outside is better

Sermon Prep

Sermon Prep
Originally uploaded by chadbrooks

My good friend David Norman blogged about how he prepares for sermons this week.  I thought I would put my addition in a post instead of a comment. 

I prefer to spend time preaching through an extended piece of text, but I have only once had the opportunity to spend several weeks in the same book.  When I teach my youth I take my time, but that is a whole different monster, since most of the are biblically illiterate (thats another post).

Once I have my text down, and I usually shoot for at least for a few related verses, if not an entire literary segment, I gather my resources.  I am a huge fan of Oak Tree's softwares Accordance, and I use it throughout the process.  I translate the passage from the original languages first.  I don't do this because I want to have my own translation, but instead to see subtle word play and to hopefully spark some good ideas.  Some of my best sermons came from things I found once I translated the text.  I have a few lexicons inside accordance that I use too, and I bring them out when anything seems interesting or different from the usual english translations (NRSV, NIV and the NLT are my usuals).

Once I have my translation I spend a few hours thinking about the text structurally and theologically.  I do some basic level IBS, but I do not go as far as I would for a school assignment.  It is in this stage that I often find what I want to focus on.  I try to be honest and not take the text outside of it's greater scriptural family or to present it in a way that wouldn't make sense to its contemporary readers/hearers. 

Two of the places that I having been going to lately are, "Theological Interpretation of the Old Testament" and its partner "Theological Interpretation of the New Testament", edited by Kevin J. Vanhoozer and published by Baker.  I recieved both of these free at SBL last year and I find myself going to them often.  Theological Interpretation is a movement that seeks to rejoin the academic families of Biblical Interpretation and Theological studies.  It may seem surprising to you that they are separated, but inside the academy, this is a new and innovative movement.  It seeks to read the scripture theologically.  These books do a great job at showing a wide breadth of theological thought regarding the Bible. 

By this time I try to have some themes worked out.  I now go to The Essential IVP Reference Collection software that I have for Accordance.  I like this set of dictionaries (which can also be found in paper copies) because in Accordance I can surf around the different dictionaries.  Its almost like going to Wikipedia, but you can trust (and cite) the information found.  It is a quick way to get around alot of information, and I never do any work without it.  It is a pretty important tool to me.  I really like the Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, The New Dictionary of Biblical Theology and the Dictionary of the Latter New Testament and its Developments the best.  I would buy Accordance just for this set. 

When I have a couple of things that have really jumped out at me, I look for some academic articles surrounding the topic.  I rarely actually use anything from them, but they are a great way to see how others have put together the information.  I also have a couple of commentary sets I go to every time (the Sacra Pagina and the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture), and then I start pulling things off the library shelf.

By now I have my sermon pretty much outlined and I start trying to put it all together.  My pastor usually tells me I need more illustrations, but I strive for a more narrative approach so I have a hard time with stories that are outside of my life.  I never speak more than 25-30 minutes so I have alot of triming to do, but I like having the information in front of me.  I speak from a manuscript that I am really familar with.  I outline my sermon and then annotate the manuscript with the outline.  I would say that I don't need it 65 to 75% of the time, but it is nice to keep me grounded. 

Well, thats how I prepare a sermon.  You need to tell us now as well.

What has to be learned by the American Church...not just evangelicals

I have been in the process of writing my follow up to my last post regarding communal doctrine.  I want to make sure it is really sweet, but in the process I came up with this list, which I am imagining to be a work in progess.  Feel free to push back or add to this.

What has to be learned by the American Church:

Fundamentalists:

• Issues regarding authority need be re-thought.  You simply make claims about biblical issues that just can't be substantiated with the History of Judeo-Christian tradition. (Read Craig D. Allert;s "A high view of scripture?")
• Speaking of traditon, it should be recognized more.  How do you think Christianity was transmitted pre-text? D. H. Williams is a great starting place.
• Proper Trinitarian Thoughts, an emphasis on all three members and teaching on how they properly interact with one another.

Traditional/Liturgical

• The difference between issues of justice and evangelism needs to be fleshed out.  While the justice piece has been important in the Mainline Protestant churches,  it is not thought of as an evangelical practice with kingdom/gospel dimensions.
• The Holy Spirit and His place within the sphere of worship.  It is evident in the words of your liturgies, but it needs to be put in practice.
• Cultural adaptation needs to happen, this means that things change in order to keep things refreshed.  This won't destroy the richness that is a positive trait, but will allow it to continue to be what it has always been, but in a way that translates to the non or de-churched.

Again, these are just working lists.  I want to think about an Evangelical list and a Pentecostal/Charismatic list.  I really see these not as destructive, but as ways that the church can hopefully grow in the 21st century.  For those that minister in "Non-Sexy" churches, and are searching for re-vitalization, I think these are points that have to be thought of.  The more people I meet on the street that consider themselves "religious" have no denominational or traditional loyalty, they just want to see a Church that functions like Jesus lived.

Book Review: Who Goes There? A Cultural History of Heaven and Hell

Who Goes There?:A Cultural History of Heaven and Hell

By Rebecca Price Janney

Who Goes There?:A Cultural History of Heaven and Hell is written by Rebecca Price Janney.  Dr. Janney hold the unique perspective of being a theologically trained historian.  Just her perspective alone interests me, because I often think the historical is left out when people are deciding or debating hot button theological issues.  The idea of an afterlife is at the fundamental existence of any religion, and you could argue that having some sort of a view of life after death is a keystone thought in determining if something is a “religion”.

The author quickly goes through an ancient perspective of differing views, traversing through various historical religious traditions.  She also introduces Americans fascination with death and interacting with the idea of an afterlife when remembering those who have passed.  To a point, this book could be looked at as a view of American Church History.   No matter what, is shows what a fundamental place eschatology has in American Protestantism.  She also shows how as Americans, we have baptized the ideas of justice and liberty and intertwined them within our religious world-view.

An interesting intersection is when Janney shows the difference between two presidents funerals, 25th President William McKinley and the 35th President John F Kennedy, both assassinated in office.  McKinley was held to be a “good Christian man”, and part of his funeral was the idea of him being a righteous public official, and his death was even evangelized.  John F Kennedy, while recognized religiously as our first Roman Catholic President, was generally regarded as a “secular” president.  In his funeral proceedings were described as “a curious blending of sacred and secular” and while lauded as someone whose example to follow, it was because of his civic reputation.

A critique I do have is that while mentioned, the critical place of pre-millennial dispensationalism in 19th century American thought was passed over quickly.  The rise of this viewpoint served as a hingepoint in American evangelicalism.  The reaction between this and the Civil War greatly altered the American religious landscape and I think it should have been addressed better.

Dr. Janney’s text is a great book that outlines the development not only of American religion, but of our forming as a nation and the place that religious views had in its forming.  The book would serve as a great introduction text into a Church History, Philosophy  or general Religion class.

Here is some more information
Book Website
Here is an excerpt

Review: The Voice New Testament

It was several years ago that I first heard of The Voice translation project.  It was actually through my interests in Christian art and the release of The Last Eyewitness, a contemporary retelling of John 13-21.  I remember being interested with the work and made a mental note to keep up with it.  Meredith and I also visited Chris Seay’s church Ecclesia when we were at her parents in Houston.  The actual project of the Ecclesia Bible Society is interesting enough to warrant its own blog post.  Buts that’s not the point here.

The Voice New Testament is the first “long form” offering in the project.  While multiple smaller books have been put out, this is the entire New Testament.  I find that this translation actually answers many of the issues that I have in regard to a Bible that is stimulating enough to make people want to actually read it.  I know that is a statement that may make some uncomfortable, but its true.

What The Voice does offer is an accurate translation that is transmitted in un-orthodox manner.  What this means is that in sections of dialog sections, the text is broken up into script format, allowing the reader to follow along easier.  I also noted that in certain places in Revelation time based words have been rendered as in the Greek, and not inserted as part of the narrative. For example;

Rev 14
NIV
Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.

NASB
Then I looked, and behold, the Lamb was standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His name and the name of His Father written on their foreheads.

The Voice
The scene changed. I looked and saw the lamb standing on top of Mount. Zion, and with Him were the 144,000 who had His name and His Father’s name inscribed on their foreheads.

This sounds like it really doesn’t matter, but the translators of the voice have paid attention to the difference between written prose language and the idea of narrative community story-telling.  This is just one of the features about the voice that I enjoy. The writers identify this italic type as "words not directly tied to a dynamic translation of the Bible."  These are pieces of information that would be obvious to the original hearer (or reader), but in English don't carry the original meaning.  Solving this is the answer to one of my largest pet peeves in regard to English translation and how people read the Bible.

Another feature is the addition of devotional content that is placed amongst the text.  It is written by several writers who are well known in the more “emerging” contexts that The Voice is unofficially associated with.  The Voice also steers clear of some of the more recent issues in evangelical textual criticism dealing with authorship and dating.  It does this my simply staying away from the subject and not veering of into an inherancy/infallibility discussion.

My only problem with The Voice is the dual column format.  I know that this is a standard, and that not doing this could potentially disrupt the flow regarding the devotional section, but for a Bible that is really trying to get out of the mindsets of Bible publishing it was a surprise. 

Overall though, The Voice is a wonderful Bible and translation.  For those who minister to non or de-churched people it is a great Bible to use because it is able to communicate without assuming a Biblical worldview, which is hard these days.  Many Christian publishers understand it as a problem but don’t offer a good solution. The Voice has a high level of readability that gets out of the "a verse here.....and a chapter here" mentality of scripture reading. 

To download a free copy of the Gospel of John click here.

The Christian and the political sphere

I try to stay out of politics and posting to much class writing here, but I felt that this was somewhat needed.  Last week our country made political history and plenty of Christians have strong views regarding politics.  I waited until I got this essay back from my professor to make sure it wasn't to far off base, but it came back through today and I wanted to put it up here for you.  I took a stand regarding politics a few months ago and this essay was influenced by the feelings I had at the time.  Typepad doesn't handle copy/paste well, so I tried to make the academic mark-up as friendly as possible.

+++
The Christian and the Political Sphere
    In his most recent book Can These Bones Live?(1), Barry Harvey outlines the affect of modernity's invention of “the self” in relation to the sphere of religion and civic duty, focusing on the separation between the spheres of sacred and secular.  John Milbank also speaks about the creation of “secular” and the privatization of religion in his first few pages of Theology and Social Theory.(2)  These are just two mentions of the intricacies of the development of the modern western notion of the state.  The guidelines for this essay ask that we take a position in relation to Christian engagement with politics, and outline its placement within the current spectrum of life.  For my entry into this assignment, I wanted to start off with idea of the progressive de-valuing of communal identity and the realm of the sacred as stated by these first two scholars.  I believe that Christian identity is tied into the covenant community of God and moral direction (and political values) come from inside those boundaries.
    At this point, one could wonder what this has to do with a Christians engagement with politics, but I think it matters greatly.  What a person believes about their identity as a Christian, and what the Churches role is in the greater society, will ultimately form how they choose to interact as a citizen within the State.  When we fall into the trap of individualization, we forget what Aquinas reminds us of, that our ultimate end is to become like God.(3)  The only way to do this is to realize that the task of life on this earth is wrapped inside the Church, and not the State.  We have a dependence on other people.
    At a root definition of the church we should look to the formation of the covenant Jewish community that is told in the book of Exodus.  The Decalogue is a classic example that many people understand, but usually confuse as a set of individual laws that are to be practiced by their individual self.  The formation of a moral community in covenant with a saving God isn’t the usual method of interpretation that is learned in Vacation Bible School.  At the other end of the scriptures, we see the author of 1st Peter writing to the “aliens, scattered throughout…” and again writing in 2nd Peter to “the sojourners and exiles”, and identifying them within the context of the stories of the community in the Old Testament.  The called out, covenant community with defined boundaries is a scriptural definition of the Church.
    When we think about how we align ourselves politically, we are ultimately talking about if we agree or disagree about ethical decisions the government has made.  Do we feel that they support us, or are we against what they deem as ethical.  The government makes these decisions with a utilitarian mindset, what they think would be the greatest good for the most people.  An ideal view of democracy means that the majority of constituents vote in the candidate they believe will do the best, in turn the politician represents the views of those who elected him or her.  What happens when we realize this doesn’t work is where we see political dissidence among the populace.  What do we do when we don’t agree with the government is where many Christians start to have a hard time figuring out what to do next., and many of these issues lie within their individual faith (with a faith community being functionally nonexistent) and how to voice dis-pleasure and not be looked down upon.
    Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. voices his displeasure for the political system in Letter from Birmingham Jail(4), defends his non-violent methods, and asks church leaders to realize the situation and their subsequent religious duties to alleviate the situation.  The writings of the evangelical abolitionists show a deep belief regarding the duty of the Christian and justice.(5)  Charles G. Finney bemoans the church forgetting its mission and leaving it to be conducted by those who are ill equipped.(6)  Boff and Boff writes about what they identify as the liberal-bourgeois tradition and how it defends “individual rights disconnected from society and from basic solidarity with all”.(7)
    Many Christians today would identify themselves as Evangelical.  Wrapped up inside of this are specific views regarding ultra right-wing politics.  To disagree with the government, or to vote “wrong” regarding the difficult situations of homosexuality and abortion would mean almost certain social expulsion from their church.  Some would say that they have combined Church and State and take a very “Christ of culture” model in regards to the role the Christian has within the political sphere.  They say that the specific morality must be legislated, or God will judge us and it is out of the hand of the Church.  I come from and serve inside of this religious system right now.  It is a system that has “baptized” a specific political ideal and has lost covenant communal identification
    I think Reinhold Niebuhr offers the best advice in his description of prophetic faith.8  It realizes that without proper grounding inside of the Church, that we can go to extremism.  We can become scared and pull away from society, or we can become so inter-woven within it that we are no longer distinct.  For those that seek seclusion, they in turn become separatists and are filled with fear.  Those who marry the culture, start to think as individuals in a democracy thats ultimate good is not a vision of the kingdom of God.  Either way, we loose a world-view that is based off of the reality of God coming to earth as a man and radically changing everything forever.  We have to put ourselves back inside the story of God in order to understand the moral fabric that makes up the Christian Church.  When the Church starts to act like the Church, we will slowly rely less and less on the government for moral decisions and put it back in what Augustine says is its proper place, a necessary entity that gives order to this temporary place.
+++
1 Barry Harvey. Can These Bones Live?: A Catholic Baptist Engagement with Ecclesiology, Hermeneutics, and Social Theory. Brazos Press, 2008. pg 111
2 John Milbank. Theology and Social Theory: Beyond Secular Reason. 2nd ed. Wiley-Blackwell, 2006. pgs 9-11
3 St. Thomas Aquinas, "Excerpts from Summa Contra Gentiles and Summa Theologica," in From Christ to the World, ed. Boulton, Wayne G.,Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey (Grand Rapides, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1994), pg 110
4 Martin Luther King Jr, "Letter from Birmingham Jail," in From Christ to the World, ed. Boulton, Wayne G.,Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey (Grand Rapides, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1994), passim
5  Donald W. Dayton. Discovering an Evangelical Heritage. Hendrickson Publishers, 1988.
6 ibid pg.20
7 Leonardo Boff and Clodovis Boff, "Key Themes of Liberation Theology," in From Christ to the World, ed. Boulton, Wayne G.,Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey (Grand Rapides, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1994), pg 481
8 Reinhold Niebuhr, "The Relevance of an Impossible Ethical Ideal," in From Christ to the World, ed. Boulton, Wayne G.,Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey (Grand Rapides, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1994), passim

Galatians 5:6

I received my prize of a ESV Study bible from Best-Bible.org in the mail this afternoon.  I shelved it thinking I wouldn't have the time to look at it because I had a speech this evening in class and a massive amount of Hebrew to do for tomorrow.  But class is canceled and the speech is don and that means I get to check out this new bible.  I have a few other new bibles (NLT Study Bible and a review copy of The Voice New Testament) coming in the mail in the next few weeks so I am excited to put them all together.  While I spend some time in this Bible, I wanted to post the text of my speech here.  It is on "Faith" according to Galatians 5:6.

Galatians chapter 5 offers an explanation of a classic triad of grace by talking about faith, hope and love.  Our assignment doesn’t mention verse 5 and hope, but these early expression of the three graces show a relationship of actions that are tied in with each other.  “Faith which is made more effective through love” the phrase that has everyone in this classes stomach tied up in knots, and we are all trying to find a way to express something unique about this.  I will address the topic by looking at individual versus corporate expressions of faith and the interaction they have with mission and church life.

Faith is the the quintessential word to describe religion.  Inside of “Faith”  is an entire thought process regarding everything that sums up life, uttered in a quick one syllable word.  Faith has the idea of belief and reliance tied up inside of it’s definition.  But it’s also a concept that we deal with on a daily basis. 
Any man my size understands faith multiple times a day.  I have to have faith that the chair I am about to sit down in will hold me!!! I have a friend that has no chairs I trust (because I broke 2), he usually brings out a rolling office chair when I eat dinner with his family.  I doubt many of us understand how the complex brake system in our cars works, but we always trust it.

The issue here is to take this idea of Faith and re-claim it’s theological uniqueness.  Pistos was a word already when Paul wrote his letters.  It was not a new concept when the writer of Hebrews wrote that “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for”.  We need to understand that their is a secular understanding of faith.

St. Augustine contrasted two different worlds the city of God and the city of man.   And in doing this, he answered many questions regarding what it looks like for Christians to live life in two places at once.
Our theological redefinition of Faith has to come to terms with us trusting that while we live and interact with the City of Man-we are simultaneously living in the City of God.  We are sojourners, living in tents-temporary dwellings as we travel towards the city of God and we are supposed to be picking up hitch-hikers while we are on our way there.  Our Faith is about our belief in this reality.  The life of faith is about our confidence in God to fulfill his promises for more than just us, but for all of humanity. 

Faith is the hope of the Church to be re-united with the bridegroom.  In the Old Testament, the faith of what was to come is what held the saints together.  But now, we are not waiting for revealing, because through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus we already know.  We still live in an alien world, as strangers and travelers, but our pilgrimage has ended.  We are already in the heavenly realm and we are just waiting for a geophysical manifestation of it.  The Church has now taken over the role of Israel, by serving as a beacon to the entire world, pointing towards the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Faith is not just an individual action, as much as we have tried to make it in the last century.  I honestly think one of the sins of 20th century evangelicalism will be the individualization of the Christian life.  Individual faith makes us feel good and answers many questions, but corporate faith does alot more than just singing songs together on Sunday.  We aren’t supposed to identify ourselves as an independent, autonomous being in which self-actualization is a primary concern.  We are the people of God, the body of Christ, and the corporate dwelling place of the Holy Spirit.

Our eschatological framework, is wrapped around God’s continued business of redemption, and this makes the faith of the Church a powerful message.  We know that their will be an end, and in this end the people of God will be gathered together in a promised glory.  But when the individual self thinks about the end, they think about judgment.  When the Christian church thinks about the end they think about eschaton-a wonderful reunion with God.  For to long, faith has solely been about heaven or hell for many people-and it is far time that we remove it from this method of thought.  Faith in relation to love speaks of a life that is worked out as Gospel mission.  It is through this practical and actual faith, rooted in devotion to Christ, that we see a mission worked out towards the world that shows true faith-and not just civic and religious duty.  We can’t stop engaging faith in relation to mission.

Barry Harvey writes that in the last 1500 years, our thoughts regarding the non-christian have moved and the non-christian ceased to be the most significant measure of the charity and love that is formed through the participation in the justice of God’s reign.  In the past their title has been the barbarian to be ignored or the heretic who must be punished. And at one time we went so far as to name them infidels- persons in whom all that is opposed to the virtues of faith, hope and love exist.  Mission had become Holy War.  To destroy them was to hold a virtuous office.  John Howard Yoder says we have created a mind that thinks it’s divine imparted duty is to either destroy or rule over the non-christian. 

This is the place where pseudo-religious faith has taken us before, a place of fear and of self-protection.  But understanding that our faith is worked out in the righteous actions of love brings our lives, our personal ministries and our activity among Gods Church to a level that transcends what humans think is possible or even attainable.  As Steve Deneff said in chapel just a few weeks ago, the kingdom of God is the world turned upside down on it’s head.  It is life worked out through radical love, grounded inside of the identity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit that expresses the Christian idea of faith.  When we think about faith with theological eyes, and the reality that the biblical narrative shows us-we see that faith is a corporate affair, a gathering together and community wide expression.  Trendy terms (Which I have been known to use) such has missional, relevant, authentic, and contemporary move into a place where they are no longer needed, not because they are dismissed, but because the problems they are seeking to solve become absent due to the church behaving like the unified body of Christ.  The individual becomes wrapped up in the body, and self-awareness is actualized inside of God’s eyes and no longer ours.  Our Faith is worked out through the hope and assurance of Gods unending love.

Are you worried? I'm not...

The amount of Christians that are going nuts and practicing Bible math these last few weeks is starting to get a little out of hand.  Forget donkeys and elephants-hold fast to the lamb.  Reading this a few times a day will keep everything in perspective.

Matthew 6

Giving to the Needy

1 "Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' in front of others, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.

    2 "So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing,  4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

Prayer

5 "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.  8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

    9 "This, then, is how you should pray:
       " 'Our Father in heaven,
       hallowed be your name,

    10 your kingdom come,
       your will be done,
       on earth as it is in heaven.

    11 Give us today our daily bread.

    12 And forgive us our debts,
       as we also have forgiven our debtors.

    13 And lead us not into temptation, ^[a]
       but deliver us from the evil one. ^[b]'

    14 For if you forgive others when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.  15 But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

Fasting

16 "When you fast, do not look somber as the hypocrites do, for they disfigure their faces to show others they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 17 But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face,  18 so that it will not be obvious to others that you are fasting, but only to your Father, who is unseen; and your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

Treasures in Heaven

19 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.  20 But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

    22 "The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are healthy, ^[c] your whole body will be full of light.  23 But if your eyes are unhealthy, ^[d] your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!

    24 "No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.

Do Not Worry

25 "Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? 26 Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27 Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life ^[e]?

    28 "And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin.  29 Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these.  30 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith? 31 So do not worry, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?'  32 For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them.  33 But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.  34 Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

The future of Christian Music

I was scanning through my feedreader today and came upon a great post from Collide Magazine, and found something that was really surprising. CCM, the giant of Christian Music publishing, is stopping their paper based magazine.  As an artist that pulled out of music altogether for several years, and is just now thinking about starting again, I find this really interesting.

The Collide article (written by Scott McClellan) is a response to this article in the last print issue of CCM. McClellan really offers some good thoughts into the original CCM article by Charlie Peacock.

The basic gist of the whole thing is the the contemporary Christian music machine was just a vehicle for business and to offer an alternative to mainstream rock acts.  Anyone remember those posters that had band comparison's  ie..."If you like Sepultura and Napalm Death check out Audio Adrenaline"?  The only "Christian" artists that I have continually liked have been The Normals and Waterdeep, both bands writing highly innovative music.  Their are a score of other bands that happen to be christian but don't actively pursue an evangelistic career (anything on Tooth and Nail/SolidState).

What I liked the most about McClellan's article was that the segmentation of Christian Music lead to a non-holistic experience.  Their almost seemed to be a checklist of what you could write songs about, and I remember this sort of frustration when I was playing CCMish music.

I really agree with what Peacock said, as an artist whose faith happens to be the primary influence this really speaks what some of us have been struggling with for years.  I actually feel like I picked a good time to start writing and playing music again.

 

More thoughts on excellence and God deserving our best

God deserves our best.  That is the statement that I hear often when in regard to worship planning and production.  It is a great statement and a very true statement.  But where I think this has turned itself around is when we justify our expense accounts with it.  It also deals alot with our slick production values that we have when it comes to worship design and proper execution.

Since I am more and more identifying myself with Wesleyan theology and church practice, I want to make an attempt to try to talk about excellence from this perspective, but it may be a bumpy road.

Like I said in an earlier post on the topic, how we define worship will be how we answer questions on excellence.  Over the year I have served in worship at Asbury Seminary, I am continually redefining worship along the lines of Trinity, Story and World.  To shorten this definition up, I am realizing that worship really doesn't have anything to do with the individual.  The hairy part of this topic is how we fit in personal piety.  I just don't think the congregational gathering is the place for the personal. 

Excellence is often pursued because a.) God deserves it and b.) people now expect a very clean presentation of "church".  So what we have to take on next is our definition of worship and how excellence goes along with it.

So how would you define worship?  No Sally Morgenthaler (she took most of it back) or John Piper/Westminster Catechism (it gotten generic) Sunday School answers.

A Review of "Evangelicals and Tradition" by D.H. Williams

Ecumenicism among younger evangelicals is on the rise, as those who grew up in “seeker-sensitive” congregations grow dissatisfied with the lack of historicity in their various denominations and worship settings.  In conversation, I usually recount that my own personal discovery of patristic writings heavily influenced my own personal faith. 

At the head of the field of evangelical thinkers making entry into the problem of connecting evangelicalism with patristic thought is D.H.Williams.  His book “Evangelicals and Tradition: The Formative Influence of the Early Church” offers answers to the many questions that “free-churchers” often have when faced with the introduction of a more classic stream of Christianity. 

The basis of the book lies in grappling the touch questions involving the role of tradition in the church.  We will look at three of the over-arching themes in the book-tradition in regard to practice, scripture in relation to tradition and the issue of the Protestant theology of justification in regard to patristic views.

The Great Tradition is the idea that through ecclesial tradition, certain tenets of the faith are maintained and continually re-taught.  Many Protestants argue that this places tradition in level with Scripture and goes against Sola Scriptura.  What Williams goes to show us is that tradition works hand in hand with Christian practice from the beginning.  At the beginning of the Christian Church, before the time of the scripture, tradition is what kept the standards of orthodoxy.  In Romans, we learn the value of learning the faith by hearing (10:17), and the faith of Christ was transmitted orally before the scripture was completed and canonized.  It was this rule of tradition that allowed the early Christians to decide what was normative of Christianity and was outside of the bounds of orthodoxy.  Ultimately, tradition functions as the memory of the Church, a living and shared memory functioning as the preservation of the work of God in the life of Christ.

Sola Scriptura is a Protestant doctrine that is held in the highest regard in most free churches (and Protestantism in general).  What Williams shows us is that the patristic writers also had a very high view of scripture, but would not go to the lengths that contemporary theologians have in regard to the placement of scripture and tradition.  Tradition was what tested canonical functionality.  If a writing did not measure up to the tradition of the Church, it was deemed to not be apostolic and was not regarded as a part of Holy Writ.  Tradition was never appealed to apart from scripture and scripture functioned as the anchor and the language of worship (tradition) served the role of interpreter.  This interplay allows the correct preservation and action of revelation, preserving the divine character of God and how He acts towards humanity.

In the last section of the book, Williams deals with justification.  This is a "sacred cow" to many Protestants, that use the word very highly, but more often than not cannot actually articulate what it means.  The pre-reformation church most likely understood the theological idea of justification, but not in the language and terms of 16th century Protestantism.  Justification (in our terms) was just not an issue for the early Church.  There was full awareness of what Christ had done for them in salvation.

D.H. Williams has yet again added to his corpus of books for the evangelical with a bent towards classic, consensual theology.  The overall task of showing Protestants that there is a wealth of knowledge in Church history seems to be a stated goal in his writing, but I think he also shows how necessary classic devotional is in order for the faith to continue to remain orthodox while staying relevant.  For anyone that is trying to grapple with the move towards a more generic faith inside of evangelicalism, Williams would serve as a good read to direct you to the wealth of Patristic thought.  Williams writing is academic, and to enjoy it there is am understated level of knowledge in regard to church history, but “Evangelicals and Tradition” would serve as a great primer to anyone interested.

Related Posts:
Why I am comfortable with Tradition