The Problem with DINKS

This essay is not your standard Advent offering. In fact, it is the anti-Advent piece.

I find it fascinating that as we near the feast of the nativity, and while the world enters into the “thrill of hope” for the incarnate baby, countless adults are revealing a mosaic of selfishness, exalting their dual-income status and cherishing their joy of being childless. These are the DINKS (dual-income-no-kids) of our generation.

In this article, I offer a few key statistical points of this obtuse generation and then conclude with the biblical alternative of Genesis.

Faithful American Churches

While there is much to critique in American churches–its mainline apostasy, sexual compromises– we still can claim to have the most faithful churches in the world–numerically and qualitatively. These include churches of all sizes, in every tradition, proclaiming Christ as King and faithfully administering the sacraments, and preserving the faith once and for all delivered to the saints. Our critiques should not overlook the immensity of fidelity among churches throughout the United States.

At this stage of history, we are attempting to build on the benediction of a Christian heritage where the language of Christendom is still very much embedded in societal institutions. Therefore, this allows us to strengthen the culture of our churches in the biblical grammar and persuade others that the city of God is superior to alternative cities.

There aren’t one or ten, but thousands upon thousands of persevering bodies who will not bow down to Caesar but to Christ alone. This remarkable reality gives me confidence in the preservation of this country and the continual blessings of God upon our churches and, thus, upon our culture.

The CREC Aficionados?

Presbyterians and Baptist pastors (the worlds I am most acquainted with) are dealing with Moscow fans in their congregations. I know this because I receive questions from such parishioners regularly. 99% of them do not want to cause friction in their local churches, but they are tired of direct attacks from the pulpit about the CREC or Douglas Wilson or some supposed boogeyman called the Federal Vision. Most of them have read a few things I’ve written (though I am far from the most prolific in our group). Still, lots of them have come across the Canon+ app, Crosspolitic, or the various high-quality publications from Canon Press, and invariably something from Pastor Wilson.

My recommendation is rarely, if ever, to encourage them to leave. In fact, my encouragement is that they find peace within the body and not raise their convictions to issues of first importance. However important their issues may be, there is a greater right than being right. They should speak with the pastor. Build a history of peace-making within the body. And if there should be an opportunity to leave, leave peacefully and quietly without internet noise. We have enough growing pains not to desire additional turmoil, which is why we don’t waste time selling our agendas in private meetings with members from other churches. We invest in our calling as local bodies and shepherd those under our care, and God gives the increase.

The reaction of high-profile pastors to the supposed threat of Moscow/CREC is, first and foremost, pastoral. Kevin DeYoung is genuinely seeking to protect his flock from what he perceives as a danger to the long-term well-being of his congregants. Others speak out from a position of defensiveness and even react aggressively, which exemplifies a lack of confidence in the ministry of the Gospel. These churches/pastors become watchdogs, constantly looking for trouble where there is none, thereby creating congregants suspicious of everything and everyone who does not uphold identical dogmas.

My suggestion to pastors is to draw these questioners close. Engage the topic with concerned parishioners and grant that their interest in healthy families, a strong political backbone, and a high view of worship (things our Communion cherishes) are good things to pursue and that you share these pursuits, though from a different perspective. But don’t act defensively or aggressively. I guarantee you will find much more agreement if you carefully engage rather than overreact.

Preaching and Rhetoric

Preaching is not simply conveying data without thought to rhetoric. Healthy preaching develops a rhetorical framework through which ideas can be appropriately communicated and received by the people. It seeks to understand the ecclesial context before proclaiming the ecclesial word.

Much of this comes with time and trust in the pulpit. Each minister will develop a particular flavor that will communicate more astutely to their listeners. But the problem is that while we may communicate well to our particular people, we may not train them to listen well. It is possible to learn from poor communicators, but it is not ideal to learn from poor communicators.

For this reason, ministers need to train themselves in preaching, considering their style and changing it appropriately. I have written about ten questions to ask before each sermon here: https://kuyperian.com/10-questions-preachers-ask-sunday-morning/…

The danger of poor articulation of ideas is that it leaves parishioners weak to more seductive forms of learning. Preachers are imaginative creatures proclaiming a heavenly revelation that changes the thinking and structures of human understanding.

Paul chastises sophistry (I Cor. 2) but does not chastise proper rhetorical pursuits or persuasion (Acts 19:8). The minister brings the kingdom of God to full display in the preached word. He is not simply conveying data but a biblical dramatizer of the Word. #preaching #pulpit