Maybe some of you who read here know something more about them. If you do, please feel free to offer it up in the comments.
I'll list each of the "key truths", then offer my sometimes sarcastic and consistently frustrated comments below it.
It’s about God’s glory
The real objective in striving for Biblical orthodoxy and orthopraxy is to bring glory to God
Particularly when God's name is attached, no argument here - although I'd argue vehemently with their success on this point.
Nicene Creed
There are essential and foundational doctrines of the faith expressed in the simplicity of this creedal statement that identify the basis for believing fellowship
A creed is largely some group of people you don't know determining for you what you're to believe and how you'll practice it. I don't care for creeds. Christ crucified and resurrected is creed enough for me. Heck, I don't even like the band Creed all that much.
Male leadership
The design of God for the created order includes the leadership role of men in every earthly jurisdiction
If we're going by created order, let's all submit to the fish and creeping things. By God's personal design, they were here first. No need in us getting all rebellious about it.
Family is the foundation
The home is the foundation block upon which all other earthly jurisdictions stand
*cough* ermm *cough* What???! What happened to the Chief cornerstone? Are we to now trade the Rock for shifting sand? Are we to serve two masters? The human family AND Christ? It's a nice soundbite for the cultural war, but it isn't something even remotely found in scripture.
Marriage – Picture
Marriage was given by God to be a picture of the relationship between Christ and His bride
A hearty amen. Except...there's no biblical evidence that man knew anything about the eventual relationship between Christ and His bride when the institution of marriage was first put into practice. In fact, Adam was in the physical presence of God when God looked at him and said "It's not good that he's alone." So while it's a very similar union, and a Christ-centered marriage IS based on the Christ/church relationship in numerous ways, this "key truth" exercises a certain amount of liberty in speaking in place of God.
Programmatic church is harmful
The culturally normative worship and teaching format practiced by most of the professing church disregards Biblical principle and therefore contributes to ongoing cultural melt-down
This is a pretty big stretch. I'm no fan of much of modern worship services, formulaic worship, and the like, but the cultural melt-down? Really? No, I mean, really? Of course, with this crowd, it always goes back to culture. It wouldn't matter to them if those in the "culturally normative" worship mode were actually growing in Christ. That's irrelevant to growing in the conservative southern white Antebellum culture, dad-gummit, and that's the important thing here, isn't it?
Age segregation is at war with spiritual heritage
The ability to pass on truth multi-generationally is essentially extinguished in a culture where generations are cut off from one another by age segregation.
So, a couple of hours a week in a Sunday School class or a youth group extinguishes - not hinders or slows, but extinguishes - the administering of truth as compared to the countless hours of monotonous
Home school movement is an evidence of revival
The handi-work of God is evidenced in our day by the turning of the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers as families have reclaimed their Biblical responsibility for child rearing.
Revival? Really? I'm pretty sure it started with, and is still being fueled by, cultural paranoia. Hearts should be focused on the Father, not the father. The latter is idolatry. I guess, on the Day of Pentecost, the Mighty Rushing Wind the disciples heard was the sound of all those A Beka textbooks flying open in that great revival.
Family worship is the foundation for community worship
Faithfulness of men at home is the prerequisite for faithfulness in the community of believers. Men leading in worship at home produce families that can worship in public
There is absolutely ZERO biblical instruction for a man to "lead worship" in the home. Only the Holy Spirit can "lead" worship, and only God determines when and how (or by whom) he's to be worshipped. Just ask Aaron's sons. Good intentions got the best of 'em.
True masculinity serves
Biblical manhood rejects leadership by control and instead embraces the model of Christ as servant-leaders
I don't deny that this is true in proper context. What I DO deny is that it's even possible in this system of belief. I don't believe it is. It's a system that's set up to fail, and fail it will, spectacularly, sooner or later, claiming many wounded lives in doing so.
Men and women are different by God’s design
The unique design of manhood and womanhood should be celebrated, taught and invested in.
No argument here. My argument would be with the (mis)application of this belief.
Preference and deference
A major evidence of revival is the ability for brethren to dwell together in unity by learning how to let others disagree in a spirit of respect. God has not simply called us to be right, but to be righteous.
I'm not sure how this is evidence of revival, even though it's a wonderful thing. It should be the rule, not the exception.
Jurisdiction(s)
Clear teaching on the lines of authority and responsibility that God has established within Biblical order will provide the foundation for blessing, peace, and health in the home, church, and society
So I'm not eligible for blessings, peace, and such, until I understand and submit to the human authority chain? Seriously? Who wrote this list? The cast of Survivor?
Biblical world view instead of a cultural world view
The church must reestablish itself on the foundation of Biblical practice rather than cultural tradition
Uggghhh. "Worldview" has become one of those words that just makes my insides go "uh oh", particularly when I see "biblical" in front of it. The irony of this is, you know all this stuff they're calling biblical practice? It's cultural tradition that just happened to take place in biblical periods. Ouch.
Again...Take the authority structure out of the equation and see if you can find their Jesus. At some point you have to ask the hard question of "Just who/what are they worshipping?" I'm sure they'll tell you "Jesus, of course", but really, examine this list of "key truths" and see if the math works better for you than it did for me. How many altars will you find in their temple? There'd better be more than one, or some of their gods will be jealous.
"The design of God for the created order includes the leadership role of men in every earthly jurisdiction."
ReplyDeleteIncluding women's bible studies and Kindergarten classes, of course.
"If we're going by created order, let's all submit to the fish and creeping things. By God's personal design, they were here first. No need in us getting all rebellious about it."
ReplyDeleteROTFL, this was a great line. Great job on this post, Lewis. Thank you for helping me think through the foolishness.
Argh! If I hear "servant leader" one more time I am going to barf!
ReplyDeleteResearch "servant" in the gospels. It means someone who is always ordered around and complies to being ordered around. "Slave" comes a bit closer to an American understanding.
Leader, on the other hand, means the person setting the agenda and giving the orders. So the phrase "servant leader" is Orwellian doublespeak.
I think it should be replaced by "slave master" because that's closer to the ideal represented in more ways than one!
Clearly, the women and the children in QF/P families are the ones expected to take orders and comply, or serve. IF a man should condescend to do anything for the family, it will NOT be obeying a command of his wife or one of his children, but a sacrifice for which he expects to be honored! To command a QF/P father would be blasphemy, rebellion, witchcraft!
So since no one in the family can give a command to a QF/P father, he is no one's servant.
He will claim that in his leadership, by considering his family's needs as he sets his agenda and gives orders, he is "serving" them. Uh, no. You are still the master. You are leading them, not serving them, albeit you are claiming to do it justly and even benevolently (which I hope is true).
But please stop the double-speak. There is no such thing as a "servant leader" anymore than a slave can also be a master.
Jesus was among us as one who serves. He took orders all the time. "Jesus, son of David, have mercy on me!" Jesus offered to serve the centurion, the Syro-Phonecian mother, Jairus, over and over Jesus asked people,what do you want me to do for you?
When QF/P fathers and even comps start asking their wives and children "what do you want me to do for you?", then and only then will they begin to understand how Jesus was among us as one who serves.
Everytime I see "servant leader" I know it really mean "slave master". One is either the slave or the master; the servant or the leader; one cannot be both. Jesus chose to serve.
Real men have no problem with this concept. Ironically, it's the ones wanting to hold on to a vaulted position of power that insist on using the term "servant leader".
The true servant is a man who gets up in the middle of the night to calm a frightened child because he is serving his child and his Lord, not because he is doing his wife a favor. The man who does the dishes because they need done, and does not expect anyone else to praise him for it, that is the true servant.
The true servant may have a traditional arrangement where the wife stays home, but that will be because he and his wife decided it was the best use of their individual talents and gifts, not because "a woman's place is in the home". Or he may be the one who takes a hiatus from the workforce to care for the children, because that is what he and his wife decided was the best use of their individual gifts and talents.
No patriarchal man is a servant. He has just redefined lording it over others as service because it fits his agenda. Blech.
"The culturally normative worship and teaching format practiced by most of the professing church disregards Biblical principle and therefore contributes to ongoing cultural melt-down..."
ReplyDeleteGAAAAAAAAHHH!!!
(That sound you are hearing is this church musician bashing his head vigorously against the wall.)
I'll prophesy you a nickel (as one of my theology profs once said) that their idea of "biblical" "worship and teaching format" is taken from 19th-century American Revivalism, which was a direct appeal to the popular (secular) musical and cultural norms of its own day. There was a sermon because secular people liked to go to lectures; lively songs with choruses because secular people liked to sing along. Try to do the same thing with our culture, of course, and you're "disregarding Biblical principle." Thunk thunk thunk thunk thunk thunk thunk...
"Faithfulness of men at home is the prerequisite for faithfulness in the community of believers. Men leading in worship at home produce families that can worship in public"
ReplyDeleteI guess my family's doomed then. We'll never know how to properly worship God in public since my husband has neither the time nor inclination to "lead family worship".
Actually we're doubly doomed since I'm the one who "leads worship" in our family, at home and often at church. *listens to the sound of fainting patriarchs* Worship in music is my gifting, not his, and my husband is more than happy to watch and support that gift being used to bless our family and our church. Oh, and we worship publicly just fine, thank you very much.
As for the FIC subject, they can have 'em. I'm with my kids 24/7. I look forward to listening to a sermon without them, knowing that they are enjoying their church time and actually learning something.
Creeds tend to be a necessary tool (or evil), like those doctrinal statements churches have.The Nicene creed helped to dispel the Arian heresy in the 4th century.
ReplyDeleteI agree with shadowspring on the whole 'servant leader' concept. Although I know some good pastors trying to fulfill this role, within the confines of the home it becomes skewed. You become caricatures of yourselves. My household probably more closely resembled Archie & Edith Bunker (with a half dozen kids in the mix). Ridiculous.
Eric P: I agree with you 100% that that's what they're thinking.
ReplyDeleteReminds me of a conversation I had with a 94-year-old woman at church about 10 years ago. She was talking about how terrible her children's music (Tommy Dorsey) was, and how Christian the music she listened to as a teen was. Of course, I politely asked her what her own mother had thought of her music back then. You can guess what her answer was. :P
I love this:
ReplyDelete"Jesus was among us as one who serves. He took orders all the time. "Jesus, son of David, have mercy on me!" Jesus offered to serve the centurion, the Syro-Phonecian mother, Jairus, over and over Jesus asked people,what do you want me to do for you?
When QF/P fathers and even comps start asking their wives and children "what do you want me to do for you?", then and only then will they begin to understand how Jesus was among us as one who serves."
Thank you, Shadowspring.
As for "the home is the foundation upon which all other earthly jurisdictions stand," Lewis is quite right. I've been reading a lot about this, and it's pretty much word-for-word what the Romans believed. Jesus and Paul, on the other hand, envisioned the Kingdom of God as being one large family in which we are all brothers and sisters, and God is the sole Patriarch. When Jesus said to follow Him we must "hate" our father and mother, He was saying a Christian's loyalty to his or her new Family of God was to supercede loyalty to the home (which was the basis of the State). No wonder the Romans persecuted the Christians. Protestants nowadays have forgotten all about the virgin martyrs, but they were condemned to death for refusing to marry and have children, because they felt a call to be celebate and devoted to Christ. The Romans saw this as undermining the social order, in which the family was paramount.
Patriarchalists would find themselves siding with the Romans, wouldn't they?
Kristen, I am intrigued by your comment, not least because I was about to post one myself boggling over the abstract connection between family order and society at large. It's painfully unspecific. In what way does the family support society - and which aspects of society are these? the state? the economy? the church establishments (and which ones, and is this a good thing in their eyes)? If earthly jurisdictions stand on the foundation of the family, and "culture" is the enemy, shouldn't we dissolve all families to stop supporting the institutions of worldly "culture"?
ReplyDeleteI really wondered where this thought-stopping cliche came from in the first place. "Family is the foundation of society" sounds so good (supposedly - it triggers the gag reflex now) and means absolutely nothing. Can you point me to some more resources on this idea? Thanks!
Sierra
Sierra, I got a lot of my information from Michael Kruse's Household of God series online. It is very extensive and well-researched. Here's a link to an excerpt:
ReplyDeletehttp://krusekronicle.typepad.com/kruse_kronicle/2007/07/household-the-h.html
The point was that in Greco-Roman times, each household was a min-government, expected to support the government of Caesar, who was considered the Patriarch-in-Chief, as it were. "Family" as we define it today (a nuclear family with a husband, wife and children, with "extended" family in contact but not living with us) was a foreign concept in those times. When the Greeks and Romans talked about "family" supporting the rest of society, they were referring to "households" as mini-units of government and commerce. Patriarchalists are trying to recreate this image, where each family is a socio-economic unit unto itself. Jewish households by the time of Christ were constructed on roughly similar lines, only with more emphasis on "clans" and "tribes" in addition to "households."
But the New Testament definitely shows the "Household of God" as being something spiritual and completely distinct. The New Testament does not endorse the deification of ancient household codes-- but instead, everyone being brothers and sisters (ie., equals) in one big spiritual Family.
I'm so rethinking the whole going to "church" thing. I hear so much of this you need a church, you need to fellowship, you need the support, blah blah blah! The last church I attended recently the pastor gave my private information away to another member whose known for being a busy body. I confronted the pastor and he apologized but do you think that I wanna go back there and that I feel safe there? Now ppl want me to find another church cuz DH's in a cult and I need the support. Yes, true that! How do I get excited about looking for another church? Yes, DH is in a cult. Yes, I need an iron clad support group check, yes, i need to fellowship check, but do i need to sing songs of singsperations too?
ReplyDeleteI'm tainted with church can you tell? LOL I have a list of about 5 churches to try in my area but eh no motivation. Is that cuz i'm a bad bad bad christian or because i'm sick of the spiritual abuse and being made to sing songs of singsperations?!! No offense Darcy! I don't get it and I'll stop here!
Most of the patriarchy seem to practice FATHER worship and father adoration. Father as in Daddy, not Our Father Which Art in Heaven......... it's SICK.
ReplyDelete