The Church of Frank Sinatra: an American Egalitarian Ecclesiology
Michael Brown
in Creeds & Confessions, Ecclessiology
|
13 Comments
(this post was originally posted on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 08:50AM)
With the rise of American biblicism and "Scriptura Solo" (in contrast to the Protestant and Reformational principle of Sola Scriptura), came the erosion of ecclesiastical authority. Populist hermeneutics, which promoted the autonomy of the individual conscience, gave way to an anti-clerical, anti-authoritarian attitude. Like creeds and confessions, the value and necessity of well-trained clergymen was challenged. As Hatch points out, a revolution within the church was called for “to place laity and clergy on equal footing and to exalt the conscience of the individual over the collective will of any congregation or church organization.” This was seen most vividly in the renouncement of all institutional forms of church government (including church membership) and the upsurge of untrained preachers and their vernacular style of preaching.
Ironically (and sadly), American biblicism - both then and now - fails to see in the very Bible they tout as their "only creed" the divinely prescribed order of the church and the offices God has given her (Acts 14.23; 20.28; 1 Tim 3; 5.17; Tit 1; Heb 13.17). The canon of Scripture is the means by which Christ shapes his church and exercises his authority over her (Mt 16.19; Tit 1.13; 2.15). This is the very reason for subscription to creeds and confessions; they act as summary statements of biblical truth to keep the church on course and from falling into error.
Yet, in its attempt to free the Bible from the fetters of the traditions of men, American biblicism has actually removed Scripture from its authoritative function. Rather than being guided by the principle of Sola Scriptura, biblicists have been guided by the egalitarian spirit of the American culture. The result has been a Protestantism that "has been pushed and pulled into its present shape by a democratic or popluist oreintation."
Sadly, this continues to be a great problem for the Christian Church in America. Anti-authoritarian attitudes that scorn ecclesiastical offices and church government incessantly prevail. Well-educated and well-trained clergy (both pastors and missionaries) is increasingly becoming a norm of the past. Just as the American biblicism of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries produced self-called ministers who relied completely on their inward call and neglected “almost every ministerial qualification required in the sacred Scriptures,” so too at the present day nearly anyone possessing skills to persuade a crowd and a belief of some personal, inward experience can proclaim himself a minister, set up shop, and often obtain celebrity status...sort of the ecclesiastical version of a garage band. As one of our elders at Christ URC likes to say, it becomes the Church of Frank Sinatra: "I Did it My Way."
Creeds and confessions help curb that sinful spirit of autonomy in each of us. They protect the church from wild-eyed biblicism and privatized religion. They protect us from "Scriptura Solo" while upholding Sola Scriptura. They protect the health and care of the church from American egalitarian ecclesiology.
Reader Comments (13)
Mike, I have appreciated this series, and the related discussions. You have painted a fairly bleak picture of the situation on the ground. What kinds of solutions are being talked about. Other than Reformed churches out there, just doing what they do, and guys like you "spreading the word," has anyone proposed "ways of proceeding" in this current environment?
Well, to a large extent, this is what magazines such as Modern Reformation and radio shows such as "The White Horse Inn" are all about: confessional Protestants (be they Reformed, Presbyterian, Lutheran, or Baptist) raising awareness through writing and conversation and calling the church to repent of its worldiness.
I say this as a hearty WHI/MR Innkeeper and champion, etc.
But I can't help but wonder...
"Raising awareness and calling the church to repent of its worldiness" almost sounds like something one might expect of Revivalists and Biblicists. I realize it can be very fuzzy, but where do we draw the line between "fixing things per our own powers" and relying on word and sacrament to effect things? Where do we rely on a churchly approach versus an activist one? Is work like MR/WHI the confessional version of Evangelicalism?
Yet, at the same time, I wouldn't have "found my way in" were it not for this work. I hate to sound like I am biting that hand that fed, but I do consider those in our circles to be able to take honest questions. (My initial conversion came at the hands of Willow Creek, but broad Evangelicalism was just never really built to withstand self-inquiry and criticism.) I don't know, this has been a quandry in my mind for some years now.
Zrim
Zrim,
I hear ya, but think about how the Reformation in the 16th C spread across Europe. Had it not been for the printing press and lots of conversations in taverns and university dorms, it probably would not have had the success that it did. None of this takes away from the real power of Word and Sacrament.
I know, that's part of my quandry. I hear Stellmann snickering now. ("Sheesh, that guy never gives up on activism, like a dog with a bone.").
Something still tells me that the Church was still there and was vital anyway. Something about the gates of hell, etc.
Zrim
Well, of course. Nobody is denying that. But Xp builds his church on the rock amidst much messiness. Look at the seven letters in Revelation. While conversation and writing is not the means of grace, it is still, broadly speaking, part of the church's continuance in apostolic doctrine.
Yes, I agree. I think what I am trying to do is distinguish between "godly conversation" and "much trifling about words that leads to schism and hatred." Seems to me talk about "paper pope" language falls into the latter. Ironic, given its ostensible goals of "unity, freedom and brotherhood." That's part of what I meant when I said I was never so schismatic as when a biblicist, never as catholic as when an intolerant confessionalist.
I am grateful for your series of posts and would love nothing more than to see them in print form. I know the group that I am involved in called the Heidelberg Reformation Association would benefit greatly from having this in print form. We are seeking ways to help Reformed churches remain Reformed and churches that have lost their Reformed identity to regain it.
Howard
hra.witnesstoday.org
Sorry, being blonde does have it's drawbacks (not many contrary to popular belief) but where, oh where is there any reference of Francis Albert Sinatra on this page? His marvelous photo is displayed, but scrutinizing the article and each post, I see no connection whatsoever! Thank goodness for my Thesaurus as well.
Kindly explain, or it is just a cover-up to attract family and friends of Frank? If so, it certainly displays no regard for personal feelings for the finest vocalist of the twentieth century!
Dee Dee,
Frank "did it his way." Get it?
Jason,
Really? I thought it had something to do with Joe Piscopo and Bono? Kidding.
Dee Dee, I hope you're not one of those blondes who uses liquid white-out on computer screens. Those white-out tape dispensers work so much better.
Zrim
Mike,
You have to love providence. I received the latest NTJ yesterday. Landry and Smith bat around the ideas you and I did above: parachurch work and their relation to ecclesiastical bodies.
Zrim
Zrim,
We should sign Dee Dee up for a subscription to the NTJ. Bless her heart.
Dee Dee, just so you know, I think Ol' Blue Eyes was an amazing vocalist.