Mullet Theology: Blessing or Curse

Peggy and Joey on Halloween Night outside Rust Restaurant in Clarksdale, MS.

By PONTIFICUS MINIMUS

CLARKSDALE, Mississippi

What say ye Pontificus? Mullet theology? Doth thou jest or are thou creating a new belief about God? Neither one my fair friend, I am merely proposing a contemporary name for the centuries old quest for the answer to many a Christian’s dilemma: Who is right, Reformation man or Renaissance man? Mullet theology combines a little of both.

Pontificus wears a t-shirt with a picture on the front of a guy with a mullet, in nice black raised velvet. It says, “Business in the front, party in the back.” The mullet was a hairstyle that was short in the front and sides, and long in the back. Don’t laugh, many 70’s and 80’s icons–both male and female–sported these awesome hairdos. There was and still is no shortage of mullets in the Deep South. Think Joe Dirt.

Reformation man would generally hold to a more sanctified view of theology: Do not be influenced by or flirt with the things of the world that are antithetical to scripture. Be separate from those who do not adhere to one’s interpretation of scripture and keep oneself blameless, pure and undefiled from a Godless world.

Renaissance-minded Christians would embrace modern media to tempt an audience to be more open-minded and explorative. They would use modern tools like television and the Internet to reach people with their message. They view the arts and their expression as being not only utilitarian, but as an expression of the human spirit as designed by God.

Two messages, two types of folks: Renaissance man and Reformation man. The first often relies on media to convey expressions–both nouveau and historical. The latter places more emphasis on his or her message than any particular medium. Both extremes rarely see eye to eye. The Renaissance guy or gal has the means to disseminate meaning and the Reformation folks often tout a message with more gravitas.

Pontificus has been on both sides of the fence and acutely understands both camps and their message. However, he would like to see a marriage of the two to the degree that it is biblical, efficacious, and freedom-of-expression valuing.

Pontificus and his alter ego Poor Willam believe a bibical synthesis of the two might just be the ticket in America. Of course, if it is biblical, then it is right, but how often do different denominations, churches, or individuals quarrel about the meaning of the same scriptures?

Maybe mullet theology is not a bad idea. Let’s just define it as, “Love the Lord and do what is right by others in the front, and have a ball being yourself and pursue your passion in the back!” Vaya con Dios! PM

WE HIGHLY ENCOURAGE COMMENTS!!!