 |
| A young cleric, Rev. Paul Levy International Presbyterian Church Blogger, www.Reformation21.org If an open necked shirt, why not a Hawaiian shirt, shorts, and flip flops? On principle, why not a bathrobe and slippers? |
Rev. Paul Levy, of the "International Presbyterian Church," offers an odd, confused, and rather broadly "evangelical" statement about Creeds and confessions in worship. He notes that "written confessions of sin and confession of faith and the Apostles Creed are particularly helpful in screwing good solid theology into the minds and hearts of our people." This has long been known, but Paul was not reared with this. He apparently is just learning this. Yet, he unhelpfully opines--again oddly and unhelpfully--that there are "Presbyterians who are really `'wanna be anglicans' and want to legislate for every bit of the service with endless liturgy." So, toss your hymnbooks, Presbyterians, be consistent, and have all sing whatever lyrics you please. Yet, you use "written hymns" with 700 plus hymns in the books! Yet, you have 33 written chapters in the Westminster Confession. What's the complaint here of value? None. What confused thinking! Is this the best Paul can offer? Or Ref21? Or the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals? Or, what does R.C. Sproul, Sr., one of the better voices, know about it? Or, the congregations and followers of these "parachurch" outlets? Rev. Levy or Churchmen at ACE or Ref21, inter alia, modern Cranmers? No. But, then, what does Paul, or what does anyone on the staff or on the board of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, or on the faculties of Westminster or Reformed Seminaries, know about the disciplines, lections, collects, rhythms, and piety of Prayer Book Anglicans? Answer: a LARGE ZERO.
Sorry, Paul, or other Reformed readers, but if you choose to make a snarky comment about "wanna be Anglicans" who seek to "legislate every bit of the service with endless liturgy" (as if you haven't), you can and should expect this Marine, a Reformed Anglican, to push back with commensurate and measured force. Some of us tire of it.
We've learn our Confessional theology from the Reformed. Thank you. But we have learned nothing about worship, music and Prayer Book Churchmanship from any of you, anywhere, or anytime. Frankly, we didn't learn alot about the Bible from you either. Paul, and Ref21, just stay off the topic of Prayer Book Churchmanship, since all of you know nothing about it.
We saw unfortunate comments recently about Lent 2012 as well and did a push back.
We're also beginning to believe that this Prayer Book incompetence, like Paul's, informs many conservative American Anglicans as well.
Remedy? Use the BCP daily 365/52/24/7 for decades. After a few decades of this type of use, return to make further comments. Of course, there are several hundred books that could be recommended also. At least the English Puritans were skilled in the Book of Common Prayer, e.g. Richard Baxter.
http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2012/04/what-do-you-believe.php
I was brought up in a church that didn't have a written liturgy. That's not to say there wasn't a liturgy. The argument that we have no set liturgy is ever so slightly ridiculous. Can you imagine getting up and announcing a hymn and saying, 'There are no words. Please feel free to sing along to the tune and ad lib'. The prayers also were pretty much the same every week and you had what was known as the long prayer which struck dread into the heart of every small boy. On occasions you were lifted up to heaven but more often than not it was interminably dull. I seem to have spent quite a number of the prayers with my father's hand clamped around my neck or leg longing for it to end.
Anyway, since coming to IPC, I've been introduced to a light liturgy. There are Presbyterians who are really ''wanna be anglicans'' and want to legislate for every bit of the service with endless liturgy. I'm aware that we live in a culture where there are many people who are not particularly literate and find reading uncomfortable. However, written confessions of sin and confession of faith and the Apostles Creed are particularly helpful in screwing good solid theology into the minds and hearts of our people.
I've learnt to love the Creed; the certainty of it, the joy in confessing our faith with one another. There is a sense in which we should roar with joy after reading it but of course we never would.
We live in an age where people don't know what they believe or why they believe it. In the film Chocolat where one of the main characters was asked 'what do you believe?', this was the reply:
Magic carpet rides, rune magic. Ali Baba and visions of the Holy Mother, astral travel and the future in the dregs of a glass of red wine...Buddha. Frodo's journey into Mordor. The transubstantiation of the sacrament. Dorothy and Toto. The Easter Bunny. Space aliens. The Thing in the closet. The Resurrection and the Life at the turn of a card...I've believed them all at one time or another. Or pretended to. Or pretended not to.
We have certainty in an age of uncertainty. We confess our faith with an army of believers around the world and down through the ages. Next time you say the creed give a cheer and rejoice in rock solid truth
4 comments:
Apart from the silly jibe about anglicanism which has riled you, you agree with the post don't you?
While I most rarely, if ever, post some anonymous poster, viewing it as rank cowardice, I'll forego the usual policy. Hopefully, you are not a rank coward. Please note the editorial policy at the top re: anonymous posters. As to Rev. Paul Levy's stupid and illiterate post, we haven't the kindest or gentlilest thing to say about it. It's manifoldly stupid, like the sponsors at ACE and Ref21, illiterates--to a man--about Prayer Book doctrine, worship and piety. Illiterates, the lot of them.
Rather than sniping at a Presbyterian who has begun to use some formal liturgy I suggest your energies would be better used in calling back evangelical Anglicans to their liturgical heritage which so many seem to have sold for a mess of charismatic pottage. Do I need to remind you that a foolish and unbiblical uniformity in dress and liturgy led the C of E to its worst ever schism in 1662?
Graham, thank you for your comment.
It is robust and critical.
The sniping at a Presbyterian, by me, is equally robust and critical.
It stands too.
It is high time for the Reformed Seminaries to begin a worship-reformation by a return to good Prayer Book Churchmanship so that, in turn, amongst presbyteries, in the churches, a real reformation in doctrine and piety may occur. I have no hope that Seminary Professors have any skill or foresight in seeing such through. Hence, the just title "incompetents" in liturgy.
Here is one suggested resource. http://www.amazon.com/The-book-common-prayer-Westminster/dp/114975253X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1403117000&sr=8-1&keywords=westminster+1661+book+of+prayer+book
But, think of Westminster, Escondido. Godfrey, Clark, Horton or others? Prayer Book there? Or, in Philadelphia, Lillback, Poythress, Gaffin or others? No, no hope of it.
I grant one narrow slice of your objection, to wit, a kudo to the Presbyterian making the effort under review.
Your other objection is equally robust and strong. And it is a good one. To wit, directing criticisms at "charismaticism" and its mess in Anglicanism. I could not agree more. I would take your criticism even further and apply it to Tractarians.
If you have been around this forum for long, you will have seen that we have strenuously made the same criticisms re: Anglicanism. We've even gone further criticizing them for the rank failure to insert the Reformed Confessions into the BCP.
As for the latter comment about "foolish and unbiblical conformity" in dress and liturgy, that's churlish, unpeaceable, and unnecessary. Your objection has also been handled elsewhere. As for liturgy, see the above book written by Westminster divines. It's the same as the 1662 BCP imposed upon 9000 churches (minus a few things). Yes, the Anglicans erred in failing to adopt that 1661 BCP, just like the Presbyterian erred in tossing the BCP--and hence, losing worship depth that informs Reformed churches.
But, I appreciate your strong comment. I suspect we have much in common here.
I've had many Presbyterian ministers and military chaplains--in my world travels--ask me for a BCP for private worship. But, given the historic divide--long over now--they realized nothing might be effected denominationally while they worshipped with the BCP privately. They were fine men too. But, contrarily, not a once, not one time, have I heard a forlorn Anglican ever ask for the Westminster standards. That, indeed, was a huge lose and a huge mistake in 1662 that forever impoverished Anglicanism.
But, I'll offer this from Mr. Packer (who, in other situations, has made some strategic mistakes, e.g. ECT, burying the hatchet with Tractophiles), but here's his comment. Here's Jim:
"My frequent quoting of the Westminster Confession may raise some eyebrows, since I am an Anglican and not a Presbyterian. But since the Confession was intended to amplify the Thirty-nine Articles, and most of its framers were Anglican clergy, and since it is something of a masterpiece, “the ripest fruit of Reformation creed-making” as B. B. Warfield called it, I think I am entitled to value it as part of my Reformed Anglican heritage, and to use it as a major resource. I gratefully acknowledge the hidden hand of my much-admired friend R. C. Sproul, from whom came the germ idea for several of these outlines. Though our styles differ, we think very much alike, and have cooperated happily in a number of projects. I find that we are sometimes referred to as the Reformed Mafia, but hard words break no bones, and on we go."
Packer, J. I. (2008-07-31). Concise Theology . Tyndale House Publishers. Kindle Edition.
PS. Thank you for your robust comment. Affirmed in part, denied in a narrow part and, on the whole, enjoyed.
Post a Comment