Peter Leithart makes a helpful point with regard to the role of worship in the political lives of Christians:
Christians are engaged in political action just by being part of the church. Worship is the leading political activity of Christians. In worship, we sing Psalms that call on God to judge the wicked and defend the oppressed, and God hears our Psalms; we pray for rulers to rule in righteousness; we hear the word of God that lays out our alternative way of life, and we sit at the table where we who are many are formed into one body, an alternative Christian polis, by sharing in the one loaf. The problem is that in many churches those things don’t happen. Churches don’t sing Psalms, and especially don’t sing the hard Psalms that call on God to judge the wicked. More churches are having weekly Eucharist, but in evangelicalism that is still more the exception than the rule. The first political agenda for American Christians is to get worship more into line with Scriptural requirements.
Bob Kauflin also has a helpful blog post here, discussing the “how and why” of singing God’s judgments. Bob looks at (1) God’s judgment at the cross; (2) God’s past judgments; (3) God’s future judgments.
Thank you for this post! I have been preaching through 2 Kings and have recently come to chapters 9-10. As Dale Davis says in his commentary on 2 Kings, we should be singing “Joy to the church, the wicked queen is dead!” WE have airbrushed Jesus and God so much in our preaching and singing it would be great to see a post of songs that sing about Jesus not just as the sacrificial lamb who takes away the sins of the world but also as the apocalyptic lamb who burns with the righteous and holy fury of God!
If interested, you can find my 3-part series on 2 Kings 9-10 at my site: http://www.pastormanwarren.wordpress.com
Thank again for this post.
just FYI: Leithart = Federal Vision = Heresy
Donahue, don’t believe everything you hear. That’s not only lazy logic, it’s also bearing false witness against your neighbor. (Proverbs 18:13: “He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.)
Donahue,
As someone familiar with the FV debates, I just have to register that all the PCA’s study report which Leithart is being tried under right now says is that Leithart is “out of accord” with the Westminster Confession, and thus shouldn’t be ordained in the PCA. If that = heresy, well, I’d love to hear what you think of our reformed Baptist brothers like JT :)
Don’t believe the hype. It is orthodoxy reinvisioned for a 21st century context with an emphasis on Christology in the states.
Or, maybe you guys should actually read what Leithart has written instead of ignorantly brushing aside a serious warning.
http://www.weswhite.net/2010/06/peter-leithart-nails-it/
p.s. I’m a baptist too, except I don’t let John Piper do all my thinking for me.
It’s nice to know that I am not the only one around here with the courage to call a spade “a spade.”
I’ve probably read more of what Leithart has written than you have and that’s why I’m defending him. The problem is that too many folks have read their own understanding into Leithart’s words, and that’s only when they’re actually reading him. I have a hard time seeing how these aren’t blatant second and ninth commandment violations. Too many who have done far too little study have been quick to cast the first stone.
Five words and two equals signs constitute a “serious warning”?