Catholicity, Orthodoxy, and Lordship
10 hours of Ron Paul in one day? [kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/_mK4ChoBSNk?rel=0" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]
Hurrah![kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/sh2baZgf_Cc?rel=0" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]
I may do this more often in the future. I absolutely enjoy starting conversation with strangers. It is just part of my nature, but this 30-second conversation I didn’t start.
Stranger: So, what’s wrong with your truck.
Me: Well, it appears that the alternator drained the battery. ( By the way, that’s what someone told me. I couldn’t tell you what an alternator was if my life depended on it) Last night, as I was leaving work, the truck wouldn’t turn on.
At this point, the TV on the background is relating some details of last night’s Democratic debate. The debate commentator says that Obama did better than the other candidates.
Stranger: I just think that Hillary is going to get the nomination. So, are ya’ll Republicans or Democrats?
Oh, by the way, there is also a quite man in the room. He seems satisfied in not making eye contact with the woman.
Me: I am a libertarian.
Stranger: What does that mean? Never heard of that! Does that mean you don’t care about politics?
Me: No, not at all. It is a third party. a
Stranger: Well, I am Republican.
On her chair lies a copy of Desecration: Antichrist Takes the Throne; the ninth book on the Left Behind Series.
I have long read Jeff Meyers’ blog. He has always been an insightful voice in an age of liturgical phobia in our Presbyterian tradition. Seven years ago, Jeff Meyers, Leithart, Jordan, and others were part of a Reformed Liturgical Conference. This series, which, he has started is an updated version of his lectures in 2001 (I believe he is referring to these lectures, though it may have been in 2000). In this first article, he writes on why Conservative Presbyterians fear Liturgy. This is a promising series.
Incidentally, I have started to listen to the Reformed Liturgical Conference in 2001 before I knew about this series. The first lecture I listened to was by Peter Leithart on the Lord’s Supper. I shall write about these instructive and profound lectures.
Why Some Conservative Presbyterians Don’t Like Liturgy – Part I
I will be out of town this weekend. I will be dropping my wife off at Clearwater for a volleyball camp and visit our home church in Tampa.
First published 2 years ago at Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam
Peter Leithart comments on the role of hymnody in our churches. He argues that modern hymnody has embraced 19th century escapist mentality. No longer are we declaring the triumph of the church or that the gates of hell shall not prevail, rather we are exalting solely the world to come. Accordingly, some are denying the Christian responsibility given by God at creation to “have dominion over all things” (Genesis 1:28).
In fact, this attitude is so central to their worship that some have abandoned all hope of any victory here. Political and cultural wars they say, are not to be fought. After all, this world belongs to the god of this age, not the Creator of the cosmos. For some, the first coming of our Lord was not sufficient to establish a growing dominion. Rather, we are to earnestly pray for a second coming to bring all things under His reign. This is a mishandling of the biblical data. God in all His glory has promised to give a people unto His Son and that all will be subdued under His righteous authority (I Corinthians 15:24-26). Echoing Leithart’s comments on hymnody, let us sing songs of victory in great faith that Christ will rule through His church to the glory of the Father.
Darryl has been able to give a pejorative name to advocates of Christian civil government: Transformationalist. What a dirty sounding word to anyone who stands upon anti-liberal ground. Surely Christian civil government must be rejected, it is an ideology that seeks to change (transform… yuck) society through politics… to tinker (transform) with human nature to conform to our NAPARC dreams.
But then I ask myself the question. What if the gospel takes root in China? Will China remain unchanged? Will its culture not be… transformed? Not on the basis of politics, but through the impact of souls who have been ordered according to the standards of a Christ and His law.
This is how it was in the West and I am grateful for it. Grateful for our heritage of ordered liberty, economic freedom, and respect for humanity as made in the image of the living God. It has checked the power of the beast; it has made daily life more humane, and given honor to the church as the eschatological Kingdom dwelling in our midst.
Chellis appears to be responding to some level of criticism to his understanding of cultural transformation. My contention over this matter has always been the same for years. Instead of placing Abraham Kuyper versus those who would oppose cultural transformation, (D.G. Hart, etc.) the proper Biblical approach is a both/and. The church needs to preserve her duty to minister bread and wine and proclaim the gospel, while at the same time encouraging, rather, emboldening her people to transform every dimension of society into a repository of Biblical righteousness. There simply is no other option. Anyone who dares assume that the gospel has no transformative power beyond the spiritual change has not properly understood the completeness of Christ’s work to bring all His enemies under His feet.
Darryl has been able to give a pejorative name to advocates of Christian civil government: Transformationalist. What a dirty sounding word to anyone who stands upon anti-liberal ground. Surely Christian civil government must be rejected, it is an ideology that seeks to change (transform yuck) society through politics to tinker (transform) with human nature to conform with our NAPARC dreams.
But then I ask myself the question. What if the gospel takes root in China? Will China remain unchanged? Will its culture not be transformed? Not on the basis of politics, but through the inpact of souls who have been ordered according to the standards of a Christ and His law.
This is how it was in the West and I am grateful for it. Grateful for our heritage of ordered liberty, economic freedom, and respect for humanity as made in the image of the living God. It has checked the power of the beast, it has made daily life more humane, and given honor to the church as the eschatological Kingdom dwelling in our midst.
Chellis appears to be responding to some level of criticism to his understanding of cultural transformation.. My contention over this matter has always been the same for years. Instead of placing Abraham Kuyper versus those who would oppose cultural transformation, (D.G. Hart, etc.) the proper Biblical approach is a both/and. The church needs to preserve her duty to minister bread and wine and proclaim the gospel, while at the same time encouraging, rather, emboldening her people to transform every dimension of society into a repository of Biblical righteousness. There simply is no other option. Anyone who dares assume that the gospel has no transformative power beyond the spiritual change has not properly understood the completeness of Christ’s work to bring all His enemies under His feet.