It is not wrong to say that sometimes God kicks our ass.
I’m not putting links on this one. If you haven’t heard about what people blog about when, apparently, there is nothing at all worthwhile to blog about about, then you are blessed.
There are things that ought not be said. But there are many things that simply sound less dignified than others. And this is the bottom line. If you want to communicate that something is really important or memorable, then you have to break the “dignified” rule. And if you refuse to do so, then you are refusing to make your point as powerfully as it could be made.
And, to repeat, it is not wrong to say that sometimes God kicks ass.
See Mark….this is why I am looking into Shinto.
I’ve enjoyed all the fuss. People have written *pages* about this thing!
I’ve been looking for the resurgence of moralism in the Reformed world. I’d been told it was around, and now I see it. When will the study committees form?
At bible study last week, I was trying to say that in Ezekiel, we see alot of “freaky, wierd stuff”
But I said “Freakin’ wierd stuff” instead.
God sometimes also speaks through asses.
Speaking of moralism: Berek Smith shared this item with me from the Lutheran Witness, February 7, 1883. (All that follows is from the above publication. This strikes me as very par for the course in 19th century American churches. I wonder how many clergy in the northern branch of the Presbyterian Church were being disciplined about this time for subscribing to Darwinism, higher criticism, and other forms of modernism.)
DISCIPLINED FOR DANCING.
——
A Monongahela City special says: The Pigeon Creek Presbyterian Church which stands upon the Washington pike, in Nottingham township, Pa., about two miles from this place, is one of the oldest established churches of that denomination in Western Pennsylvania. The membership numbers about 200, composed principally of well-to-do farmers and their families. For years past the pastor of this Rock has been sorely grieved by the fact that despite the private protests of the elders and the public denunciations hurled from the pulpit against the sin of dancing, the younger members and in fact many of the married ones would meet at social parties and indulge in quadrilles, with an occasional round dance thrown in by way of variety. Finally, at the suggestion of some of the older heads of the church, the pastor, Rev. John Marquis, determined to put a stop to infringement of the rules, and on Sunday (Communion-day) all those who had danced during the past year were requested to stay away from the communion table and take back seats. Seventy-two members arose and complied with the order. Twelve have since confessed their fault and been received back in church. The remaining sixty have until March 1st to see the error of their ways, but should they still remain unrepentant, they will then be read out with “book, bell, and candle.” The pastor’s daughter is included in the number, and was considered by all the best dancer. The affair has caused considerable excitement in the neighborhood.
Clipping this from Our Church Paper, we wish to present it to our readers with a few remarks, especially as we are entering upon the Lent season, which unbelievers and worldly minded Christians signalize by multiplied dances, balls, masquerade balls, and other sinful amusements, as if they had no sins to repent of, no occasion for sack-cloth and ashes. Dancing has grown into such features that even daily papers are opening their eyes upon them. The German paper of Zanesville calls upon ministers and all that are able to stem the tide of growing immorality to raise a loud and earnest protest against the manner in which dancing is carried on at balls and socials. ”The habits and dances of the lowest dens of Paris are taking hold of our public merriments. We warn all parents against letting their daughters engage in these so-called round dances, which are a disgrace.” To tell our Readers plainly why we must and do protest against attending dances and balls on the part of our church-members, young or old, is because we want to guard their character, their reputation. The young man that desires to remain chaste, the young lady that loves her virtue and honor, must not go to dances, still less attend balls, or masquerade balls. The dancing halls and dancing parlors are made more and more places of seducement where young people are ruined for their lifetime and contract vicious habits. We cannot see how those that love the Lord Jesus, love integrity and honor, should endanger their Christian faith and life by frequenting places and partaking of enjoyments upon which even unbelievers are beginning to frown who would have some traits of honor and modesty preserved in common life. The Lord Jesus surely did not buy and cleanse us with His blood that we should seek the enjoyments of the ungodly, the company of those of evil habits, to risk our honor for the smiles and friendships of those that will entice us to fornication and uncleanness. Keep thyself chaste and shun all such socials and halls where people engage in dances, is the true Christian counsel of all those interested in your true temporal and eternal welfare!
C.A.F.
Maybe the temperance movement will make a comeback, too. If the fundie Southern Baptists can convince/convict the Founders crowd, it could spread to TR Presbys next…
The dancing quote is interesting…
It makes me wonder though. Were the authors merely imputing alot of bad motives to the dancers, or were they dealing delicately with actual promiscuity?
This was shortly after the era of “bundling” and such, wasn’t it?
I dunno, Paul, it makes specific reference to “round dances and quadrilles” and then speaks of “all who had danced within the past year” being barred from the table. Clearly the “dancing” spoken of was actual “dancing,” and ALL who had engaged in dancing were barred. Sounds to me like it was the actual dancing that was at issue. Round dances and quadrilles, of course, are not dances that lend themselves to “dirty dancing” in any way, so they could only be seen as having an “evil tendency” in themselves if all dance was so regarded. The later references to “dancing halls and dancing parlors” might lend themselves more to your interpretation, but the problem is that private parties with round dances and hanging out at dancing parlors are treated as though they are morally exactly the same thing.
What’s really disturbing is that these were Lutherans and Presbyterians, whose moral and sacramental theology should have been something of a barrier to such nonsense. Perhaps there’s a lesson there.
Here’s a question: Was it a class resentment issue? Anglicans had no problem with dancing. I wonder if the Presbyterians were reacting. Not sure why the Lutherans would join in though….
Yes, but has anyone checked to see if the unnamed famous minister in question who made the kick ass remark (and I do mean both that the remark was itself “kick ass” and was, in my opinion, kick ass!)….has anyone investigated whether he has ever gone dancing with his beloved Noel?
If so, it could be the final blow to his now ruined career. This would be a huge financial hit to the bookstore where I work, as we have a full 25 linear shelf feet of his books (just added two more titles yesterday, one of them looks like it will kick ass!).