An Aesthetically-Burdened Theology

Man, as made in the image of God, is a connoisseur of beauty. Every eminent feature of the created order is reflective of the perfections of God; hence, it is but fitting for man to appreciate His various creaturely analogies. However, when the comeliness of natural revelation begins to impose upon one's apprehension of special revelation, problems arise.

Somehow, the recent anomalies of "conversions" to Rome by prominent names in Reformed circles are instances of a specific kind of swimming goggles already worn years in advance, even before the Tiber was actually swum. A certain predisposition to beauty, commingled with religious convictions, lends these people weak to the transcendent, and what is it that Roman pomp and pageantry offer but the transcendent mediated through architecture and ritual. Given the almost irresistible tug of these sense-pleasers, the mind, and the theology it once held dear and defended, give in and conform (mutate), in accommodation to the aesthetic presupposition.

But are we promised grace from the both-immanent-and-transcendent God through such means? No. The presumptuously immanentistic trajectory of the low-church modern evangelical is no better countered by the awe-inspiring transcendentalism of the high-church Romanist.

But how is grace from God mediated to His worshippers? Through the Word of God.

The Word of God is communicated to God's people as grace through its faithful preaching and its proper administration as the Sacraments (the tangible/material Word).

I think it is in keeping with the humility of God that present age grace is delivered in a package of meekness, i.e., weak and faltering human ministers and the mundaneness of water, bread, and wine. However, thrill-seekers will not be disappointed at the glory and grandeur that will accompany Christ's second coming—something that will reduce today's incredible cathedrals to yesterday's crumbled bastions of idolatry.

But that is for a future day. Today, those faithful to the Gospel must content themselves with the beauty of holiness as it is presented in a run-down church.

Machen on the Perichoresis Between Evangelism and Apologetics

Getting on a street corner (or the other side of the globe), oozing with enthusiasm, is not enough. J. Gresham Machen explains why:

"We are all agreed that at least one great function of the Church is the conversion of individual men. The missionary movement is the great religious movement of our day. Now it is perfectly true that men must be brought to Christ one by one. There are no labor-saving devices in evangelism. It is all hand-work.And yet it would be a great mistake to suppose that all men are equally well prepared to receive the gospel. It is true that the decisive thing is the regenerative power of God. That can overcome all lack of preparation, and the absence of that makes even the best preparation useless. But as a matter of fact God usually exerts that power in connection with certain prior conditions of the human mind, and it should be ours to create, so far as we can, with the help of God, those favorable conditions for the reception of the gospel. False ideas are the greatest obstacles to the reception of the gospel. We may preach with all the fervor of a reformer and yet succeed only in winning a straggler here and there, if we permit the whole collective thought of the nation or of the world to be controlled by ideas which, by the resistless force of logic, prevent Christianity from being regarded as anything more than a harmless delusion. Under such circumstances, what God desires us to do is to destroy the obstacle at its root.....What is today a matter of academic speculation begins tomorrow to move armies and pull down empires. In that second stage, it has gone too far to be combatted; the time to stop it was when it was still a matter of impassionate debate. So as Christians we should try to mold the thought of the world in such a way as to make the acceptance of Christianity something more than a logical absurdity.....Is it not far easier to be an earnest Christian if you confine your attention to the Bible and do not risk being led astray by the thought of the world? We answer, of course it is easier. Shut yourself up in an intellectual monastery, do not disturb yourself with the thoughts of unregenerate men, and of course you will find it easier to be a Christian, just as it is easier to be a good soldier in comfortable winter quarters than it is on the field of battle. You save your own soul—but the Lord's enemies remain in possession of the field." (J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Culture)

Reformed Rap

There's this discussion over at The Reformed Pinoy about whether "Christian rap" is permissible in the context of the corporate worship of the church.

The Reformed Regulative Principle of Worship immediately informs us that the biblical reply is No.

Simply put, the RPW is sola scriptura applied to the corporate worship of God's people during the Sabbath assembly. It is not that, where Scripture is silent, we are free to devise our own schemes as pertaining to the elements of worship, but that we are to implement only those which Scripture explicitly mandates.

The elements of worship consist substantially of the Word of God and formally of the Word preached, the Word prayed, the Word sung, and the Word eaten and drunk. The circumstances of worship are those peripherals that do not impinge upon the nature and character of the dialog that ensues between God and His people (marked by reverence, awe, and humility), such as the building where the assembly is held, microphones, pews, etc. It is a universal phenomenon, and not cultural, that heavy, crunching guitars, slamming drums, and screaming (or rapping) vocals do not make for reverential, awe-struck, and humble expression.

Click here for the biblical arguments for RPW, and here for Calvin's take on worship.

Now that I'm at it, here's how a "Reformed rap" might look like (my own "composition"):

Hey, everybody, have you got a flowah
That changes lives, ooooh, what a powah
Comin' from mah homies, number one is Piper
But he's Baptistic, ooooh, makes me shudder

TULIP is the flowah everybody's pickin'
Even heretics, just look at Rick Warren
It's so cool, jump on the bandwagon
Just so you know, that's not the Reformation

TULIP! TULIP! TU-TU-TU-TULIP!
Not the Reformation
TULIP! TULIP! TU-TU-TU-TULIP!
Just look at Rick Warren
TULIP! TULIP! TU-TU-TU-TULIP!
Number one is Piper
TULIP! TULIP! TU-TU-TU-TULIP!
Ooooh, it makes me shudder

(Repeat indefinitely until crowd frenzy ensues)

Doing Church

Contrast the rantings of this "young, restless, and reformed," Emergent type on his ideals for "doing church" with this treatment of the marks of a true church by Dr. R.S. Clark.

There are three marks of a true church:

1.) The whole counsel of God is preached (Law and Gospel).

2.) The sacraments are faithfully administered.

3.) Discipline is enforced among the membership.

The YRR guy may claim compliance to the first two marks, but his 8th point leaves more to be desired as it relates to the third mark:

"8. If you think this will be a nice little church that stays the same size, where everybody knows your name and you have my cell number on speed dial and we have a picnic lunch together every week (By God’s grace, we want to grow)."

How can discipline be enforced in the form of submission to the rule of elders, as these elders dispense of their God-ordained duties, when anonymity is encouraged and accountability frowned upon? He says they want to grow? By growth it seems is meant the bursting at the seams in terms of population when genuine fellowship then proves impossible.

He does get one thing right, though: I certainly wouldn't want to join his church.

The Inspiration of Inspiration

If the Scripture be of divine inspiration,
then be exhorted to,

Study the Scripture.
Prize the written Word.
Believe it.
Love the written Word.
Conform to it.
Contend for it.
Be thankful to God for it.

Adore God's distinguishing grace, if you have felt the power and authority of the Word upon your conscience.

— Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity, 34-38.

Some Theobloggers on Preaching

I came across the following blog posts, written by stellar theologians, on the topic of preaching:

A Teaser on Preaching
The Mystery Source Is....
More on Barthian preaching
Preaching again...
Slouching to Bethlehem
Running to Bethlehem
Don't Disagree but....

You have to read them in the same order as they are posted here for the message's coherence to be maintained.

Initially, we have Carl Trueman quoting Karl Barth's polemic against boring and unbiblical preaching. He rightly asserts the juxtaposition of Osteenian speech-making to biblical preaching. But then he inserts a light jab at supposedly "entertainment-driven" preachers that are "confessional in subscription", the latter ascription I take to mean confessionally Reformed. Not content with rightly pointing out the errors of unbiblical and pragmatic/entertainment-driven preaching, Trueman then proceeds to rail against redemptive-historical preaching. Derek Thomas joins him in bewailing the "Reformed error" of being too hung-up on trying to squeeze Christ out of the biblical text, describing most manifestations of this exercise as "flat." Somehow, all this reminds me of Trueman's prior debate with Graeme Goldsworthy, wherein he tries to pit systematic theology against biblical theology, with his dog being the former, and with Goldsworthy counting him out in the corner with the former's rightful insistence that the relationship between the two theological disciplines is perichoretic.

Sean Lucas then comes into the picture, injecting the anti-venom to what has become a toxic mix of what I would consider as a caricaturing of what Reformed preaching is about. Lucas justifiably brings what it means to be a herald of the Gospel to the forefront by reminding us that the whole of Scripture speaks of Christ and of what God has done, is doing, and will do in redemptive history through Him, and that this is to be the crux of all Gospel preaching—indeed, all preaching! Trueman inquires that must this be the be-all and end-all, a confounding of the indicative with the imperative? To that I would remark that the Gospel is the foundation of all truly God-pleasing responses to the imperatives. Anything less is legalism or moralism.

The Word of God Creates

While it is indeed the profession of many Christians that the Bible is the inspired and inerrant Word of God, the essence and luminosity of the latter phrase has somehow lost its shine and sheen. These days, one can find Scripture being used in all sorts of ways as a "guide" to many schemes: from getting rich, to staying healthy, to developing leadership savvy, all the way to attracting a prospective mate!

In light of these misappropriations,

"...we will also have to recover the Reformation view that the Word of God is not only a canon that regulates our beliefs and practices...but that it is actually alive, accomplishing everything God intends. While upholding the reliability and authority of Scripture, conservative Evangelicalism has tended to reduce God's Word to a sourcebook for timeless doctrinal and ethical laws, missing the crucial point that the Bible itself underscores from Genesis to Revelation: namely, that God's speaking is acting, and this acting is not only descriptive but creative. God's Word is authoritative not only because of what it is (God's utterance), but because of what it does (God's utterance).

The Word of God written and preached is not simply legally authoritative and binding, but is the primary means of grace, through which the Spirit ordinarily creates communion with Christ and therefore the communion of saints: ekklesia. In other words, in this conception, the Word is not merely something that stands over us. It is also 'the implanted word' (James 1:21) that 'abides in you' (1 John 2:14), and is to 'dwell in you richly' (Col. 3:16). 'So then faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of Christ' (Rom. 10:16).

Thus the Word is not only the church's norm for faith and practice, but the primary means of grace, often referred to as the 'sacramental Word.' Although there can be no saving, personal, covenantal encounter apart from information and assertions of fact, the Word in this sense is much more 'living and active' than that. It not only tells us what God has done; it does what God tells.

Life is found only in God, located in Christ, mediated by his Word. Specifically, the gospel is that part of God's Word that gives life. Not everything that God says is saving. Sometimes God's speech brings judgment, disaster, fear, warning, and dread, Calvin reminds us. God's majesty is so terrifying that we would either be overwhelmed with despair or driven to idolatry and self-justification in an attempt to avoid the God who actually exists. The only safe route, therefore, is to receive the Father through the incarnate Son. Christ is the saving content of Scripture, the substance of its canonical unity. Calvin notes, 'This is the true knowledge of Christ: if we take him as he is offered by the Father, namely, clothed with his gospel. For as he himself has been designated the goal of our faith, so we shall not run straight to him unless the gospel leads the way.'

As Christ gives himself to us through creaturely elements of water, bread, and wine, so too he gives through the words of Scripture and the proclamation that is derived from it. As with baptism and the Supper, the Spirit creates a bond between the sign (proclamation of the gospel) and the reality signified (Christ and all his benefits). That is why the Heidelberg Catechism (Q. 65) answers the question, 'Where does this true faith come from?' by saying, 'The Holy Spirit creates it in our hearts by the preaching of the holy gospel and confirms it by the use of the holy sacraments.' Through such preaching, sinners are actually reconciled to God."

— Dr. Michael S. Horton, 'Creature of the Word' (A Liberating Captivity), Modern Reformation, March/April 2007.

The Primacy of Preaching

I had this well-meaning and sincere, though misguided, individual tell me one time that the "praise and worship" part of the service was the most important one since it was the part that ushered the people into God's presence. Of course, such a notion is more in keeping with revivalism's modus operandi of stroking man's fleshly appetite for excitement and immediate experience than it is grounded on biblical doctrine—and the only thing that it really ushers people into is an adrenaline rush!

This mentality acutely reflects the sad state of modern Evangelicalism in how it has completely missed the fact of the dialogical nature of the worship service: God speaks; we listen and respond in worship, humility, and gratitude, and are sanctified by the spoken Word. What you have in most Evangelical Sunday services is a pop-rock concert in the beginning, a self-help, pseudo-psychological talk in the middle, and an encore of the previous "music ministry" performance in the end. God's Word in Scripture, if ever used at all, come in sporadic bursts of verses here and there that are forced to concur with the speaker's agenda, thereby stripping the text of its intended meaning, stifling the work of the Spirit in His sacramental function of quickening the Word, and robbing the people of blessing.

It is the preacher's job and mandate to be a scholar of Scripture for God speaks to His people through the preached Word. This is the most important part of the worship service. Let no one delude you into thinking otherwise.

"God thinks preaching is much more important than most people do. For God, it is not just verbal 'filler' in a Sunday worship service. Neither is it the sharing of
one’s experiences designed to inspire and stimulate those of others. Nor is it a nicely organized talk, complete with PowerPoint slides, intending to inform people of '10 ways to become more spiritual.' (I never found a text in Scripture that contained 10 practical ways to do anything!) Rather, the words of the preacher are to echo the words of his text, and, when faithful to that text of Scripture, contain 'the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes.' As Paul writes elsewhere:

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to
preach the gospel….For the message of the
cross is foolishness to those who are perishing,
but to us who are being saved it is the power of
God (1 Cor. 1:17-18).

You’ll need to contend with that whether or not you are called to preach. If you are, tremble! What you will declare with your lips is the redeeming energy of God Himself. If you are not called to preach, assigned instead to join God’s people as they hear faithful preaching and give it fleshly form in their obedience, take that task seriously too. God’s Word brings life or death. Remember the sobering words of the apostle, admonishing preacher and hearer alike:

For we are to God the aroma of Christ among
those who are being saved and those who are
perishing. To the one we are the smell of death;
to the other the fragrance of life. And who is
equal to such a task? (2 Cor. 2:15-16).

Who indeed?"

— Dr. John R. Sittema, 'Called to Preach', 15—16