MENU

Culture
Category

On July 7, 2020 By In Culture, Worship

Why We will Not Stop Singing

It would have been almost impossible to imagine a few months ago that we would be where we are today. Viruses and viral police stories have become the catalysts to bring to the surface deeper spiritual issues within the culture.   Equally difficult is to anticipate all the ways these crises will affect our life and culture in the days to come. One of the interesting effects of COVID-19 up to this point is the way in which we gather to worship as God’s people. Not only has it forced us to worship differently as the body of Christ, but it has stirred many questions regarding the way in which we are to worship. Living in a nation that was built upon the principle of religious freedom, the church in America has not had to wrestle much with the tension between faithfulness to God in worship and obedience to the State as citizens. That tension is quickly and inevitably tightening.

A recent example of this growing antithesis can be found, unsurprisingly, in California. It started several weeks ago with the suggestion from various sources that Christians should consider not singing within the corporate worship gatherings. The suggestion itself was not altogether surprising given the ignorance and obstinacy of the culture. But the fact that some churches and individual Christians actually considered such a suggestion should have been astounding. Now the soft, steady beat of suggestion and persuasion has risen to sound more like the drums of war. 

Speaking of war, I am the first to caution my brothers and sisters in Christ against the temptation to fight every battle, to make every bump a hill to die on. If Christ indeed rose from the dead and ascended into heaven to sit down at the right hand of the Father, if He is truly and presently ruling over all creation as King of kings and Lord of lords, then I think Christians should respond to the worldings around us from a position of strength. We have the high ground of truth. We are not called to live in a defensive position, reacting to the thorns and thistles that poke and prod us as we go. 

So when someone, well-meaning or otherwise, suggests to us that maybe refraining from singing in our worship services would be wise and considerate, the proper response should be nothing more than a dismissive chuckle. It should be the same kind of response you would give to the suggestion that air-borne illnesses would disappear if we all just started holding our breath. 

For the Christian, one who is not only created in the image of the Triune God but is being conformed into the image of the Son and is indwelt by the life-giving Spirit, singing is as natural as breathing. We should no more be able to stop singing than fish can stop swimming. If you see a fish that is no longer swimming, it is not going to be a fish very much longer. Its fish-life is either ebbing away or gone altogether. Christians sing together because it is in our very nature to do so. To cease from singing is to cease from being. I don’t care how ridiculous that might sound to the “wise fools” who pretend to sit in judgment over such things. 

However, there are fights worth fighting. There are hills upon which we can and must be willing to die. And when silly suggestions grow into perverse requirements, the people of God must remain steadfast in our faith, knowing that compromise and capitulation to our thornbush leaders would result in the life being choked out of us. a If you want to know what that looks like, there’s a great little parable about it in Judges 9. Therefore, as we anticipate the fight before us, here are a few things to consider.

First, we must fight out of love for Christ and in a way that loves our enemies. This is a tricky one for us in the current cultural climate. There are many voices in these conflicts that are antagonistic to the truth. Some are deceptive in nature, speaking in ways that tickle the ears of the culture for their own gain. Others are deceived in their motives. They think they are actually loving people by what they stand up for or affirm, but their words are empty of life.

At the same time, we who love the truth can also fall into a deceptive trap. We can become more enamored with winning the fight than pleasing God in the struggle. If the false prophets are shouting, we will shout even louder. We can become motivated out of frustration at losing rather than maintaining faithfulness to God. And we can easily end up fighting worldliness with self-righteousness rather than simply being bold witnesses to His justice and mercy.

Jesus commanded his disciples to live in such a way that others would see their good works and become worshippers of God themselves. b Our ultimate desire as Christians is not to sing and praise God loud enough to drown out the cries of our enemies. Our desire is to worship in such a way that God would overcome our enemies by His grace and they would join the loud refrain. 

Second, we need to remember that conflicts are gifts from Christ for the good of His church. It can be easy for us to get all worked up in a righteous frenzy when we feel the squeeze. It is helpful to be reminded that in every conflict there is opportunity for growth. In every crisis there is opportunity for clarity. These are God-given moments in the washing and beautifying of Christ’s bride. Let us not waste these trials, but use them to increase the depth, passion, quality, frequency, unity, and diversity of our singing together. There is much fruit to be gained here across all denominations and traditions.   

Third, we must sing out of a clear understanding and deep appreciation of our history and our future. Not only is singing a part of our nature as God’s image-bearers, c but singing has been a primary means by which we praise and magnify who God is and what He has done from the beginning.

We find Adam poetically expressing his delight in God’s gift of Eve after being resurrected by Him from the death-like sleep. d We find Moses and the sons of Israel singing a song following the exodus of God’s people out of Egypt. e  This song would be sung generation after generation to remind them of God’s faithfulness and power. It was a corporate preservative of their identity as a people chosen by Yahweh and called out of bondage to worship Him.  

Creation itself is commanded to sing to its Creator in response to God’s redemptive actions toward His people. “Sing for joy, O heavens, and exult, O earth; break forth, O mountains, into singing! For the Lord has comforted his people and will have compassion on his afflicted.” f The Psalms command us again and again to sing to the Lord, g and as we do so in the assembly, it reorients our thoughts and affections rightly as the covenant community of the Risen Christ. h  

And at the final consummation of the age when Christ comes again to bring to completion the new heavens and new earth, we find the saints singing the song of Moses and the song of the Lamb. i 

These are difficult and unusual times to be sure. The church is not without its challenges and concerns ahead. But it has always been this way and will continue until that final day when all presence of sin is eradicated from our midst and the bride of Christ stands in all her perfected beauty radiantly reflecting the glory of her Groom. Until then, we must remain “steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.” j Singing is an indispensable part of that work. We sing in victory, we sing in tragedy, we sing in the light, we sing in the dark, we sing as a means of warfare, we sing in expectation of peace. We will sing the great story of redemptive history from generation to generation, and we will continue to sing into eternity when time no longer matters.

  1. Matthew 13:22  (back)
  2. Matthew 5:15-16  (back)
  3. Zephaniah 3:17  (back)
  4. Genesis 2:23  (back)
  5. Exodus 15  (back)
  6. Isaiah 49:13  (back)
  7. Psalm 30,47,51,67,68  (back)
  8. Colossians 4:16  (back)
  9. Revelation 15:3-4  (back)
  10. 1 Corinthians 15:58  (back)

Read more

On July 3, 2020 By In Culture

Non-Trinitarian Singing

One of the distinctive features of our congregation where I pastor is our Trinitarian theology. It’s the article of faith that structures all the faith and practice of our faith. A visit to Providence Church (CREC) in Pensacola,FL and you will notice that our liturgy, our hymns, and lives all find themselves in God who reveals himself as One in Three and Three in One. The Trinity, Bavinck says, “beats the heart of the whole revelation of God.” It’s in everything we do, and not just on Trinity Sunday. It’s embedded into our practices and dogmas.

The Trinity was not something built up in a Greek laboratory, the Trinity is. It’s the way God reveals himself to his people from the beginning to the end of history and for all eternity.

One way our Trinitarian theology is made known is through our singing. I always say that if you tell me what you sing I can probably tell you what you believe. Providence is part of a long tradition of churches that sings hymns written in the past, and by past I don’t simply mean 150 years ago (we sing those too), but also 1,750 years ago. It doesn’t necessarily mean we have a higher sense of who God is, but it does mean a sense of certainty that much of what is sung is leading us somewhere away from the sentimentalism so prevalent in our day to the worthiness of a God whose breadth and depth has no end.

Suffice to say, there are some beautiful human beings composing some great hymns today. Some of them are theologically sound and deeply Trinitarian in their thinking. But these composers don’t make it to any famous contemporary magazines; they lack the sex appeal of modern christian composers.

So, it did not come to me as a shock when the recent piece from Christianity Today entitled, “The Trinity Is Missing from Christian Worship Music” stated:

“The Trinity almost never comes up in the songs sung by American Christians, according to a new study of the 30 most popular hymns and the 30 most popular worship songs over the past five years.”

Further, as religion professor Michael Tapper observes, “In the music we sing, it seems like we’re not as Trinitarian as we think we are.” This conclusion is rather frightening. In one way it serves to remind us that what we sing in church matters. Of course, this assumes that pastors think about what the singing communicates. The reality is that many are not much involved in this field at all allowing less theologically inclined musicians to make decisions that can change the heart of a generation.

When the Church sings, she is not just singing as an exercise to get to the sermon, the church is sermonizing in her singing. She is doing theology with her voice. So, when we think of what we sing in our churches, it is imperative that we know what we are singing. In the end, we can sing about how all blessings flow from God, but forget to sing to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. If we do forget, our doxology is incomplete.

Read more

On June 30, 2020 By In Culture

When Candace Owens Loses the Cause

Candace Owens is the kind of provocateur that is going places. Her national show and audience continues to increase by the thousands. Her outspoken and brazen forms of expression have brought her a vast array of criticism as well as abounding praise. Candace is a black woman who forcefully opines on the needs of her community. She is part of a growing number of black voices on the popular and intellectual fields fighting against the myth that to be black means to subscribe to a certain political narrative. In her talks and interviews, her strategy is to leave no prisoners behind. The latest target was the well-known Professor, Dr. Marc Lamont Hill who joined her in a fairly civil conversation on the “The Candace Owens Show.”

Hill takes virtually the opposing viewpoint on all the major issues in the black community. He views a form of re-segregation as healthy and needful. He affirms that we should create spaces only for black people, and when questioned whether he would favor the same idea for white people he notes that white people would never want to share in an all-black dormitory. We should do the same thing for Asians and Jews, he says. “Merit” should play little to no role in being accepted to a university. Diversity forms the community that is best for society whether a certain GPA is good or bad.

On discussing the nature of riots and protests, he also notes that to get the nation to pay attention to black death in this country requires the “spectacle of violence.” While not wholeheartedly embracing violent demonstrations, Hill comes rather close.

Hill’s descent into subjectivity was phenomenal. He affirmed that gender is a “social construct” and that we can “re-imagine our reality;” (language used in humanity courses all over American universities) at the same time, there ought to be, he argued, clear laws that mandate the use of gender terms not according to what we think, but according to what the person whose gender has “changed” thinks. When asked if a man can menstruate, Hill paused and said, “Sometimes.” This combination of changes based on personal preference and the imposition in some cases as in Canada of fines for failing to refer to someone by their preferred gender (a number too great to count) is the leftist’s clever attempt to find refuge in contradiction.

But to be fair, and to continue my genuine tendency to offend all in the left and the right, Candace Owen’s provocative, conservative credentials fell short. When speaking about the LGBTQ, she told Hill that she was okay with the “L” and the “G” and the “B” but not the “T.” To be unhappily more precise, she was okay with transgenderism as long as there were no laws forcing us to address them in the pronoun they desired. Further, Candace rightly noted that transgenderism is a mental disorder (gender dysphoria) and to accept the worldview of the “transgender” community would be akin to accepting a man’s perspective that at night he becomes Batman.

The fundamental problem with provocateurs like Candace, however, is that they end up making deep mistakes in their rhetoric; they end up affirming certain presuppositions and missing the whole point altogether. Candace conquered her guest clearly, but in the process she lost her intellectual soul. While rejecting the Trans community and their agenda, she allowed gays, lesbians and bisexuals to re-imagine their realities as well. And for the Christian, only the Creator can take our realities and change them.

Some of my concerns with Candace is that such voices tend to fade when their vigor for the vitriolic ends. To be a provocateur in our day takes a lot of stamina and we need such voices constantly making the right enemies. But to provoke is an art that is best served with a consistent view of the world. Whether in the name of conservatism or not, we can’t choose which sins we hate less. When we do so, we lose the cause in the end.

Read more

On June 23, 2020 By In Culture

Systemic Racism: No Gospel, No Peace

Systemic racism. The phrase provokes all sorts of visceral responses on all sides of the race debates; fear, guilt, anger, and revulsion to name a few. The cultural narrative is easy to sell nowadays, and everyone from politicians to celebrities to Christians–individuals and entire denominations–are confessing our sin and pleading for forgiveness. Some people in our country have gone so far as to self-flagellate to atone for our cultural sin of systemic racism. Dan Cathy, CEO of Chick-Fil-A suggests that the way white people begin to atone for our sins is to shine the shoes of black people. In some Christians circles, prominent Christians such as Tim Keller have written about our sin of racism at the individual and corporate/institutional levels, and some Christians such as Alexander Jun (former moderator of the Presbyterian Church in America) and Jemar Tisby have gained notoriety by talking about these issues. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary fired a few professors, and one of the issues was their criticism of the support of the Critical Race Theory at the seminary (a theory closely associated with the whole systemic racism issue). Christians are proudly standing with the Black Lives Matter movement, an organization that is blatantly anti-Christian.

What the culture outside of the Christian Faith does with this issue isn’t surprising to me in the least. My concern is how Christians have become enamored, guilt-ridden, evangelists for this “anti-systemic racism” gospel. Quite frankly, I’m left confused and more than a little frustrated because of the nebulousness of the whole matter.

(more…)

Read more

On June 22, 2020 By In Music

Bonhoeffer and the Role of Singing in Tumultuous Times

Bonhoeffer’s wisdom is needed in these tumultuous times. There is certainly a rise in interest in what the Lutheran martyr would say in our our own day. I will be delivering a talk at the Psalm Tap Colloquium this Wednesday on what Bonhoeffer would say to evangelicals today about singing.

My current doctoral project spends half of a chapter thinking through Bonhoeffer’s understanding of friendship and how the role of community shapes relationships. Of course, when you read hundreds of pages of an author’s words and interpreters of said author, you end up exposing yourself to a host of topics which I kindly tuck in a folder and reserve the right to peruse at a future date. Bonhoeffer’s Ethics, for instance, has always been one of those enchanting works that I had the opportunity to read through, but not with the intensity it deserves.

Alas, I delved deeply into his letters and the tenderness of his notes to family members and friends. Beyond the books, there is an entire array of technical works hidden from the public eye written by capable scholars who engage at a more profound level with Bonhoeffer. Robert Smith’s essay Bonhoeffer and Music Metaphor was one of those happy discoveries. Smith brings together Bonhoeffer’s hermeneutic with his music, thus providing a sample of the musical theology of the German theologian.

Smith offers a sample of how music shaped Bonhoeffer. His home was filled with what he called the “Grundton of joy.” Grundton speaks to the first degree of a major or minor scale in music, so that Bonhoeffer speaks of the prominence of music in the home as that which stimulated and promoted joy. Indeed, the later Bonhoeffer would contemplate those early days as preparatory for his latter days in a prison cell, which eventually led to his execution right before the end of the war.

Bonhoeffer notes that the greatest gifts that children can receive are “spiritual values” and “intellectual stimulation.” But he also notes that music is what will bring you to clarity in times of confusion. It is the practice that will sustain you in times of sadness. Bonhoeffer lived that out in his prison cell as he bathed himself in hymns from his Lutheran tradition and his favorite Psalm settings from Heinrich Schütz. He sang not just as a pastime but as an objective of way of remembering God’s promises amidst uncertainty.

Bonhoeffer’s legacy to our uncertain times is not some mystical mantra, but the concrete singing of psalms and hymns. It’s how we “point the Christian to his foundation.” For his Lutheran theology, that meant God as a suffering God would take our song and minister to us in our suffering. Thus, singing took us to the cross where the note of greatest joy sounded on Good Friday.

Read more

On June 19, 2020 By In Culture

Thoughts on Social and Protest Movements

Social/protest movements will always promise you more than what they can deliver. Whether the left or the right, if you embrace it wholly they will entice you with religious language only to leave you disappointed in the end. They will often articulate ideals that sound good, but in practice are often contradictory. For the Christian, some movements will be so explicitly un-christian that it justifies an immediate refusal. While other movements will seek to persuade you on the basis of their compassion and desire for unity which are certainly Christian virtues.

What I have seen is a steady passion among advocates of social movements to view them as the sine qua non of existence. This can happen with sports, but it’s much more visible at a social movement level. Social movements encompass not only the existential but also the intellectual which make them more compelling.

When Christians embrace such social movements their energies are drained quickly because they demand religion-like stamina. What is left of the strength after engaging the itinerary of these movements through the week is nothing more than left-over enthusiasm for foundational habits like worship and worldview thinking.

Very often social movements suck the life out of true religion and diminish any attempt to see life through Christian lenses. Social movements too often make you more passionate about “causes” than “Christ.” A quick tour through the dangerous world of twitter will reveal that rapidly. And here is the great danger: one can view their social movement as an extension of their faith, but most likely it is an extension of their social self, which often puts the individual at risk of embracing other like-minded movements that may not be as careful to delineate ideas than the first.

Protest movements are generally absorbed into an ethos that does not provide sensitivity to kingdom ideals or people, but sensitivity and proclivity to be around people who share only those ideas. I would argue that this is the beginning of racist formulations which as we have seen is found in every skin color. Further, social or protest movements when embraced as sole forms of expression lead to the vast politicization of churches who view their role to affirm such movements and never to challenge them for fear of backlash.

But Christendom is not dependent on social or protest movements, and if we do embrace or enter such movements, we need to attach ourselves temporarily to them lest we begin to trust in ideological horses and chariots over the Lord our God. All our movements need to come under the Lordship of Jesus, and must begin with that reality; any other other foundation is sinking sand.

Read more

On June 16, 2020 By In Culture

When SCOTUS Scoffs at God

The Supreme Court handed over its keys to the LGBTQ community. The vocal minority of intoleristas are now in charge. The presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden, stated that the SCOTUS affirmed a “profoundly American idea” that discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity is prohibited.

Now, let’s consider that we are now comparing the rights of voting, public accommodation, and basic human rights of a black individual to the rights of individuals who through a variety of circumstances embody sexual rationales that are inevitably contrary to the very core of human existence. SCOTUS affirmed that the color of the skin which cannot be naturally changed is the equivalent to the changes made by many in the LGBTQ community to live a certain way that violates basic human norms, to consume certain medications that change the natural dispositions of the body, who chose to adhere to principles of sexuality that unmistakably damage the human soul.

Let’s also take a step further and consider the language of “discrimination” in this case, which is diametrically different than what occurred some decades ago in this country during the Civil Rights Movement. We are now dealing with distinct facts and cases. For instance, if a Christian man chose to discriminate against me because of my brown skin, I would find him reprehensible; a secularized scoundrel unworthy to carry the name of Jesus. The very fabric of the Christian story entails a reconciling Lord who broke down racial barriers and calls us to see beyond our nationality and skin color.

Yet, in biblical categories, there are harsh implications for those who choose to satiate their thirst in unnatural desires (Rom. 1). If a Christian is compelled to do that which is contrary to his conscience, thus violating the very essence of his faith, he is thereby giving to Caesar what does not belong to Caesar: his religious convictions. If a boss discovers that one of his employees at his Christian bookstore is now transgender and will henceforth dress like a man starting Monday, what shall he do?

The only way these ideologies can be accepted today is when the Church affirms that we can separate our identity from what we believe and practice. If that happens, and all signs point to that reality, we live an impotent Gospel. God is no respecter of persons; he discriminates based on choices. Some choose to call good evil and evil good. We are living in the days when all distinctions are forgotten and we are walking towards the precipice of unprincipled pluralism. SCOTUS embodies the scoffing of the principles of heaven.

But it’s not all bad news. The good news is that we can return more fervently to that one duty that we all know to be true and good–the duty of worship, where God takes our humanity and forms us anew. I remain committed to that reality and encourage us to that greater call which can never be erased by an earthly court.

Read more

On June 14, 2020 By In Church, Culture, History, Politics, Theology, Worship

Kingdom Revolution

We are in the midst of a revolution. Societal structures are being overturned and a new order of government is taking over. Old symbols of tyranny are being toppled. The way we live in relationship with one another is being redefined. Our understandings of what constitutes justice and peace are being reshaped. Language itself is being transformed. Logic and rationality are being turned upside down so that not just what we think but how we think are being radically transformed.

This is what happens in revolution because a revolution is the overturning of one culture and the creation of another.

(more…)

Read more

On June 13, 2020 By In Church, Culture, Politics

The Priorities of Priests and Protests

It is a remarkable thing, you know, this thing called priority. Just a few weeks ago religious leaders were boldly asserting in their high-dollar on-line videos that it was too dangerous to return to worship and that we needed to listen to our political and health leaders. “They are the experts,” they told us. And so a vast amount of compliant people stayed home following the orders of their health czars and most religious leaders quickly concurred. For some now, it has been 1/3 of the year away from church; that’s approximately 121 days without the church “out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.” (WCF 25.2)

The shocking reality, as Barna pointed out recently, most evangelicals quit the virtual worship experience after four weeks. The hype and enthusiasm of pajamas and brewed coffee in front of a screen lasted no more than 30 days. As if we needed more proof, the reality of virtual worship became virtually unknown shortly after the quarantine.

Then, the tragic death of George Floyd, propelled by other sociological events, urged religious leaders to come out of their basements, put on their clerical garbs and take a stand. Letters were sent out urging pastors to speak up. Many needed practice since it had been a long rhetorical hiatus. Of course, by that time, thousands of protesters were flooding the streets everywhere. The public square was filled again. Then, and only then, did the religious leaders say, “Come, let us go do the work of the Lord!” Yes, even Michigan and New Jersey governors known for their vociferous opposition to that thing called “gathered assembly” now joined the festivities with dance and song. The media which condemned the little children from playing in the streets and prophesied doom to any who would dare take off their masks or gather in greater than the magnanimous number of 10 quickly raised the banner for the protesters.

“Thou shalt worship at home with no more than 10, but thou shalt protest with no less than thousands,” saith the media.

The Christian should and must seek the peace of the city, the welfare of its brothers and sisters, justice and mercy must kiss at the call of righteousness. To protest is the inherent right of human beings, but do you know what else is an inherent right of image-bearers? psalms, and hymns and spiritual songs, the wine and the bread, the word of God preached, the fellowship of the saints, hugs and handshakes.

That remarkable thing called priority has a way of showing us our true loves. Would that the zeal of pastors and priests be as elevated for the death of God’s Son as much as the death of one of God’s children. Perhaps one reason many of the protests have turned into a spectacle of shame and destruction is because they failed to be grounded first in the compassion of Jesus which we receive most clearly when God’s people enter his courts with praise and thanksgiving.

Read more

On June 10, 2020 By In Culture

Liberating Ourselves From Liberationist Movements

The laws of a culture establish the culture’s god(s). In similar fashion, the presuppositions of a culture shape their understanding of the purpose of a society. So, let’s consider two of the most classic assumptions that have guided liberal movements in the last 100 years and that are seeing a resurgence in our day:

Assumption #1: God has a preferential option for the poor, oppressed, and the marginalized.
Assumption #2: God is working towards the political liberation of such people from their subjugators.

Now, in this corner we put men like Gutierrez, Cone, Romero, and others. Their starting assumptions seem good and noble. After all, the prophets are filled with exhortations to love the poor and oppressed; and, we should add that the Exodus motif also provides at least some rationale for a form of liberation. But you should note that these assumptions stem from a fairly limited sense of biblical history. It fails to connect the Israelite Exodus–for example–to the re-establishment of a new Israel who will never be enslaved again and subjugate themselves to Pharaoh. The remarkable thing about redemptive history is that it never ceases to move.

One of the distinctions I use is the difference between biblical literacy and biblical sense. Biblical literacy means you’ve read the Bible and are self-aware of general themes (creation, John 3:16, etc.). Biblical sense means you’ve read the Bible, but are also capable of connecting the dots of the Bible and forming a coherent view of redemptive history. I argue that theologies of liberation glue themselves to one big theme (let’s say the Exodus as an example) while forgetting to connect that theme to the rest of sacred history.

If we assume that God has a preference for a particular group or color, we are pouring our limitations on God’s affections, thereby freezing God’s free acts. God is, of course, no respecter of persons (Rom. 2:11) but all persons are called to respect God. Ideologies that begin with the premise that God offers the preferential treatment is most likely to look down upon others for whom they perceive God to be blessing. It’s no wonder that these ideologies inhabit largely liberal Catholic locations or word-of-faith environments. Both which trade God’s sovereignty for a sort of welfarism divinity which can be summoned by cheap tricks or sacerdotal acts.

We are to desire to see God liberate all the oppressed and all the poor, but also all the comfortable and all the adulterers in Wall Street. Christians do not begin under condemnation, but under a cosmic liberation from sin and the tyranny of the devil and all his works.

The liberation many seek in our day will leave them just as helpless as before. Even if their earthly subjugators (as they see them) leave them alone, they will still find themselves shackled to false narratives which in the end will make them even poorer.

Read more