In his condemnation of Christmas, Pastor Jason Cooley suggests that parents in general and fathers in particular not impose an outright prohibition against the holiday cold turkey.
Instead, the minister suggests it might be better to phase things out gradually over time.
If so, then what is so wrong with these traditions and practices to begin with?
Applying this methodology to other so called “sins”, instead of dropping his three extra wives all at once, would the polygamist be allowed to release them back into the singles pool one at a time in elimination ceremonies reminiscent of the tribal council on Survivor?
Or what if someone has a mistress?
Is it being suggested that instead of romping with her three times per week, that the philanderer merely cut back to once per week for a whole followed by a period where she is still wined and dined but simply not bedded before the relationship is cut off entirely?
In his opposition to Christmas, Pastor Jason Cooley on a SermonAudio podcast remarked how he was trying to get his church to fast that day.
However, isn't elevating that to an implied obligation just as pagan or Romanish as the other traditions that this fanatic rails against?
For even if Baptists of this hardline variety insist that what they are doing is voluntary, the authenticity of your individual faith will be drawn into question if you fail to hop on board and go along with them.
Matthew 6:17-18 says, “But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and they Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.”
If a church body has the authority to shame or guilt trip people into semi-compulsory fasts, what's so wrong with the season of Lent?
And is not one of the condemnations of Christmas that no human, only God, has the authority to implement a mandatory religious observance such as a festival or holy day?
By Frederick Meekins