 |
| "I wanna be relevant, relevant. Let's get down to relevant." |
http://pollutedwels.blogspot.com/
Training Camp
Am I being too harsh in criticizing the recent International Youth Rally? Absolutely not. I'm convinced that these youth rallies are destructive to our congregations and, more seriously, destructive to the faith of our young people.
The International Youth Rally is nothing more than training camp for future non-denominational mega-church members. These kids spend a few days "rocking out for Jesus" and listening to speakers telling them they can totally "overcome all of life's adversities", but then what?
They go back to their home congregations. The hymns aren't "rocking" and the pastor talks about stuff like sin--what a bummer! So what do they do?
Hey, that non-denominational mega-church down the road looks and sounds exactly like what we experienced at the youth rally! Let's start going there instead!
Just that easily, these kids have left the truth of Confessional Lutheranism to chase after that emotional high they felt at the youth rally.
The International Youth Rally is nothing more than training camp for future non-denominational mega-church members. These kids spend a few days "rocking out for Jesus" and listening to speakers telling them they can totally "overcome all of life's adversities", but then what?
They go back to their home congregations. The hymns aren't "rocking" and the pastor talks about stuff like sin--what a bummer! So what do they do?
Hey, that non-denominational mega-church down the road looks and sounds exactly like what we experienced at the youth rally! Let's start going there instead!
Just that easily, these kids have left the truth of Confessional Lutheranism to chase after that emotional high they felt at the youth rally.
THURSDAY, JULY 3, 2014
Don't have a cow, man!
Well, it didn't take long. Someone went to the tried and true method for shutting down the discussion of Lutheran worship: "It's just a matter of style and style is an adiaphoron so stop talking about it." Let's take apart Joel's comment piece-by-piece, shall we? (I'll use pink for Joel's comments, because, why not? Colors are a matter of adiaphora.)
Well, because contemporary music IS designed to lead people to Evangelical doctrine. Style is not necessarily neutral and it's not necessarily an adiaphoron. When contemporary worship demands the removal of altar, font, and pulpit, it leads people to Evangelical doctrine. When contemporary worship puts attention on performers on a stage, it leads people to Evangelical doctrine. When contemporary worship shifts the focus to me and my feelings rather than Christ and his works, it leads people to Evangelical doctrine.
Two problems here. First, what's happening here is absolutely not what has happened in the church down through the ages. Through the ages, the church has been scrupulously careful not to adopt the practices of the secular world around them. Second, contemporary worship does not "tell the story of Jesus". It tells the story of me and how I feel about Jesus. Big difference.
This is a false analogy. At no point did these "styles" of music demand the removal of altar, font, and pulpit, the gutting of the historic liturgy, and the shift in language and focus that contemporary worship demands.
I have no problem with developments in musical theory and style. We're in a veritable golden age right now of new, high-quality liturgical hymnody and musical composition. What's called "contemporary worship" is something else entirely, though.
As I've hopefully demonstrated by now, this simply isn't true. This isn't a subtle development of Lutheran liturgical worship, it's a complete rejection of Lutheran liturgical worship, and, with it, a rejection of Lutheran doctrine as well.
I most certainly will have a cow, man. This is not a matter of differing styles. This is not a matter of adiaphora. This is a pollution of true Lutheran doctrine and practice.
Why is it that every time Lutherans use contemporary music, someone has to say that it is designed to lead people to Evangelical doctrine?
Well, because contemporary music IS designed to lead people to Evangelical doctrine. Style is not necessarily neutral and it's not necessarily an adiaphoron. When contemporary worship demands the removal of altar, font, and pulpit, it leads people to Evangelical doctrine. When contemporary worship puts attention on performers on a stage, it leads people to Evangelical doctrine. When contemporary worship shifts the focus to me and my feelings rather than Christ and his works, it leads people to Evangelical doctrine.
If you want proof, look at my analysis of the official summaries of the youth rally. Look where the focus is. It's not on Christ. It's on "me". That's Evangelical doctrine as a result of contemporary style.
What happened here is what has happened in the church down through the ages. People of every generations have found ways to worship God and tell the story of Jesus through the music of the day.
Two problems here. First, what's happening here is absolutely not what has happened in the church down through the ages. Through the ages, the church has been scrupulously careful not to adopt the practices of the secular world around them. Second, contemporary worship does not "tell the story of Jesus". It tells the story of me and how I feel about Jesus. Big difference.
Look at the history of the liturgy. You will see that the liturgy is a vastly different experience in each of major eras of music (Baroque, Classical, Romantic, Nationalistic, and Modern -- to name the major movements).
This is a false analogy. At no point did these "styles" of music demand the removal of altar, font, and pulpit, the gutting of the historic liturgy, and the shift in language and focus that contemporary worship demands.
I have no problem with developments in musical theory and style. We're in a veritable golden age right now of new, high-quality liturgical hymnody and musical composition. What's called "contemporary worship" is something else entirely, though.
What happened here (and it happens any time Lutherans use contemporary music) is just another chapter in this ongoing history of worship styles.
As I've hopefully demonstrated by now, this simply isn't true. This isn't a subtle development of Lutheran liturgical worship, it's a complete rejection of Lutheran liturgical worship, and, with it, a rejection of Lutheran doctrine as well.
Don't have a cow, man!
I most certainly will have a cow, man. This is not a matter of differing styles. This is not a matter of adiaphora. This is a pollution of true Lutheran doctrine and practice.
 |
| DP Don Patterson features live bunny petting for his Easter Sunday seeker services. No wonder Ski transferred down to Austin. Not those bunnies, Ski. |
 |
| "Model." |
---
Vernon Knepprath said...- I was going to respond to the "Don't have a cow, man!" comment with a comment, but you beat me to it with your latest post. You saved me from saying some of the things I had planned to say, but I'll still post a comment here.
Another favorite I've heard used by a pastor in response to concerns about practices and teachings in the church is "Don't get your britches in a bind!". It makes one begin to wonder if there is an on-line course out there for pastors, coaching them on how to use demeaning comments to discredit any and all concerns regarding practices and teachings.
How do comments such as "Don't have a cow, man!" and "Don't get your britches in a bind!", made in response to concerns about practices and teachings in the church, fit with 1 Thessalonians 5:21? They don't. But maybe that will be resolved in the next Bible translation. Maybe "Don't have a cow, man!" is what we can expect in the next contemporary translation of 1 Thessalonians 5:21.
Vernon
- Brett Meyer said...
- Responses like that from Lutheran clergy are direct indicators of their concern for pure doctrine and right practice. It indicates their opinion of the laity's responsibility to ensure the Word is taught in all of it's purity and the Sacraments are distributed rightly. It also reveals where their allegiance lies. It is my opinion that it doesn't lie with Christ, His Word, first and foremost but lies with the Synod and fellow clergy. This situation really comes as no surprise since the WELS, ELS and LCMS clergy have recently referred to the doctrine of One Justification Solely by Faith in Christ Alone as a doctrine from the pit of Hell and the teaching of an Antichrist. Refer to the discussions concerning Universal Objective Justification on LutherQuest and Steadfast Lutherans for these statements.
- Anonymous said...
- Vernon is more accurate than he probably knows when he asks if WELS pastors take a class in conformity. They do. It's not an online class, though, it's taught on-campus and it's taught very well. You won't find it in any course catalog though.
Hope you all have a Good dAy!
--JS - Anonymous said...
- ^ Ahhh, I see what he did there. Nice.
- Anonymous said...
- ^ Ahhh, I see what he did there. Nice.
- Anonymous said...
- A great place to start for someone just diving into this debate is "The Fire and Staff: Lutheran Theology in Practice" (Concordia, 2004) See a sample here:www.cph.org/pdf/155060.pdf
- franklapidus4ever said...
- I really hate when people make huge assumptions and generalizations about contemporary worship. I've seen some poor examples of contemporary worship in my time, but I've also seen some very good examples too. Not all forms of contemporary worship remove the altar, font, and pulpit.
On a side note, I just hope this blog doesn't turn into another dumping ground for WELS-haters to constantly bash the WELS and its teachings. This blog calls for open and honest discussions - let's try to keep it to that!
Lawrenz passes the baton
to another Church and Change founder.
 |
| Andy Stanley is one more Evangelical apostate, surrounded by "conservative" Lutheran fans. |
