenship to build the church, not to restore the nation. And, if God so wills, our church building will give us a nation in which we will live under His law and have quiet and peacable lives.

Some thoughts. Bring it on, punks. Or do you feel lucky?

W~  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 2:12 PM

  This is a story about a guy named Sean
Poor baker here barely kept his stomach fed
One day then he was lookin for some food
When in through the door walked a bustlin hood
Soldier, that is.
Cramped life
Army style.

Next thing ya know ol' Sean's an army hare
All the kinfolk said get a wife 'fore there.
So he loaded up the Honda and drove to New York
And married his good old friend Kate
Wed, that is.
Rhymin sucks
Story true.



Congratulations Mr. and Mrs. Sean Larson (iffen' ya went through with the cermony yesterday!) God's blessings to both of you. 'Till His Kingdom Comes, remain His Soldier first.
W~

P.S. Oh, and thanks for the stereo. We'll take good care of it.   ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 12:54 PM

  Yes, I'm working on a post. It's getting out of hand and I have an exam I have to take for work on Thursday. Please be patient. God isn't finished with me yet.

I did have a 1998 Coonwarra Cabernet. Coonwarra is an Australian appelation. Having had this particular wine before, I was expecting raspberries and mint, but instead it tasted like cranberries. Sour, very sour. Actually, it tasted like the 1999 vintage of the same wine. It could be mislabeled.

W~   ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 7:34 PM

  Hello extra-large-quad-half-calf-skim-milk-with-a-dollop-of-soy-milk-cappuccino-with-whip-cream-and-chocolate-shavings-on-top drinkers. You're not welcome here. Go somewhere else. To those of you who barfed at the said drink, welcome and brotherly affection to you.

(The following is a paid service announcement. The views expressed in this announcement are those of the advertisers and not necessarily those of the owners of this blog)

For those of you in the know, Stillwater, MN is the home of Loome's Boostore and is very close to where I currently redise. I recommended the Messers of the ACCS check out Loomes when they came to the State where nothing is allowed. They did, and in the words of Mr. Christopher Schlect, "Loomes Bookstore is what Powells wants to be when it grows up." I'll admit that Loome's website isn't that hot, but if you ever get a hankerin' to visit the largest used theological bookstore in the world let my lovely wife and I know.
We'd be happy to help make arraingements.

Now that I have some time on my hands, I'm trying to decide what to do with my blog. I'm not that great at writing poetry. After all, that's what I got me a wife for. Neither do I wish to just tell you about life in Minnesota; as great as it is and as fun as that might be. Also, I'm currently too impoverished to be enjoying lots of wine. When I can open a bottle, I'll give you a posting, but that won't be nearly as often as it has been in the past, when I have been priviledged to share a bottle with many of you.

I've decided to just write. Some of this will sound familiar to you Muscovites, present and past. Hopefully new people will visit here and get some recommendations. Some of this will also be questions on things I do believe. For example, I am postmillenial, but I also see a lot of the texts covering the conquest of Christ including prophecies of the Kingdom of Christ going forth in violence. Does this mean we should be more militant and violent? (Will the FBI be visiting me?) What exactly do the passages mean when they tell of the nations of the world becoming the footstool of our Christ?

That's one question I'm going to mull over. I'd appreciate your thoughts.

Second, and this has been subject to a lot of discussions between my brother, father, and me recently: Why should I care about being an American? Why should I give two figs for the legal actions for the defense of marriage? Why should I care if the Ten Commandments are being removed from the courthouse in an Alabama Legal Institution? Should I care about the legality abortion? After all, is it not the nature of pagans to kill their young?

We are Christians, members of the Church, elect and now alone among those who are qualified to worship YHWH, the Triune God. Nietzche was right in this: We are Christians, we alone among the world can worship God. We don't have to offer sacrifices to gain favor, neither do we have to obey laws to gain God's love. We already have it. Therefore, let us worship YHWH as Christ worshipped Him, as a Son. And if this be first in our thoughts and actions, why should I be concerned about whether the non-churched, those with whom I have no covenant connection do? If they wish to get married, why should I oppose it? Is marrage some concept that needs my defense? Where is this concept? Why does it need my defense? And since when has a definition needed defending? If the pagans wish to remove God's law from their midst, why should I oppose its removal?

Concerning the defense of marriage, Pastors attack marriage by divorcing and allowing divorce. Concerning the Law of God which is given for our purity and can only be kept by those who have been justified, we the churched despise it, ignore it, and consider it irrelevant. It is then no surprise when the pagans treat it similarly. Yes, yes, you New St. Andrews students, I'm getting all "City of God" on you. But ask yourselves what that means when we consider the US and the Church? As for me and these problems, I find the US rapidly becoming irrelevant in my mind. Or am I covenantally connected to the United States?

And yes, I am aware that these wicked acts will bring judgement upon our land, but I doubt that such judgement as we deserve will be stayed merely because such wickedness is illegal. Rather, I believe the wickedness is now legal because it is rampant, not rampant because it is legal. Making sodomy and abortion illegal will not stay God's hand. But, perhaps excommunicating adulterers will.

Still, too many questions.

W~
  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 11:56 AM

  FYI: Alaina is back up.

W~  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 2:09 PM

  Greetings again. I have finally brought my blog up to code. Although not the complete overhaul that Mr. Swait has done on his blog, I have at least put all the links in working order and installed a new notation system. Now Alaina wants me to help her get her blog back up and running.

W~  ¶

// posted by The Wino @ 2:01 PM