Church Archives - Page 8 of 8 - Kuyperian Commentary

On April 3, 2014 By J. Luper In Worship Like

Fellowship of Suffering

In a recent article on the Christian Post, Dr. Cornelius Plantinga of Calvin Institute of Christian Worship voices a sobering critique of contemporary evangelical and reformed worship, observing that discussion of sin is disturbingly rare. Plantinga says this is seen chiefly in the obsolescence of rites of confession, and in the songs of the churches, where the “biblical tradition of lament, which is all through the prophets and the Psalms is gone, just not there.”

Plantinga hits upon a crucial point: the psalms (whether spoken or sung) have been absent from church liturgies for decades. Therefore, it’s no surprise that weighty biblical issues like sin, judgment, confession, and lament have become passé. Abandonment of the psalter results in an impoverished liturgical vocabulary, invites trite sentimentalism, and substitutes stilted emotive ecstasy for the broad biblical palette of spiritual affections. Confession and lamentation become foreign once the psalms are lost.

However, the presence of confession and lamentation requires not only appropriate liturgical forms, but a people who are willing to acknowledge the realities of sin, suffering, and injustice in their lives and in society. Communities are shaped by liturgy, but liturgies also take shape according to a communal ethos.

Increasingly, churches are generationally, racially, and economically segregated. Whether by design or not, this has occurred in large part because churches have attempted to be relevant to a fault, deploying marketing campaigns to create an enticing “brand,” borrowing sales techniques to bolster growth, and eschewing tradition in favor of trends. Such a strategy leads to demographically-homogenous congregations. By courting the culturally savvy and elite, churches truncate the body of Christ and cut themselves off from those who have a historic memory and experience of oppression, struggle, and suffering (e.g., the elderly, poor, racial minorities, disabled)–people who would be much more familiar with the vocabulary of lamentation and confession (even imprecation) than the typical hipster evangelical.

To be sure, evangelical churches are populated with plenty of suffering people. And as Plantinga notes, “Ceasingly cheerful worship does not fit with the lives of people who come to worship.” Notwithstanding, the chirpy aura of many modern churches discourages corporate recognition of sin and voicing of lament. Would such a lopsidedly optimistic atmosphere be as plausible and as entrenched if the church better reflected her identity as the new humanity in Christ, and embraced all classes, colors, and ages in her worship and fellowship? Perhaps, then, the pathway to biblically faithful worship needs to include not only recovery of the psalms, but reconciliation of division within the church.<>online mobi реклама а в гугл

On February 25, 2014 By Uri Brito In Books Like

Don Miller and the Modern Temptation to Abandon the Institutional Church

The pastoral task has all the ingredients for abstractness. After all, we are constantly engaging dead people and throwing around foreign terms to most in the pew. In fact, many of the concerns I have heard over the years from parishioners of different traditions has been the concern that sermons and pastoral work do not reach the laity. Donald Miller manifested this sentiment in his now controversial blog post I don’t connect with God by singing. I connect with him elsewhere. The article received abundant criticism. Miller asserted elsewhere that he simply intended to start a conversation–and what a conversation he started. In another interview, Miller summarized his post:

And so I talked about the reality that I don’t get a lot out of church when I go. I don’t connect with God very well there, and I wondered if it wasn’t more of a learning style issue because it is a lecture format, and it’s not how everybody learns. ^a

Miller’s concern was not unique. Many have expressed this frustration with the intellectualization of worship. Rev. Jeff Meyers’ wonderful book “The Lord’s Service: The Grace of Covenant Renewal Worship answers Miller’s concern with clarity and with classic historical categories. Meyers argues that worship ought to have a wholistic vision prioritizing every detail as opposed to over-emphasizing merely the word preached.

Don Miller asserts that one of his struggles is that the worship service does not appeal to his style of learning. The worship service has as its emphasis a lecture model. Since Miller does not learn through lecture models, therefore Miller no longer finds appeal in the institutional church. ^b In his interview with The RELEVANT he asserts that he did not qualify things well in his blog post and that looking back he wished he would have not written it. But as the interview continued, Miller affirms the same sorts of things his critics condemned in the original blog post.

I actually believe Miller is on to something. The lecture model of doing church is not the one I advocate. In many ways, the Church–especially in the Reformed tradition, which naturally claims a more intellectual history–has become a magnified classroom with lengthy biblical expositions at its center. Whatever precedes the sermon is only pre-game information. And whatever comes after it is not as significant as the sermon either. But as Randy Booth rightly noted–quoting a portion of James Jordan’s work Theses on Worship– in his booklet A Guide to Worship, “the entire service is sermonic, not just the sermon.” ^c “The sermon itself,” he writes,” is very important, but it is not the all-important event. It is one important part of the many other important parts of worship.”

But if this is the case and any historical/liturgical tradition will attest, and since I am convinced Miller is aware of this historical precedent, then why not work to change this paradigm in the institutional church instead of generalizing it and bidding the historical ecclesiastical traditional adieu? With Miller’s book and lecture platform he could affect thousands of pastors who see worship as a lecture hall. That’s the reformer Don Miller the Church needs, not the one who throws away everything for a literal walk in the park on Sunday morning.

What is Miller trying to get rid of?

According to the author of best-seller, Blue Like Jazz, we have turned over the Acts church to the hands of professionals, known as the pastoral staff. Instead of doing that, we should simply hand out sheriff badges to everyone and say to them that they are all pastors. They are all in control. Sunday serves only to prepare these pastors–male and female–to go forth and be the church wherever they are. First Peter two does affirm our royal priesthood. We are all priests in the sense that we are no longer bound by bloody sacrifices. Christ’s redemption is accomplished, thus transforming us into agents of redemption in the world. However, what Miller fails to see is that Paul does not flatten the priesthood, he sees the priesthood operating differently in different spheres (I Tim. 3, Eph. 4:11-13). There is an office of priest (overseer) that is distinct from the general priesthood that we all inherit united to Messiah, Jesus.

Miller also wants to get rid of the institutional Church as center of community life.

I frequent a coffee shop weekly where one of the baristas is the leader of a church. When I asked him about the church, he told me that they meet at the same coffee shop on Sunday mornings to drink coffee and discuss the Bible. When I asked him to define a bit further what they do, he was quick to point to the flaws of the modern church. “We don’t need structure. We need to return to simplicity.” Since I have lectured on this topic before a few years ago, ^d. I can probably summarize this general view point as the “Romanticized Acts Church” movement. I am no opponent of coffee and Bible studies; in fact, I encourage them. But the idea that a return to the first century Church–as privately interpreted–is the solution to today’s ecclesiastical woes is overly caffeinated.

Why can’t I simply find community on my dinner table? or a pub? –because community life is complex. There is nothing wrong with finding community in these places, but they are all incomplete pictures of community life. They may be fine extensions of the community life, which the creeds refer to as “the communion of saints,” but to assert that that is a legitimate replacement for Word, Sacrament, and Discipline in the context of the gathered community is simplistic and dangerous. What then do we do with the adulterer? or the rich folks who are arriving at the Lord’s Supper and the agape meal and eating and drinking everything before the poor arrive? or the sexual abuse situations that are unfortunately prevalent in our churches? Miller has no answer. “I can maybe set up a board or something like that,” he said casually. But wouldn’t a board indicate some type of structure; the very same type you are attempting to eliminate?

Miller also says that he doesn’t find intimacy with God by singing songs to him.

As one deeply involved in ecclesiastical music, this concerns me. Miller is suffering from the psalmic-less nature of modern church music. What some of us treasure each Sunday through hymns and psalms of lament, imprecation, and overwhelming joy has been largely forgotten. The robustness of masculine voices and the beauty and nuance of female singing has become a forgotten history. All of it replaced by praise bands, and the few songs intended for congregational singing are quickly swallowed by the voluminous instrumentation.

If Miller is saying he simply does not like to sing, then he needs to re-adjust his biblical priorities. A quick search for the words “singing” and “music” will reveal their prevalence, especially in the Hebrew Scriptures. Because I don’t like to do something does not mean I should simply replace or eliminate it from the life of the church.

How Miller finds intimacy with God.

The answer is another example of a faulty ability to differentiate. Miller writes:

The answer came to me recently and it was a freeing revelation. I connect with God by working. I literally feel an intimacy with God when I build my company. I know it sounds crazy, but I believe God gave me my mission and my team and I feel closest to him when I’ve got my hand on the plow. It’s thrilling and I couldn’t be more grateful he’s given me an outlet through which I can both serve and connect with him.

I find his response a wonderful example of missing the point. We all find intimacy with God by working. We were created to work for six days, which means there is a great priority that God places on that. We all find hobbies and passions that fulfill us as men. We all agree with Eric Liddel’s wonderful attestation of the presence of God when he says in Chariots of Fire, “When I run I feel his pleasure.” When Miller works with his crew he feels God’s pleasure. But his intimacy ought to be the outworking of an intimacy that begins when by the Spirit we are seated with Christ in the heavenly places (Eph. 2:6).

Miller’s entire paradigm could be easily dealt with by reading an introduction to ecclesiology. ^e Don Miller is the product of modern individualism. And though he flees from that language with his post-modern categories, ultimately, he falls in his own trap. Miller believes that church is all around us. Yes, we go as church to the world. We carry the name of God. ^f But we go as church because we have already been fed by the head of the Church as we gathered as one body.

Conclusion

Miller’s platform is huge. His simple blog post, which he indicated took him about three minutes to write, led to a firestorm on the web. His attempt to start a conversation actually hinders us from having a more necessary conversation. The question should not be whether we worship in the traditional sense or simply find intimacy with God through other means, the question is “How has God called us to worship?” Further, whether you worship in a more lecture-style congregation or otherwise because of your learning style, what does your personal style of learning have to do with worship? What if God’s way of sanctifying you is by killing your learning style and causing you to appreciate God’s way of learning? What if the institutional church is God’s way of killing your wants so you may conform to his? What if attending church regularly is the way God intended to prepare you to understand intimacy?

I am not one to deny Miller’s connection with God via his work and habits, but I do reject his premise that abandoning the institutional church is the path to a deeper connection. The institutional church, I argue, is the deepest means of finding intimacy with God.<>оптимизация нового а

Read more at http://www.relevantmagazine.com/god/church/donald-miller-church#KDZHerDkw3EuWr6q.99 (back)
If you do not have this book, please purchase Kevin DeYoung’s wonderful work found here: http://www.amazon.com/Why-Love-Church-Institutions-Organized/dp/0802458378 (back)
see Covenant Media Foundation for copies (back)
My lecture at the Family Advance Conference in 2012; e-mail for a PDF copy (back)
Maybe R.B. Kuiper’s work “The Glorious Body of Christ (back)
This is the heart of the third commandment (back)

On November 1, 2013 By Kuyperian In Theology Like

Forgotten Saints – Joy on this All Saints’ Day

By Alan Stout

For all the saints who from their labors rest,
Who Thee by faith before the world confess,
Thy name, O Jesus, be forever blest,
Alleluia! Alleluia!

I love the hymn For All the Saints Who from Their Labors Rest. Here is a wonderful thought… The overwhelming majority of saints who now rest are unremembered in their specific labors. No memorials, no days of feasting, no honor over their hidden graves. They are all forgotten, yet we are here blessing the name of Jesus. It would take a great deal of effort to trace your current position in the body of Christ back to one of the Giants of the Faith. Calvin, Knox or Spurgeon might be in your spiritual family tree, but you would probably lose the branches in the forest after going back a generation or two. In spite of that the gates of Hell shake when we sing our Alleluias! What a marvel!

Thou wast their Rock, their Fortress, and their Might;
Thou, Lord, their Captain in the well-fought fight;
Thou, in the darkness drear, their one true Light.
Alleluia! Alleluia!

Today is All Saints’ Day in the western Church and we remember those forgotten even by the Church. We remember them by joining them in looking to the Light in darkness drear and singing His exploits as Rock and Fortress and in the singing of what He has done we find that He is still doing it. All of this with the sure knowledge that we too will be part of the great forgotten and glory fills the earth at our Alleluias!

Oh, may Thy soldiers, faithful, true and bold,
Fight as the saints who nobly fought of old
And win with them the victor’s crown of gold.
Alleluia! Alleluia!

By and large the way you are forgotten, and the way the Kingdom grows, is to decrease in stature. Decrease by giving yourself away and that joyfully. This was John’s mission in life:

28 You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, ‘I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him.’ 29 The one who has the bride is the bridegroom. The friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly at the bridegroom’s voice. Therefore this joy of mine is now complete. 30 He must increase, but I must decrease.” (John 3:28-30 ESV)

John’s decrease led him to the executioner’s blade; his head served as a grand subtlety for a tiny king no one honors today. This was a noble fight, bold and true. His joy over the Son facilitated his giving, enhanced it to the point of sacrifice. Joyful giving is a mark of a soldier whose Captain is Christ. John’s joy was full.

In The Breathing Method, a short story by Stephen King, a woman sacrifices a great deal to give birth to a child. She loses her reputation, family and financial position. In the midst of delivery her head was severed from her body, yet she survives for a half hour or so, sees her son, smiles and mouths, “thank you” to the her physician (I told you it was a Stephen King story). I imagine John smiling up from his decreased position on the platter, joyfully mouthing, “Alleluia!” to his host!

O blest communion, fellowship divine,
We feebly struggle, they in glory shine;
Yet all are one in Thee, for all are Thine.
Alleluia! Alleluia!

The gifts you give are more likely to be so feeble so as to be utterly forgotten here on earth. However, if you mix joy with your giving I promise that they will be remembered in glory, and your face will shine with the radiance of the Son of God. John said his joy came from hearing the Bridegroom and giving himself away in His name. Joy in Jesus means that a cup of cool water for the thirsty is glorious. Though the one receiving it may forget you completely his thanksgiving over that cup reaches to Heaven. Even you will probably forget the clothes you give to the mission, but Jesus remembers as the poor are dressed. Your unseen visit to a prison done in Jesus name and with joy is Alleluia, praise to God.

From earth’s wide bounds, from ocean’s farthest coast,
Through gates of pearl streams in the countless host,
Singing to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,
Alleluia! Alleluia!

Beloved, labor in joy! Give yourself away with a smile and a song to the Father, Son and Spirit.

Today is All Saints’ Day, may you be forgotten by all men and remembered by the Church and her Bridegroom. Alleluia! Alleluia!

Alan Stout is the Associate Pastor of Providence Church in Pensacola, Fl. <>vzlom-facebook.com раскрутка а в киеве

On September 17, 2013 By Peter Jones In Worship Like

How Should We Pursue Maturity in Worship Music?

There are two temptations that nip at our heels as we pursue reformation in worship. The first is to believe that older is automatically better. This group clings to the past like it is a magic charm. To them it is a window to better days when the church was “more pure.” There is no maturing in the church for this group. For this group, worship music is largely culturally defined, but the culture is an older one. The second temptation is to assume that newer is automatically better. The culture has moved on from “Holy, Holy, Holy” and if the church is to reach the culture she must move on as well. There is very little to learn from the early church for this group. For this group, worship music is to a large degree culturally defined, but the culture is the newest one. Let’s be clear, while the first error does exist, it is the second error which is the great temptation of our age. We must move on. We must be relevant. The great sin of our age is to look old.

We should aim to avoid both these errors. As we pursue reformation in church music here are some things to remember.

We should be grateful for what we have. We live in an age of complainers. We whine about everything, including church music. Yes, there is always room for improvement. Yes, we all cringe at certain songs. Yes, it would be nice if we had the Psalms that were not paraphrased. Yes, it would be nice if we had better contemporary music. But God has been good to us. We have a great musical heritage from Ambrose to Luther to Wesley. We have more and more Psalms being set to music every year. Growth comes from gratitude not from grumbling.
Any reformation in church music must be built on the foundations of love for Christ and love for his people. If we seek reformation because we want to be “traditional” or because we want to be “relevant” or because we want to be “exciting” we are going to make fundamental mistakes. Love for Christ and love for the Church form the center. Without love our songs are empty and vain.
Musical growth is dictated by God’s Word not by our current culture or a past culture. That means our primary means of evaluating our singing will be the Bible.
We should want to thoroughly ingest the older songs and the older ways of singing. These men are our fathers in the faith. We should sit at their feet before we seek to stand on their shoulders. This does not mean we will like all their songs or methods. But it does mean that each church should seek to live within the stream of Christian tradition. No church should sing only new hymns and choruses and completely reject the older tradition. This only shows arrogance.
We should seek out new, theologically sound music to introduce to the congregation. No church should only sing older stuff. I do think a lot of newer stuff is weak, if not heretical, but not all of it is. There are God-honoring songs being written. We should not be afraid of incorporating these into our local church music.
We should be cautious in accepting worship music advice or songs from theologically inept musicians, whether they are on a church staff or in the pew. Here is why a lot of contemporary worship music is weak: worship music in the modern church has ceased to be overseen by the elders of the local church. I am not saying elders must do everything. But they must oversee it all. Music is a teaching ministry. If the church is to have theologically robust songs they must have theologically robust men writing them and evaluating them. The elders are the guardians of God’s Word. Yet for some reason they leave one of the most potent parts of worship up to other men (or women) who are not fit. Here is what Titus 1:9 says an elder must do. “He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.” Too many worship leaders and those who write church music do not fit this description. Also many elders do not read and study enough to know what God requires of a church’s music ministry.
Each church can and should have its own local sound that uses local talents and resources, but still functions within the tradition of the broader, historic church. If you have a piano player, then don’t grumble because you don’t have drums or guitar. If you have a guitar player, use him. Two churches separated by thousands of miles should sing songs that have similar content and doctrine. This comes from faithfulness to God’s Word. But these same two churches may sound very different.
This does not mean sound is irrelevant. Some sounds are inappropriate for worship. Some tunes do not match the words they are being sung to. Some types of music drown out the voice of the people. Or they are designed to create false emotional responses. Or they are designed to highlight the musician instead of the people. Or they are associated too closely with worldliness. The musical sounds in our churches will vary, but that does not mean any sound is acceptable for corporate worship.