Once again, Carl Trueman writes a prophetic, edgy, and spot-on piece for Ref21, this time analyzing the hopeless inconsistency of conservative-but-light, empty, trivial, contemporary Christian worship. You can read the whole article here, but let me note the quote-worthy parts for you:

The service ended, not with a benediction or even a prayer, but with another chance to meditate, this time not to waves crashing on a beach but to a recording of Kenny G playing `Amazing Grace.’

The service was, in many ways, a multifaceted microcosm of a lot that is wrong with the church at large today. I remember sitting in the room and looking around at the earnest faces as they concentrated on the crashing waves, or empathized with the linguistic struggles of the spontaneous inclusive language guy, or were carried heavenward by the mellifluous tone of Mr G’s saxophone.

Ironically, not all conservative services are much better than their liberal equivalents.  Now, the difference is that liberal theology should inevitably lead to liturgical nonsense in a way that orthodoxy should not.  After all, orthodox theology grew out of the worship and liturgy of the ancient church, so it should be no surprise that the collapse of that theology connects to the collapse of worship and liturgy. After all, it is hard to see the musical genius of Kenny G giving birth to the Nicene Creed, or, for that matter, providing an atmosphere in which the same might be sustained.

What are surprising, therefore, are accounts of services where the theology is supposedly orthodox but the content is sheer trivia.  If God is awesome, sovereign and holy; if human beings are small, sinful, and lost; if Christ died and rose again by a most miraculous and costly act of grace, then this should impact the way things happen in church.

A church service involving clowns or fancy dress or skits or stand-up comedy does not reflect the seriousness of the gospel; and those who take the gospel seriously should know better. Frankly, it is more appropriate to liberal theology which does not take the gospel, or the God of the gospel, seriously. Serious things demand serious idioms.  I heard recently of a church service involving dressing up in costume and music taken from a Tom Cruise movie.  Now, if I go for my annual prostate examination, and the doctor comes into the consulting room dressed as Coco the Clown, with `Take my breath away’ from Top Gun playing in the background, guess what?  I’m going to take the doctor out with a left hook, flee the surgery, and probably file a complaint with the appropriate professional body.  This is serious business; and if he looks like a twit and acts like a twit, then I can only conclude that he is a twit.

You can tell a lot about someone’s theology from what they do in church.  Involve Kenny G’s music in your worship service, and I can tell not only that you have no taste in music but also that you have nothing to offer theologically to those who come through the church doors; indeed, what you do have can probably be found better elsewhere.

I’ve made reference on this blog before to the so-called “New Calvinism” movement.

Kevin DeYoung — a young (i.e., younger than me!) pastor in East Lansing, MI and author of this and this and this — has just written a wonderfully wise, clarifying analysis of the New Calvinism for the Christian Research Journal. Here are some highlights of Kevin’s article:

Here are the two most important things you need to know about the rise of the New Calvinism: it’s not new and it’s not about Calvin. Of course, some of the conferences are new. The John Piper packed iPods are new. The neo-reformed blog blitz is new. The ideas, however, are not.  “Please God, don’t let the young, restless, and reformed movement be another historically ignorant, self-absorbed, cooler-than-thou fad.”

And while I’m praying: “Please God, don’t let the New Calvinism ever, ever be about the New Calvinism. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not afraid to be called a Calvinist. I’ve read the Institutes multiple times, most of Calvin’s commentaries, and was voted “Calvin Clone” by my peers at seminary. I thank God for Calvin. But if the New Calvinism is to continue as a work of God, which I think it has been, it must continue to be about God. Young Christians have been drawn to Calvinism not because they were looking for Calvin or an “-ism” but because they were drawn to a vision of a massive, glorious, fall-down-before-Him-as-though-dead kind of God who loves us because He wants to.

The influence of Calvinism is growing because its God is transcendent and its theology is true. In a day when “be better” moralism passes for preaching, self-help banality passes for counseling, and “Jesus is my boyfriend” music passes for worship in some churches, more and more people are finding comfort in a God who is anything but comfortable. The paradox of Calvinism is that we feel better by feeling worse about ourselves, we do more for God by seeing how He’s done everything for us, and we give love away more freely when we discover that we have been saved by free grace. …

What draws people to Reformed theology is the belief that God is the center of the universe and we are not, that we are worse sinners than we imagine and God is a greater Savior than we ever thought possible, that the Lord is our righteousness and the Lord alone is our boast.

The attraction of the New Calvinism is not Calvin, but the God Calvin saw, not some new fad, but something old with new life blowing through it from the Spirit of God.

HT: Andy Naselli

May 1-3, 2009 DSC hosted Ray Ortlund, Jr. and Sam Storms as they taught on “The Convergence of Doctrine and Delight.” The audio is now available:

1. Ray Ortlund: “True Spirituality: Delighting in Truth” (Psa. 1)
2. Sam Storms: “Jonathan Edwards on Religious Affections: The Soul Set on Fire for God”
3. Ray Ortlund: “False Spirituality: Flirting Around” (2 Cor. 11:1-4)
4. Sam Storms: “Enjoying Election: Finding Delight in God’s Decree”
5. Panel Discussion 1
6. Ray Ortlund: “Dangerous Moderation: The Nausea of Christ” (Rev. 3:14-22)
7. Panel Discussion 2
8. Ray Ortlund: “Break Through: No Other Desire” (Psa. 73)
9. Sam Storms: “Delighting Ourselves in the Lord: Why Joy in God Matters” (Psa. 37:4)

The audio of our past years’ conference weekends is available here.

This short 1999 Christianity Today article on tithing begins in quintessentially-Carson fashion:

“A simple yes or no to this question would be horribly misleading.”

And in quintessentially-Carson fashion he unpacks the complexity of the issue in very clear terms.

From an older Banner of Truth printed sermon on 1 Tim. 2:15 (“But women will be saved through childbirth, if they continue in faith, love and holiness…”):

What is involved in motherhood? After birth pangs bring children into this world, there come years of life pangs. It is a mother’s task and privilege to oversee the forging of a personality in her sons and daughters. For this she must set a tone in the home which builds strong character. Hers it is to take great Christian principles and practically apply them in every-day affairs – doing it simply and naturally. It is her responsibility to analyse each child mentally, physically, socially, spiritually. Talents are to be developed, virtues must be instilled, faults are to be patiently corrected, young sinners are to be evangelised. She is building men and women for God. Results may not be visible until she has laboured for fifteen or twenty years. Even when her task ends the true measure of her work awaits the full maturity of her children.

This is why Proverbs 10:1 tells those who are children that “A foolish son is the heaviness of his mother”. Immorality is a public shame to the mother of one who breaks God’s law. Her whole life was devoted to raising her son and daughter. Father has a career as well as a home. But all of mother’s eggs have been placed in one basket. Motherhood could not be a part-time hobby. If you become a fool, you will break your mother’s heart. Godly women do not live for kisses and nice little gifts, but to see their children walking with the Lord in righteousness. All of a godly woman’s hopes in this world are bound up with the children of her motherhood.

The rest of the sermon (online here) has some provocative — if not controversial — thoughts on the on the “salvation” and “childbearing” of the 1 Tim. 2:15 passage. Some excerpts:

This is not a text on remission of sins but deliverance out of sin-related suffering and oppression. Woman will triumph over and emerge from the misery and curse under which she is held by forces of evil.

It is obvious that more is intended by “childbearing” than the physical process of conceiving, carrying a child in the womb, and bringing him into the world, but mothering that person is assumed.

But how are women saved? By their joining militant organisations which demand rights equal to man’s? By proving that women can “make it” in the world of business, politics, sports, and even the pastorate? By escaping from home where she has been buried in obscurity and where so many evils have been perpetrated by abusive husbands? Never! That approach only institutionalises her rebellion against her God-given place.

Conscientious motherhood cannot follow the selfish pattern of having a child only to send him off as soon as possible to a day-care centre. Of course, at times this is essential for survival! But at other times it is produced by a selfish interest in one’s own career or in acquiring more wealth. Women want to get on to more exciting things. This low view of a mother’s task is damaging the church.

Her pathway to real salvation was appointed by the Almighty. It is motherhood. “She shall be saved through childbirth” (v 15). The first gospel promise was given before any curse was pronounced on man or woman. And the promise wonderfully involved the means of motherhood. “I will put enmity between you [the serpent] and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (Gen 3:5). God our Maker would not allow the human race to perish. Now that Adam and Eve had sinned and Paradise was shattered, the only hope lay in God himself. “I will” is the message of grace. One means was mentioned as the instrumental course of salvation from the devil’s clutches. It was childbearing! Deliverance comes, not through man’s vocational efforts in the cultural mandate, but through woman’s childbearing. How wrong women are when they imagine that their hope lies in imitating men’s careers. As they abandon motherhood for the office and factory, they despise God’s carefully designed means of breaking the devil’s yoke and fleeing the miseries he has inflicted.

It is to woman, not man, that God assigned this high calling. But her hope is not identified with her political savvy, her business acumen, or her social activism. It is in childbearing! Women today are so eager to abandon “mere” motherhood to duplicate male labours. How tragic, when the hope God has given woman and for all of our race is tied to childbearing! Of course the central attention of Genesis 3:15 is upon one seed of the woman, Jesus Christ. He who was born of the Jewess, Mary, delivered the decisive death blow to the head of the serpent on Calvary. He purchased salvation for all who are redeemed.

Yet, even before Christ came, a godly seed of the woman was set against Satanic forces. Childbearing prepared the way of the Lord. When about to raise up mighty leaders, Jehovah God, often sought out peculiarly able women. Jochebed, the mother of Moses; Hannah, mother of Samuel; Manoah’s wife, mother of Samson, are leading examples. Through their childbearing the course of history was wonderfully altered. Since Christ has come, a godly seed carries the gospel to all the earth to gather God’s elect and hasten Christ’s return. Raising a godly seed is still of the profoundest importance to the cause of God in the earth.

Adam saw at once that the most profound work of the ages – God’s work of grace – is directly related to motherhood. Appreciating God’s purpose, “Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living” (Gen 3:20).