Localism: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Time to talk about the pros and cons of Localism.

Localism is a trending thought in my circles.  The idea is that we should focus more on building relationships and thick Christian culture close to home, than on national or international politics or concerns.

Pastor Michael Foster in Ohio just put on a County before Country conference, a prime example of this idea.

I didn't go, and the talks aren't public yet, so I'm going out on a limb here a bit, evaluating this movement.  I'm open to pushback wherever I'm mischaracterizing localism.

Pros of Localism

1. When Jesus told the Good Samaritan parable, the point was to love whoever God puts in front of you, and that is certainly local.  The priest and Levite who passed by (literally walked over) the guy, probably had responsibilities in Jerusalem, a few miles away on foot.  But they should have stopped and helped.  This is one good thing localism is getting at.

2. The political principle of subsidiarity fits here as well - the conservative notion that problems are best fixed at the most local level possible.

3. It is better for us to be shaped by in-person mentors close by with whom we have frequent contact, than by online celebrity teachers.  Some friends were going to go to the conference mentioned above, but wound up helping a friend get their house ready to sell.  Why drive 7 hours to hear talks about localism, when we can actually do it, right here? they said.  Amen.

4. I've pastored two churches now for 15 years or so, where people drive for quite a ways to come, seeking particular things in a church.  That's not inherently wrong or unwise.  But localism is a good push in the opposite balancing direction.  Do we simply gather together because we agree on a list of topics and opinions?  Or does our geography, which makes real and deeper relationships more feasible, matter?

Cons of Localism

1. Politically, this is a new version of isolationism in national politics, the rise of which I dread and oppose.  America shouldn't be the world's policemen everywhere, but we should help where we can, and we have the resources few others do.  Less foreign aid generally?  Yes.  But refraining to counterbalance the tyrannical assertions of evil empires, like Russia into Ukraine, or China into Taiwan?  Bad idea.

2. I fear for the effect this has in the church on international missions efforts, as well.  We are connected tangibly through the church to certain Christian Ukrainians, for example.  Such connections should be fostered, not de-prioritized, even though they are far away.  Churches should set aside 10% of their budgets to give to ministries and missions outside of their work, both local and international.

3. Localism has obvious limits.  It cannot be the only factor in deciding where to invest relationships.  I'm geographically closer to a shop that sells crystals, tarot, and does psychic readings, than I am to over half of our church members.  That doesn't mean I'm more relationally bound to the occult-friendly shop.

4. The Ugly: some of the localism movement appears infected with a studied disdain or apathy for those who aren't like us or who are far away.  An inference is sometimes falsely made: since those farther away or less like you have less priority, then it is wrong or at least unwise to give them any of your attention or energy.  So, do not pay attention to the inner city's needs near you, but only to your family and neighborhood.  You are not obligated in any way to people of a different ethnic heritage than you, and should let them help their own.  Your family and most of the people around you are white, say - deal with your own kind (hello, kinism).  Since I referred to Michael Foster above, I should clarify that he is not friendly to this ugly strand of localism.

This is where the Good Samaritan parable comes back into play as a corrective.  Jesus makes the last guy a Samaritan.  As I understand it, this parable was told by the Pharisees before Jesus told it, and the last guy was always a Pharisee, told to an audience of Pharisees, who did for the poor guy all that is described in Jesus' parable.  This was a self-righteous, populist take: we're the good guys.  The elite Sadducees may talk a good talk, but they won't actually help the poor.  WE will.  Jesus counters, and makes the good guy someone who all Jews had the most racial and religious antipathy for.

So localism is bounded Scripturally by rejecting hostility for ethnic or racial differences, and by rejecting an endorsement of keeping a separation between such differences.  We should make an effort to bridge those divides when we have opportunity, as Jesus did (John 4; Mark 7:24-8:13 - note in 8:11-13 that the Pharisees argue with Jesus after He feeds the 4,000 in the Gentile territory of the Decapolis).  

Localism should also be balanced with other factors, like affinity of beliefs.  Paul wrote letters to fellow believers far away, when he could have focused all his time on those immediately surrounding him.

But the basic premise of localism is sound.

Build networks and culture with the ones God has placed around you.  God wants an incarnational church, one that makes a physical and in-person difference in lives directly around you.  This is an aspect of the Dominion mandate (Gen 1:28) and the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-19).  Fulfill that mandate!

Covid // Culture Wars // Heaven

 Here's an accurate take, I think, on society's response to Covid.

"Our democratic life together is being replaced by totalitarianism as a result of today's biopolitics."

Theology Pugcast did a show on it, but I can't find it right now...

World's news podcast Friday, Sept 2 was great, especially John Stonestreet's discussion of our need to engage in the culture wars, and Michigan's proposed radically pro-abortion constitutional amendment. 

I'm preaching on Heaven soon, and came across "Reunion on the Far Shore."

At first is asks whether we will see our loved ones in Heaven and recognize and fellowship with them.

But Heaven is about far more than that, and this leads to a deeper question: what is needed to be fit for Heaven?  The article ends up with an explanation of CS Lewis' Till We Have Faces, a notoriously difficult read.  If you've ever struggled with it, read the end of this article.

The Church's Invitation

 Rev 22:17 - The Spirit and the Bride say, “Come.” And let the one who is thirsty come...

 

At the very end of the Bible, God invites the world to Jesus.  He does it through the Spirit and the Bride.  This is what we do every Sunday here at the table.  I am the voice of the Bride, the Church.  And the Spirit is also at work in your hearts.  We are both inviting you, drawing you to Christ.  Many of my communion prayers end with “Even so, come Lord Jesus.”  We usually think of this related to His second coming.  But it is also a prayer that Jesus would make himself known to us here and now, as we eat the bread and drink the wine.  Jesus died for you: broken bread, like a broken body, to feed you.  Jesus bled for you: poured wine, like a bleeding corpse, to atone for you.

 

The invitation - the summons - is to all, but especially to His baptized body on the Lord’s Day, gathered together in this place.

 

Come 4 all things are now ready.

8/28/22

Ordinary Fuel

Romans 6:1-5

"What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?  Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?  We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.  For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his."

Today we’re looking at the church, and the outward means of grace: the Word, sacraments, and prayer.

 

As we prepare to confess our sins, let us remember this.  We tend to rely on emotions or on opinions, to fuel our spiritual growth.  But God points us to ordinary things that we often find rather boring.  Read His book.  Go to church.  Take the Lord’s Supper.  Pray with God’s people.  This is where God usually works.

 

It’s like a rocket launching into space.  There will be spectacular visual moments when one section detaches from the rest, or when it arrives at the space station.  But it took a whole lot of fuel burning constantly to get to those points.  Like the 5 wise bridesmaids, who prepared to have enough oil to keep their lamps burning, keep those ordinary things going.

 

So don’t despise the ordinary things.  See God at work every time we stand and read His word, or pour a little water on a covenant child of His.  He is feeding our souls.

 

This reminds us of our need to confess our sins.

8/28/22

Our Man in Havana

Our Man in Havana by Graham Greene
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Mr Wormold, a vaccum-cleaner salesman in Havana, Cuba, is offered a spy job with MI6, and takes it to make some extra money. He makes up stories and drawings and sends them to London, which takes them seriously. This gets several people killed, and entangled Wormold in the actual spy world of Cuba.

Greene’s tone is rather flippant and cynical in this short story. Wormold’s apathy to national affairs is evident. He just wants to survive and provide for his daughter. It is a critique (in 1958!) of Cold War priorities on nation and ideology above all else.

I enjoyed the scene near the end where Wormold sits in his bedroom plotting to murder a spy enemy, all while he hears in the next room his daughter and love discussing personal matters of love about him and his daughter.

The most intriguing aspect of this book, is the implicit assertion that fiction can affect reality. Lies believed, can change the world. It may bring short term gain, but if it's really a lie, there will be negative consequences, too. But part of the point seems to be, that you can fudge your way through, in the end, because those who BELIEVE lies want to cover up their errors, too.

I wouldn’t call this a great classic, but it’s perfect for a mix of light reading and thought-provoking content. 3 stars.

View all my reviews

Church Membership and Family/Church Interaction

 I just realized something

 

1. Doing membership classes en masse with several families at once, implies that the church culture is the thing the family is joining and conforming to.  Medium to large sized churches do this.

 

2. Doing membership classes with one family at a time, implies that the family culture is more important than integrating with the church culture.  Small churches tend to do this.

 

Neither is necessarily better than the other – each has pros and cons.

The first option makes church more “programmed” – a bad thing in my mind.

But conveying church culture is important to do, and the first route does it.

 

The second option makes church more relationally based – a good thing.

But it keeps the family more an isolated unit, instead of integrating the family into the church’s culture more.

 

Families should be willing to adapt themselves to get involved with church life.

And churches shouldn’t demand too much of families, and should often tailor church events to family roles, to strengthen the family.

 

There was a lot of talk a decade or two ago about making sure churches are family-friendly.

It’s also true that families should be church-friendly. 

Rich Lusk and Uri Brito even wrote a book about this, “The Church-Friendly Family.”  Check it out.

Evangelicalism Divided

Aaron Renn's "Negative World" paradigm made a big splash a few months ago.

I finally got around to reading it, and I highly recommend it.

https://www.firstthings.com/article/2022/02/the-three-worlds-of-evangelicalism

Learning, Not Deriding

I’ve been bothered lately by what “my people” (in the CREC orbit) call “big Eva.”  Too often they just mirror the culture's priorities in what they talk about.

But I've also been bothered by the often-self-serving, anti-big Eva rhetoric, from my people.

 

At the root of it is this question: what is the expected, particular shape that our Christian life should take? 

 

What do I mean?

 

In the general evangelical world, the ideal Christian is emotional in worship, nice to people relationally, fervent and spontaneous in prayer, gushingly gregarious, and avoids controversial issues.  But in my denomination, the CREC, the ideal Christian is martial in worship, rips on the woke, and pursues the distinctiveness of their biblical roles as men or women.

 

Now, here comes the hard part for everybody.  NEITHER OF THESE IDEALS IS BAD.

 

Each has its weaknesses.  But folks on both sides look at the other, and sadly believe they see unbiblical, compromising, unfaithfulness to Christ.  This is because each side has too narrow a view of what a Christian disciple should look like.

 

Avoiding controversy is sometimes compromise, and sometimes wisdom.

Critiquing the woke left is needed, until you unjustly condemn any teacher or institution that you suspect might possibly be woke.

 

I cringe when my guys deride niceness.  When nice means papering over problems, I get the critique.  But the derision is often an excuse to justify overly harsh critique.  We don’t want to have to be kind to people we disagree with.

 

I also cringe when their guys see my people as a bunch of angry, harsh, fighting dominionists.  Partly because sometimes it is true.  But their perception is often an excuse to not have to confront a problem: “I don’t have to listen to the merits of this guy’s argument, when he’s offending me personally with his strong rhetoric.”  They often hold back from discerning truth, to keep a relationship peaceful, or to hide real compromise with the culture that they are making.

 

 

Bringing this down to brass tacks, I dropped a child off at Grove City this past week.

 

If the evangelical ideal above is a 1, and the CREC ideal is a 10, I’d put Grove City at a 3-5 on the scale.

That really disappoints many of my CREC compatriots.  Why go to a school like that?  My answer:

Because my children have grown up in CREC culture for 18 years, and it is time they broaden their Christian experience, and learn more how the Christian world out there thinks and operates.  They have filters in place to avoid compromise.  And there are things to learn from the lower numbers on the scale, that a CREC church may be weak in, to balance one’s Christian life.  Likewise, Bible church or EPC type students at places like Grove could learn plenty from the OPC church in town, or from CREC teachers online.

Dustin Messer tweeted this, right when I was finishing this up:

 

I largely agree with his sentiment, but he falls into the ditch on the other side, deriding the anti-big Eva crowd as "school girl immaturity."  Not helpful.  Same shock-jock rhetoric you're critiquing.  The love of drama/attention probably gets more to the heart of things.  But pressing for your too-particular vision of what a Christian should look like is the core, in my view.

It would be wise to stop deriding each other, and start learning from each other.

God's Table Blessing

Ephesians 3:14-19

"For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith—that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God."

God speaks words of benediction at this table.  You are His loved children, in Christ.  He has delivered You from His wrath, forgiven You of Your sin against Him, and adopted You into His family.  Receive these good words, this truth, from your God.  He gives You not just words, but Himself.  His own Son so that You may have life.  This bread and wine, signs of union with Him.  Do not turn away, but come to Him in faith, and receive the love and the life that He gives.

8/21/22

Critiquing Trueman?

A friend passed on this critique of Carl Trueman's excellent book, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self - first negative review I have seen.

It seems to me that Jon Harris' forte and audience expectation is negative critique.  The emphasis is to find what's wrong in everything.  He criticizes Trueman:

 - for not making the argument he wanted him to make.  

 - for not addressing BLM (which hadn't come to prominence when Trueman finished writing).  

 - for not addressing post-modernism (which he did, if Harris had eyes to see it).

I would urge listeners of Harris to balance their input with positive content, like actually reading Trueman.  There is a certain type of person who just wants to find fault with every teaching they are exposed to, instead of finding what is helpful for them spiritually.  It's a "ready, fire, aim" approach Harris has, that I'm quite averse to.  If Carl Trueman isn't reliable, then only Jon Harris is, and I'm wary of that approach.

There's a whole "no one is as unwoke as me" vibe that's disturbing, here.

There is MUCH to learn from the Trueman book, which I read, and there is nothing in it that will lead you astray.  Harris uncharitably implies otherwise.

A Portrait of the Christian, at Table

Proverbs 9:1-6
Wisdom has built her house;
she has hewn her seven pillars.
2 She has slaughtered her beasts; she has mixed her wine;
she has also set her table.
3 She has sent out her young women to call
from the highest places in the town,
4 “Whoever is simple, let him turn in here!”
To him who lacks sense she says,
5 “Come, eat of my bread
and drink of the wine I have mixed.
6 Leave your simple ways, and live,
and walk in the way of insight.”

The Lord’s Supper is a portrait of the Christian Life

Wisdom Jesus calls everyone, but only some come.

It takes faith to make this work.

Justification: God executes rebels, but sets a table and feeds those He forgives and adopts.

When we repent it means we realize we "lack sense," and we come to Jesus for that.

Sanctification – partaking and fellowshiping here helps us grow, just like reading the Bible does.

Assurance – you have a place at God’s table.  He wants to feed you.

Perseverance – there’s going to be food on the table next week, too, and the next week.

Prayer - Taking the bread and wine is a prayer of sorts – we are asking God to feed us.

 

The gifts of God for the people of God.

8/14/22

Drastic Change in Christ

Acts 2:36-38

"Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”  Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”  And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

In the message this morning, we will consider what happens to us when God saves us.  Peter's audience was cut to the heart, and they asked, “What shall we do?”, and he says, “Repent.”  And many of them do.  This involved a drastic change of direction for them, into a relationship with JC and fellowship in His church.  Some of us have experienced that drastic change.  

For others raised in the church, remember that God calls for course corrections in everyone, b/c we all get off track in various ways.  We have to keep trusting that Jesus is the way, not our own opinions.

 

This reminds us of our need to confess our sins.

8/14/22

Christian Theology in a Nutshell // Balanced Thoughts on Gender

Sinclair Ferguson briefly and poignantly summarizes the Christian worldview here.

"What is Our Theology?"

Kevin DeYoung offers up thoughts on gender that are balanced and helpful.

Neither androgynous nor rigidly stereotypical, this approach is helpful.

Theology for Normal Life

So here’s something interesting.

 

In one pastoral situation a week or two ago, I found it helpful to refer to Philippians 4:2

"I entreat Euodia and I entreat Syntyche to agree in the Lord."

 

Then, a week later, I was preaching on Christology and my studies led me to Philippians 2:5-11 – Jesus humbling Himself, considering the interests of others before Himself.  We are to have that mind.

 

Then the next day I read this, connecting 2:5-11 and 4:2.  Paul explains massive doctrinal truth partly to appeal to two women to get along, agree, and reconcile.  (He also applies it to the Judaizing problem in 3:1-11.)

 

This is why it is important to read Scripture in context.  Theology is for everyday, normal life, as the article title asserts.  We are meant to learn the high Christology, so that we will live properly with others, love our neighbors.

God Forgives Us; We Forgive Others

 Eph 2:14-18

Jesus is the crux of our relationship with God.  We can’t come near God without Jesus – God is rightly offended and keeps His distance from us.

With Jesus, God favors us, forgives us, and welcomes us back into His fellowship.

We need to be like this with one another, whenever we sin against each other.  Favor, forgive, and welcome others back, even when they have sinned grievously against you.  B/c God has done this for you.

8/7/22

Jesus Redeems, Helps Us

Hebrews 2:14-17

Jesus helps humans.  He releases the children of Ab from death and guilt.  He satisfies God’s wrath against us.  He makes us one of His own people.  As we confess our sins, God treats us like He treats Jesus – as a beloved, begotten child.  Take comfort.  You are part of the family of God.  B/c Jesus became like you.  So come to Him and admit your faults freely.  He will forgive. 

8/7/22

The Christian Reformed Church's Course Correction - Why?

Here's a fascinating article on why the CRC, going mainstream liberal for decades, made an abrupt about-face and affirmed biblical sexuality, even resolving to discipline specific cases over it.

The whole thing is worth reading, but this paragraph especially caught my eye (I took out the graph and references):

But beginning in 2017, the quiet practices of personal piety have changed trajectory. The percentage of congregants who have been praying privately..., having family devotions..., reading the Bible daily..., and having personal devotions daily ... began to rise for the first time in 20 years....

Another chart shows that the mean number of children in households with children—that is, the number of children among parents of childbearing age—also began rising around 2012.

This correlation makes sense to me. The connection between personal piety and favoring traditional marriage has been well documented. It follows that a denomination of people who pray, read their Bibles, and go to church would favor biblical sexuality.

Less clear is why CRCers began praying and reading Scripture more after 2012. There wasn’t an organized push for quiet times. The denomination didn’t campaign for Bible reading plans. The pastors I talked to didn’t even notice it was happening.

An Example of Beauty // Down with Patriarchy? // Creation Proved?

This was a fascinating piece on the Pantheon in Rome.

Kevin DeYoung talks a lot of sense here, on the difference between patriarchy and complementarity.  He looks at the pros and cons of each.  His last sentence is a good summary: "The biblical vision of complementarity cannot be true without something like patriarchy also being true."

I found this quote by Thomas Aquinas in First Things, naturally.  Interesting to consider it in light of the recent Creation Science movement sparked by Henry Morris.  I share this as a convinced 6-day creationist.  The quote could be misused to argue for old-earth views or other nonsense, but Aquinas is just wisely marking the boundary of what science can prove, theologically.

"That the world had a beginning is an object of faith, but not a demonstration of science.  And we do well to keep this in mind; otherwise, if we presumptuously undertake to demonstrate what is of faith, we may introduce arguments that are not strictly conclusive; and this would furnish infidels with an occasion for scoffing, as they would think that we assent to truths of faith on such grounds."

First Things, Feb 2022, pg 12.

Wilson Rebutted (Poorly) on White Man's Backlash

Thomas Achord, co-author of a book I criticized recently, has responded in a podcast to the Doug Wilson posts I praised with some strong disagreement.  I'm with Doug on this one.  Below are my shorthand notes that I took while listening, summarizing Achord's argument.  My comments are in [Italics] until the end.

 

Doug said we have more in common with a Nigerian Anglican Christian, than with a white, non-Christian neighbor.

Achord: we do NOT have more in common with Nigerian Anglican Christian women, than with white conservative neighbors.

We have heavenly eternal things in common, but MORE in common?  No.

I have more spiritual things in common with the Nigerian…

I have more earthly things in common with my neighbor than with Nigerian…

Thus, my earthly resources should be more engaged with my neighbor.

“You have a lot in common with them [the Nigerian], supposedly.” 

[Our earthly resources should be directed by our spiritual priorities, not by physical factors in common.  And what is this “supposedly”?  He’s talking about union with Christ.  Achord grossly devalues the spiritual bond of brotherhood in Christ, to uphold earthly factors of place and race.]

 

Shouldn’t your spiritual priorities be focused on the Nigerian, then? No.

You have nothing to do with them.

DW is not sending part of his check to help them.

 

You can’t pray for every Xian in the world.  Who do you focus on?

 

DW throws out rhetorical bombs here.  We should be more careful.

It’s not a game of counting numbers of how many things I have in common with Ghanan Christians.

 

Augustine’s order of loves: Achord reviews this for the last 40 minutes of the podcast.

Achord contrasts Augustine with DW

[To assume DW doesn’t get Augustine’s order of loves is ridiculous.  He does.  And he knows how to apply it to the issue of race far better than Achord does.]

 

Give to the one more bound to you, and closer to you.

[A good general rule, though there are times to heed the Macedonian call.]

 

Care about your people, not those half way around the world.

[What affect would this have on international missions efforts?  I hear Achord basically arguing against them, altogether.]

 

Love the ones God put you with.  Marriage analogy.

[So if God puts you with white people, you just love white people?  Marriage is a covenant to "forsake all others."  There is no such restriction in society.  Rather, we seek "justice for all."]

 

Augustine: consideration of race remains “embedded in our mortal interactions.”

[Achord changes this to “should be respected.”  A big change I don’t think Augustine would have agreed with.  There are plenty of times we need to take race into account in interactions, but these should be minimized, more than respected.  We want to respect the dignity of each person’s background, but whiteness or blackness should not be a major driver shaping our identity or opinions.  Since when is Augustine our expert on modern race relations, instead of a theologian, anyway?]

 

Don’t blend the heavenly/ecclesial realm, where there is no Jew/Greek, with the earthly realm, where gender [and racial?] roles should still be taken into account.

 

There is an analogy to gender roles.  The Left is trying to wipe out the roles. 

[So there is a similar dynamic with race??  Yikes, what is that supposed to look like?  He never says.]

Destruction of social distinctions is the problem generally.

[I agree with this, regarding gender roles, and the bane of egalitarianism.  But race should not be a part of that concern.]

 

Don’t spiritualize the earthly or let the earthly overwhelm the spiritual.

[Agree with this principle, but Achord certainly overwhelms the spiritual with a focus on earthly/physical factors.]

 

Augustine: peace of soul = order of the parts; peace of society = order of the parts

Have to regulate your affections to the natural order of what is better

[I generally agree with this, but again, Achord implies an application to race, but says nothing about it.  I deny an application of this excellent classical principle to race.]

 

Paul: there are different members of the body (1 Cor. 12). 

[Same problem: Achord implied that difference of race makes you a different member of the body.  But a black pastor may have the exact same gifts as me, and be the same kind of member, regardless of race.]

 

We shouldn’t feel bad about focusing on the people around/near us.

[Agree.  Rejecting all forms of “white guilt” is important.  But to over-react, and PREFER people who are like us, especially racially, is to violate the 1 Cor. 12 principle!  The finger is naturally going to prefer other fingers, and denigrate the ear, etc.  That needs to be BATTLED, not respected.]

 

 

 

Summary critique (me, not Achord, now):

This is an over-emphasis on earthly/physical factors and priorities.

It is an over-reaction to Gnosticism.

Past generations in the church focused overly on pietistic spiritualizing.  But ever since Darwin, Marx and Freud, society has been materialistically focused.  Christians are tempted to be sucked into that vortex, rather than critique it with a balanced, biblical worldview.  While we should revel in the particularities of God's material creation, spiritual principles should always direct, temper, and even overwhelm, the weight we give material/physical factors (John 4:9 is a good example).

If you love being white, because the woke are trying to shame you for being white, it's just passive-aggressive anger at the woke, to spite them.  That's not Christ-like or biblical at all.

 

It was the curse of Babel to scatter and divide us, geographically and racially.

Let’s not call that a good thing, and affirm any and everything "natural," but rather seek unity over racial issues in Christ, and seek common cause socially, instead of reinforcing the dividing of people a la Marx.

 

The woke are dividing society over class and race.

Ironically, the ultra-right is agreeing with them.

More on White Man Backlash

Douglas Wilson had two great posts lately, that I just read. Here are two snippets:

"But in the meantime, here is a word for the red-pilled. A lot of the anger that I see floating around the Internet is simply ungodly. This ungodly anger is directed from the left to the right, and from the right to the left. And it is just as carnal, just as ungodly, when it is aimed at Nancy Pelosi as when it is aimed at Tucker Carlson."

https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/augustine-priorities-rightly-ordered-affections-and-the-red-pilled-among-us.html

"When young white straight men are continually harangued for their whiteness, and their straightness, and their men-ness, and are constantly told that they are the cancer of the cosmos, and that the world would be a better place if they all just went and filled up a bucket and stuck their collective head in it . . . well, certain things tend to follow. One of the things that happens is that these young men get angry, and do not see that this is a trick. It is a trap. It is a stratagem, a subterfuge, an inveiglement, a ploy, a gambit. Don’t do it. It is a machination; it is a ambuscade.

Because they do not see the trap, they react in the other direction. Told that whiteness is a cancerous disease, they react into the just-as-silly idea that whiteness is somehow a virtue. But no. They are not being tricked into denying their whiteness. They are being maneuvered into adopting the structure of their [woke] way of understanding the antithesis."

https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/straight-from-the-pit.html

Homemaker of the Year!

I love that the fair a town over from me has a “Homemaker of the year.” Glorious.

Never mind the wrestling…

Contemporary Christian Music Compared with the Psalms

Old Testament scholar, Michael J Rhodes, tweeted a glimpse into his research on the Top 25 Christian worship songs, after spending months studying the Psalms. Here are his main insights (lightly edited by me for readability):

1. Justice is mentioned only once in one Top 25 song. In contrast, the Hebrew word for justice “Mishpat” alone can be found 65 times in 33 different Psalms.

2. The poor are completely absent in the Top 25. By contrast, the Psalter uses varied language to describe the poor on nearly every page.

3. The widow, refugees, and the oppressed are completely absent from the Top 25. The orphan gets two mentions, one occurrence of which appears to refer to a "spiritual" orphan.

4. Whereas "enemies" are the third most common character in the Psalms, they rarely show up in the Top 25. When they do, they appear to be enemies only in a spiritual sense.

5. Maybe most devastatingly, in the Top 25, not a SINGLE question is ever posed to God. The Top 25 never ask God anything. Prick the Psalter and it bleeds the cries of the oppressed pleading with God to act. This is completely lacking in the Top 25.

Rhodes goes on to say, “Indeed, there is very little evidence that the Top 25 are ever speaking clearly about situations of social and economic harm.

‘Are you hurting and broken WITHIN’ sums up the way these songs transform the holistic nature of the psalms into songs about spiritual healing.

Worse yet, we deny the poor and oppressed the "First Amendment Right" to protest the psalms offer them.

Meanwhile, those of us who are not poor and oppressed continue to refuse to learn how to mourn and protest alongside them.”

Source: Craig Greenfield

Civil Disobedience // Handling Our Debt to God's Grace // On the Conservative Backlash to Woke-ness

This was a very insightful interview with Glenn Sunshine, on Romans 13, church history, and our current politics.

And this:

"O to grace how great a debtor, daily I'm constrained to be..."

I found this article VERY edifying spiritually.

How are we in debt to God for His grace to us, yet today, if at all?

Should we seek to pay off this debt?

Please read carefully, for your own spiritual health.

Very helpful article on the ultra-right over-reaction to leftist identity politics, going on today.