New Blog Website

As if you didn't already know, this blog is dead. It's been 4 months since the last entry and the posts before that were spotty at best. The three of you who read this blog moved on 3 months ago.

Well, I'm moving on, too. Maggie, Shepherd and I are moving to Pearland, TX to be apart of a new church plant, Covenant Community Church. With my new role and place, I thought I should have a new role and place online.

You can now find me at dainsworth.wordpress.org, writing as the Unlikely Texan. Learn about the changes here and the new name here.

Twitter

[HT: Z]

A Lenten Way of Life

Peter Leithart on fasting:

Feasting is the beginning and the goal, but Adam could enjoy the full feast—truly enjoy it—only by first keeping the fast. Eventually, he would feast even on the forbidden fruit, but he could do that well only if he waited for permission, only if he waited until he was ready.

Of course, Adam didn’t want to wait. Eve saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food, and desirable to make one wise, so she ate and Adam joined in. Adam sinned because he wanted it all—wisdom, authority, a full belly, the whole abundant goodness of creation—now. He sinned because he grabbed for the feast. He sinned because he didn’t keep the fast, and as a result even the appetizers he already had were taken from him.

Jesus is the Last Adam because He keeps the fast. He enters a world that is no longer a garden, but a howling waste, and in that wilderness Satan tempts Him to break the fast, to be an Adam: “You’re hungry; eat this now. You deserve the accolades of the crowds; you can have it now if you jump off the temple. You want all authority in heaven and on earth, but your Father won’t give that to you unless you suffer an excruciating, shameful death; you can have it all now, no cross or self-denial required. It’s yours, and you only need to do a bit of bowing. Life, glory, power, everything you want, everything you deserve—you can have it all now.”

Jesus refused, and refused, and then refused again, and in so doing broke the power of Adamic sin. Jesus kept the fast; he waited, labored, suffered, died, and then opened his hand to receive all the life, glory, honor, authority, and dominion that his Father had to give Him. He kept the fast and as a result was admitted to the fullness of the kingdom’s feast—because by that time both it and he were ready. And by resisting the devil, Jesus sets the pattern of true fasting and reveals a Lenten way of life.

[HT: Justin Taylor]

Phrases which help you avoid asking for forgiveness

[HT: Language Log]

Advice for Buying Plane Tickets

Here is an NPR story (All Songs Considered, Mon 03/09/2008) covering the recent slashing of air fares, a complete contrast to last year's outrageous prices.

In it, Rick Seaney, chief executive of Farecompare.com, offers some insider knowledge about buying plane tickets.

One trick, he says, is to buy airline tickets on Tuesday afternoons. That's the time he calls "the perfect sweet spot," when the sales have come in and all the airlines have matched.

He also says the absolute cheapest days to fly are Tuesday, Wednesday and Saturday, and that many of the lowest airfares come with rules stating that travelers can fly only on those days.

Facebook in Reality

[Warning: If you work in a bastion of evangelicalism, this may or may not be appropriate to play at your desk.]



[HT: Alan Jacobs]

A New Crystal Cathedral

Sorry for the absence of new posts. I've read a number of things I'd like to link to, but haven't had the time. My posting will probably be more sporadic -- today marks the 2-month mark until Shepherd's birth and there is still much to do.

Here is something interesting, though. The WSJ reports about a new cathedral building in Oakland, CA built by the Catholic diocese there. It is beautiful, especially the inside, so don't miss the slideshow.

Seeing great, huge, beautiful church buildings is such a joy, but I confess they challenge my conscience. I love this far more than the church warehouses so common in Protestantism. It gives gravity to our corporate worship. But I also am persuaded by the Protestant warehouse argument -- if we're aliens in this world, traveling ambassadors, why spend millions on something that will pass away?

But, since we're not in Oakland or a member of this local body, that is not a decision the Lord has called me or you to make. So let's be thankful and marvel at the God-given creativeness and technical ability of man when its used, however weakly, to point to Him.

Love in the Time of Prostrate Cancer

Don't let Valentine's Day pass without reading the NYT blogpost, "Love in the Time of Prostrate Cancer." It is testimony to the truth that all marriages display the glory of God's covenant-faithfulness and love for his Bride.

(HT: Vitamin Z)

Shakespearean Superstition

Interesting blurb on CNN.com:

It’s a word so fraught with superstition, its very mention can send grown men ducking for cover — and President Obama used it Wednesday night.

Macbeth.

On a trip to Ford’s Theater, site of President Lincoln’s assassination, Obama paid tribute to the 16th president’s ability to recall passages of Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Macbeth. And with that reference, he unwittingly ventured into what many theater hands believe to be dangerous territory: any mention of the name of the doomed Scottish king in a theater outside of a performance is considered verboten by many actors, who believe it will result in a cursed production — including a greater possibility of injury, bankruptcy, even death.

So does Obama have anything to fear from uttering the unluckiest word in what may be the unluckiest theater in American history? Theater-goers can relax: Many stage afficianados believe that the prohibition only applies to performers or theater hands, and non-actors have nothing to worry about.

Denim Performance

I can't decide which is more remarkable in Li Wei's performance art -- the acrobatics or his tight denim shorts.

A Failed State or a Rogue State

The ultimate question for any foreign policy is, when should one nation invade another. Christopher Hitchens at Slate.com, in seeking to make the case that Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe must be deposed, helpfully distinguishes between failed states and rogue states.

A failed state is one which cannot or refuses to provide for its own people. On a sin-ravaged Earth, these abound. A rogue state is one which has a severe destabilizing effect on other nations. For the sake of simplicity, the choice to invade a failed state is a moral question. The choice to invade a rogue state is a question of self-interest.

Hitchens offers four reasons to invade, one moral and three for stability:

One is genocide, which, according to the signatories of the Genocide Convention (the United States is one), necessitates immediate action either to prevent or to punish the perpetrators. Another is aggression against the sovereignty of neighboring states, including occupation of their territory. A third is hospitality for, or encouragement of, international terrorist groups, and a fourth is violations of the Nonproliferation Treaty or of U.N. resolutions governing weapons of mass destruction.

However, he notes how easily these categories blend. Failed states, with no source of legitimate income, often turn to weapons traffiking. Genocides usually cause refugee migrations, which destabilize neighboring nations. Iraq, he says, qualified according to all four criteria.

Zimbabwe is quickly becoming one of the most dangerous places in the world. And, with Mugabe continuing to withhold medical treatment for the cholera outbreak he created, he is endangering the welfare of all southern Africa. I agree with Hitchens -- to the best of our ability, we must make sure that Mugabe is removed from power and arrested.

Read the whole thing and pray that Zimbabwe might be freed from tyranny.

Why Americans love peanut butter?

One of my favorite online columns is written by Slate.com's Explainer. At least once a week, it addresses various questions based on recent news stories. Frankly, I'm jealous of the men and women who write this column. It's every nerd's dream job.

So, for a history of PB&J and her cousins, check it out.

Universal Healthcare, Market Principles, and Moral Questions

You can't avoid market principles. The only thing you can change is what currency you traffic in. Nadeem Esmail makes this point today in the WSJ:

Health-care resources are not unlimited in any country, even rich ones like Canada and the U.S., and must be rationed either by price or time. When individuals bear no direct responsibility for paying for their care, as in Canada, that care is rationed by waiting.

Esmail illustrates his point in "'Too Old' for Hip Surgery," profiling legal challenges faced by the Canadian government and their monopoly on healthcare. He tells the story of Canadians who, upon being diagnosed with dangerous, fast-acting medical problems, are told they must wait months for treatment. A question for any Canadian reader: Is it true, as the article implies, that individuals are restricted from spending their own money on healthcare, but rather must accept only government services? That is hard to believe, but explains why Canadians often must travel to America for major-medical procedures.

On the face of it, I am not morally opposed to government-run universal healthcare. Rather, with most conservatives, I don't believe that the government can do a better job. However, as Esmail's title suggests, moral issues do develop when government policy imposes itself in life-and-death issues. How old is too old? How sick is too sick? To use Obama's phrase, this is "above his pay grade" -- which is fine, as long as he doesn't offer legislation which requires an answer. We should be more than a little frightened by Nancy Pelosi's recent contraception comments -- especially if she and her ilk are going to be writing up our healthcare benefits.

Universal healthcare is often presented as a moral issue -- as if those opposed to it were opposed to healthy people. What proponents don't realize, though, is the moral quagmire they will find themselves in when presented with limited resources and thousands upon thousands of daily emergencies.

Grieving: Three Stories

One of the great legacies of the New Journalism is the dignified portrayal of all types of people. When done well, it is a wonderful affirmation of the image of God in all people (and often the doctrine of total depravity).

Such writing, I've found, is helpful for me as a developing pastor. It teaches me how to observe and listen well, how to ask good questions. It also provides a sufficiently full picture for me to reflect on each subject, to consider my response to him as if he was my neighbor or a member of my church. Perhaps most importantly, such writing calls from me compassion and sympathy, a first step towards showing mercy.

Here are three very different portraits of grief that I found to be compelling. They are all stories which center around women and all involve health concerns.

The first story, found in The New York Times, is the autobiographical account of a woman in New York as she pursues motherhood through surrogacy.

In the second article, Newsweek reports a growing trend to take infant photos of stillborn children. They profile the non-profit Now I Lay Me Down to Sleep. [Photographers: Check this organization out. I don't know how well I could handle it, but what a powerful ministry this is.]

Last, New York follows a young, successful woman in her late-twenties who has been diagnosed with Usher's syndrome. She is simultaneously losing her sight and vision. (Note: According to one of the comments, while published recently, this article was written a couple years ago.)

Levittown: The Unsightly Beginnings of Suburbia (Books to Read No. 9)

In today's WSJ, Fergus Bordewich writes a book review of Levittown by David Kushner. The Levittowns (there were two -- one in New York, the other in Pennsylvania) were suburban communities created by Bill and Albert Levitt and mass-produced and mass-marketed to returning soldiers and their families.

They were designed to be perfect, complete communities. Unfortunately, part and parcel to 1950s suburban perfection, at least in Levittown, was racial segregation. "Buyers of Levittown homes were required to sign a statement that declared, in bold capital letters, that they would 'not permit the premises to be used or occupied by any person other than members of the Caucasian race.'"

It wasn't until 1957 that this racism went challenged. African-Americans Bill and Daisy Myers moved in, supported only by one other (white) couple, Bea and Lew Wechsler. They endured all manner of persecution, eventually vindicated by the state attorney general. From the Myers experience, Bordewich notes "that facing down segregation required from ordinary black men and woman a degree of heroism that few white Americans have ever been asked to exhibit except in war."

I am moving to the suburbs of Houston within the year, so I don't link to this review to condemn suburbia outright. Racism and suburbia are not necessary corrollaries.^[*] Rather, crowds of unregenerate people and systemic sin is the link of note. That said, it is instructive to Christians in surburbia to know the perfection for which you are striving and encouraging others to pursue. Is it one of our own devising or the one presented by Jesus Christ? Don't assume, for wide is the gate that leads to destruction, but narrow is the way to eternal life.

Read the review in full here.

^[*]In fact, to see how the table has turned in the suburban/urban wars, take care to note what "urban renewal movements" often mean in reality -- move all the poor people out of town and replace them with upper middle-class business professionals, i.e., former suburbanites.

George Carlin

I heard this line today, from the late comedian (and atheist) George Carlin:

I'm not concerned about all hell breaking loose, but that a PART of hell will break loose... it'll be much harder to detect.

Obama: You've been Rick-Rolled

I might be behind the times on this, but I just discovered it and thought it was funny.

Obama at a Saturation Point?

Peggy Noonan today in the WSJ:

A final point: In the time since his inauguration, Mr. Obama has been on every screen in the country, TV and computer, every day. He is never not on the screen. I know what his people are thinking: Put his image on the age. Imprint the era with his face. But it's already reaching saturation point. When the office is omnipresent, it is demystified. Constant exposure deflates the presidency, subtly robbing it of power and making it more common. I keep the television on a lot, and somewhere in the 1990s I realized that Bill Clinton was never not in my living room. He was always strolling onto the stage, pointing at things, laughing, talking. This is what the Obama people are doing, having the boss hog the screen. They should relax. The race is long.

Can a fallen pastor ever redeem himself?

That's the sub-headline to a Slate.com article on Ted Haggard by Patton Dodd, who was "Haggard's writer and editor for eight years." He briefly narrates the sad tale of Haggard's shifting postures of humiliation and self-justification, but closes reflecting on the limited possibilites open to fallen pastors.

The problem for people like Ted Haggard [...] is that he was in a position of public trust. Once fully lost, that trust can never be fully restored. Robert Downey Jr. can become an A-list actor, ruin himself with drugs, sober up, and become an A-list actor all over again. A businessman, a scholar, or a parent can do something similar. Why can't Haggard? Because his very public career was based on the antithesis of his failures. Downey wants only to be a damn fine actor, and he can be that no matter the content of his character. Haggard wanted to be a minister, a position that makes claims on his behavior—claims that Haggard professed to be equal to. Haggard didn't have to be a big supporter of President Bush, or outspoken against homosexuality, or any of the things that charged his public life. But he did have to have character that was consistent with the values that he so loudly espoused. His life did have to be consistent with what he preached, because preaching is based on public trust within the preacher's community of followers. Integrity is the deal-maker, hypocrisy the deal-breaker.

Most people who fail need only redeem themselves with their most immediate friends and family. They can ask forgiveness of every person they've wounded. How could Haggard ask forgiveness of 30 million—or even the 14,000 members of his former church? Sitting across from Oprah is no substitute for sitting across from those you've hurt. But he can go away quietly, do the work of atonement, and let tales of his renewed life spring up naturally [...].

Haggard can't enter a pulpit, and he shouldn't seek to be a spiritual leader, at least not for eons. He can enter a congregation somewhere, and if he wants to do that, he should, as a fellow traveler with other seekers. And that congregation should embrace him. That's what his spiritual restoration would look like.

Sobering thoughts for all those aspiring to shepherd God's people. These consequences, which Haggard seems unwilling to acknowledge, are present signals of the eternal reality that all pastor's will be called to give an account. With the double honor he cherished comes a double requirement.

May God's mercy protect us from such resounding failure.

Prepared for the Storm?

I realize tomorrow might be the storm of the season, but I think the Courier-Journal is going a little overboard for Louisville, KY.