Possible Changes for the Blog

So, I’ve been thinking about making a few changes to the blog, I’d love to know what you all think about some of them. However, you need to know that any suggestions made may be just rejected outright. 😉

1. Name Change. A little pretentious? Especially for those who have no familiarity with the language.

2. Number of Posts. Instead of one post per day, I may actually start posting throughout the day. This means I may post more. Maybe. Tuesday’s Ten and Thursday’s Random Thoughts will remain. Settle down.

3. Politics. I’d like to have some civil talks about political and social issues. I may use Fridays for this. I know this may be controversial. But my hope would be to get people thinking. I was a political science major in college for a time and still love the subject. One way to approach this may be to approach it answer as to why I am a conservative. Just short posts on various issues.

4. My Book. I know I have not talked much about it lately. It is all still in the editorial process. But I am afraid. I’m afraid my blog will become a marketing platform for the book. I don’t want it to.

5. What’s Missing? Anything you would like to see me discuss? Any subject? Movement? Idea?

Thursday’s Random Thoughts

1. In the past couple of weeks I’ve noticed something interesting. My blog is getting lots of hits from Germany and Russia. Though I am sure this is totally unrelated, I’m reading a book on communism and one on fascism.

2. Question: can you publicly rebuke someone for publicly rebuking a public statement?

3. My desire to write about bacon on Thursdays is pavlovian.

4. Looked at how much it cost to go see Adele in the ATL. Whoa.

5. My wife keeps getting better looking. Me? Not so much.

6. My son refuses to believe that Superman would not suck his thumb. Great, another lawyer. (Wink at my friend, Anita.)

7. “Missional” can be a helpful word as long as we don’t use it as a hammer against critics or a hedge against criticisms.

8. So, I’m actually thinking about buying a gun and learning to hunt. But it has to be a pretty gun.

9. When my wife forgets to buy bacon, it puts stress on our marriage. And our lunch.

10. Wait. Do you need a concealed carry permit if you get a belt with dual holsters and a couple of colt revolvers?

Responding to the Defense of Mark Driscoll’s Call to Ridicule Effeminate Men

(Update: Driscoll responds to it all. Though there is no apology, he does admit it was “flippant” and thanks his critics for their wisdom.)

(Update 2: I’ve now read over this twice and I am still struck by the lack of apology here. No only that but as someone else pointed out, you should just apologize, not plug a new book you have coming out. When my son hits my other son, we make him actually say, “I’m sorry for hitting you.” We want to instill that habit of acknowledging the wrong and the hurt. This may be the crappiest apology ever.)
(Update 3: A friend pointed me to this list. 4, 6 and 7 are notable.)

(My first post on this issue is here.)

While I am not surprised there are some who would defend Mark Driscoll’s call on facebook to ridicule effeminate men. I am surprised by the way he is defended and the veritable silence from the big-time evangelical neo-calvinist bloggers…those in my tribe. The post, now gone, happened five days ago and neither Challies nor any of The Gospel Coalition blogs have addressed it. (Of course they have also not commented on the now public accusations against C.J. Mahaney and SGM.)

So the defenses keep coming and the more they come, the hollower they sound. The following are some of the defenses of Driscoll and his invitation for you and others, the world over, to ridicule men with feminine qualities.

1. “Mark was just trying to use humor to point out what we already know.” When I was in High School a friend of mine told me how frustrated he would get when people would say something unkind and then follow it up with “just kidding.” I’ve never forgotten it. It’s true, we use the “jk” to make up for the fact that we might have just said something hurtful, painful or cruel. Explain to me why this defense of his behavior works again? If I make fun of overweight people and it’s funny, do I get a pass? Similar to this is the “we need to lighten up” argument. How about this for answer – “No. I will not lighten up.” We, as pastors, should not be ridiculing a group a people. We should not be asking others to do it along with us. And we should be swift to want to fight for them with all the belief in grace we can muster.

2. “His critics already don’t like his theology and were just looking for a reason to pounce.” This may be true. But it is just as likely that the defenders share his theology and therefore will not listen or take seriously his critics because of their theology. This is a ridiculous defense. Shouldn’t we care what those who think differently think about our character? Yes, many of his critics hate our Complementarianism. Shouldn’t we adorn that conviction with kindness instead of what looks like bullying? Yes, you heard me right, I am a complementarian and yet still appalled by Driscoll’s callousness. Does our desire to be missional not spill over into how we treat others…say effeminate men?

3. “Calling him a ‘bully’ is overdone.”  At first I thought so. But I think Rachel Held Evans is right in saying this is bullying. Imagine this was not taking place on facebook but in another social arena…say a lunchroom or the locker room. Or the hallway at school. Who would be the one saying this kind of thing? Would it be the leader of Young Life? Possibly. But doubt it. More likely it’s the bully, insecure and wanting all those weaker than him to be the same. OK, so you think he is not being a bully, fine. What is a bully then? What does a bully do? What is it that makes a bully? What if your son was effeminate?

4. “Nobody’s Perfect.” This is the “mercy for me and mine and judgement for everyone else” defense. No one really thinks this is a good excuse in response to a pastor openly ridiculing and then inviting his fans and followers to do the same. It’s just a lame attempt to silence critics instead of actually engaging what he actually did and naming it. The nobody’s perfect defense silences the critics of leaders and preachers who are often (and rightly so) teaching so as to correct those who need correction. What if those in the pew all started saying, “Nobody is perfect” when being instructed. Actually the nobody is perfect defense should tell us something. When we do not feel the need to apologize after ridiculing others, we actually admit we do not believe this. The fact that nobody is perfect should make it easier to apologize and ask for forgiveness.

5. “Paul seemed to be concerned about it, shouldn’t we be concerned about the fact that men have feminine qualities?” Maybe. It’s debatable. But that is not why so many of us are repulsed. We are repulsed because this is the worst way to discuss any issue. There is no way a reasonable person could look at what he said and assume concern for effeminate men, worship leaders among them or the church at large.

6. “The criticism of Mark Driscoll is slanderous gossip.” So, let me get this straight. A high-profile pastor with over 112,000 followers on facebook invites those followers to ridicule effeminate worship leaders – and calling him to account for it is slander and gossip? Slander has to do with making false allegations in order to harm someone’s reputation. And once something is put on facebook and others are asked to comment, the critical comments are not gossip, even if they are now on blogs or news-sites.

7. The Silence.  Am I the only one who thinks it is weird that nothing is being said on all the huge christian blogs about this. Nothing in support. Nothing of rebuke. Just silence. Nothing on Challies. Nothing on TGC. Nothing from the T4G guys. Nothing from World magazine or Christianity Today. Maybe nothing should be said. Maybe something will be said at a later date. But, the silence is strange.

All of these defenses have the distinct aroma of fear around them. Are we afraid of calling to account those whom we before had put so much stock in? Is it because we will be let down if we admit to ourselves that we invested too much into the cult of personality? Is it because we put far too much faith in the celebrity pastors and not enough in the gospel itself? And if we let go of our ill-placed faith, we have too little left?

Tuesday’s 10: Favorite Foods

Limiting my favorite foods to 10 would be stupid hard. So that is not what this is. These are 10 foods that would always be at the top.

1. Buffalo Wings. I discovered these babies back in the summer of 1991 while I was living in Buffalo for the summer. They cheap, hot and everywhere. I never not want them. I’m trying to think back over the years and remember if I’ve ever had some bad ones. Nope.

2. Shrimp. I have never eaten shrimp cooked in any fashion and thought it was not royally good. On my last vacation I had shrimp 7 different ways.

3. Bacon. Maybe this should be number 1. Sorry bacon, momentary lapse of reason.

4. Hot Dogs. I eat them all the time and have been eating them all the time since I was a kid. The ones I eat now are almost fat free. But I add stuff to help ’em out. See Number 3.

5. Pizza. I think people who do not like pizza are communists. Or fascists. Either way, they should be looked at sideways and you should worry about your belongings. The best pizza around me is Café Luigi in Riverchase.

6. Reuben Sandwich. A good Reuben is worth whatever it costs. One of my favorites is the Russell Street Reuben from McGurk’s in the STL.

7. Cheeseburger. Who doesn’t like these besides communists and fascists? Add bacon and it becomes an eschatological experience. Around these parts Mugshots has the best.

8. Bar-B-Que. Wait. maybe this should be number 1. You know how rice is a called a “staple” for Asians? Well, for the Redmonds, this is our staple. I grew up eating this all the time. Pork shoulder, Brisket, Ribs, Sausage, Chicken, Turkey, Bacon. You name it, I think if you smoke it and put some BBQ sauce on it, it’s dinner. Or lunch. Or breakfast for that matter. I also smoke my own.

9. Asian. Speaking of Asians. I love your food. At least the americanized form of it. Favorites? Pad Thai. Mongolian Beef. Lo Mein. Teriyaki Beef. Satay. Laab. Sushi. Fried Rice. Crab Rangoon. Egg Rolls. Spring Rolls.

10. Gyro. I can remember when I was in college and I realized not everyone grew up eating Greek food. I’m Irish…and Native American. But Birmingham is rife with Greek places. Some have white table cloths and some are dives that stay open all night. A Gyro Wrap from The Purple Onion is about as good as it gets. My body often craves shaved meat from a spinning pole.

Aren’t We the Ones Who Should Be for Fighting for Them?

(Update: Driscoll responds to it all. Though there is no apology, he does admit it was “flippant” and thanks his critics for their wisdom.)

(Update 2: I’ve now read over this twice and I am still struck by the lack of apology here. No only that but as someone else pointed out, you should just apologize, not plug a new book you have coming out. When my son hits my other son, we make him actually say, “I’m sorry for hitting you.” We want to instill that habit of acknowledging the wrong and the hurt. This may be the crappiest apology ever.)

(Update 3: A friend pointed me to this list. 4, 6 and 7 are notable.)

A few days ago, Mark Driscoll posted the following to his facebook page:

Listen. I am politically and theologically more conservative than you. I’ve got more albums by the Clash and Springsteen than you and I’m a decent athlete. I’m married with three kids. And I do not recall ever being called effeminate. This is not “personal”. (Update: The reason I point these things out is so you will understand that this is not personal. Although just like Jared Wilson, I am not handy around the house. Also, my favorite novelist is Jane Austen, my favorite album of the year is Adele’s 21 and I do not own a gun…yet. But in Jr High I was more than a few times called ‘faggot’ with meaning. I’m not overly masculine. It’s a damned if you and damned if you don’t issue. If you say you are effeminate, you are taking it personally. If you say you are not, then you still get criticized for pointing out you are not.)

But when Mark Driscoll asked others on facebook to join in his ridicule of “effeminate anatomically male” men who lead worship in churches I was amazed.

How is this possible? How is it possible a pastor can do such a thing and none of his peers publicly call him to account for his actions but instead defend him?

What group of people would a pastor like Driscoll have to make fun of before we in the conservative theological tribe said, “enough”?

What have we become when this is acceptable to anyone within the church? This kind of behavior should be the most abhorrent of all among pastors. The thematic ethic of how we deal with others throughout the New Testament is love for one another. We are told they will know we are followers of Jesus because we love one another. This is not some conservative/liberal issue. This is simple kindness.

We have now gotten to the point where a pastor has to sleep with someone, steal something or kill someone to be publicly called to account. As long as his doctrine accords with our own we set up the pastoral version of what the police call the “blue wall.” We protect our own.

Is this what the celebrity pastor cult of personality has wrought? An untouchability when it comes to inciting young men the world over to attack effeminate men. 


Aren’t we the ones who should be for fighting for them? 

Thursday’s Random Thoughts

1. Saw Super 8 last night. Great movie and not just because the space ship looks like the stage from U2 360.

2. Went to a restaurant last night where they were doing karaoke. I’m convinced karaoke is symbolic of all that is wrong with our culture.

3. The reason we have juries in this country is because facebook verdicts will never do.

4. So on Wednesday I read an article citing a lengthy study which saying there is no definite link between salt consumption and heart disease. I also read an article saying that China’s use of coal has cooled the earth. Next I’ll read there is no link between my roll-on deodorant and breast cancer.

5. I’d pay extra for a teenager-free movie theater.

6. On the entertainment spectrum of cultural value, karaoke is the polar opposite of Opera.

7. I think most people hold their position on various issues (theological, political, social, etc) based on emotions rather any study of the facts. Thus, our bumper sticker culture. Nobody stops and thinks.

8. Mercy for me and justice for everyone else.

9. I feel like I lose brain cells every time I have to watch the previews before a movie. A robot boxing movie? Really?

10. Smoked ribs for the first time on July 4th. Waiting for study telling me what I already know – ribs are good for me.

Tuesday’s 10: Reflections On U2 In Nashville

1. I am too old to stay up that late after a day of standing in line in the heat sweating away precious fluids that could only be replaced at great cost within the stadium. Still glad I did it though.

2. Who would have thought 20 years later they would be opening a string of shows with 4 songs from Achtung Baby starting with Even Better Than The Real Thing?

3. The guys from U2 may talk like Liberals but selling t-shirts at $40 a pop betrays they are free market capitalists who understand the glorious laws of supply and demand.

4. U2 has only performed The Wanderer once. And I was there.

5. Maybe the best part of the show was knowing how much my friend Sean was enjoying his first U2 show.

6. Florence and The Machine is a weird, weird deal. (Very “Ferngully” as my friend Jason said.)

7. We were down in the “inner circle” and I still can’t get over how much I felt like we part of the show, not just watching it.

8. Hipsters, there were 2,500 of us in the inner circle. In other words, more than go to you’re favorite indie band’s concert.

9. I got choked up during With Or Without You.

10. It is hard to exaggerate how great U2 is live.

Happy 4th!

Today is the 235th birthday of of the Declaration of Independence. And I’ve been reading through The Black Book of Communism. Barely into its 900 pages, I see already what cannot be ignored already – the inherent tyranny of Communism.

This desire to fight against tyranny is no small thing. I sit here on my couch in freedom reaping the benefits of the document below and the willingness to fight against tyranny. That is staggering. For many labor under the iron fist of tyranny. They sleep under the same stars as us but they seem so little light with all the darkness between. They long for the very kind of air we so often curse because we have never breathed in anything else. We, out of some kind of sick self-hatred denigrate this place so many long to enjoy. We are comfortable with patronizing them. We are uncomfortable with patriotism.

But I love the document below. I cannot expect perfection in it or from it…I’m a Calvinist. Nor should anyone. But as its vision echoes on into the moment of now…on my couch drinking coffee, I am thankful.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

(HT: Michelle Malkin for the actual Declaration and the signatories.)