or Getting a Handle on the Scandal

“We are on the right track as long as we have biblical horizons.”

Peter Leithart has been put through the ringer with accusations and trials for having some “Romish” doctrines. He’s posted some good defenses (links posted on here recently). Basically, Protestantism threw out some baby with the bathwater, and we need it back.

Now it turns out that the gent at the centre of the condemnation of Dr Leithart for going over to the dark side was himself a Sith Lord in training.

I’m thick when it comes to legal details, but this is what it boils down to: the Westminster Confession is treated by some as a sort of “paper Pope.” That is, it has an earthly authority over the Scriptures. The accuser says that holding Dr Leithart to account because he wasn’t submitting to this paper Pope, even while he himself was moving on up to a real pope, was entirely logical. Logical, perhaps. Human, no.

Before this post gets boring, here’s a good summary if you are interested.

The only reason I’m interested, and posting about it (despite being a fanboy of Dr Leithart and concerned that he was being demonized) is what’s going on theologically behind the opprobium and the personalities. What’s really at the heart of it all, and how can I get a  handle on the scandal?

The Spirit gathered the Church by the Scriptures, and the Church gathered the Scriptures by the Spirit. We don’t like that idea. We want control. And Protestantism is messy. [1] But growing up always is. This sin of Roman Catholicism, a desire for a certainty we cannot have (at least not all in one go) has led that church into certain error.

And I guess we can have no doubt that treating any confession as if it were inspired will have a similar result over time, more or less. Doing so is desiring kingdom–the fruit of the second tree–before God’s time. The Bible shows us that this is what is behind every turn to the dark side in the history of Church and State. It is simply a lack of submission to the Word and Spirit of God. We are on the right track as long as we have biblical horizons.

Dr Leithart has some words here on confessionalism:

…essential as the past is, for Protestants the past ought never become an ultimate standard. Even the fixed points can be freshly formulated (cf. recent developments in Trinitarian theology and in Pauline studies). Beyond those few fixed points, much remains up in the air (for Catholics and Orthodox too), and will for centuries to come, as Christians continue to pore over the Scriptures and seek unity of mind concerning what they teach. Scripture remains fixed and immovable, the test and touchstone always of everything. Our understanding doesn’t stay fixed. Protestants should be perfectly comfortable with that.

_______________________________
[1] See A Priesthood of All Believers Can Be Messy.

“The second ‘zone’ we need to think about concerning gnostic tendencies is the sacraments. God’s affirmation of the material world is seen in the fact that He uses physical water to introduce people into His kingdom; and by the fact that we eat Christ’s flesh and drink His blood in the Lord’s supper. Many Christians, however, cannot embrace such physical ideas. Water baptism is thus reduced to a mere symbol instead of a powerful communication from God. And so are the bread and wine of the supper.

Such a reduction is not the view of the Protestant Reformers who sought to correct the magical view of the Papal church without denying the fact that God really acts through such material means. By the 19th Century, however, the heirs of the Reformers were no longer willing to abide the Reformers’ starkly materialistic views…

God created the universe in such a way that it is designed by Him as His means to communicate with man… These are the means that God has appointed to bring us near to Him. God’s Spirit uses these physical things. Therefore, if God also uses water, oil, bread and wine to communicate His presence to us, what’s so strange about that?…

But what do we get? Instead of a nice shower of water from above in baptism, we get a few drops. Instead of a good, munchable piece of bread, we get a tiny bit of cracker. Instead of a good slug of alcohol, which makes a peace-inducing impact on the body and also puts fire inside of you, we get a sip of insipid grapejuice. And anointing the sick with oil, which puts them back into the olive tree, as commanded by James 5:14, has largely disappeared.”

James B. Jordan, Preterism vs. Gnosticism, Biblical Horizons Conference 2007. Available from www.wordmp3.com WEPOW

Whether you know it or not, as you flip through a magazine, or peruse a Christian bookstore, the big question on loop in your mind is “What’s in it for me?” In a culture where an advertiser or publisher has only seconds to grab your attention, there has to be a visual hook. Magazine articles hit us with one big photo, knowing that if they sell us with that, we’ll read the fine print. A book, right down to its spine, has to say “Pick me because…” For the world’s Vanity Fair hucksters, the aim is to wave a stunning flag at all costs. It doesn’t even have to be for the right country. Anything goes as long as they draw a crowd.

In a busy marketplace, Christian ads and books also need to be attractive and culturally relevant, but we too have begun to let the importance of the graphic design overpower or obscure the message.

As a designer, I love the Bible because it is filled with pictures. Every sentence is carefully crafted communication. No matter how obscure, poetic or just plain old weird Zechariah 5 might initially seem, it has a very pointy message. The images the Lord revealed were not only attention-grabbing, but also deep enough to be chewed on like good steak. With the Lord, a thousand words is as one picture. God designed a world full of mountains and fountains, gemstones and horses, symbols that communicate complex abstract truth with majestic simplicity. The prophets mined this planetful of objects because they have God-intended built-in connotations that don’t need re-explanation. Revelation communicates an enormous amount of information economically by loading a machine gun with familiar, borrowed capital. And it hits its target every time, unless of course we aren’t familiar with the capital! Shame on us.

Graphic designers know this. Images, typefaces and colors have distinct connotations in our culture. We know which colors to use to make you feel a certain way. Typefaces are also subliminally associated with certain types of messages. The average consumer doesn’t appreciate the amount of time spent choosing typefaces and colors for advertisements and corporate brands. The wavelength of the message is much wider than it often appears. You only notice it when it’s missing. That’s why office newsletters often look the way they do. Ew, and huh? It’s the print equivalent of crocodile shoes, a feather and a purple three-piece on an undertaker. Graphic designers, however, tend to fall off the other side of the horse. The presentation might be more tasteful, but the message is given second place. Why this trend? Is it our egos?

Despite having developed incredible means of communication, our culture really has very little to say. The choice is always style over substance. Beauty is everything, so we think movie stars have opinions worth listening to. A miracle of modern technology like an ipod is pumped full of disposable music and B-grade TV. We babble to fill the silence left by the departure of a very literate God. Advertising moves continually towards being art for art’s sake because there is no longer any new message. It has the basic, vacuous aim of just being seen in all the right places. The images can be abstracted from the message because-hey-I’ve-got-your-attention-now-and-that’s-all-that-matters-just-keep-looking-at-me. It doesn’t have to hit the target because it makes itself the target. Like abstract art, the response doesn’t matter so long as there is a response. Abstract art is subjective, that is, the artist produces something detached from reality so that the response to it is unpredictable. The more the art is detached from reality, the less predictable will be the ways people connect with it. The channel for the message becomes the message.

But unlike the world, we Christians DO have something to say, and it’s a matter of life and death. Even the visions in the Bible are built out of real, identifiable ‘things.’ The response matters. As symbol-makers like God, our artwork has to be totally objective, that is, it should be carefully crafted to carry the message and get the exact response required. Revelation works this way. The crystal walls of New Jerusalem have to be pure so the world can see Jesus enthroned inside. Sure, she’s a pretty city, but the bride of Christ points to Someone Else. There is a very definite response required to her beautiful gates. So, our art should not steal the attention from the message. Like the harlot in Revelation, the trappings of the Temple should not become an end in themselves. But what makes our art ‘Christian’? Are there any guidelines? Is Christian death-metal OK?

Doug Jones recently spoke about the Protestant cultural vision never lasting very long because it doesn’t get much past good doctrine on its way to good culture. In fact, it has often produced a generation of rebels who take the Spirit-endowed strength and health and head on back to Egypt for the cultural stimulation. Sure, we need to point out what’s sick and twisted about the symbols that naturally flow from those with a worldview gained from fairground mirrors. But we also need to be producing a new culture that flows from the ideals of the New Jerusalem, including art, architecture, and even comedy that bring life wherever they flow. Despite its flaws and excesses, this is one of the things the medieval period got right. Beautiful fashion, music, literature and architecture flowed out of a Biblical view of the world, and it was anything but disposable. We are still chewing on them. A strong central Christian message communicated life, structure and beauty.

Jones pointed out that the expression ‘cool’ means ‘where the life is.’ The culture that grows out of the church should be attractive to the world. Instead, we’ve let Solomon’s wives dictate what’s pretty and cool and ended up with a low-budget, G-rated tribute to the world’s Vanity Fair.

How can we fix this? With a Biblical worldview of course, and that means seeing the inherent symbolic values of the things God made as revealed in Scripture, including men and women. As we learn to see the real world, we will communicate using the language and wisdom of God. When we fill ourselves with Bible truth it flows out of us in every area of life, and the channels naturally become secondary to the message. Living water will be mediated ‘crystal clear’ through bricks, words, textiles and pixels, and the message will be expressed in everything we do. Like God, all the silent things we make will be practically speaking. Even our ads and book covers.

Written for www.americanvision.org

“…the historic Protestant Church must reassert her prerogatives with regard to keeping the oracles of God. The rights to market the Bible were not sold by the Holy Spirit to Rupert Murdoch, the current owner of Zondervan. How in blue blazes did Mammon get the publishing rights to the Word of God? Who was involved in the transaction, and why hasn’t he been publicly flogged?”

– Doug Wilson, Mother Kirk, p. 59-60.

The Synod of Dort

If you’ve ever been to a Synod, you’ll quickly find out that “truth” is determined by numbers.

So remarked a Catholic contributor on a Protestant forum recently. Is this a fair criticism of Protestant disunity? How should we Protestants reply? Thanks to James Jordan’s teaching, I think I can offer an answer.

One of the greatest themes of the Bible is of growth to maturity. The Old Testament priesthood was about simply obeying the rules. They didn’t have to think, just obey. This period peaked with Solomon’s wise but perhaps culturally limited reflections on the Law.

After the captivity, applying God’s Law in new situations and under new conditions (Gentile emperors) required greater wisdom. Not only did scattering Israel enlarge the mediator-nation’s sphere of influence, it was a move from the simplicity of priestly ‘bread-making’ (follow the rules) to the tricky process of kingly ‘wine making’ – ie. tough decisions.

This culminated in the last supper, when men were finally invited to drink wine before God as kings.

Now, the Catholic church might create ‘unity’ through its central system of doctrine (and I would argue that this is unity in error), but the Protestant system is a brave application of this process of maturity. We have to work things out under new conditions, and in many situations which would have been unimaginable in previous generations. Not everything is spelled out for us in the New Testament. We are commanded to ask God for the wisdom of Christ, our Greater Solomon.

Perhaps this is the reason Catholics were denied wine at Mass, congregational participation was kept to a minimum, and in a recent survey among all Christian denominations, Catholics dragged the “Bible knowledge” average down. It was the logical result of their revived Old Covenant priestcraft.

This is the New Covenant, and we are required to think. The time of spoon-feeding is over, and every believer is expected to learn to feed themselves. This is a glorious, albeit at times messy, process.