Apparently I'm not the only one with thoughts along the line of my last post. Check out my friend Isaac's blog post (here). He takes a slightly different approach in that he's more calm and probably nicer about it, but either way here is a slightly different perspective on the same issue.
And I don't think he read my post before he wrote his.
Enjoy.
- Ben
Showing posts with label Spiritual Depth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Spiritual Depth. Show all posts
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Why I don't Like Protestant Worship Music
I'm trying to catch up on some reading for classes so I can't write a long post, but I wanted to jot down this thought before I got distracted.
For my independent study I've been reading the second volume of Jaroslav Pelikan's wonderful church history set entitled The Rise of Eastern Christendom. Since Pelikan's work chronicles the history of theology and thoughts I am finding that it's a moderately heavy read, especially given that even at seminary many of these historical concepts have not been taught to me.
Today I was reading about the Nestorian, Jacobite, and Monophysite heresies and on the hypostatis of Christ. Since Pelikan quotes from so many primary sources (something that is often missing in many church histories) I found myself getting a little confused concerning the hypostasis of Christ and what orthodox doctrine taught. Instead of turning to wikipedia or another source that would of taken a lot more time to find some resolution I remembered that there is an ancient hymn of pascha that briefly discusses the hypostasis of Christ. Since I had my ipod on me I decided to turn to the music of the church to teach me the orthodox way and bring about clarity of thought.
Granted the hymn isn't a treatise, but I wasn't looking for a treatise, I was merely looking for a quick answer as to how many hypostates Christ has. This is when I realized that I was able to articulate one of the many reasons I don't like Protestant worship music - namely, that I don't like to guess and check when it comes to the doctrine conveyed within my church music.
Due to the plethora of music in protestantism and the constant desire to update the music I find that one cannot trust the theology that is conveyed in much of it. In strict juxtaposition to this is the music that is sung at the Orthodox church I currently attend. When I hear the hymns of the Orthodox church I am sure that what is being taught is theologically in-line with the 7 ecumenical creeds of the church. I don't have to guess if I'm being taught something heretical because the songs have been tried by church and found fitting to be used in the worship of the Holy Trinity.
Sure, there may be some great assets to protestant music, but as a whole it is theologically vapid and emotive to a fault. While it is always good to asses and think about what is being sung in worship, I think that having to constantly analyze and wonder if the music is teaching correct doctrine is counterproductive to the church service. The music of the church should be filled with dogmatically correct theology and should be able to be used as a basis for the lay person to refute or accept notions of the divine. One can very easily argue that our theology in protestantism is weak because we do not sing it and we do not sing it because it is weak. This cycle is a disastrous one that is hurting the church and leading people into ignorance of the divine. How can we, expect to truly become partakers of the Divine essence (2Pet 1.4) if we do not even know God as he has revealed himself to us?
I fear I'm approaching a tangent so I will conclude now. If the reason I set out to articulate wasn't clear above let me sum up. Part of my aversion to Protestant worship music is that it has no substance and that which it tries to pass as substance is often near heretical if not blatantly so. The songs of the church should be those which have been tried by years of reflection and should be able to be used as concise creedal statements of belief that will plant the deep truths of the faith into the hearts of clergy and lay persons alike.
May the faith grow deep within you all
- Ben
For my independent study I've been reading the second volume of Jaroslav Pelikan's wonderful church history set entitled The Rise of Eastern Christendom. Since Pelikan's work chronicles the history of theology and thoughts I am finding that it's a moderately heavy read, especially given that even at seminary many of these historical concepts have not been taught to me.
Today I was reading about the Nestorian, Jacobite, and Monophysite heresies and on the hypostatis of Christ. Since Pelikan quotes from so many primary sources (something that is often missing in many church histories) I found myself getting a little confused concerning the hypostasis of Christ and what orthodox doctrine taught. Instead of turning to wikipedia or another source that would of taken a lot more time to find some resolution I remembered that there is an ancient hymn of pascha that briefly discusses the hypostasis of Christ. Since I had my ipod on me I decided to turn to the music of the church to teach me the orthodox way and bring about clarity of thought.
Granted the hymn isn't a treatise, but I wasn't looking for a treatise, I was merely looking for a quick answer as to how many hypostates Christ has. This is when I realized that I was able to articulate one of the many reasons I don't like Protestant worship music - namely, that I don't like to guess and check when it comes to the doctrine conveyed within my church music.
Due to the plethora of music in protestantism and the constant desire to update the music I find that one cannot trust the theology that is conveyed in much of it. In strict juxtaposition to this is the music that is sung at the Orthodox church I currently attend. When I hear the hymns of the Orthodox church I am sure that what is being taught is theologically in-line with the 7 ecumenical creeds of the church. I don't have to guess if I'm being taught something heretical because the songs have been tried by church and found fitting to be used in the worship of the Holy Trinity.
Sure, there may be some great assets to protestant music, but as a whole it is theologically vapid and emotive to a fault. While it is always good to asses and think about what is being sung in worship, I think that having to constantly analyze and wonder if the music is teaching correct doctrine is counterproductive to the church service. The music of the church should be filled with dogmatically correct theology and should be able to be used as a basis for the lay person to refute or accept notions of the divine. One can very easily argue that our theology in protestantism is weak because we do not sing it and we do not sing it because it is weak. This cycle is a disastrous one that is hurting the church and leading people into ignorance of the divine. How can we, expect to truly become partakers of the Divine essence (2Pet 1.4) if we do not even know God as he has revealed himself to us?
I fear I'm approaching a tangent so I will conclude now. If the reason I set out to articulate wasn't clear above let me sum up. Part of my aversion to Protestant worship music is that it has no substance and that which it tries to pass as substance is often near heretical if not blatantly so. The songs of the church should be those which have been tried by years of reflection and should be able to be used as concise creedal statements of belief that will plant the deep truths of the faith into the hearts of clergy and lay persons alike.
May the faith grow deep within you all
- Ben
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Shared Experiences
Much of what is below is still a work in progress (especially given I just started thinking about this about 3 minutes ago) but I wanted to throw it out there before I forgot it (as I usually do).
I was just youtube-ing at work since the student center is completely empty and I have another hour and a half to work, and I came across a sweet video via my friend Tegan's blog. I promptly sent the link to my sister with whom I was IM-ing to pass the time.
After a period of no response from my sister (not an unusual thing) I asked if she watched it yet? She replied that she hadn't and thus I exhorted her to watch "now." I told her it was great and gave her a few reasons to watch it. After prodding her to watched it I began thinking about the youtube phenomenon and blogging and things of that nature.
I began to wonder how much of this is more the desire for shared experience than actually just the dissemination of cool videos and ideas. I'm sure it's a bit of both, but it seems that one of the driving forces behind youtube and really all the internet fads is shared experience.
As I think about this I wonder if this is need or craving for shared experience has helped to feed into the various popular Christian movements over the past few years. Think about the Emergents. What do they emphasize? They build upon a need for experience and collective-ness at the expense of Christian orthodoxy, even to the point of holding heretical views and ignoring essential Christian tenets. I personally am absolutely dismayed that the emergent movement continues to thrive. This is a cancer growing through protestantism that is causing us to forsake the Christian faith all for some sort of collective experience and liberal idealism. In my mind many of the emergents are no better than the heretics of old such as Arius, Nestorius, Montanus, etc.
I also wonder if desire for shared experience helps to contribute to the Rob Bell craze. While I'm still working on reading through some of this guy's books, I do have to say that I'm not a big fan. His nooma videos are junk and I think they are mostly fueled by this desire for a shared experience or a desire to be 'timely' (see my post: Current? and yes I do realize that I'm being a bit contradictory by posting these thoughts so quickly)
The students here crave Bell and the Emergents. They get all starry-eyed when someone mentions their names and quickly bristle when someone like me says that they're not that great and may indeed hold heretical beliefs (emergents). I find it disturbing that students champion these people and drink the proverbial Kool-Aid so quickly. Why must our shared experience be found in the latest fad and not the timeless beliefs of classic Christian orthodoxy? Why do we champion these new thinkers for innovative ecclesiologies when they lack the substance of the faith and are doing nothing more than leading people down the path to hell with their watered down theology and absence of anything genuine?
If these men and women teach something contradictory to classic Christian Orthodoxy and they cease to become "nice" and "slightly misguided" people that we should learn from and they become impious God-haters (to use some of the phrasing for those anathematized at the ecumenical councils).
Just so I don't get misunderstood and get a ton of backlash let me be clear: I am not calling Rob Bell a heretic. I am also not calling ALL of the Emergents heretics. I have, however, had a conversation with one high-profile Emergent leader in which he claimed the Trinity was just Greek philosophical ideals and not really Christian and thus not a necessary or even important doctrine. I also think that Emergent theology down plays Christian orthodoxy to a dangerous extreme and thus runs fearfully close to falling into heresy (like the aforementioned leader).
My concern is that Asbury Seminary students and undoubtedly students, ministers, and lay people across the country and buying into these faulty paradigms because they desire a shared experience. This is absurd. The shared experience should be the Holy doctrines of the Church which help us to partake of the divine essence of God as St. Peter says. I am absolutely disgusted with the hero worship the students around this campus give to folks like Rob Bell and the emergents.
While the same charge of hero worship could be thrown at me and the way I read the saints of the church, I will just say that my hero's have lasted the test of time, and were actually building up and codifying Christian orthodoxy not ignoring it and leading people astray.
- Ben
I was just youtube-ing at work since the student center is completely empty and I have another hour and a half to work, and I came across a sweet video via my friend Tegan's blog. I promptly sent the link to my sister with whom I was IM-ing to pass the time.
After a period of no response from my sister (not an unusual thing) I asked if she watched it yet? She replied that she hadn't and thus I exhorted her to watch "now." I told her it was great and gave her a few reasons to watch it. After prodding her to watched it I began thinking about the youtube phenomenon and blogging and things of that nature.
I began to wonder how much of this is more the desire for shared experience than actually just the dissemination of cool videos and ideas. I'm sure it's a bit of both, but it seems that one of the driving forces behind youtube and really all the internet fads is shared experience.
As I think about this I wonder if this is need or craving for shared experience has helped to feed into the various popular Christian movements over the past few years. Think about the Emergents. What do they emphasize? They build upon a need for experience and collective-ness at the expense of Christian orthodoxy, even to the point of holding heretical views and ignoring essential Christian tenets. I personally am absolutely dismayed that the emergent movement continues to thrive. This is a cancer growing through protestantism that is causing us to forsake the Christian faith all for some sort of collective experience and liberal idealism. In my mind many of the emergents are no better than the heretics of old such as Arius, Nestorius, Montanus, etc.
I also wonder if desire for shared experience helps to contribute to the Rob Bell craze. While I'm still working on reading through some of this guy's books, I do have to say that I'm not a big fan. His nooma videos are junk and I think they are mostly fueled by this desire for a shared experience or a desire to be 'timely' (see my post: Current? and yes I do realize that I'm being a bit contradictory by posting these thoughts so quickly)
The students here crave Bell and the Emergents. They get all starry-eyed when someone mentions their names and quickly bristle when someone like me says that they're not that great and may indeed hold heretical beliefs (emergents). I find it disturbing that students champion these people and drink the proverbial Kool-Aid so quickly. Why must our shared experience be found in the latest fad and not the timeless beliefs of classic Christian orthodoxy? Why do we champion these new thinkers for innovative ecclesiologies when they lack the substance of the faith and are doing nothing more than leading people down the path to hell with their watered down theology and absence of anything genuine?
If these men and women teach something contradictory to classic Christian Orthodoxy and they cease to become "nice" and "slightly misguided" people that we should learn from and they become impious God-haters (to use some of the phrasing for those anathematized at the ecumenical councils).
Just so I don't get misunderstood and get a ton of backlash let me be clear: I am not calling Rob Bell a heretic. I am also not calling ALL of the Emergents heretics. I have, however, had a conversation with one high-profile Emergent leader in which he claimed the Trinity was just Greek philosophical ideals and not really Christian and thus not a necessary or even important doctrine. I also think that Emergent theology down plays Christian orthodoxy to a dangerous extreme and thus runs fearfully close to falling into heresy (like the aforementioned leader).
My concern is that Asbury Seminary students and undoubtedly students, ministers, and lay people across the country and buying into these faulty paradigms because they desire a shared experience. This is absurd. The shared experience should be the Holy doctrines of the Church which help us to partake of the divine essence of God as St. Peter says. I am absolutely disgusted with the hero worship the students around this campus give to folks like Rob Bell and the emergents.
While the same charge of hero worship could be thrown at me and the way I read the saints of the church, I will just say that my hero's have lasted the test of time, and were actually building up and codifying Christian orthodoxy not ignoring it and leading people astray.
- Ben
Monday, July 11, 2005
On Conversion... more or less
I've been doing a lot of thinking about conversion lately. Some of it has been on my own and some of it has been through dialogue with some of you who may read this.
I really don't know how to phrase what I'm thinking, but I will give it a shot and maybe someone will have some input.
Most of these thoughts (that I'll get to in a bit) have risen out of an increased desire to see my lost friends become part of the Kingdom of God. My heart is continually burdened for their salvation, that they may know the joy, hope and love that I have in Christ. Although I desire their salvation, I don't desire them to "be saved" in the sense that most of western Christendom uses the term. I don' want them to pray a prayer and go on with their lives, I don't want them to be part of a Christianity that teaches them that they "must" worship God because they have an obligation, that they must do such and such because that is the way that "Christians" act.
No, my heart longs for them to have a deep and intimate relationship with the Living God. I want them to exceed the bounds of normal, complacent, dead Christendom and live in the fire of the Holy Spirit. I want them to long to worship God, because they delight themselves in Him.
But the question is how... how do I explain to them this depth that can be theirs, that God longs for them to have? A couple of them have some concept of Christianity but others have no god-concept at all. How do I start from scratch, a person with no conception of any of the things of God or gods and speak to them the supernatural and the things of the divine?
Suppose I do start with the small things of God, how do I lead them to the intense depth that God has for them? I don't know how I've come to see it and live in it (not that I have achieved the goal by any means - I am still running). I have sought God and he has been faithful to answer, he has drawn me into his heart.
I do not want to lead my friends in the "sinner's prayer" and have then believe that they have accomplished all they ever need to do. No I want them to thirst after God, to taste and see that he is good, to rise above the common level of Christianity and become passionately in love with the Holy and Triune God.
I know how to preach to God's people, how to call and beckon them deeper, it seems to come naturally because it is the message that I've been called to proclaim. For those who aren't in the flock I find myself at a loss of how to relate. I suppose I could take them through the "regular steps" and let them dwell in complacent and apathetic Christianity for an extended period of time before they are urged to go "deeper," to which they may respond or not. But, that seems insufficient to me, why must they go through that stage, I don't believe complacency is a normal part of the Christian maturation process. Christian growth is a process, but I don't believe part of that process is settling for a decaying faith that has no power or passion.
We must dispel this notion that the current state of the majority of Christendom is normal, and that intense passion and zeal are only for the ministers, the missionaries and those who actually have the courage to give something up. Christianity has always been about sacrifices, about following with passion and zeal - that is normal Christianity. Normalcy for believers should be lives that are lived with the possibility of martyrdom in the mind at all times. Normalcy in Christ means dying and giving of oneself, it means loving when it hurts and it means standing for things that most don't stand for (even those on the conservative "Christian" right).
I would even go so far as to challenge the "salvation" of those who live in this "normal" complacent Christianity. Faith without works is dead, and yes we only need to call upon His name, but if we call upon it we better carry it as our banner for all of our days. And that means being willing to pay the price, or better yet, paying the price in every breath.
This, it seems to me, is where true Christianity lies - in the sacrifice. It's funny though how if you stand for the things of God and are willing to pay the sacrifice you actually end up doing it. The price often starts first from the complacent mass of Christians who realize their inadequacies and don't want to sacrifice their "golden calves" of "Christian values" or "American dreams". They push you to the fringes and write you off as a zealot, liberal, or something in between.
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe I'm perfect and I don't believe I've figured everything out. I'm not trying to sound overly negative or arrogant, I just am passionate about the lost. I'm so passionate that I don't want them to become "Christians" I want them to become followers of Christ, pursuers of God, or people filled with the Holy Spirit - whatever you want to call it. I want them to skip the "phase" of complacency and live how true Christians should be living. I love my friends and I would give my life for them to become part of the Kingdom of God - a true citizen of the Kingdom, who lives passionately for God, ready to give his/her life in an instant for the gospel. I don't want them to live the way everyone else lives... no I want them to follow Christ. This is my desire, not just for my friends, but for myself (as I'm still running) and for all. We need to prepare ourselves as the bride of Christ, for a day is coming when our beloved will return and we must be ready.
I really don't know how to phrase what I'm thinking, but I will give it a shot and maybe someone will have some input.
Most of these thoughts (that I'll get to in a bit) have risen out of an increased desire to see my lost friends become part of the Kingdom of God. My heart is continually burdened for their salvation, that they may know the joy, hope and love that I have in Christ. Although I desire their salvation, I don't desire them to "be saved" in the sense that most of western Christendom uses the term. I don' want them to pray a prayer and go on with their lives, I don't want them to be part of a Christianity that teaches them that they "must" worship God because they have an obligation, that they must do such and such because that is the way that "Christians" act.
No, my heart longs for them to have a deep and intimate relationship with the Living God. I want them to exceed the bounds of normal, complacent, dead Christendom and live in the fire of the Holy Spirit. I want them to long to worship God, because they delight themselves in Him.
But the question is how... how do I explain to them this depth that can be theirs, that God longs for them to have? A couple of them have some concept of Christianity but others have no god-concept at all. How do I start from scratch, a person with no conception of any of the things of God or gods and speak to them the supernatural and the things of the divine?
Suppose I do start with the small things of God, how do I lead them to the intense depth that God has for them? I don't know how I've come to see it and live in it (not that I have achieved the goal by any means - I am still running). I have sought God and he has been faithful to answer, he has drawn me into his heart.
I do not want to lead my friends in the "sinner's prayer" and have then believe that they have accomplished all they ever need to do. No I want them to thirst after God, to taste and see that he is good, to rise above the common level of Christianity and become passionately in love with the Holy and Triune God.
I know how to preach to God's people, how to call and beckon them deeper, it seems to come naturally because it is the message that I've been called to proclaim. For those who aren't in the flock I find myself at a loss of how to relate. I suppose I could take them through the "regular steps" and let them dwell in complacent and apathetic Christianity for an extended period of time before they are urged to go "deeper," to which they may respond or not. But, that seems insufficient to me, why must they go through that stage, I don't believe complacency is a normal part of the Christian maturation process. Christian growth is a process, but I don't believe part of that process is settling for a decaying faith that has no power or passion.
We must dispel this notion that the current state of the majority of Christendom is normal, and that intense passion and zeal are only for the ministers, the missionaries and those who actually have the courage to give something up. Christianity has always been about sacrifices, about following with passion and zeal - that is normal Christianity. Normalcy for believers should be lives that are lived with the possibility of martyrdom in the mind at all times. Normalcy in Christ means dying and giving of oneself, it means loving when it hurts and it means standing for things that most don't stand for (even those on the conservative "Christian" right).
I would even go so far as to challenge the "salvation" of those who live in this "normal" complacent Christianity. Faith without works is dead, and yes we only need to call upon His name, but if we call upon it we better carry it as our banner for all of our days. And that means being willing to pay the price, or better yet, paying the price in every breath.
This, it seems to me, is where true Christianity lies - in the sacrifice. It's funny though how if you stand for the things of God and are willing to pay the sacrifice you actually end up doing it. The price often starts first from the complacent mass of Christians who realize their inadequacies and don't want to sacrifice their "golden calves" of "Christian values" or "American dreams". They push you to the fringes and write you off as a zealot, liberal, or something in between.
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe I'm perfect and I don't believe I've figured everything out. I'm not trying to sound overly negative or arrogant, I just am passionate about the lost. I'm so passionate that I don't want them to become "Christians" I want them to become followers of Christ, pursuers of God, or people filled with the Holy Spirit - whatever you want to call it. I want them to skip the "phase" of complacency and live how true Christians should be living. I love my friends and I would give my life for them to become part of the Kingdom of God - a true citizen of the Kingdom, who lives passionately for God, ready to give his/her life in an instant for the gospel. I don't want them to live the way everyone else lives... no I want them to follow Christ. This is my desire, not just for my friends, but for myself (as I'm still running) and for all. We need to prepare ourselves as the bride of Christ, for a day is coming when our beloved will return and we must be ready.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
