FV Pastor: "Apostacy is a real possiblity!"
Anti-FV Pastor: "Any Reformed pastor who believes apostacy is a real possibility is surely an apostate!"
FV Pastor: "Could you expand on that?
Anti-FV Pastor: "Sure. Any true believer who truly has true faith in the true God who has truly come to the conclusion that a true believer can truly fall away from the true faith in the true God has truly fallen away from the true faith in the true God. It's just that simple."
FV Pastor: "Huh...wha...?"
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Thursday, August 16, 2007
My Experience with the Federal Vision
I have been recently asked by an old friend if I have been "sucked in by the dark Auburn Avenue doctrines." That is a fair question, if not necessarily fairly worded, so therefore, I thought I would attempt to make a brief answer. BRIEF answers are not my forte, but I will try anyhow!
Btw, if you are reading this and have absolutely no idea what is meant by "Auburn Avenue Theology," or "The Federal Vision," please count your blessings and just skip this post. It will be meaningless to you and is simply not worth worrying about.
The person who asked that loaded question (I’ll call him ‘M’) is in fact, humanly speaking, as responsible as anyone for my current theological outlook. Years ago, I use to spend a lot of time on an Internet bulletin board dedicated to religious discussion. I was pretty much a run of the mill standard conservative modern American Evangelical Southern Baptist. Skipping the details as to why I was posing the question, I posed the question of predestination/free will to the bulletin board. The question itself messed with my mind, as I could see something of both sides of the equation, while also seeing the weaknesses of both sides.
Most of the responses I received took the side of "free will." I basically went along with it. But one person (M) answered from the ‘Calvinistic’ perspective. His response left me reeling, but, (again to make a very long story very short) over time, with repeated exchanges, I finally settled on the view of predestination. (I still hold to it today!)
I developed a friendship with M that, while we have gone entirely separate ways, we have managed to maintain through occasional Internet or email exchanges, and occasional telephone calls. I still value that friendship greatly.
Now, M was also in a time of theological transition. He had been basically as I had been, then became a ‘reformed’ Baptist, then eventually became a Presbyterian. I pretty much skipped the middle step, and flew straight from contemporary evangelical Baptist to be a Presbyterian. The last issue to fall was the issue of Baptism. Largely, though not entirely, this issue changed for me after reading the relevant section from Dabney’s Systematic Theology – a book that was recommended to me by M.
In the background to all of this, was this lingering feeling to me that in addition to theological precision and the importance of systematic theology, one thing that was missing from contemporary evangelicalism was beauty, depth, and meaning in worship. Most of the worship I had been exposed to was like this: After a brief time singing sappy praise hymns, the children are dismissed to "Children’s Church", then the adults remained for a rather elementary worship and preaching service. I could only wonder how childish the children’s service was, since there was no depth or beauty in the adult service. Not only that, but I did not even like the idea of children’s church or nursery for the younger kids. The wife and I had basically began taking our young kids to the service with us. I don’t think they ever went to a children’s service.
So, one of the things I was looking for as I began the search for a Presbyterian Church was not only a change in theology, and preaching and teaching with more meat, but, I desired more ‘beauty’ in worship. I wanted a more family, covenantal approach that included the children in the worship of their God. I thought maybe the Presbyterian Church would be more reverent in this way in their worship.
Now, B’ham, even though it is more or less the founding city for the PCA, is not exactly loaded with PCA churches. In the ‘ham, there is a Baptist Church on every block. Every other block has either a Methodist, Church of Christ, or some varient of a Pentecostal church. However, there are only a relative handful of Presbyterian Church (literally probably about five percent as many PCs as BCs). Even among the Presbyterian churches, here in the buckle of the Bible belt, probably two-thirds of them were of the liberal leaning PCUSA. I was definitely not interested in a denomination that has to constantly debate the whether homosexuality is acceptable or not!
Well, I visited a couple of PCA churches – both of which I had to drive quite a ways to get to. Both were pretty nice. There was definitely a step up in Preaching in terms of Biblical exegesis. Doctrine was definitely important. However, and I couldn’t quite put a finger on it, there was something still missing. Other than the preaching, both were almost indistinguishable from most of the Baptist churches I had been to. I remember one of them dismissing the children for children's church. I remember the other one making the point that they had two services – a ‘traditional’ one and a ‘contemporary’ one. Not real crazy about that idea either.
Well, in the meantime, M had wound up in the ATL area and become sold on a particular church called Chalcedon Presbyterian Church pastored by Dr. Joe Morecraft. In talking with M, it seemed to me that a lot of what he was saying about his church matched with what I was looking for. He told me he would ask around and see if anyone there was familiar with a good church in the ‘ham.
He got back with me and said "Reformed Heritage Presbyterian Church." Someone there told him that if you wanted a true Reformed Church in Birmingham, that was the ONLY place to go. Even Pastor Joe was quite familiar with the church, had spoken there before, and recommended it. I was vaguely familiar with it because my sister works directly across the street at a Barber shop and I saw the church numerous times from there. The only problem was that it was on the opposite side of town – probably a 30-35 minute drive.
Well, we visited one Lord’s Day. To the naked eye it would have seemed massively unimpressive. A small, old, not necessarily lovely building. Poor restroom facilities. The building does not sit on a very good lot. After church they had a lunch in an even worse building that seemed to be about to fall apart. However, to the open heart, we knew we had ‘come home.’
First, the first thing I noticed was the presence of a Dr. and Mrs. D. This was an older couple that I had known years before through some of our mutual political interests. They were a couple I admired greatly. Another thing was the friendliness of the people in general. We were immediately made to feel at home. Another thing was that one of the leaders just happened to stand up and make a point (before the beginning of worship) that they are not for a separate children’s church (how did he know that is what I wanted to hear?) The pastor mentioned things in his sermon that resonated with me regarding a preteristic postmil eschatology which was a whole ‘nother theological transformation that I was undergoing. Finally, though, the worship itself seemed to be more holistic, deep, and meaningful. I was too ignorant to put my finger on it, but there was something different. It was not just a couple of songs, a sermon, then we go. It was more structured. It seemed to have meaning, direction, purpose. They had communion, and it seemed that it was something they did every week. That was new to me, but somehow it seemed right.
After some time visiting there, we began to develop friendships. One thing we heard about again and again was that there was a very interesting history to the church. This involved a lot of ups and downs – trial and triumph. At the moment, it seemed, the church was in something of a flux, with a little bit of an unknown future. The ‘pastor’ who had been preaching was really a supply pastor, but he had a long history with the congregation. The leader who spoke about children’s church was in fact more or less the ‘pastor designate’ who was finishing up his seminary training. (For the record, I loved and respected, and still do, both of these men despite the changes that have since come up) However, I kept hearing about this former pastor who had more or less set the current direction of the church. His name was Peter Leithart.
In retrospect, it would seem humorous to anyone familiar with the whole Federal Vision controversy that Joe Morecraft and those at his church insisted that I must go to the church that had been set on its course by Peter Leithart. Peter is one of the big names in the whole Auburn Avenue controversy. Morecraft is one of the big leaders in the anti Auburn Avenue camp. The Lord works in mysterious ways!!
Now, in my early days at RHPC, I was not at all knowledgeable about the differing strains within Presbyterianism. I just assumed Presbyterians were all one big happy family. Turns out, they look more like the Addams family!
However, in continuing the relationship with M, and in the relationships I developed at RHPC, certain names of certain key leaders, pastors, thinkers, and writers past and present kept coming up again and again. Steve Wilkins, Douglas Wilson, Greg Bahnsen, Cornelius Van Til, R. J. Rushdoony, Gary North, Gary DeMar, Jim Jordan, Steve Schlissel, and on and on. The supply pastor at RHPC had attended Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson back in the 70s and was quick to tell you that Greg Bahnsen was his favorite prof. While there, he knew DeMar, Wilkins, Jordan, David Chilton and others. In fact, the original relationship of the supply pastor with the congregation, as it turns out, was that he was personally recommended to the congregation by Rushdoony. At one time in the history of the congregation, both he and DeMar were utilized as preachers while they were attending RTS.
So, at a point around, say mid 2001, I thought I had found the one big happy reformed presbyterian family. All the people I was running with were more or less influenced by the same people (the names listed above and perhaps others) RHPC had, during this time scheduled Pastor Schlissel to come and speak in November of that year. I had forwarded this to M, asking him to come over and attend also. Unfortunately, Schlissel’s church being in the heart of NYC was affected greatly by the event of September 11 of that year and he had to cancel.
I do remember M, though, questioning Sclissell because he had had some negative things to say about the "regulative principle." Fair enough, but I think overall we take the person on the whole of what they’ve done, not on whether they already agree 100 % with us on 100 % of the issues.
However, let me reiterate to you that it was M who introduced me to the likes of Wilson and Wilkins. It was M who told me about some of the great work Wilkins had done both in theology and history. It was M who suggested to me once that Credenda Agenda (the magazine of Wilson) should be required reading in every Christian home.
All of this was reinforced with me by my own experiences. I continued to hear about Dr. Leithart. Apparently, he had left RHPC to pursue his PhD. Upon completion of that, he went to Moscow, Idaho to teach at New St. Andrews. This is, of course, tied closely to Wilson. Many of his books are published by Canon – Wilson’s puclishing house and he writes frequently for Credenda Agenda – must reading indeed! In fact, during this time, Dr. Leithart was a member of Pastor Wilson’s church. In addition to hearing about him, I got the opportunity to actually hear him and speak with him a couple of times. He occasionally gets to pass through town and when he does he usually speaks at our congregation. One time in particular the PCA GA was in Birmingham and they held a pre-GA liturgy conference at our facility. Dr. Leithart, Jim Jordan, and Wes Baker all spoke. This was perhaps the beginning of a great awakening for me concerning my views on worship. The concerns I had as expressed above were being addressed by some very smart people in very intelligent, and might I add, Biblical ways.
At any rate, I knew there were some differences within this group of leaders and thinkers. But, in my opinion they were peripheral. There were numerous things they held in common. This included centrally the idea that the whole word of God regulates our whole lives. This places God’s law on a higher plane. God’s law is not irrelevant to us, but is in fact binding. All the members of this group tend to hold God’s law, God’s Word in high regard. God’s word also regulates how we are to worship Him.
Another consistent viewpoint among this group tended to be that they were, I believe without exception, postmillenial and (orthodox) preterist. There may certainly be variations in the particulars of this, but I think they largely fell into those categories.
In addition to these similarities in peripheral issues, all these men were of course Calvinistic in soteriology, presbyterian in government, covenantal in their viewpoint of God’s relationship with His People. They all held to paedobaptism. In other words, these guys in addition to all being nominally some variant of Christian, were in fact in agreement on 98% of their theology. Where differences seemed to exist it involved the actual application of the theology. Just as an example, both Joe Morecraft and Jim Jordan have indicated that they believe in the regulative principle of worship. This means that in determining what we are to do in corporate worship, we are to look to the Bible and follow what it says. On that point these two are in 100% agreement. However, when they develop their ideas as to what it is exactly that the Bible instructs us to do in corporate worship, the two are miles apart. One could truly say to the other "I believe you are wrong in the way you develop and apply the regulative principle." However, it would be incorrect for one to say to the other "You deny the regulative principle." There are likely other topics where this type of application difference shows up. How do you deal with it? Especially, if you are all one big happy family how do you deal with it when your brother’s conclusion at a particular point differs from your own? This is where I found out that we really weren’t a big happy family.
I still remember opening the email from M some time in 2002. "Have you heard the latest about Schlissel, Wilson, and Wilkins? They’re denying justification by faith!!!!"
I have to admit that my initial reaction was not "Oh no, somehow these great men of God have suddenly all at once lost their mind and gone after false doctrine." Instead I thought, "I wonder what that is all about." That began my quest.
Now, admittedly I have not heard the full tapes of the original conference at Auburn Avenue, nor have I read the full transcripts. I have read quite a bit of it though. Initially, I was a little confused because I was still new to the whole reformed world. However, I have read substantially from the writings of not only Wilkins, Wilson, and Schlissel, but even more so from Leithart, Jordan, and others who have since been lumped into this camp. In studying all this, I also came across the name of Rich Lusk (more on this later!). I have read much of the writing against these guys as well. I have read the Auburn Avenue Theology Pros and Cons book numerous times. I offer the following brief (maybe?) critique of the situation. I know this is wrought with over simplification and has gaping holes, but there simply isn’t time or space here for a full review. So deal with it!
From the very beginning, it has been obvious to me which side has been fair, even handed, Christ like and so forth in their behavior. For instance, the first big blowup was in a small presbytery of a small denomination (the RPCUS – Morecraft’s denomination) publicly calling for the repentance of four men from other denominations. The accused have claimed that they were not approached by the accusers and given the opportunity to sit down in private and defend their views. Is this scriptural? Any time any one from any branch of the church makes statements that I disagree with, can I publicly call them to repentance and ask for discipline? The whole tenor of this debate has been "Guilty until proven innocent, and, oh by the way, we’re not giving you a chance to prove your innocence. Therefore, guilty." A perfect example of this was the recent adoption of the committee report by the GA of the PCA. The ‘study committee’ was fully stacked with those who had been public in their opposition to the AA theology. In defense of this stacking, R. C. Sproul made the incredible statement that of course you don’t fill a jury with those sympathetic to the accused. There are two major problems with this statement that are readily evident to any first grader. First, this was not a trial by jury, but a study committee. A study committee should have people who are on both sides, as well as those who have no current opinion. A wide reading of the case should be made, then recommendations of both a majority and minority report given. Secondly, though, if this were a trial by jury then why is it stacked against the accused? True you don’t fill a jury with those sympathetic to the accused. But you don’t fill it with those who have already publicly stated their belief in his guilt! This was a grave miscarriage of justice any which way you slice it.
Now, it is true that Pastor Wilson does frequently use sarcasm and humor to make a point. I would even say there are times when he has carried it too far. However, I notice his biting sarcasm in this instance has always been in reaction to the incredible attacks made on him. Which demonstrates a lack of Christian charity more – boldly attacking an erstwhile friend and co-laborer for Christ, or responding to such an attack in a less that perfect manner?
So much could be said about the theological matters here, but I don’t have the time nor the ability to go into any detail. Suffice it to say, though, that the charge that any of the names associated with the AA theology are denying justification by faith are just plain silly. I can’t state that strongly enough. Its just plain silly. I don’t know how many times these guys have to make the specific point over and over and over again that they believe there is no way we could ever bring works to God and have a claim on salvation; that we are solely saved by an act of His Free Grace; that this is solely because of the work of Jesus Christ on the cross; that this is obtained only by means of faith. They say all this, yet are still accused of denying these very things.
The fact of the matter is that the accusers and the accused, when their theology in total is reviewed, share almost the exact same theology in so many ways. In the broader Christian ‘pie’, they are all on the same small slice. Yet the most viscious of attacks have been leveled at the one by the other. It is sad, Sad, SAD!
I think the great sin of the AA crowd is that they dared to think. Especially, they dared to think outside the box of a 19th century interpretation of a seventeenth century interpretation of the teachings of Scripture. Read that sentence again. It is not a typo. The AA thinkers are truly Catholic (in the best sense of the word) learning from various strains of Christian theological tradition. However, virtually everything, if not everything, held by any of these men have been held by other leaders in the history of Reformed Christianity. The accusers want to make Reformed Christianity simply fit a tiny tiny little theological pattern. Anything outside of that pattern is not reformed. And, if a reformed leader steps outside that pattern, he is worse than someone already outside of that pattern. That is, these ‘true reformed’ leaders will still at least accept Baptists, Methodists, and sometimes even Roman Catholics as being, while theologically mistaken, Christian Brothers. However, let a Reformed leader vary his view slightly, and Whamo! he is damned to hell!
The great sin of the AA movement is also that it does not deny that the Bible does speak of works, covenant membership, apostasy, effectual sacraments, etc. Actually for the most part, their views of this fit within the teaching of the Westminster Confession (some hold to paedocommunion which is not taught by the WCF. Some also deny a covenant of Works) However, in other areas, the AA teaching are actually more consistent with the teachings of the Confession than the accepted interpretation by the "truly reformed" crowd.
In the end, though, can’t we simply in love debate these doctrines? Can’t we say "You know, I believe the WCF may be wrong in not allowing for paedocommunion." Can’t we use language that may be different that the WCF (especially if it is Biblical language??!!) Can’t we just sometimes agree to disagree and continue to be brothers? Can’t we sometimes learn from each other – as iron sharpens iron? Do we have to immediately condemn our brother whenever he says things in words different from what we might choose to use? Again, I think this is all just so sad.
Now, as I said earlier, I came across the name of Rich Lusk in my studies. Later, when we began searching for a full time pastor, his name came up. I did further research. I spoke with him on the phone at length. I drove to Monroe with two others from our congregation to meet him and his family and to hear him preach. (He was then Assistant Pastor at Auburn Avenue). I specifically asked him questions such as "Are you a five point Calvinist" and other pertinent topics. Not only I, but virtually our whole congregation was sold on him. He graciously agreed to become our pastor in 2004, and we have slowly, but steadily grown in numbers and in maturity. (As of 2003 our congregation was on the verge of disbanding, with only a tiny handful of families left. We are now strong and vibrant).
Btw, just this past week, and this was not an aberration but just the latest example, Pastor Lusk went to great lengths in his sermon to explain that our justification is by faith and not works. Hmmm. Strange from a guy who denies that truth!
I have sat under his teaching now for almost three years. I have learned so much. I have seen this "Dark Auburn Avenue" theology bring so much light and fruit. We have a congregation where everyone loves each other. We have a congregation that is beginning to become active in the community. You will know them by their fruits.
So, I invite anyone who has a problem with this ‘dark’ theology to simply come and visit us at any time. Hear the joyful singing. Hear the heartfelt confession. Hear the hearty shouts of "Amen!" and "Thanks be to God!" Celebrate communion with our Lord and with each other. Hear God’s word preached. Come on, I dare you!
Btw, if you are reading this and have absolutely no idea what is meant by "Auburn Avenue Theology," or "The Federal Vision," please count your blessings and just skip this post. It will be meaningless to you and is simply not worth worrying about.
The person who asked that loaded question (I’ll call him ‘M’) is in fact, humanly speaking, as responsible as anyone for my current theological outlook. Years ago, I use to spend a lot of time on an Internet bulletin board dedicated to religious discussion. I was pretty much a run of the mill standard conservative modern American Evangelical Southern Baptist. Skipping the details as to why I was posing the question, I posed the question of predestination/free will to the bulletin board. The question itself messed with my mind, as I could see something of both sides of the equation, while also seeing the weaknesses of both sides.
Most of the responses I received took the side of "free will." I basically went along with it. But one person (M) answered from the ‘Calvinistic’ perspective. His response left me reeling, but, (again to make a very long story very short) over time, with repeated exchanges, I finally settled on the view of predestination. (I still hold to it today!)
I developed a friendship with M that, while we have gone entirely separate ways, we have managed to maintain through occasional Internet or email exchanges, and occasional telephone calls. I still value that friendship greatly.
Now, M was also in a time of theological transition. He had been basically as I had been, then became a ‘reformed’ Baptist, then eventually became a Presbyterian. I pretty much skipped the middle step, and flew straight from contemporary evangelical Baptist to be a Presbyterian. The last issue to fall was the issue of Baptism. Largely, though not entirely, this issue changed for me after reading the relevant section from Dabney’s Systematic Theology – a book that was recommended to me by M.
In the background to all of this, was this lingering feeling to me that in addition to theological precision and the importance of systematic theology, one thing that was missing from contemporary evangelicalism was beauty, depth, and meaning in worship. Most of the worship I had been exposed to was like this: After a brief time singing sappy praise hymns, the children are dismissed to "Children’s Church", then the adults remained for a rather elementary worship and preaching service. I could only wonder how childish the children’s service was, since there was no depth or beauty in the adult service. Not only that, but I did not even like the idea of children’s church or nursery for the younger kids. The wife and I had basically began taking our young kids to the service with us. I don’t think they ever went to a children’s service.
So, one of the things I was looking for as I began the search for a Presbyterian Church was not only a change in theology, and preaching and teaching with more meat, but, I desired more ‘beauty’ in worship. I wanted a more family, covenantal approach that included the children in the worship of their God. I thought maybe the Presbyterian Church would be more reverent in this way in their worship.
Now, B’ham, even though it is more or less the founding city for the PCA, is not exactly loaded with PCA churches. In the ‘ham, there is a Baptist Church on every block. Every other block has either a Methodist, Church of Christ, or some varient of a Pentecostal church. However, there are only a relative handful of Presbyterian Church (literally probably about five percent as many PCs as BCs). Even among the Presbyterian churches, here in the buckle of the Bible belt, probably two-thirds of them were of the liberal leaning PCUSA. I was definitely not interested in a denomination that has to constantly debate the whether homosexuality is acceptable or not!
Well, I visited a couple of PCA churches – both of which I had to drive quite a ways to get to. Both were pretty nice. There was definitely a step up in Preaching in terms of Biblical exegesis. Doctrine was definitely important. However, and I couldn’t quite put a finger on it, there was something still missing. Other than the preaching, both were almost indistinguishable from most of the Baptist churches I had been to. I remember one of them dismissing the children for children's church. I remember the other one making the point that they had two services – a ‘traditional’ one and a ‘contemporary’ one. Not real crazy about that idea either.
Well, in the meantime, M had wound up in the ATL area and become sold on a particular church called Chalcedon Presbyterian Church pastored by Dr. Joe Morecraft. In talking with M, it seemed to me that a lot of what he was saying about his church matched with what I was looking for. He told me he would ask around and see if anyone there was familiar with a good church in the ‘ham.
He got back with me and said "Reformed Heritage Presbyterian Church." Someone there told him that if you wanted a true Reformed Church in Birmingham, that was the ONLY place to go. Even Pastor Joe was quite familiar with the church, had spoken there before, and recommended it. I was vaguely familiar with it because my sister works directly across the street at a Barber shop and I saw the church numerous times from there. The only problem was that it was on the opposite side of town – probably a 30-35 minute drive.
Well, we visited one Lord’s Day. To the naked eye it would have seemed massively unimpressive. A small, old, not necessarily lovely building. Poor restroom facilities. The building does not sit on a very good lot. After church they had a lunch in an even worse building that seemed to be about to fall apart. However, to the open heart, we knew we had ‘come home.’
First, the first thing I noticed was the presence of a Dr. and Mrs. D. This was an older couple that I had known years before through some of our mutual political interests. They were a couple I admired greatly. Another thing was the friendliness of the people in general. We were immediately made to feel at home. Another thing was that one of the leaders just happened to stand up and make a point (before the beginning of worship) that they are not for a separate children’s church (how did he know that is what I wanted to hear?) The pastor mentioned things in his sermon that resonated with me regarding a preteristic postmil eschatology which was a whole ‘nother theological transformation that I was undergoing. Finally, though, the worship itself seemed to be more holistic, deep, and meaningful. I was too ignorant to put my finger on it, but there was something different. It was not just a couple of songs, a sermon, then we go. It was more structured. It seemed to have meaning, direction, purpose. They had communion, and it seemed that it was something they did every week. That was new to me, but somehow it seemed right.
After some time visiting there, we began to develop friendships. One thing we heard about again and again was that there was a very interesting history to the church. This involved a lot of ups and downs – trial and triumph. At the moment, it seemed, the church was in something of a flux, with a little bit of an unknown future. The ‘pastor’ who had been preaching was really a supply pastor, but he had a long history with the congregation. The leader who spoke about children’s church was in fact more or less the ‘pastor designate’ who was finishing up his seminary training. (For the record, I loved and respected, and still do, both of these men despite the changes that have since come up) However, I kept hearing about this former pastor who had more or less set the current direction of the church. His name was Peter Leithart.
In retrospect, it would seem humorous to anyone familiar with the whole Federal Vision controversy that Joe Morecraft and those at his church insisted that I must go to the church that had been set on its course by Peter Leithart. Peter is one of the big names in the whole Auburn Avenue controversy. Morecraft is one of the big leaders in the anti Auburn Avenue camp. The Lord works in mysterious ways!!
Now, in my early days at RHPC, I was not at all knowledgeable about the differing strains within Presbyterianism. I just assumed Presbyterians were all one big happy family. Turns out, they look more like the Addams family!
However, in continuing the relationship with M, and in the relationships I developed at RHPC, certain names of certain key leaders, pastors, thinkers, and writers past and present kept coming up again and again. Steve Wilkins, Douglas Wilson, Greg Bahnsen, Cornelius Van Til, R. J. Rushdoony, Gary North, Gary DeMar, Jim Jordan, Steve Schlissel, and on and on. The supply pastor at RHPC had attended Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson back in the 70s and was quick to tell you that Greg Bahnsen was his favorite prof. While there, he knew DeMar, Wilkins, Jordan, David Chilton and others. In fact, the original relationship of the supply pastor with the congregation, as it turns out, was that he was personally recommended to the congregation by Rushdoony. At one time in the history of the congregation, both he and DeMar were utilized as preachers while they were attending RTS.
So, at a point around, say mid 2001, I thought I had found the one big happy reformed presbyterian family. All the people I was running with were more or less influenced by the same people (the names listed above and perhaps others) RHPC had, during this time scheduled Pastor Schlissel to come and speak in November of that year. I had forwarded this to M, asking him to come over and attend also. Unfortunately, Schlissel’s church being in the heart of NYC was affected greatly by the event of September 11 of that year and he had to cancel.
I do remember M, though, questioning Sclissell because he had had some negative things to say about the "regulative principle." Fair enough, but I think overall we take the person on the whole of what they’ve done, not on whether they already agree 100 % with us on 100 % of the issues.
However, let me reiterate to you that it was M who introduced me to the likes of Wilson and Wilkins. It was M who told me about some of the great work Wilkins had done both in theology and history. It was M who suggested to me once that Credenda Agenda (the magazine of Wilson) should be required reading in every Christian home.
All of this was reinforced with me by my own experiences. I continued to hear about Dr. Leithart. Apparently, he had left RHPC to pursue his PhD. Upon completion of that, he went to Moscow, Idaho to teach at New St. Andrews. This is, of course, tied closely to Wilson. Many of his books are published by Canon – Wilson’s puclishing house and he writes frequently for Credenda Agenda – must reading indeed! In fact, during this time, Dr. Leithart was a member of Pastor Wilson’s church. In addition to hearing about him, I got the opportunity to actually hear him and speak with him a couple of times. He occasionally gets to pass through town and when he does he usually speaks at our congregation. One time in particular the PCA GA was in Birmingham and they held a pre-GA liturgy conference at our facility. Dr. Leithart, Jim Jordan, and Wes Baker all spoke. This was perhaps the beginning of a great awakening for me concerning my views on worship. The concerns I had as expressed above were being addressed by some very smart people in very intelligent, and might I add, Biblical ways.
At any rate, I knew there were some differences within this group of leaders and thinkers. But, in my opinion they were peripheral. There were numerous things they held in common. This included centrally the idea that the whole word of God regulates our whole lives. This places God’s law on a higher plane. God’s law is not irrelevant to us, but is in fact binding. All the members of this group tend to hold God’s law, God’s Word in high regard. God’s word also regulates how we are to worship Him.
Another consistent viewpoint among this group tended to be that they were, I believe without exception, postmillenial and (orthodox) preterist. There may certainly be variations in the particulars of this, but I think they largely fell into those categories.
In addition to these similarities in peripheral issues, all these men were of course Calvinistic in soteriology, presbyterian in government, covenantal in their viewpoint of God’s relationship with His People. They all held to paedobaptism. In other words, these guys in addition to all being nominally some variant of Christian, were in fact in agreement on 98% of their theology. Where differences seemed to exist it involved the actual application of the theology. Just as an example, both Joe Morecraft and Jim Jordan have indicated that they believe in the regulative principle of worship. This means that in determining what we are to do in corporate worship, we are to look to the Bible and follow what it says. On that point these two are in 100% agreement. However, when they develop their ideas as to what it is exactly that the Bible instructs us to do in corporate worship, the two are miles apart. One could truly say to the other "I believe you are wrong in the way you develop and apply the regulative principle." However, it would be incorrect for one to say to the other "You deny the regulative principle." There are likely other topics where this type of application difference shows up. How do you deal with it? Especially, if you are all one big happy family how do you deal with it when your brother’s conclusion at a particular point differs from your own? This is where I found out that we really weren’t a big happy family.
I still remember opening the email from M some time in 2002. "Have you heard the latest about Schlissel, Wilson, and Wilkins? They’re denying justification by faith!!!!"
I have to admit that my initial reaction was not "Oh no, somehow these great men of God have suddenly all at once lost their mind and gone after false doctrine." Instead I thought, "I wonder what that is all about." That began my quest.
Now, admittedly I have not heard the full tapes of the original conference at Auburn Avenue, nor have I read the full transcripts. I have read quite a bit of it though. Initially, I was a little confused because I was still new to the whole reformed world. However, I have read substantially from the writings of not only Wilkins, Wilson, and Schlissel, but even more so from Leithart, Jordan, and others who have since been lumped into this camp. In studying all this, I also came across the name of Rich Lusk (more on this later!). I have read much of the writing against these guys as well. I have read the Auburn Avenue Theology Pros and Cons book numerous times. I offer the following brief (maybe?) critique of the situation. I know this is wrought with over simplification and has gaping holes, but there simply isn’t time or space here for a full review. So deal with it!
From the very beginning, it has been obvious to me which side has been fair, even handed, Christ like and so forth in their behavior. For instance, the first big blowup was in a small presbytery of a small denomination (the RPCUS – Morecraft’s denomination) publicly calling for the repentance of four men from other denominations. The accused have claimed that they were not approached by the accusers and given the opportunity to sit down in private and defend their views. Is this scriptural? Any time any one from any branch of the church makes statements that I disagree with, can I publicly call them to repentance and ask for discipline? The whole tenor of this debate has been "Guilty until proven innocent, and, oh by the way, we’re not giving you a chance to prove your innocence. Therefore, guilty." A perfect example of this was the recent adoption of the committee report by the GA of the PCA. The ‘study committee’ was fully stacked with those who had been public in their opposition to the AA theology. In defense of this stacking, R. C. Sproul made the incredible statement that of course you don’t fill a jury with those sympathetic to the accused. There are two major problems with this statement that are readily evident to any first grader. First, this was not a trial by jury, but a study committee. A study committee should have people who are on both sides, as well as those who have no current opinion. A wide reading of the case should be made, then recommendations of both a majority and minority report given. Secondly, though, if this were a trial by jury then why is it stacked against the accused? True you don’t fill a jury with those sympathetic to the accused. But you don’t fill it with those who have already publicly stated their belief in his guilt! This was a grave miscarriage of justice any which way you slice it.
Now, it is true that Pastor Wilson does frequently use sarcasm and humor to make a point. I would even say there are times when he has carried it too far. However, I notice his biting sarcasm in this instance has always been in reaction to the incredible attacks made on him. Which demonstrates a lack of Christian charity more – boldly attacking an erstwhile friend and co-laborer for Christ, or responding to such an attack in a less that perfect manner?
So much could be said about the theological matters here, but I don’t have the time nor the ability to go into any detail. Suffice it to say, though, that the charge that any of the names associated with the AA theology are denying justification by faith are just plain silly. I can’t state that strongly enough. Its just plain silly. I don’t know how many times these guys have to make the specific point over and over and over again that they believe there is no way we could ever bring works to God and have a claim on salvation; that we are solely saved by an act of His Free Grace; that this is solely because of the work of Jesus Christ on the cross; that this is obtained only by means of faith. They say all this, yet are still accused of denying these very things.
The fact of the matter is that the accusers and the accused, when their theology in total is reviewed, share almost the exact same theology in so many ways. In the broader Christian ‘pie’, they are all on the same small slice. Yet the most viscious of attacks have been leveled at the one by the other. It is sad, Sad, SAD!
I think the great sin of the AA crowd is that they dared to think. Especially, they dared to think outside the box of a 19th century interpretation of a seventeenth century interpretation of the teachings of Scripture. Read that sentence again. It is not a typo. The AA thinkers are truly Catholic (in the best sense of the word) learning from various strains of Christian theological tradition. However, virtually everything, if not everything, held by any of these men have been held by other leaders in the history of Reformed Christianity. The accusers want to make Reformed Christianity simply fit a tiny tiny little theological pattern. Anything outside of that pattern is not reformed. And, if a reformed leader steps outside that pattern, he is worse than someone already outside of that pattern. That is, these ‘true reformed’ leaders will still at least accept Baptists, Methodists, and sometimes even Roman Catholics as being, while theologically mistaken, Christian Brothers. However, let a Reformed leader vary his view slightly, and Whamo! he is damned to hell!
The great sin of the AA movement is also that it does not deny that the Bible does speak of works, covenant membership, apostasy, effectual sacraments, etc. Actually for the most part, their views of this fit within the teaching of the Westminster Confession (some hold to paedocommunion which is not taught by the WCF. Some also deny a covenant of Works) However, in other areas, the AA teaching are actually more consistent with the teachings of the Confession than the accepted interpretation by the "truly reformed" crowd.
In the end, though, can’t we simply in love debate these doctrines? Can’t we say "You know, I believe the WCF may be wrong in not allowing for paedocommunion." Can’t we use language that may be different that the WCF (especially if it is Biblical language??!!) Can’t we just sometimes agree to disagree and continue to be brothers? Can’t we sometimes learn from each other – as iron sharpens iron? Do we have to immediately condemn our brother whenever he says things in words different from what we might choose to use? Again, I think this is all just so sad.
Now, as I said earlier, I came across the name of Rich Lusk in my studies. Later, when we began searching for a full time pastor, his name came up. I did further research. I spoke with him on the phone at length. I drove to Monroe with two others from our congregation to meet him and his family and to hear him preach. (He was then Assistant Pastor at Auburn Avenue). I specifically asked him questions such as "Are you a five point Calvinist" and other pertinent topics. Not only I, but virtually our whole congregation was sold on him. He graciously agreed to become our pastor in 2004, and we have slowly, but steadily grown in numbers and in maturity. (As of 2003 our congregation was on the verge of disbanding, with only a tiny handful of families left. We are now strong and vibrant).
Btw, just this past week, and this was not an aberration but just the latest example, Pastor Lusk went to great lengths in his sermon to explain that our justification is by faith and not works. Hmmm. Strange from a guy who denies that truth!
I have sat under his teaching now for almost three years. I have learned so much. I have seen this "Dark Auburn Avenue" theology bring so much light and fruit. We have a congregation where everyone loves each other. We have a congregation that is beginning to become active in the community. You will know them by their fruits.
So, I invite anyone who has a problem with this ‘dark’ theology to simply come and visit us at any time. Hear the joyful singing. Hear the heartfelt confession. Hear the hearty shouts of "Amen!" and "Thanks be to God!" Celebrate communion with our Lord and with each other. Hear God’s word preached. Come on, I dare you!
Friday, August 10, 2007
Latest musical recommendation
Ok, my weekly music recommendation has turned into an every once in a while recommendation. But, here goes another installment. Like most things, I tend to get wordy and that’s why I post so infrequently – who has the time to write this much?
I would like to discuss an artist that I have listened to for many years. The man is known by numerous monikers including The Belfast Cowboy and Van the Man. I am speaking, of course, of Van Morrison.
Whether or not you know the name or are very familiar at all with his work, I know you know a couple of his tunes, at least. His late sixties top ten hit "Brown Eyed Girl" has to be one of the most aired songs in radio history. Other radio hits include 1970’s "Moondance" and "Domino." He also had something of a hit with "Wild Night" (redone back in the 1990’s by John Mellencamp and some chick whose name I can’t pronounce or spell). His 1989 song "Have I Told You Lately" was re-recorded by Rod Stewart in the 1990s and was a big hit.
Van has worked with some of the greatest as well. This includes Ray Charles, B. B. King, John Lee Hooker, The Chieftans, Bob Dylan, and others. His songs have been in numerous movies. He also has several books about his life – I think he detests these!
Van has a reputation of being difficult. He has walked out on shows. He has walked out on interviews. I once read an interview of him and it was filled with vulgarity – almost to the point of making me not want to listen to his music anymore. This bad temper and personality is puzzling to some because frequently Van writes and records songs with an apparant Christian theme. A few examples of these are "Full Force Gale," "Whenever God Shines His Light," "When Will I Ever Learn to Live in God," "Give Me My Rapture," and so on. However, to put these songs into perspective, you have to know the context in which he writes. I do not pretend to know the inner workings of the man, but I can speculate quite a bit based on what I do know of him.
One other thing you may or may not know about Van is that one of the greatest garage band songs of all time was penned by no other than Van the Man. After spending his youth in the fifties and early sixties playing various music scenes (most notably as a saxophonist with the band The Monarchs), Van was part of the rock band Them, which was a minor part of the British Invasion of 1964-65. (Ok, so they weren’t the Beatles!) They scored some hits with "Here Comes the Night," and "Baby Please Don’t Go." (The latter of which I know I heard in a movie soundtrack once, but I do not recall the movie.) However, their most notable hit was the Morrison penned "Gloria." This is the song where the chorus has the lead singer spell out the name G—L—O—R—I—A-A-A-A-A-A as the background singers belt out "Gloria." Shortly after Them scored with the song, another British Invasion Band (I don’t recall their name), scored a hit with it also. Later the song was done by the likes of The Doors, and Jimi Hendrix. Probably every garage band in the 60s-80s also worked this song. Give Van credit. Even at his most shallow, he can write a mean tune!
But the problem with Van in terms of radio success (he’s had a pretty steady career for over forty years, but only a handful of songs ever find radio airplay) is that he is not usually shallow. He is often deep. The roots of that depth have to be discussed.
To understand something about Van, you have to consider where he came from. Belfast Northern Ireland is a town filled with spiritual anxiety. This is the hotbed of Catholic/Protestant tension. Van has stated that this tension was not really in the form of violence when he was growing up, but it has since gone that route. However, certainly the background of Catholic/Protestant tension can cause one to wander spiritually if one is a spiritual wanderer by nature, especially if one does not have his anchor down very firmly. Van’s father, I believe, was not necessarily religious. But, to add confusion to the already confused state, Van’s mother converted to the Jehovah’s Witness. She used to drag him to the meetings (his father apparantly did not go). Van has written about this in the song "Kingdom Hall" on the 1978 album "Wavelength."
So, we have a not particularly religious father, a Jehovah’s Witness mother, in a land filled with Protestant/Catholic strife. Add to that the fact that evidently Van is a natural wanderer filled with a literary, spiritual, and philosophical keenness and curiosity and you have a potential for some fairly interesting outcomes. Compound all of this with the fact that the British Isles as a whole, including specifically Ireland, have a wide and varied religious history that have included everything from the very pagan Druids to Reformed Christianity. In the midst of all of this, the Isles have so many legends and lore that often times mix and match the various religious cultures. There are all sorts of Christian and pseudo-Christian stories in the history of the Isles. We can think of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, Camelot, Avalon, the Holy Grail, etc. Much of this has ties to the history of the Church. Some of this is nothing more than fable. Van has tapped into this history and mythology and it comes through frequently in his music.
The great British, and particularly Irish poets, philosophers, and other writers have always been attracted to the spiritual meandering that have gone on throughout the history of the Isles. Van is no exception. However, what makes him stand out from say, Keats, is that Van’s poetry, philosophy, and religious groanings are carried out in the form of recorded music.
Speaking of the music, this brings us to exactly what influence his father did have on him. If his father had little of no influence on Van’s spiritual journeys (of course he HAD to have some influence one way or the other), his biggest influence on the young Van was musical. Van’s father was a collector of records. He had everything from Jazz to Hank Williams. Van grew up with this all around him. Particularly, American R&B, early Rock and Roll, and Country (such as Williams) shaped Van’s taste and style. I have heard him indicate that probably Ray Charles was the single biggest influence on him musically. It is obvious that he had a love for much of the early rock music such as Fats Domino, Jerry Lee Lewis, Elvis, etc. Other influences included black gospel music, traditional Irish music, and so on.
So, in the end what you have in Van is a man of deep literary, poetic, philosophical, and spiritual yearnings, playing music inspired by a range of styles from Irish folk to Jazz to R&B to Rock and Roll to gospel to Country. In his forty plus year career, variations of all this comes out again and again. Sometimes he makes an album that has virtually no deep thoughts but is filled with music inspired by the likes of the early R&B performers. At other times he writes and records music and lyrics that are almost other-worldly. At other times he betrays his depth by simply name dropping in his songs. It would be interesting to see a complete list of names he has mentioned in his songs throughout the years. They would include, just as a starting place, all of the names already mentioned above as well as Mahalia Jackson, Jackie Wilson, Wilson Pickett, James Brown, Gene Chandler, Edith Piaf, Oscar Wilde, James Joyce, Henry David Thoreah, Jack Keroack (sp?), Chet Baker, and many, many others.
So, where does one start if one wants to explore this long and varied career? If you have little or no knowledge of Van’s music, the place to start would be with "The Best of Van Morrison". Be careful – there is now three volumes of TBOVM and specifically the one I am talking about is the first. On top of this, there are several variations of early Van music that carry the "Best of" moniker. This is not to say that the others are not good. It’s just that as a starting place in understanding his music and to have his most familiar tunes, this is the place to start. This is a twenty song set that includes the aforementioned "Gloria", "Brown Eyed Girl", "Here Comes the Night," "Baby Please Don’t Go," "Brown Eyed Girl," "Domino," "Have I Told You Lately," "Wild Night," "Whenever God…" "Moondance," and "Full Force Gale" not to mention some other gems such as "Bright Side of the Road," and "Cleaning Windows." This collection barely scratches his deeper stuff. But it does cover almost all of his radio hits and some of the other catchier, if lighter, fair of his career. The disc seems to span from his days with Them in the mid 1960s, through 1989s "Avalon Sunset" album.
The Best of – Vol 2 might be a good compendium to have as well. It covers virtually the same territory, though released a couple of years later and containing a few songs from the two new albums he put out in the meantime. Vol 2 does seem to get into some of the deeper, spiritual stuff. The fifteen songs (many are longer than the average song on Vol 1) include "When Will I Ever…", "In the Garden," "A Sense of Wonder," "Hymns to the Silence", "The Mystery," and "Enlightenment" Just looking at the song titles tells you that most of this stuff is more spiritual and philosophical than "Baby Please don’t Go" and "Wild Night". The Best of – Vol 3 seems a bit more spotty even though it is a two disc, 31 song collection that has just recently come out.
Beyond this, it would be a huge debate as to where one should start. Simply looking at his solo career, there are so many various styles and forms represented in his music that one could hardly represent to someone what the best single album would be. Some Van fans absolutely insist that "Astral Weeks" is not only the pinnacle of his work, but is the greatest recording ever. Other people find it unlistenable for a variety of reasons. Others seem to indicate that the Album "Moondance" is his greatest, while others feel like it is a weak effort at lounge lizard jazz. Some people praise to the hilt every new album he comes out with as his best ever, or the best since "Astral Weeks" or "Moondance" or whatever their other favorite is. Others pan all his newer albums and say that only his older stuff is good. So, to add to the confusion, here is very briefly one man’s opinion.
After the Them years, he struggled for a time, eventually having his biggest hit "Brown Eyed Girl." (BEG) Though this song seems more or less standard light pop flair, it was not without controversy. Apparantly he originally titled it "Brown Skinned Girl" but the record company did not want to release a white as paste singer singing about "Making love in the green grass, behind the stadium with you, my brown skinned girl"!! This was 1967. An album of mixed stuff was relaesed with it and has been reissued with various names numerous times since then. One of the songs on the album was called "T.B. Sheets" It was about an 8-9 minute whine about Van visiting a friend dying of T.B. Uplifting stuff!
The BEG album was followed by the album "Astral Weeks" (AW) which was anything but standard pop tunage. AW is sureal, other worldly, dreamy – weird. It defies any and all musical genres. It is not rock. It is not folk. It is not country. It is not traditional celtic, or jazz, or gospel, or classical, or anything we can think of. It has elements of all of these. At times it comes real close to standard jazz e.g. "The Way Young Lovers Do." Other times it is indescribable e.g. the title song. The record was recorded quickly using experienced studio musicians. It is unpolished. There are mistakes on it. Supposedly, the original recording included tons of extended instrumental jams in the middle of many of the songs, but for time sake these were cut out, and have never been heard since. The songs are sentimental, poetic, philosophical, spiritual, eerie. The album makes many rock critics list of top albums of the rock era, but in the 40 years since its release, it may still not even be a gold album. Most novices would immediately turn their noses up to it, and their ears away from it. It is not accessible so to speak. But, for the advanced fan, it is good stuff. I just ain’t for everybody. "Sweet Thing" from this album is on Best of Vol 1.
Somewhere during the late sixties, possibly between BEG and AW, Van had major problems with the record industry. He was contractually bound to produce an album, and he did not like the terms of it. In a fit of anger, he recorded dozens of little sensless soundbites of one or one and a half minutes. This was more or less giving the record company the bird. In their eternal wisdom, record companies have taken those jokes of recordings and re-released them in CD format and marketed them as early Van recordings. You can find it now under the title of "The Bang Sessions" All the sound bites are simply titled "Jamming Sessions" but they are mostly just Van repeatedly strumming the guitar and singing sensless lyrics. The stuff they won’t sell!!! Forty years later, nearly every album he releases has at least one, if not more, songs negatively portraying the record industry.
Now, after AW his next big recording was the album "Moondance"(MD)in 1970. Although containing the great song "Into the Mystic," the album as a whole was far less mystical than AW. The title song is swinging jazz. There are several standard pop-rock tunes. On the whole, the album is far more accesible than AW. MD was followed by "His Band and the Street Choir" also 1970. This contained the big hit "Domino" as well as the smaller hit "Blue Money." Other than the Best of Vol 1, I would send the novice to this album as a starting point. Not a whole lot of deep spiritual meandering here. A lot of good, R&B, horn driven music. If you know the song "Domino," this is an album full of "Dominos." "Give Me A Kiss", "I’ve Been Working," and "Virgo Clowns" stand out as catchy. The slow soft "I’ll Be Your Lover Too" is beautiful and is reminescient of AW, only more polished and easier to listen to. Not really a bad song on the disc, though some are better than others.
"Street Choir" was followed by 1971’s "Tupelo Honey" (TH.) this contained, in addition to the title song, "Wild Night" and the beautiful "You’re My Woman." For the most part this is a peaceful, fairly happy sounding record. Van was married, incidently, to some hippie chick named Janet Planet during the MD, Street Choir, and TH years and most of the music sounds relatively upbeat. However, shortly thereafter the marriage started to break up and the music began having some darker nooks and crannies again.
1972’s "St. Dominic’s Preview" (SDP) had the very bright "Jackie Wilson Said" and "I Will be There" but also contained an 11 minute scorcher called "Listen to the Lion" where Van seems to be purging himself of some difficult feelings. Btw, at this time, I would say, I do recommend not only Street Choir, but MD, TH, and SDP. They are all good in their own way.
The follow-up, however, was called "Hard Nose to the Highway" and was probably the most forgetable Van recording yet. Not without any merit ("Warm Love" as seen on Best of Vol 1) on the whole more or less a mundane album.
The next recording is probably the most mixed reviewed album of his career. "Veeden Fleece" VF (1974) is sometimes referred to as the ‘divorce album" because either the divorce was finalized or at least in progress during the writing/recording of it. Some reviewers say stay completely away from this one. Others start with the "best since AW" type language. It is perhaps the most AW like of any of his other recordings. However, it is far more polished in sound, and at times is someone lighthearted – though heavy at others. Although the song makes no sense to me, Vans singing in "Linden Arden Stole the Highlights" is some of his best. "Comfort You" is one of his most beautiful ballads. In my opinion a good, at times great, album – but not for everyone.
Other than a live recording, Van did not release another record until 1977’s "A Period of Transition." (APOT) In retrospect, this is not a bad album. It is definitely not his best but it is not bad. But, it was a huge disappointment. Van had been gone for three years, came back with an album called "APOT" on which he worked with the great New Orleans musician Dr. John. People were expecting great things. When they got good, not great, it fell flat. "Cold Wind in August" though is a beautiful tune.
1978’s Wavelength was again an uneven work. No truly great song on there. Some good songs. Some poor songs. "Kingdom Hall" is very catchy, but the rest of the work falls short.
So, by 1979 it had been several years since a superb recording by Van had been done. That year, though, marked a true comeback and a true period of transition. "Into the Music" (ITM) is perhaps my favorite Van recording. Mostly acoustic with light woodwinds, violins (ok, fiddles) understated drumming, yet somehow still rocking R&B. "Full Force Gail", "Bright Side of the Road" – these are truly fun songs. The second half gets downright serious though. "And The Healing Has Begun" is – well what can I say – to me at least, sexy
Girl, put on your summery dress,
your Easter bonnet and all the rest,
And I want to make love to you yes, yes yes
And the Healing has begun
Cool stuff. The last song is a remake of a very old song that has been done numerous times in the past – "It’s all in the Game" Vans rendition is the best I’ve heard.
1980’s "Common One" (CO) is, next to VF the receiver of the most mixed of reviews, and next to AW is the most inaccepsible album of his career. Notice how the very accepssible ITM is followed by an inaccesible recording. CO is stranger, deeper, darker, than most of the others. "Haunts of Ancient Peace" opens up with images of that old British folklore spoken of earlier. "Summertime in England" is a fifteen minute alternating song that I personally like, though I think I would be in the minority. The last song, "When Heart is Open" is a poem set to mystical musical sounds with very little melody or rhythm. It is odd, but I like it every once in a great while if I can listen to it in the dark with a good glass of wine in hand.
This album, though, set the tone for most of the 1980s. Most of the recordings during that time were searching, spiritual, and philosophical. Some were really good, some were not (The worst in my opinion is 1982s "Inarticulate Speech of the Heart" – this is probably the last Van recording you need to buy – only when you have exhausted all other options) Most during this time though were mixed bags. "A Sense of Wonder" has some great songs like "Ancient of Days" and "The Masters Eyes" but it also has its share of filler. The Album "No Guru, No Method, No Teacher" has some of the best lyrics, and some of the best arrangements of any Van recording, but yet his voice just somehow doesn’t fit and there is a lot lacking in melodies. "In the Garden" from that album, though is certainly in my top ten Van songs of all time.
Also of note from the 1980s is Vans recording with the Chieftans of traditional Irish music. In addition to a couple of reworked Van originals, there are some older Irish folk songs. My personal favorite of the bunch is "Carrickfergus" Vans vocals are outstanding.
The 80s closed out with Avalon Sunset – one of the easiest listening records of his career – including the hits "Have I Told You…" "When Will I Ever…"and "Whenever God..." the 90s opened up with "Enlightenment" which combined some of the spiritual meanerings of his 80s recordings with a little more R&B style. It is mostly good. This phase of his career ened with 1991’s double LP "Hymns to the Silence" (HTTS) The title song is also one of his ten best in my opinion. However, I describe this work as one really really great CD spread out over two CDs. That is, it is half great, half filler. A little musical editing would have been in order.
The next recording was "Too Long in Exile" This too gets very mixed reviews. The guy at one of the major Van websites panned this one heavily saying Van should have just stayed home. However, it is one of my favorites. Van returns to his R&B roots – redoing a Ray Charles song, recording a new version of "Gloria" with John Lee Hooker, an original bluesy duet "Wasted Years" also with Hooker. A fifteen minute take on Brook Bentons "I’ll Take Care of You" finishes it off. I recommend this one.
Since that time, Van has oscillated between releasing more of the same R&B flavored original recordings along with some specialty recordings. That is, Van has released a Big Band Jazz Album ("How Long Has This Been Going On") Two Country Albums (One with Jerry Lee Lewis’ sister for some unknown reason, and the recently released "Pay the Devil") and an album of skiffle music. I have limited exposure to only a couple of his albums from the last decade or so so I feel limited on what I can say.
In the end, then, buy 1) Best of Vol 1, 2) Street Choir 3) Into the Music and 4) Best of Vol 2, Too Long IN Exile. If you like it, keep going there are about fifty more. If you don’t like it, then stop after Best of Vol 1!
Van being inducted into the songwriters hall of fame (with Ray Charles)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bbLDFDfdc0
Van and John Lee Hooker doing "Gloria"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRlVE2pNQ-s
Van doing "tupelo Honey" ~1979
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZUbjFCvlC0
I would like to discuss an artist that I have listened to for many years. The man is known by numerous monikers including The Belfast Cowboy and Van the Man. I am speaking, of course, of Van Morrison.
Whether or not you know the name or are very familiar at all with his work, I know you know a couple of his tunes, at least. His late sixties top ten hit "Brown Eyed Girl" has to be one of the most aired songs in radio history. Other radio hits include 1970’s "Moondance" and "Domino." He also had something of a hit with "Wild Night" (redone back in the 1990’s by John Mellencamp and some chick whose name I can’t pronounce or spell). His 1989 song "Have I Told You Lately" was re-recorded by Rod Stewart in the 1990s and was a big hit.
Van has worked with some of the greatest as well. This includes Ray Charles, B. B. King, John Lee Hooker, The Chieftans, Bob Dylan, and others. His songs have been in numerous movies. He also has several books about his life – I think he detests these!
Van has a reputation of being difficult. He has walked out on shows. He has walked out on interviews. I once read an interview of him and it was filled with vulgarity – almost to the point of making me not want to listen to his music anymore. This bad temper and personality is puzzling to some because frequently Van writes and records songs with an apparant Christian theme. A few examples of these are "Full Force Gale," "Whenever God Shines His Light," "When Will I Ever Learn to Live in God," "Give Me My Rapture," and so on. However, to put these songs into perspective, you have to know the context in which he writes. I do not pretend to know the inner workings of the man, but I can speculate quite a bit based on what I do know of him.
One other thing you may or may not know about Van is that one of the greatest garage band songs of all time was penned by no other than Van the Man. After spending his youth in the fifties and early sixties playing various music scenes (most notably as a saxophonist with the band The Monarchs), Van was part of the rock band Them, which was a minor part of the British Invasion of 1964-65. (Ok, so they weren’t the Beatles!) They scored some hits with "Here Comes the Night," and "Baby Please Don’t Go." (The latter of which I know I heard in a movie soundtrack once, but I do not recall the movie.) However, their most notable hit was the Morrison penned "Gloria." This is the song where the chorus has the lead singer spell out the name G—L—O—R—I—A-A-A-A-A-A as the background singers belt out "Gloria." Shortly after Them scored with the song, another British Invasion Band (I don’t recall their name), scored a hit with it also. Later the song was done by the likes of The Doors, and Jimi Hendrix. Probably every garage band in the 60s-80s also worked this song. Give Van credit. Even at his most shallow, he can write a mean tune!
But the problem with Van in terms of radio success (he’s had a pretty steady career for over forty years, but only a handful of songs ever find radio airplay) is that he is not usually shallow. He is often deep. The roots of that depth have to be discussed.
To understand something about Van, you have to consider where he came from. Belfast Northern Ireland is a town filled with spiritual anxiety. This is the hotbed of Catholic/Protestant tension. Van has stated that this tension was not really in the form of violence when he was growing up, but it has since gone that route. However, certainly the background of Catholic/Protestant tension can cause one to wander spiritually if one is a spiritual wanderer by nature, especially if one does not have his anchor down very firmly. Van’s father, I believe, was not necessarily religious. But, to add confusion to the already confused state, Van’s mother converted to the Jehovah’s Witness. She used to drag him to the meetings (his father apparantly did not go). Van has written about this in the song "Kingdom Hall" on the 1978 album "Wavelength."
So, we have a not particularly religious father, a Jehovah’s Witness mother, in a land filled with Protestant/Catholic strife. Add to that the fact that evidently Van is a natural wanderer filled with a literary, spiritual, and philosophical keenness and curiosity and you have a potential for some fairly interesting outcomes. Compound all of this with the fact that the British Isles as a whole, including specifically Ireland, have a wide and varied religious history that have included everything from the very pagan Druids to Reformed Christianity. In the midst of all of this, the Isles have so many legends and lore that often times mix and match the various religious cultures. There are all sorts of Christian and pseudo-Christian stories in the history of the Isles. We can think of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, Camelot, Avalon, the Holy Grail, etc. Much of this has ties to the history of the Church. Some of this is nothing more than fable. Van has tapped into this history and mythology and it comes through frequently in his music.
The great British, and particularly Irish poets, philosophers, and other writers have always been attracted to the spiritual meandering that have gone on throughout the history of the Isles. Van is no exception. However, what makes him stand out from say, Keats, is that Van’s poetry, philosophy, and religious groanings are carried out in the form of recorded music.
Speaking of the music, this brings us to exactly what influence his father did have on him. If his father had little of no influence on Van’s spiritual journeys (of course he HAD to have some influence one way or the other), his biggest influence on the young Van was musical. Van’s father was a collector of records. He had everything from Jazz to Hank Williams. Van grew up with this all around him. Particularly, American R&B, early Rock and Roll, and Country (such as Williams) shaped Van’s taste and style. I have heard him indicate that probably Ray Charles was the single biggest influence on him musically. It is obvious that he had a love for much of the early rock music such as Fats Domino, Jerry Lee Lewis, Elvis, etc. Other influences included black gospel music, traditional Irish music, and so on.
So, in the end what you have in Van is a man of deep literary, poetic, philosophical, and spiritual yearnings, playing music inspired by a range of styles from Irish folk to Jazz to R&B to Rock and Roll to gospel to Country. In his forty plus year career, variations of all this comes out again and again. Sometimes he makes an album that has virtually no deep thoughts but is filled with music inspired by the likes of the early R&B performers. At other times he writes and records music and lyrics that are almost other-worldly. At other times he betrays his depth by simply name dropping in his songs. It would be interesting to see a complete list of names he has mentioned in his songs throughout the years. They would include, just as a starting place, all of the names already mentioned above as well as Mahalia Jackson, Jackie Wilson, Wilson Pickett, James Brown, Gene Chandler, Edith Piaf, Oscar Wilde, James Joyce, Henry David Thoreah, Jack Keroack (sp?), Chet Baker, and many, many others.
So, where does one start if one wants to explore this long and varied career? If you have little or no knowledge of Van’s music, the place to start would be with "The Best of Van Morrison". Be careful – there is now three volumes of TBOVM and specifically the one I am talking about is the first. On top of this, there are several variations of early Van music that carry the "Best of" moniker. This is not to say that the others are not good. It’s just that as a starting place in understanding his music and to have his most familiar tunes, this is the place to start. This is a twenty song set that includes the aforementioned "Gloria", "Brown Eyed Girl", "Here Comes the Night," "Baby Please Don’t Go," "Brown Eyed Girl," "Domino," "Have I Told You Lately," "Wild Night," "Whenever God…" "Moondance," and "Full Force Gale" not to mention some other gems such as "Bright Side of the Road," and "Cleaning Windows." This collection barely scratches his deeper stuff. But it does cover almost all of his radio hits and some of the other catchier, if lighter, fair of his career. The disc seems to span from his days with Them in the mid 1960s, through 1989s "Avalon Sunset" album.
The Best of – Vol 2 might be a good compendium to have as well. It covers virtually the same territory, though released a couple of years later and containing a few songs from the two new albums he put out in the meantime. Vol 2 does seem to get into some of the deeper, spiritual stuff. The fifteen songs (many are longer than the average song on Vol 1) include "When Will I Ever…", "In the Garden," "A Sense of Wonder," "Hymns to the Silence", "The Mystery," and "Enlightenment" Just looking at the song titles tells you that most of this stuff is more spiritual and philosophical than "Baby Please don’t Go" and "Wild Night". The Best of – Vol 3 seems a bit more spotty even though it is a two disc, 31 song collection that has just recently come out.
Beyond this, it would be a huge debate as to where one should start. Simply looking at his solo career, there are so many various styles and forms represented in his music that one could hardly represent to someone what the best single album would be. Some Van fans absolutely insist that "Astral Weeks" is not only the pinnacle of his work, but is the greatest recording ever. Other people find it unlistenable for a variety of reasons. Others seem to indicate that the Album "Moondance" is his greatest, while others feel like it is a weak effort at lounge lizard jazz. Some people praise to the hilt every new album he comes out with as his best ever, or the best since "Astral Weeks" or "Moondance" or whatever their other favorite is. Others pan all his newer albums and say that only his older stuff is good. So, to add to the confusion, here is very briefly one man’s opinion.
After the Them years, he struggled for a time, eventually having his biggest hit "Brown Eyed Girl." (BEG) Though this song seems more or less standard light pop flair, it was not without controversy. Apparantly he originally titled it "Brown Skinned Girl" but the record company did not want to release a white as paste singer singing about "Making love in the green grass, behind the stadium with you, my brown skinned girl"!! This was 1967. An album of mixed stuff was relaesed with it and has been reissued with various names numerous times since then. One of the songs on the album was called "T.B. Sheets" It was about an 8-9 minute whine about Van visiting a friend dying of T.B. Uplifting stuff!
The BEG album was followed by the album "Astral Weeks" (AW) which was anything but standard pop tunage. AW is sureal, other worldly, dreamy – weird. It defies any and all musical genres. It is not rock. It is not folk. It is not country. It is not traditional celtic, or jazz, or gospel, or classical, or anything we can think of. It has elements of all of these. At times it comes real close to standard jazz e.g. "The Way Young Lovers Do." Other times it is indescribable e.g. the title song. The record was recorded quickly using experienced studio musicians. It is unpolished. There are mistakes on it. Supposedly, the original recording included tons of extended instrumental jams in the middle of many of the songs, but for time sake these were cut out, and have never been heard since. The songs are sentimental, poetic, philosophical, spiritual, eerie. The album makes many rock critics list of top albums of the rock era, but in the 40 years since its release, it may still not even be a gold album. Most novices would immediately turn their noses up to it, and their ears away from it. It is not accessible so to speak. But, for the advanced fan, it is good stuff. I just ain’t for everybody. "Sweet Thing" from this album is on Best of Vol 1.
Somewhere during the late sixties, possibly between BEG and AW, Van had major problems with the record industry. He was contractually bound to produce an album, and he did not like the terms of it. In a fit of anger, he recorded dozens of little sensless soundbites of one or one and a half minutes. This was more or less giving the record company the bird. In their eternal wisdom, record companies have taken those jokes of recordings and re-released them in CD format and marketed them as early Van recordings. You can find it now under the title of "The Bang Sessions" All the sound bites are simply titled "Jamming Sessions" but they are mostly just Van repeatedly strumming the guitar and singing sensless lyrics. The stuff they won’t sell!!! Forty years later, nearly every album he releases has at least one, if not more, songs negatively portraying the record industry.
Now, after AW his next big recording was the album "Moondance"(MD)in 1970. Although containing the great song "Into the Mystic," the album as a whole was far less mystical than AW. The title song is swinging jazz. There are several standard pop-rock tunes. On the whole, the album is far more accesible than AW. MD was followed by "His Band and the Street Choir" also 1970. This contained the big hit "Domino" as well as the smaller hit "Blue Money." Other than the Best of Vol 1, I would send the novice to this album as a starting point. Not a whole lot of deep spiritual meandering here. A lot of good, R&B, horn driven music. If you know the song "Domino," this is an album full of "Dominos." "Give Me A Kiss", "I’ve Been Working," and "Virgo Clowns" stand out as catchy. The slow soft "I’ll Be Your Lover Too" is beautiful and is reminescient of AW, only more polished and easier to listen to. Not really a bad song on the disc, though some are better than others.
"Street Choir" was followed by 1971’s "Tupelo Honey" (TH.) this contained, in addition to the title song, "Wild Night" and the beautiful "You’re My Woman." For the most part this is a peaceful, fairly happy sounding record. Van was married, incidently, to some hippie chick named Janet Planet during the MD, Street Choir, and TH years and most of the music sounds relatively upbeat. However, shortly thereafter the marriage started to break up and the music began having some darker nooks and crannies again.
1972’s "St. Dominic’s Preview" (SDP) had the very bright "Jackie Wilson Said" and "I Will be There" but also contained an 11 minute scorcher called "Listen to the Lion" where Van seems to be purging himself of some difficult feelings. Btw, at this time, I would say, I do recommend not only Street Choir, but MD, TH, and SDP. They are all good in their own way.
The follow-up, however, was called "Hard Nose to the Highway" and was probably the most forgetable Van recording yet. Not without any merit ("Warm Love" as seen on Best of Vol 1) on the whole more or less a mundane album.
The next recording is probably the most mixed reviewed album of his career. "Veeden Fleece" VF (1974) is sometimes referred to as the ‘divorce album" because either the divorce was finalized or at least in progress during the writing/recording of it. Some reviewers say stay completely away from this one. Others start with the "best since AW" type language. It is perhaps the most AW like of any of his other recordings. However, it is far more polished in sound, and at times is someone lighthearted – though heavy at others. Although the song makes no sense to me, Vans singing in "Linden Arden Stole the Highlights" is some of his best. "Comfort You" is one of his most beautiful ballads. In my opinion a good, at times great, album – but not for everyone.
Other than a live recording, Van did not release another record until 1977’s "A Period of Transition." (APOT) In retrospect, this is not a bad album. It is definitely not his best but it is not bad. But, it was a huge disappointment. Van had been gone for three years, came back with an album called "APOT" on which he worked with the great New Orleans musician Dr. John. People were expecting great things. When they got good, not great, it fell flat. "Cold Wind in August" though is a beautiful tune.
1978’s Wavelength was again an uneven work. No truly great song on there. Some good songs. Some poor songs. "Kingdom Hall" is very catchy, but the rest of the work falls short.
So, by 1979 it had been several years since a superb recording by Van had been done. That year, though, marked a true comeback and a true period of transition. "Into the Music" (ITM) is perhaps my favorite Van recording. Mostly acoustic with light woodwinds, violins (ok, fiddles) understated drumming, yet somehow still rocking R&B. "Full Force Gail", "Bright Side of the Road" – these are truly fun songs. The second half gets downright serious though. "And The Healing Has Begun" is – well what can I say – to me at least, sexy
Girl, put on your summery dress,
your Easter bonnet and all the rest,
And I want to make love to you yes, yes yes
And the Healing has begun
Cool stuff. The last song is a remake of a very old song that has been done numerous times in the past – "It’s all in the Game" Vans rendition is the best I’ve heard.
1980’s "Common One" (CO) is, next to VF the receiver of the most mixed of reviews, and next to AW is the most inaccepsible album of his career. Notice how the very accepssible ITM is followed by an inaccesible recording. CO is stranger, deeper, darker, than most of the others. "Haunts of Ancient Peace" opens up with images of that old British folklore spoken of earlier. "Summertime in England" is a fifteen minute alternating song that I personally like, though I think I would be in the minority. The last song, "When Heart is Open" is a poem set to mystical musical sounds with very little melody or rhythm. It is odd, but I like it every once in a great while if I can listen to it in the dark with a good glass of wine in hand.
This album, though, set the tone for most of the 1980s. Most of the recordings during that time were searching, spiritual, and philosophical. Some were really good, some were not (The worst in my opinion is 1982s "Inarticulate Speech of the Heart" – this is probably the last Van recording you need to buy – only when you have exhausted all other options) Most during this time though were mixed bags. "A Sense of Wonder" has some great songs like "Ancient of Days" and "The Masters Eyes" but it also has its share of filler. The Album "No Guru, No Method, No Teacher" has some of the best lyrics, and some of the best arrangements of any Van recording, but yet his voice just somehow doesn’t fit and there is a lot lacking in melodies. "In the Garden" from that album, though is certainly in my top ten Van songs of all time.
Also of note from the 1980s is Vans recording with the Chieftans of traditional Irish music. In addition to a couple of reworked Van originals, there are some older Irish folk songs. My personal favorite of the bunch is "Carrickfergus" Vans vocals are outstanding.
The 80s closed out with Avalon Sunset – one of the easiest listening records of his career – including the hits "Have I Told You…" "When Will I Ever…"and "Whenever God..." the 90s opened up with "Enlightenment" which combined some of the spiritual meanerings of his 80s recordings with a little more R&B style. It is mostly good. This phase of his career ened with 1991’s double LP "Hymns to the Silence" (HTTS) The title song is also one of his ten best in my opinion. However, I describe this work as one really really great CD spread out over two CDs. That is, it is half great, half filler. A little musical editing would have been in order.
The next recording was "Too Long in Exile" This too gets very mixed reviews. The guy at one of the major Van websites panned this one heavily saying Van should have just stayed home. However, it is one of my favorites. Van returns to his R&B roots – redoing a Ray Charles song, recording a new version of "Gloria" with John Lee Hooker, an original bluesy duet "Wasted Years" also with Hooker. A fifteen minute take on Brook Bentons "I’ll Take Care of You" finishes it off. I recommend this one.
Since that time, Van has oscillated between releasing more of the same R&B flavored original recordings along with some specialty recordings. That is, Van has released a Big Band Jazz Album ("How Long Has This Been Going On") Two Country Albums (One with Jerry Lee Lewis’ sister for some unknown reason, and the recently released "Pay the Devil") and an album of skiffle music. I have limited exposure to only a couple of his albums from the last decade or so so I feel limited on what I can say.
In the end, then, buy 1) Best of Vol 1, 2) Street Choir 3) Into the Music and 4) Best of Vol 2, Too Long IN Exile. If you like it, keep going there are about fifty more. If you don’t like it, then stop after Best of Vol 1!
Van being inducted into the songwriters hall of fame (with Ray Charles)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bbLDFDfdc0
Van and John Lee Hooker doing "Gloria"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRlVE2pNQ-s
Van doing "tupelo Honey" ~1979
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZUbjFCvlC0
Monday, July 30, 2007
The Vacation Property Scam
On an earlier post I wrote about the dangers of multi-level marketing (MLM). I actually have a planned follow-up to that post which chronicles further experiences I have had with the MLM "pod people" as I have heard them called. However, one of the main points of that post was that you should always be leery of any "opportunity" in which you are promised great things, but in which direct answers to pertinent questions are not given. I would like to discuss briefly another scheme that is out there that you may or may not have been exposed to, and which you may have even fallen victim to. That scheme is the vacation property scheme.
I don’t use the word ‘scheme’ here lightly. I do believe that when you are offered something in a high pressure way, told you must do it immediately, and are belittled if you don’t, there must be more than meets the eye. These things have all the characteristics of a scheme, a scam, and a sham.
Actually, my very first encounter with high pressure sales pitches had nothing whatever to do with either MLM, property, or anything of the sort. My first encounter was as a young man in my late teens or early twenties and pertained to a workout gym. I was not totally into that sort of thing (and my physique would make that clear!), but I had a friend who was. I went as his guest one time. I guess it was ok, but it was just not my cup of tea. However, someone there cornered me, and wanted to talk to me about joining. They had a ‘special deal’ that was just going on right then. If I did not sign up that day, I would never again be able to get in at that rate. I could not leave, think about it, and come back another day to sign up. I must do it right then or lose out.
Now, I was young and naïve. I had very little experience with such things. I was not an aggressive or assertive person. If it was anything other than money, I may have fallen for it. But, as I stated in the post on MLM, I, for whatever reason, have always been very tight when it comes to my money. And, seeing as how I was not totally fired up about paying money in order to have the opportunity to go do hard and painful exercises, I politely declined. This against the protests of the salesperson. I thought he was going to follow me out to my car and hound me all the way home. "You’ll NEVER get an opportunity like this again!!!" he said over and over.
About two weeks later I saw an advertisement in the local newspaper for that very same gym offering that exact same offer open to the public. A valuable lesson was ingrained in my mind that day. I have been leery of high pressure sales pitches ever since.
With that as a background, lets fast-forward a few years. I was in my mid-twenties, had a beautiful wife (still do!) and a wonderful young baby boy (who is now a young man in his late teens). We received a call or letter or something about coming to hear about an opportunity for a vacation property. Simply for showing up and hearing their pitch, we would receive some sort of nice prize (I don’t recall exactly what it was in this instance).
Now, as I recall it, this was a ‘resort’ being built on one of the nicer lakes in our region. We were shown a little of the property, and given promises of things that were in the works and going to be built. (Hint number one: don’t believe it til you see it. If it ain’t already built, it may never be!) After being greatly impressed, we began talking money. Frankly, I do not remember how much the money was. I do know it seemed like a whole lot to me at the time, and the thought that I was paying for a lot of possible future use in a single place that is not even completed yet gave me pause for concern. Again, I was not the most cunning of men, but somehow when it came to money, I was one of the most cautious.
Now, to paint the picture a little clearer for you, all this was taking place in a large room. There were many people there being given the same sales pitch as I. During the time I was there, perhaps five or six people actually agreed to a purchase. Each time someone did, the salesmen would stand up, ring a loud (and quite annoying) bell, and make an excited announcement. This atmosphere was similar to the ‘pep rally’ atmosphere at the MLM meeting I would attend a few years later and described in the MLM post. I guess some people really love attention like that. Not me! That actually gave me further resolve to not buy into the sales pitch.
So, I began the process of declining. This promised "no pressure" sales pitch suddenly took a turn for the worse. The guy just would not let it go. He would not take ‘No’ for an answer. I remember him pointing to my wife and my baby and saying "If I had a beautiful family like that, I know that I would want to provide them with a nice vacation place for life."
Well, that was just too much. Mess with my money and its bad enough. Question my devotion to my family and you have just gone too far. We got up, got our crappy prize, and left.
Over the years, I have had several other opportunities to go on these things. It was usually the promised prize along with a promise of no high pressure sales that got me to go. However, none of these ever seemed to work out quite like it was planned. One time, we were promised a grill and so many pounds of steaks. The grill was cheap and lousy – I don’t think we ever used it. The steaks were almost indescribable. I didn’t even recognize the cuts of meat. They were about as tender as a steel belted radial and probably less tasty.
Once, I received an invitation to one of these things that had five scratch off numbers. The instructions said that if you scratch off a series of two you get a certain prize. If you scratch of three you get a better prize. Four and five are even better prizes. When I scratched my five off, four of them were of the same number. The prize for four was some huge color television. We kinda needed a new television at the time, but I was skeptical. I read and re-read the thing over and over looking for the catch. I could not find it. I finally decided to go, knowing I would turn down the offer, and thinking I would get my great new television set for my trouble. My biggest concern was how I was going to fit that thing into my car. Yet, in the back of my mind, I feared there was still some catch to it. I just did not know what it was.
When I finally convinced the salesman that I was not going to buy, he said, "Well, give me your invitation so I can see what prize you get." Nervous, I gave it to him. He said, "Well, you have a series of two, and you get such and such prize." I don’t remember what it was, but I know it was crappy. I said, "But I have a series of four and that gives me the big TV set." "No, you only have a series of two. That gives you this crap prize."
I don’t remember the exact numbers I scratched off, but, let’s just I scratched off something like 3-3-7-3-3. Four threes, right? I get the prize for four of the same, right? No. It had to be a series. Had it been 3-3-3-3-7 then I get the TV. Instead, I just got the prize for the series of two. It was such a wonderful prize that to this day I do not remember what it was!!! Maybe this was the cheap grill and bad steaks - I really don’t remember. Actually, I do not even remember what the sales pitch was for on that particular trip.
However, I am convinced that the whole thing was a scheme. They knew that a lot of folks would think they had won the television. That got them there. Then the high pressure sales would catch some percentage of those who took the bait. What a system!
I think these offers went on for years on the basis of baiting people with the promise of a great prize, when the actual prize was not quite what you had in mind. One acquaintance of mine, who happens to love boats, received an offer that involved the prize of a sailboat. After the pitch, he asked about it and was told that they would mail it to him. How do you mail a sailboat? Turns out, it was a blow-up raft.
Another acquaintance received an offer promising a five piece entertainment system. He got a walkman, headphones, and three batteries.
Eventually, though, enough people apparently got skeptical about these tactics, and the sales people had to up the ante a bit. My further experiences did involve somewhat better prizes, but the experience itself was still very negative.
The next specific experience I remember involved a condominium that was located in my favorite vacation location – Orange Beach Alabama. We were contacted via the telephone and asked to come to the presentation with the promise of two nights at a nice hotel, a thirty dollar gift certificate to one of various restaurants, and perhaps another prize or two – I do not entirely recall. We did receive these prizes, and did enjoy them very much. My wife and I had a wonderful weekend. The gift certificate we received was even from our favorite restaurant. No complaints here.
However, the sales pitch itself was simply awful. One thing that has changed considerably from the earlier years of timeshare condominiums and vacation resorts is that now you essentially buy into the system where you can stay at resorts virtually anywhere in the world. Without going into the specific details of this particular deal (I don’t really remember them anyway), suffice it to say that we spent about an hour and a half with this lady, and the cheapest product offered to us was in the neighborhood of fourteen thousand dollars. Apparently the lady took my interest in seeing one of the rooms as an actual interest in purchasing one. Everything was fine until I repeatedly made it clear we were not buying. The last thing the lady did was very nastily say "Well, you shouldn’t take any more free vacations!!" That hacked me off!
That experience was in November, 2001. I specifically remember it because it was on the day of the University of Alabama’s last victory over Auburn in football! Only recently have I had another experience.
We had an opportunity to spend a week in Branson, Missouri free of charge at a condo of a friend. During the week their sales department called the room and offered me one hundred twenty dollars cash on the spot to listen to their pitch. Short on cash, I agreed. Basically the same pitch was given once again. Vacation paradises all over the world were mine for the asking. However, shortly into the process, our lady realized she did not have a sale. They were obligated to spend an hour and a half with us. She started basically going through the motions. It was somewhat humourous. Finally, she said, "All I can offer you is thus and so and the cost is, gulp, fifty three thousand dollars. I am quite sure that you are not interested in that, are you?" Of course we were not. Not only this, though, but they could finance this fifty three grand at credit card rates for us. Yippee!!! "However," she continued, "I’ll call John. He is authorized to give you some alternate opportunities."
Well, along came John. He was offering something quite less expensive. We were still pretty adamant that the answer was no. So, he told the original sales girl to go ahead and sign us out and get our prize. She left, and shortly thereafter an older friendly looking lady came over and began basically an exit interview. "Were you treated nicely?" "Do you understand our offers?" etc. But, slowly the questions began changing. "What is your reason for not purchasing with us today?" "On a scale of 1-10, how interested do you think you would be in buying in at some time in the future?" etc. Next thing I know, this friendly retired nurse was making the final push. She leaned over the table as if she was taking a chance telling us this and said "I’m authorized to give you this very special offer…." then went on to give one last ditch try to get us hooked. This was apparently some sort of a trial offer for only about twenty five hundred dollars. After wrestling with her for a few minutes, she finally gave up the ghost, gave me my cash, and let me go. I hated every minute of it, but I guess a hundred and twenty dollars for less than two hours of work is a pretty good rate!
Now, all of this so far has been a brief description of my experiences, but, analytical mind that I am, my real intent is to analyze in very broad and not too specific terms why one should never buy into one of these offers. It all boils down to simple economics. However, the majority of people today are totally uneducated in the field of economics. They are therefore apt to fall for something that ‘sounds’ like a good deal.
A great introductory book concerning economics is Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson. The ‘one lesson’ referred to in the title is essentially that, when considering economic policy, one has to look beyond what is immediately obvious at first glance as a short term limited result and look further and deeper to the longer term, wider impact. He then demonstrates how this works by examining a number of faulty economic premises in light of this one lesson. For example, minimum wage law in the immediate, short term, appears to have a very positive effect in that people, particularly poor people, can make more money. However, the wider, deeper, longer-term effects of minimum wage law are in fact quite damaging to the economy as a whole, and particularly to those at the lower economic levels. To see all of this takes some fairly deep and lengthy thought processes that may not be readily available to every person.
Now, were you of a lower economic status than most and your local politician offers to raise the minimum wage, you would most likely support him in his efforts. However, if someone educated you on the damages of minimum wage law and showed you that in the long run it would in fact bring harm to you, you would likely not support it. What you may need to get to the point of understanding this economic impact, though, is time to understand the arguments and think them through.
Now, in considering the vacation property offers we discussed above, the one thing that is absolutely not available is time to think. If reading this blog accomplishes absolutely nothing else than the following, I will be satisfied: Always be leery of any offer that sounds great, yet must be taken advantage of on the spot with no time for further consideration. Perhaps that can be considered "Personal Economics in One Lesson."
Every single time I have ever gone to one of these sales pitches, (including also the one from the gym) I have been told that I simply must take advantage of it right then. I had to buy while I was there. Virtually every time when I did not buy immediately, the seller began sweetening the pot with supposedly better offers, but the pot was never sweetened with time. I always asked for brochures, literature, and further information about the costs and benefits of the plan, and have yet to receive one single bit of information that I could take home and contemplate. At least once, maybe more, when I asked about further information was asked in return "Well, what information have we not already given you?" This is a stupid question. If I knew what information I had and did not have, I would not need to ask for more. The only thing that was ever shown me (and this is eerily similar to the multi level marketing scams) is a few numbers scratched on a piece of paper by the salesperson. And even this was not given to me to take home and consider. When all was said and done, I left with no information whatsoever. Please consider that fact before you buy into one of these deals.
So, the next time you go to one of these sales pitches be sure to ask yourself: "If this is such a wonderful opportunity for me, then why do they not allow me to see all the numbers and take it home and think about it for a few days?" If it is in fact a great deal, you could determine that yourself and you would likely come back to them with a purchase.
A lot could be said, and perhaps in another blog I will say more, about how to consider offers such as this should you ever have the information needed to analyze it. It is highly doubtful that you would ever receive that information from a salesperson of this sort, but the process of analysis can still be useful in multiple situations.
The long and the short of it, though, is this: With one of these deals you pay a large, very large, sum of money up front for the right of staying in a condo in the future. The latest one I went to allowed you to buy a certain size (one, two, three, or four bedroom) and a certain amount of time per year. Actually, even this was not so simple – you actually pay for a certain number of ‘points’ that can then be redeemed for certain amount of space and time per year. That is, of course, not explained in any detail, so you really do not know how much you have bought, nor do you know how much you will specifically need in the future. Therefore, you may be paying for a lot more than you need, or a lot less. You really do not know. But, once you pay this large sum, you have some certain amount of time and space in their condo resorts for some amount of time (even for a lifetime if you buy the lifetime package).
However, in addition to this, these things always have other charges that come up annually. These are usually refered to as ‘maintenance’ fees and are supposedly used for upkeep of the property. These things tend to have a way of starting out very cheap, then going up through the years. I know of people who have bought into these things and eventually their maintenance fees go up to hundreds of dollars per year.
Now, the only way to determine if you have saved money or lost money on such a deal would be for you to know and understand exactly what it is you have bought, exactly what your needs would be for the next so many years, know exactly what the rate of increase in vacation rental space would be, know exactly what the increase in your maintenance and any other fees would be, know how much interest you could make if you did not spend the large amount up front, etc. and then make a comparison. It is almost impossible for an average Joe or Jane to know all this, but I’ll bet the accountants working for the resort sales companies have a pretty good ideal!
But, as an example, say, you spent twenty five thousand dollars now, and began paying two hundred dollars annually in fees, but that these fees go up by fifty dollars each year. Now say you could get the same room for a week this year for a total of fifteen hundred dollars. Assume this goes up by five percent each year. So, comparing your two options, you could spend twenty five thousand dollars now, and two hundred plus dollars per year increasing by fifty dollars per year each year – OR – you could invest the twenty-five thousand in a savings account, get five percent per year and take your vacations from the money in that account. These rentals will cost you fifteen hundred dollars per year going up at a rate of five percent per year. Based on these assumptions (which may or may not be realistic – I just made them up) it would take at least twenty years to break even. That is, if you purchased this plan, it would take you over twenty years to start actually saving money. Less than twenty years and you would have actually come out cheaper not buying the condo and instead just renting for a week each year. This analysis does not even consider the economic impact if you bought in and had to finance the deal at essentially credit card rates.
Now, in twenty years a lot could happen. You may lose a job, have an illness, or other financial hardship. Would you have rather spent that money on still future potential vacations, or would you rather have invested that money? What if you, or your spouse, or both, passed away ten years from now? Was that a wise investment? Essentially what you are doing on one of these offers is paying for future vacations way ahead of time. That is almost never a wise thing to do (unless you are the seller of such a plan). Would you go down to the local car dealership, and pay him twenty five thousand dollars for a car you will get twenty years from now – even if that car is then worth fifty thousand dollars? I think not. Why would you do this with rental property?
Now, it is certainly possible that some people get in at the right time, have many years worth of vacations, and in the end, spend less than they would have otherwise. In most cases this is very doubtful, but it is inevitable that a few come out very good. I am sure the sellers of the condos know and understand this. But, I can guarantee you this one thing: We have only touched on the economics of doing this. The companies that market these deals have paid experts looking at the economics of it. Do you think they have your economic security or their profit in mind? I have absolutely nothing against a company making a profit. I want to make a profit. But, these guys make huge profits by, in my opinion, defrauding their customers. They make you think that you have just gotten the deal of the century, when in fact, they are laughing all the way to the bank. You or I may not be able to fully grasp and analyze the economic impact of a deal such as this but I assure you that the selling company knows the general economic impact for the bulk of their sales. Think about that before you buy into such a deal.
In the end never ever buy into anything that you do not fully understand the terms of the deal, especially if information on the terms is not forthcoming and time is not given to analyze the terms.
I don’t use the word ‘scheme’ here lightly. I do believe that when you are offered something in a high pressure way, told you must do it immediately, and are belittled if you don’t, there must be more than meets the eye. These things have all the characteristics of a scheme, a scam, and a sham.
Actually, my very first encounter with high pressure sales pitches had nothing whatever to do with either MLM, property, or anything of the sort. My first encounter was as a young man in my late teens or early twenties and pertained to a workout gym. I was not totally into that sort of thing (and my physique would make that clear!), but I had a friend who was. I went as his guest one time. I guess it was ok, but it was just not my cup of tea. However, someone there cornered me, and wanted to talk to me about joining. They had a ‘special deal’ that was just going on right then. If I did not sign up that day, I would never again be able to get in at that rate. I could not leave, think about it, and come back another day to sign up. I must do it right then or lose out.
Now, I was young and naïve. I had very little experience with such things. I was not an aggressive or assertive person. If it was anything other than money, I may have fallen for it. But, as I stated in the post on MLM, I, for whatever reason, have always been very tight when it comes to my money. And, seeing as how I was not totally fired up about paying money in order to have the opportunity to go do hard and painful exercises, I politely declined. This against the protests of the salesperson. I thought he was going to follow me out to my car and hound me all the way home. "You’ll NEVER get an opportunity like this again!!!" he said over and over.
About two weeks later I saw an advertisement in the local newspaper for that very same gym offering that exact same offer open to the public. A valuable lesson was ingrained in my mind that day. I have been leery of high pressure sales pitches ever since.
With that as a background, lets fast-forward a few years. I was in my mid-twenties, had a beautiful wife (still do!) and a wonderful young baby boy (who is now a young man in his late teens). We received a call or letter or something about coming to hear about an opportunity for a vacation property. Simply for showing up and hearing their pitch, we would receive some sort of nice prize (I don’t recall exactly what it was in this instance).
Now, as I recall it, this was a ‘resort’ being built on one of the nicer lakes in our region. We were shown a little of the property, and given promises of things that were in the works and going to be built. (Hint number one: don’t believe it til you see it. If it ain’t already built, it may never be!) After being greatly impressed, we began talking money. Frankly, I do not remember how much the money was. I do know it seemed like a whole lot to me at the time, and the thought that I was paying for a lot of possible future use in a single place that is not even completed yet gave me pause for concern. Again, I was not the most cunning of men, but somehow when it came to money, I was one of the most cautious.
Now, to paint the picture a little clearer for you, all this was taking place in a large room. There were many people there being given the same sales pitch as I. During the time I was there, perhaps five or six people actually agreed to a purchase. Each time someone did, the salesmen would stand up, ring a loud (and quite annoying) bell, and make an excited announcement. This atmosphere was similar to the ‘pep rally’ atmosphere at the MLM meeting I would attend a few years later and described in the MLM post. I guess some people really love attention like that. Not me! That actually gave me further resolve to not buy into the sales pitch.
So, I began the process of declining. This promised "no pressure" sales pitch suddenly took a turn for the worse. The guy just would not let it go. He would not take ‘No’ for an answer. I remember him pointing to my wife and my baby and saying "If I had a beautiful family like that, I know that I would want to provide them with a nice vacation place for life."
Well, that was just too much. Mess with my money and its bad enough. Question my devotion to my family and you have just gone too far. We got up, got our crappy prize, and left.
Over the years, I have had several other opportunities to go on these things. It was usually the promised prize along with a promise of no high pressure sales that got me to go. However, none of these ever seemed to work out quite like it was planned. One time, we were promised a grill and so many pounds of steaks. The grill was cheap and lousy – I don’t think we ever used it. The steaks were almost indescribable. I didn’t even recognize the cuts of meat. They were about as tender as a steel belted radial and probably less tasty.
Once, I received an invitation to one of these things that had five scratch off numbers. The instructions said that if you scratch off a series of two you get a certain prize. If you scratch of three you get a better prize. Four and five are even better prizes. When I scratched my five off, four of them were of the same number. The prize for four was some huge color television. We kinda needed a new television at the time, but I was skeptical. I read and re-read the thing over and over looking for the catch. I could not find it. I finally decided to go, knowing I would turn down the offer, and thinking I would get my great new television set for my trouble. My biggest concern was how I was going to fit that thing into my car. Yet, in the back of my mind, I feared there was still some catch to it. I just did not know what it was.
When I finally convinced the salesman that I was not going to buy, he said, "Well, give me your invitation so I can see what prize you get." Nervous, I gave it to him. He said, "Well, you have a series of two, and you get such and such prize." I don’t remember what it was, but I know it was crappy. I said, "But I have a series of four and that gives me the big TV set." "No, you only have a series of two. That gives you this crap prize."
I don’t remember the exact numbers I scratched off, but, let’s just I scratched off something like 3-3-7-3-3. Four threes, right? I get the prize for four of the same, right? No. It had to be a series. Had it been 3-3-3-3-7 then I get the TV. Instead, I just got the prize for the series of two. It was such a wonderful prize that to this day I do not remember what it was!!! Maybe this was the cheap grill and bad steaks - I really don’t remember. Actually, I do not even remember what the sales pitch was for on that particular trip.
However, I am convinced that the whole thing was a scheme. They knew that a lot of folks would think they had won the television. That got them there. Then the high pressure sales would catch some percentage of those who took the bait. What a system!
I think these offers went on for years on the basis of baiting people with the promise of a great prize, when the actual prize was not quite what you had in mind. One acquaintance of mine, who happens to love boats, received an offer that involved the prize of a sailboat. After the pitch, he asked about it and was told that they would mail it to him. How do you mail a sailboat? Turns out, it was a blow-up raft.
Another acquaintance received an offer promising a five piece entertainment system. He got a walkman, headphones, and three batteries.
Eventually, though, enough people apparently got skeptical about these tactics, and the sales people had to up the ante a bit. My further experiences did involve somewhat better prizes, but the experience itself was still very negative.
The next specific experience I remember involved a condominium that was located in my favorite vacation location – Orange Beach Alabama. We were contacted via the telephone and asked to come to the presentation with the promise of two nights at a nice hotel, a thirty dollar gift certificate to one of various restaurants, and perhaps another prize or two – I do not entirely recall. We did receive these prizes, and did enjoy them very much. My wife and I had a wonderful weekend. The gift certificate we received was even from our favorite restaurant. No complaints here.
However, the sales pitch itself was simply awful. One thing that has changed considerably from the earlier years of timeshare condominiums and vacation resorts is that now you essentially buy into the system where you can stay at resorts virtually anywhere in the world. Without going into the specific details of this particular deal (I don’t really remember them anyway), suffice it to say that we spent about an hour and a half with this lady, and the cheapest product offered to us was in the neighborhood of fourteen thousand dollars. Apparently the lady took my interest in seeing one of the rooms as an actual interest in purchasing one. Everything was fine until I repeatedly made it clear we were not buying. The last thing the lady did was very nastily say "Well, you shouldn’t take any more free vacations!!" That hacked me off!
That experience was in November, 2001. I specifically remember it because it was on the day of the University of Alabama’s last victory over Auburn in football! Only recently have I had another experience.
We had an opportunity to spend a week in Branson, Missouri free of charge at a condo of a friend. During the week their sales department called the room and offered me one hundred twenty dollars cash on the spot to listen to their pitch. Short on cash, I agreed. Basically the same pitch was given once again. Vacation paradises all over the world were mine for the asking. However, shortly into the process, our lady realized she did not have a sale. They were obligated to spend an hour and a half with us. She started basically going through the motions. It was somewhat humourous. Finally, she said, "All I can offer you is thus and so and the cost is, gulp, fifty three thousand dollars. I am quite sure that you are not interested in that, are you?" Of course we were not. Not only this, though, but they could finance this fifty three grand at credit card rates for us. Yippee!!! "However," she continued, "I’ll call John. He is authorized to give you some alternate opportunities."
Well, along came John. He was offering something quite less expensive. We were still pretty adamant that the answer was no. So, he told the original sales girl to go ahead and sign us out and get our prize. She left, and shortly thereafter an older friendly looking lady came over and began basically an exit interview. "Were you treated nicely?" "Do you understand our offers?" etc. But, slowly the questions began changing. "What is your reason for not purchasing with us today?" "On a scale of 1-10, how interested do you think you would be in buying in at some time in the future?" etc. Next thing I know, this friendly retired nurse was making the final push. She leaned over the table as if she was taking a chance telling us this and said "I’m authorized to give you this very special offer…." then went on to give one last ditch try to get us hooked. This was apparently some sort of a trial offer for only about twenty five hundred dollars. After wrestling with her for a few minutes, she finally gave up the ghost, gave me my cash, and let me go. I hated every minute of it, but I guess a hundred and twenty dollars for less than two hours of work is a pretty good rate!
Now, all of this so far has been a brief description of my experiences, but, analytical mind that I am, my real intent is to analyze in very broad and not too specific terms why one should never buy into one of these offers. It all boils down to simple economics. However, the majority of people today are totally uneducated in the field of economics. They are therefore apt to fall for something that ‘sounds’ like a good deal.
A great introductory book concerning economics is Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson. The ‘one lesson’ referred to in the title is essentially that, when considering economic policy, one has to look beyond what is immediately obvious at first glance as a short term limited result and look further and deeper to the longer term, wider impact. He then demonstrates how this works by examining a number of faulty economic premises in light of this one lesson. For example, minimum wage law in the immediate, short term, appears to have a very positive effect in that people, particularly poor people, can make more money. However, the wider, deeper, longer-term effects of minimum wage law are in fact quite damaging to the economy as a whole, and particularly to those at the lower economic levels. To see all of this takes some fairly deep and lengthy thought processes that may not be readily available to every person.
Now, were you of a lower economic status than most and your local politician offers to raise the minimum wage, you would most likely support him in his efforts. However, if someone educated you on the damages of minimum wage law and showed you that in the long run it would in fact bring harm to you, you would likely not support it. What you may need to get to the point of understanding this economic impact, though, is time to understand the arguments and think them through.
Now, in considering the vacation property offers we discussed above, the one thing that is absolutely not available is time to think. If reading this blog accomplishes absolutely nothing else than the following, I will be satisfied: Always be leery of any offer that sounds great, yet must be taken advantage of on the spot with no time for further consideration. Perhaps that can be considered "Personal Economics in One Lesson."
Every single time I have ever gone to one of these sales pitches, (including also the one from the gym) I have been told that I simply must take advantage of it right then. I had to buy while I was there. Virtually every time when I did not buy immediately, the seller began sweetening the pot with supposedly better offers, but the pot was never sweetened with time. I always asked for brochures, literature, and further information about the costs and benefits of the plan, and have yet to receive one single bit of information that I could take home and contemplate. At least once, maybe more, when I asked about further information was asked in return "Well, what information have we not already given you?" This is a stupid question. If I knew what information I had and did not have, I would not need to ask for more. The only thing that was ever shown me (and this is eerily similar to the multi level marketing scams) is a few numbers scratched on a piece of paper by the salesperson. And even this was not given to me to take home and consider. When all was said and done, I left with no information whatsoever. Please consider that fact before you buy into one of these deals.
So, the next time you go to one of these sales pitches be sure to ask yourself: "If this is such a wonderful opportunity for me, then why do they not allow me to see all the numbers and take it home and think about it for a few days?" If it is in fact a great deal, you could determine that yourself and you would likely come back to them with a purchase.
A lot could be said, and perhaps in another blog I will say more, about how to consider offers such as this should you ever have the information needed to analyze it. It is highly doubtful that you would ever receive that information from a salesperson of this sort, but the process of analysis can still be useful in multiple situations.
The long and the short of it, though, is this: With one of these deals you pay a large, very large, sum of money up front for the right of staying in a condo in the future. The latest one I went to allowed you to buy a certain size (one, two, three, or four bedroom) and a certain amount of time per year. Actually, even this was not so simple – you actually pay for a certain number of ‘points’ that can then be redeemed for certain amount of space and time per year. That is, of course, not explained in any detail, so you really do not know how much you have bought, nor do you know how much you will specifically need in the future. Therefore, you may be paying for a lot more than you need, or a lot less. You really do not know. But, once you pay this large sum, you have some certain amount of time and space in their condo resorts for some amount of time (even for a lifetime if you buy the lifetime package).
However, in addition to this, these things always have other charges that come up annually. These are usually refered to as ‘maintenance’ fees and are supposedly used for upkeep of the property. These things tend to have a way of starting out very cheap, then going up through the years. I know of people who have bought into these things and eventually their maintenance fees go up to hundreds of dollars per year.
Now, the only way to determine if you have saved money or lost money on such a deal would be for you to know and understand exactly what it is you have bought, exactly what your needs would be for the next so many years, know exactly what the rate of increase in vacation rental space would be, know exactly what the increase in your maintenance and any other fees would be, know how much interest you could make if you did not spend the large amount up front, etc. and then make a comparison. It is almost impossible for an average Joe or Jane to know all this, but I’ll bet the accountants working for the resort sales companies have a pretty good ideal!
But, as an example, say, you spent twenty five thousand dollars now, and began paying two hundred dollars annually in fees, but that these fees go up by fifty dollars each year. Now say you could get the same room for a week this year for a total of fifteen hundred dollars. Assume this goes up by five percent each year. So, comparing your two options, you could spend twenty five thousand dollars now, and two hundred plus dollars per year increasing by fifty dollars per year each year – OR – you could invest the twenty-five thousand in a savings account, get five percent per year and take your vacations from the money in that account. These rentals will cost you fifteen hundred dollars per year going up at a rate of five percent per year. Based on these assumptions (which may or may not be realistic – I just made them up) it would take at least twenty years to break even. That is, if you purchased this plan, it would take you over twenty years to start actually saving money. Less than twenty years and you would have actually come out cheaper not buying the condo and instead just renting for a week each year. This analysis does not even consider the economic impact if you bought in and had to finance the deal at essentially credit card rates.
Now, in twenty years a lot could happen. You may lose a job, have an illness, or other financial hardship. Would you have rather spent that money on still future potential vacations, or would you rather have invested that money? What if you, or your spouse, or both, passed away ten years from now? Was that a wise investment? Essentially what you are doing on one of these offers is paying for future vacations way ahead of time. That is almost never a wise thing to do (unless you are the seller of such a plan). Would you go down to the local car dealership, and pay him twenty five thousand dollars for a car you will get twenty years from now – even if that car is then worth fifty thousand dollars? I think not. Why would you do this with rental property?
Now, it is certainly possible that some people get in at the right time, have many years worth of vacations, and in the end, spend less than they would have otherwise. In most cases this is very doubtful, but it is inevitable that a few come out very good. I am sure the sellers of the condos know and understand this. But, I can guarantee you this one thing: We have only touched on the economics of doing this. The companies that market these deals have paid experts looking at the economics of it. Do you think they have your economic security or their profit in mind? I have absolutely nothing against a company making a profit. I want to make a profit. But, these guys make huge profits by, in my opinion, defrauding their customers. They make you think that you have just gotten the deal of the century, when in fact, they are laughing all the way to the bank. You or I may not be able to fully grasp and analyze the economic impact of a deal such as this but I assure you that the selling company knows the general economic impact for the bulk of their sales. Think about that before you buy into such a deal.
In the end never ever buy into anything that you do not fully understand the terms of the deal, especially if information on the terms is not forthcoming and time is not given to analyze the terms.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Music Recommendation
Okay, for the first installment, I’ll go just a tad off the beaten path. This recommendation is for anyone who thinks they may like some country music, but just can’t hardly stand to listen to the local country music stations. I guess that just about describes me! The artist I recommend is one I have never actually heard on any of my local stations even one time in my life! I did hear him one time while traveling. I was in south Texas, I think near Beaumont to be exact, and heard a song of his along with numerous others that I had never heard locally before. I guess in Texas everything is bigger – even the variety heard on the radio.
However, as a songwriter he has numerous tunes that have been recorded by many others. One in particular is almost universally known in American music. It has been recorded by many people including instrumental versions by Chet Atkins. In a totally different genre it was recorded by Sammy Davis, Jr. The most widely known version, though, was recorded in the early 1970s by The Nitty Gritty Dirt Band. The song? Mr. Bojangles. The artist? Jerry Jeff Walker.
Jerry Jeff is a very unique performer. It is widely assumed that he is a native of Texas, since that has sorta been his home base for decades. He has been a major player on the Austin music and songwriting scene for quite some time. He belongs to an eclectic group of singer/songwriters that include such notables as Billy Joe Shaver, Donnie Fritts, Ray Wiley Hubbard, Gary P. Nunn and many others.
However, oddly enough, he is actually native to New Jersey. He transplanted eventually to Texas after spending a fair amount of his early years in New Orleans – a not so small amount of which was spent in the local lockup. It was on one of these overnight stays at the New Orleans "Hilton" that he met the inspiration for his most famous song (Bojangles).
Now, actually my exposure to his music is somewhat limited. There are tons of artists about whom I could comment on their craft with more detail. I do plan on getting deeper into the JJW catalogue in the future as I am able because I thoroughly enjoy what I am familiar with.
I first heard his name as a teenager. My childhood neighbor and friend had a much older brother who had something of an affinity for both JJW and DAC (David Allen Coe) For years I basically linked these two tri-named artists and their music together. I actually became more familiar with DAC earlier than I did JJW. Actually, though, the two are quite different and I may be wrong, but I do not think they are really that closely to be associated – either artistically or personally. After years I will definitely say that DACs music (and personality or lack thereof) has more than worn thin. I really do not care that much for it. DAC seems to be a total jerk, a drunk, rude, crude, singer songwriter doing somewhat crude, sometimes humorous, sometimes annoying, somewhat edgy, outlaw country. JJW could be described (it seems to me) in much the same way – except that (and of course I do not know either one personally) he does not strike me as a jerk at all. Maybe he is a pretty good guy who writes and sings somewhat crude, sometimes humorous, sometimes annoying, somewhat edgy, outlaw country.
Before getting specific briefly, another associate of JJWs should be mentioned. Early in both of their attempts at stardom, JJW and Jimmy Buffet hooked up somehow or another and have apparently been friends ever since. JJW briefly had a television show on the country music network back in the late 1980s early 1990s and I once saw it where Buffett was his guest. The two obviously had a marvelously fun time recounting stories from their, um, colorful youth and singing their own and each others songs. The two collaborated on the song Railroad Lady which appeared on Buffett’s first major label album (A White Sport Coat and a Pink Crustacian) This song has also been performed by Willie Nelson (It is at the least on his Greatest Hits and Some That Will Be Album). I have to wonder if this song was the inspiration to the line from the Waylon and Willie hit Luckenbach Texas that goes as follows:
…Between the Hank Williams pain songs
And Jerry Jeff’s train songs
And Blue Eyes Crying in the Rain…
Now, my early exposure to his music is twofold. When I was sixteen, had a vehicle and a cassette tape player, the first two tapes I bought were Hank Williams, Jr.’s Habits Old and New (still my favorite HWJ work) and JJWs Ridin High. I bought this on a whim, in a bargain bin, only because I had heard about him from my neighbor. It is a good mixture of both uptempo and slow songs; silly and serious songs; his own songs and others (he does Willie Nelsons Pick up the Tempo, among others.) Like another totally different favorite of mine (Van Morrison) JJW seems to frequently sing about the woes of the business end music business, what they expect out of you, what they try to do to you, and so forth. Both the first and last song on this tape was just such a jab at the music industry. The opening number Public Domain has what is to me a memorable line:
I took a bite of the Big Apple
And I dabbled in that forbidden fruit
Oh oh they promised me points
And then they slipped me skinny joints
And I’ve yet to see me any loot
From that man in the high heeled Gucci shoes
The last number is the interestingly worded Pissin’ in the Wind which describes the difficulty of actually making a record his way.
I still have the original cassette and listen to it occasionally.
My next very short exposure to JJWs music came not long afterwards. I made another bargain basement purchase called Kickin Country which was a quirky collection of mostly little known throwaway numbers by a collection of both big stars as well as little knowns. Here was Walker’s live version of the infamous Up Against the Wall Redneck Mother. Gary P. Nunn does the spoken middle part and also announces at the commencement of the song that "This song is by Ray Wiley Hubbard." Pretty good hardcore country humor!
It was almost two decades before I heard much else, but when traveling with a friend in the late 1990s I got to listen to his copy of Great Gonzos: The Best of JJW. It had Redneck Mother and a song or two from Riding High along with 10-12 others, both of his own as well as other writers. It included a live version of Mr. Bojangles, and, interestingly enough, Nunn singing his own most famous tune live (apparently with JJW and band backing him up) – London Homesick Blues. If you think you’ve never heard this famous tune before, I’ll bet you’re wrong – at least if you’re much of a music fan. For years this was the theme song from the PBS show "Austin City Limits." The oft repeated chorus goes
I wanna go home with the Armadillos
Pick Country music from Amarillo and Abilene
With the friendliest people and the prettiest women you’ve ever seen.
Sound familiar?
At any rate, there really is not a bad song on this one. His version of (I think Shaver’s but I’m not sure) L.A. Freeway is excellent. Also included are the baudy, drunken Sangria Wine (the song I heard on Beumont Radio); Charley Dunn (about JJWs bootmaker in Texas); the classically moving Backsliders Wine; Easy Come and Easy Go (another stab at the process of making records); and Takin it as it Comes.
I highly recommend getting this album to anyone not familiar with JJWs music. There are 2-3 "best of" type collections out there and each one of them has something valuable the others don’t, but all of them have at least some of the essentials. This one, while not complete, seems to be the closest thing to complete. From there, if you like it, you can go further. I can only recommend Riding High, but I hope in the future to add to this collection.
Click here to see Ray Wiley Hubbard at JJWs 65th Birthday Bash describing the story behind "Up Against the Wall Redneck Mother". That is JJW beside him laughing through most of it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E24C4NY0ga8
The next two are JJW on the Dinah Shore Show with Don Meredith in the 1970s. He sings LA Freeway and MR. Bojangles (Norman Fell from "Three's Company" is on the second one briefly!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClHY2PEsw14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD4RD8vlqVQ&mode=related&search=
However, as a songwriter he has numerous tunes that have been recorded by many others. One in particular is almost universally known in American music. It has been recorded by many people including instrumental versions by Chet Atkins. In a totally different genre it was recorded by Sammy Davis, Jr. The most widely known version, though, was recorded in the early 1970s by The Nitty Gritty Dirt Band. The song? Mr. Bojangles. The artist? Jerry Jeff Walker.
Jerry Jeff is a very unique performer. It is widely assumed that he is a native of Texas, since that has sorta been his home base for decades. He has been a major player on the Austin music and songwriting scene for quite some time. He belongs to an eclectic group of singer/songwriters that include such notables as Billy Joe Shaver, Donnie Fritts, Ray Wiley Hubbard, Gary P. Nunn and many others.
However, oddly enough, he is actually native to New Jersey. He transplanted eventually to Texas after spending a fair amount of his early years in New Orleans – a not so small amount of which was spent in the local lockup. It was on one of these overnight stays at the New Orleans "Hilton" that he met the inspiration for his most famous song (Bojangles).
Now, actually my exposure to his music is somewhat limited. There are tons of artists about whom I could comment on their craft with more detail. I do plan on getting deeper into the JJW catalogue in the future as I am able because I thoroughly enjoy what I am familiar with.
I first heard his name as a teenager. My childhood neighbor and friend had a much older brother who had something of an affinity for both JJW and DAC (David Allen Coe) For years I basically linked these two tri-named artists and their music together. I actually became more familiar with DAC earlier than I did JJW. Actually, though, the two are quite different and I may be wrong, but I do not think they are really that closely to be associated – either artistically or personally. After years I will definitely say that DACs music (and personality or lack thereof) has more than worn thin. I really do not care that much for it. DAC seems to be a total jerk, a drunk, rude, crude, singer songwriter doing somewhat crude, sometimes humorous, sometimes annoying, somewhat edgy, outlaw country. JJW could be described (it seems to me) in much the same way – except that (and of course I do not know either one personally) he does not strike me as a jerk at all. Maybe he is a pretty good guy who writes and sings somewhat crude, sometimes humorous, sometimes annoying, somewhat edgy, outlaw country.
Before getting specific briefly, another associate of JJWs should be mentioned. Early in both of their attempts at stardom, JJW and Jimmy Buffet hooked up somehow or another and have apparently been friends ever since. JJW briefly had a television show on the country music network back in the late 1980s early 1990s and I once saw it where Buffett was his guest. The two obviously had a marvelously fun time recounting stories from their, um, colorful youth and singing their own and each others songs. The two collaborated on the song Railroad Lady which appeared on Buffett’s first major label album (A White Sport Coat and a Pink Crustacian) This song has also been performed by Willie Nelson (It is at the least on his Greatest Hits and Some That Will Be Album). I have to wonder if this song was the inspiration to the line from the Waylon and Willie hit Luckenbach Texas that goes as follows:
…Between the Hank Williams pain songs
And Jerry Jeff’s train songs
And Blue Eyes Crying in the Rain…
Now, my early exposure to his music is twofold. When I was sixteen, had a vehicle and a cassette tape player, the first two tapes I bought were Hank Williams, Jr.’s Habits Old and New (still my favorite HWJ work) and JJWs Ridin High. I bought this on a whim, in a bargain bin, only because I had heard about him from my neighbor. It is a good mixture of both uptempo and slow songs; silly and serious songs; his own songs and others (he does Willie Nelsons Pick up the Tempo, among others.) Like another totally different favorite of mine (Van Morrison) JJW seems to frequently sing about the woes of the business end music business, what they expect out of you, what they try to do to you, and so forth. Both the first and last song on this tape was just such a jab at the music industry. The opening number Public Domain has what is to me a memorable line:
I took a bite of the Big Apple
And I dabbled in that forbidden fruit
Oh oh they promised me points
And then they slipped me skinny joints
And I’ve yet to see me any loot
From that man in the high heeled Gucci shoes
The last number is the interestingly worded Pissin’ in the Wind which describes the difficulty of actually making a record his way.
I still have the original cassette and listen to it occasionally.
My next very short exposure to JJWs music came not long afterwards. I made another bargain basement purchase called Kickin Country which was a quirky collection of mostly little known throwaway numbers by a collection of both big stars as well as little knowns. Here was Walker’s live version of the infamous Up Against the Wall Redneck Mother. Gary P. Nunn does the spoken middle part and also announces at the commencement of the song that "This song is by Ray Wiley Hubbard." Pretty good hardcore country humor!
It was almost two decades before I heard much else, but when traveling with a friend in the late 1990s I got to listen to his copy of Great Gonzos: The Best of JJW. It had Redneck Mother and a song or two from Riding High along with 10-12 others, both of his own as well as other writers. It included a live version of Mr. Bojangles, and, interestingly enough, Nunn singing his own most famous tune live (apparently with JJW and band backing him up) – London Homesick Blues. If you think you’ve never heard this famous tune before, I’ll bet you’re wrong – at least if you’re much of a music fan. For years this was the theme song from the PBS show "Austin City Limits." The oft repeated chorus goes
I wanna go home with the Armadillos
Pick Country music from Amarillo and Abilene
With the friendliest people and the prettiest women you’ve ever seen.
Sound familiar?
At any rate, there really is not a bad song on this one. His version of (I think Shaver’s but I’m not sure) L.A. Freeway is excellent. Also included are the baudy, drunken Sangria Wine (the song I heard on Beumont Radio); Charley Dunn (about JJWs bootmaker in Texas); the classically moving Backsliders Wine; Easy Come and Easy Go (another stab at the process of making records); and Takin it as it Comes.
I highly recommend getting this album to anyone not familiar with JJWs music. There are 2-3 "best of" type collections out there and each one of them has something valuable the others don’t, but all of them have at least some of the essentials. This one, while not complete, seems to be the closest thing to complete. From there, if you like it, you can go further. I can only recommend Riding High, but I hope in the future to add to this collection.
Click here to see Ray Wiley Hubbard at JJWs 65th Birthday Bash describing the story behind "Up Against the Wall Redneck Mother". That is JJW beside him laughing through most of it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E24C4NY0ga8
The next two are JJW on the Dinah Shore Show with Don Meredith in the 1970s. He sings LA Freeway and MR. Bojangles (Norman Fell from "Three's Company" is on the second one briefly!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClHY2PEsw14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD4RD8vlqVQ&mode=related&search=
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Music recommendation of the week - Intro
I thought I'd write just a minute about a few eclectic musical interests. First off, let me say that what I like is rock, blues, country, etc. However, at the same time, I am not really into most of the junk that comes on the radio. Maybe about a fourth of what you may hear on the classic rock stations is good. Maybe a tenth of what comes on most country stations is good.
There are some other musical forms that I like somewhat. It is funny that some of the stuff that I hated at the time it came out, I kinda like now. One example is some of the dance music of the 70s. Don't get me wrong. Disco IS dead and I AM glad! However, a few of those numbers do hold up and make for excellent music for dancing and frolicking in such instances as wedding receptions, etc.
I also like some jazz, some folk, some classical, and others. However, for the most part with these other forms, I do not know enough about it to say "I like" this or that in particular. When I hear jazz that I like, I know I like it, but I can't run down a list of artists or songs or particular forms or styles of jazz and say "This is what I like." I just know it when I hear it. Same for classical and others.
Now, with a very very few exceptions I hate all of the following forms of music: Heavy heavy metal (sure I like a little bit of ACDC, or Sabbath, etc, but none of this modern death metal crapola); Rap, Opera. Now there's a mix. Metal, rap, and opera. Can't stand to listen to any of them!
With that in mind, I'll start trying to post something musically related at least once per week or so.
There are some other musical forms that I like somewhat. It is funny that some of the stuff that I hated at the time it came out, I kinda like now. One example is some of the dance music of the 70s. Don't get me wrong. Disco IS dead and I AM glad! However, a few of those numbers do hold up and make for excellent music for dancing and frolicking in such instances as wedding receptions, etc.
I also like some jazz, some folk, some classical, and others. However, for the most part with these other forms, I do not know enough about it to say "I like" this or that in particular. When I hear jazz that I like, I know I like it, but I can't run down a list of artists or songs or particular forms or styles of jazz and say "This is what I like." I just know it when I hear it. Same for classical and others.
Now, with a very very few exceptions I hate all of the following forms of music: Heavy heavy metal (sure I like a little bit of ACDC, or Sabbath, etc, but none of this modern death metal crapola); Rap, Opera. Now there's a mix. Metal, rap, and opera. Can't stand to listen to any of them!
With that in mind, I'll start trying to post something musically related at least once per week or so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
