Posts Tagged ‘orthopathos’
I’ve been pretty surprised at the rate at which new cultural orthodoxies have been formed over the course of my lifetime but particularly the last decade. This post serves as an attempt at dissecting how cultural orthodoxies form and serves to appreciate the complexity of their genesis. There is too much reductionistic thought out there about how cultural shifts occur and most of it centers on just one or two cultural factors and fails to take into account the massive web of multiple reciprocities that is this thing we call culture. Most of the current cultural commentary picks two or three sources as the root causes. Typically the cited sources are institutional – the (liberal) media, corporations, the current political milieu, or highly organized elite power brokers. I think these things have certainly played a role, even key roles, into the cultural shifts that we have seen. That said, I think these views are pretty reductionistic and fail to understand the complexities the constitute culture. As Justin Holcomb has said, “The most powerful aspect of culture is that which we do not think or reason about.” My main point in this piece is that the forces, elements, and ingredients that cause cultural change are very complicated and cannot be boiled down to just a few people, tribes, or institutions.
First, we need to understand what elements of culture are at work, both conscious and unconscious:
There is a constellation of at least 8 things that add to the formulation of cultural dogma – NOTE: 5 of these 8 are directly taken from a presentation delivered by Justin Holcomb and represent heavily thoughts from UVA’s department of Sociology (particularly that of James Davison Hunter) and also that of Christian Smith (Notre Dame)).
1. Artifacts: iPhones, iPads, or other iDevices that unconsciously reorder how we interact with stimuli or information. Artifacts can also be cultural icons such as the Cowboy, Bald Eagle, or Coca-Cola. Artifacts unconsciously impact how we think and interact about our world.
2. Language: Language is the carrier of culture… this is why terminology, accents, vocabularies, technical terms, pronunciations, and word meanings can very heavily geographically even within the same linguistic system. The use of the various aspects of language heavily determines tribal identity.
3. Beliefs, Symbols, or Ideas: these comprise some of the commonly held notions, brand identities, or thoughts of a people group or tribal faction.
4. Social Forces (aka Deep Structures) – Note the first 6 are from Justin Holcomb:
- The Therapeutic – the making of everything as not anyone’s own ultimate responsibility and the centrality of personal happiness of the goal of the individual
- Consumerism – the commodification of things that should not be commodified
- Pluralism – the acceptance of mutually exclusive systems of thought as being equally valued and/or true
- Secularism – the intentional lessening of religious authority in a culture
- Democritization of knowledge – consensus is king and if the consensus doesn’t agree with you, bludgeon them until they do
- Post-Modern-Pragmatism – this is my own personal soap box on the mis-labeling of all things post-modern and what we really mean when we say the term “post-modernism”
- Globalism/Mobility – this also relates closely to the rapid rise of urbanization, the velocity of ideas, the fluidity with which people change geographic location, and the role of the worldwide marketplace and supply chain
5. Institutions: politics, education, economic, spiritual, media… etc.
7. Elites: these can be media, political, athletic, celebrity, or other cultural curators and definers. One could categorize these as being the heads of various institutions (#5 above), but elites are more individuals than groups and seem to transcend even the institutions that gave them their platforms.
8. The Marketplace: dollars (or perceived dollars) can be the most significant voters of cultural change and this can happen on both the macro (Mozilla) and micro levels (Worldvision).
Second, we need to understand what some of our cultural orthodoxies (dogmas) happen to be:
(Note – I have in view here principally the West and specifically the American cultural context)
-“The highest moral good lay[s] in personal self-fulfillment” – see George Marsden’s book, The Twilight of the American Enlightenment: the 1950s and the Crisis of Liberal Belief – WSJ review here
-Public conversation (or dialogue or discourse) is only to be about facts and not beliefs – in other words it is taboo to talk about God
-Marriage is fundamentally about (romantic) love
-Homosexual behavior is to be accepted at least as non-abnormal and in some instances as normative
-What doesn’t hurt other people is morally permissible
–Authenticity to self and personal happiness are very important virtues and perhaps the highest of all the virtues
-Personal happiness is ultimate
-Sex is principally intended for pleasure
-Be good (in your own eyes) in order to be self-actualized (happy)
-The subjective individual self, in combination with the herd (read: democritization of knowledge), is the greatest interpreter, curator, and judge of what is true, good, and beautiful (over against history, data, or external authority)
Third, we need to understand the interplay of the cultural elements with the culture, our tribal faction, and ourselves
Velocity of ideas:
Before movable typeset, ideas and culture were principally only shared along trade routes. Those trade routes which were often roads or nautical routes were the only means by which one culture (or tribe) might cross-polinate another group. This made the velocity of ideas was much slower than in post-industrial and pre-internet age. Another complexity to the transmission of ideas dealt with low levels of literacy and significant linguistic barriers that existed for millennia. Oral traditions can travel remarkably quick yet must gain certain thresholds of cultural penetration in order to take route and multiple through generations. The paradigm shifts in the transmission of ideas were principally the Gutenberg printing press, transportation advances (cars, planes… etc.), and communication revolutions (radio, television, satellite, internet, web 2.0). These paradigm shifts in transmission of ideas has radically increased the velocity of ideas. In the modern era, ideas can travel at nearly limitless speed, spread through thousands of seemingly disparate and unconnected networks or tribes, and reach saturation levels significant enough to change public opinion, shape political policy, or even to overthrow governments (ie. Twitter and the Arab Spring).
Cultural Interaction is Determinative of Belief:
Humans naturally gravitate toward like kind and like minded. That said, there is significant interplay between what we believe and how you come up with what you believe. Orthodoxy (right beliefs) affects orthopathos, (right emotions) affects orthopraxis (right practice), affect orthodoxy, affects orthopraxis, affects orthodoxy… ad infinitum. So how we interact with culture – whether we engage it, critique it, or embrace it will impact consciously or unconsciously what we believe. You can evidence this very clearly with radically undercontextualized and/or cultish groups like the FLDS or the Westboro Baptist folks.
Unconscious Cultural Elements:
The seven cultural elements listed above are constantly influencing our lives in good ways, bad ways, and every shade of grey in-between. Most of this influence is unconscious, subconscious, selectively ignored, or down played as not playing a role in what we believe. I have had several hundred conversations with people about what they believe. In an overwhelming number of such instances, people believe the set of ideas that justify their wants, desires, and passions. In these instances the horse was the wants, desires, and passions of the heart that drove the cart of the justifications, rationalizations, and knowledge of the head. In other words, people seek evidence, truth, arguments, facts, and knowledge about their beliefs after those beliefs are formed by their belief system (secular, religious, philosophical, or other). There are notable exceptions, but this seems to be more normative than not. Most folks could not even name a single thinker, writer, philosopher, sacred text, or cultural element that was the genesis of their most central tenets, dogmas, orthodoxies, or beliefs.
That said, some of these cultural elements above are very conscious. These elements are the ones that tend to get the most ink spilled about them. It is usually institutions and elites that get the most attention and the usual scapegoats for when their is some rising cultural dogma that is contrary to our own tribal orthodoxy. I do not wish to downplay the role of celebrity, elites, the marketplace, and institutions of all kinds in the formulation of new cultural dogmas. The role of these conscious elements has been well noted in the sexual revolution, the rise of feminism, the rise of fundamentalism and evangelicalism, and have shaped the battle lines on other issues like abortion, gender, and sexuality.
Concluding thoughts: If you have bought into the idea that the contours of the cultural landscape are complex and inter-related, then I hope that you might be willing to think and interact on those contours with more deftness and in a manner than is more winsome. I would hope that you would be able to identify more readily some of unconscious elements that comprise the invisible hand of culture. Be patient with people who do not understand or do not care that they hold numerous mutually exclusive ideas in their worldview. Have compassion on the culture for it is harassed and helpless:
When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Matthew 9:36
For further reading:
Culture Wars, James Davison Hunter
Intellectuals, Paul Johnson
Total Truth, Nancy Pearcey
Social and Cultural Dynamics, Pitirim Sorokin
To Change the World, James Davison Hunter
Desiring the Kingdom, James K. A. Smith
One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, John Frame
Chuck DeGroat has one of the best pieces I have read in a long long time called, “What’s Wrong With Your Pastor?” Orthodoxy without orthopathos is orthoworthless.
Marvin Olasky is resuming full-time duties at World Magazine.
Kansas State nutrition professor loses 27 pounds over two months while eating a diet of Twinkies and Nutty Buddy Bars, while lowering bad cholesterol by 20% and raising good cholesterol by 20%.
Company creating an app and cell phone plug-in device to test for STDs. I am not sure if this is exceedingly strange or a good idea… or both.
iPhone app of the week: MileBug – creates IRS compliant travel logs simply and easily and you can email yourself the reports in both Word or Excel formats. If you don’t want to pay the $2.99 they have a Lite version that allows you to create 10 trip reports before having to email yourself. Also, it allows you to take notes and add parking, toll, or food expenses to each mileage report.
Pretty crazy trick play in a Middle School football game:
Women solves Wheel of Fortune puzzle with just one letter:
This list is what I think are the 10 best books that I have read from John Piper. I haven’t read some of the more recent ones, but have heard good things about This Momentary Marriage (a book on marriage apparently).
1. Desiring God [y, l, e, p, s]
This classic is what introduced me to a sovereign God and the doctrines of grace. It also taught me that my pursuit of joy and my pursuit of God were one and the same pursuit. If you cannot get through it or are intimidated by its size, try The Dangerous Duty of Delight, he essentially says the same things, just more concisely.
2. Don’t Waste Your Life [y, l, e, p, s]
Quite simply this book needs to be read (and can be) by everyone. The title says it all. His passion for living a worthy life is infectious.
3. Let the Nations Be Glad [y, l, e, p, s]
This is his book on missions. It is excellent. Reading this book is what compelled me to spend time overseas investing the Gospel into people.
4. Brothers We are NOT Professionals [l, e, p, s]
Just as relevant in 2009 than it was in 2002. I agree with my friend James W. that this book ought to be read by every seminarian before and after seminary. Piper takes aim at the professionalization of the ministry. We are not professionals, we are shepherds.
5. The 5 Book Biography Set [y, l, e, p, s]
Each book has three or so vignette-length biographies. They are all good and the link above takes you to DG’s Christmas sale.
6. Finally Alive [l, e, p, s]
This book may prove to be one of Piper’s most important contributions. The book concerns the rarely written on, doctrine of regeneration. Definitely one of the best books of 2009.
7. Battling Unbelief [y, l, e, p, s]
This book gives you tools to fight for your joy in Christ when you don’t feel it. Also, I am told that, When I Don’t Desire God, and When the Darkness Will not Lift are both quite good and in the same vein.
8. The Supremacy of God in Preaching [e, p, s]
One of the best books on preaching. Period.
9. Future Grace [l, e, p, s]
The superior pleasure of Christ and the hope of future grace are our tools in fighting against sin.
10. God’s Passion for His Glory [y, l, e, p, s]
This books is Piper channeling Jonathan Edwards thoughts (which is much of what Piper has done his entire ministry… and that is a good thing). We would be wise to listen to Edwards and his vision for a God who is passionate for His own glory.
What’s the Difference – book on Biblical manhood and womanhood.
Counted Righteous in Christ – book defending the doctrine of Christ’s imputed righteousness. A critical doctrine and a solid book on the matter.
The Justification of God – rock solid exegesis of Romans 9. If you have ever had questions about Romans 9, this book will answer them.
(c=children; y=young adult; l=lay leader; e=elder; p=pastor; s=scholar)
Because the deck of life is always shifting balance can be nothing more than momentary synchronicity. (Richard Pratt)
Balance is something that evangelicals know very little of. We were birthed as a reaction against liberalism. In doing so, much of the conservative theology and philosophy of ministry were an equal and opposite reaction against liberalism. For much of fundamentalism-turned-evangelicalism’s existence, we defined ourselves anegativa against liberalism, rather than forming a positive definition from Scripture alone. In many ways, early evangelicalism required liberalism to exist, in order for it to exist.
Moving forward, here are 9 (non-comprehensive) areas where evangelicals ought to seek balance:
1. Words and Deeds
Some churches like to show the gospel, some like to preach the gospel – we should do birth. The lost should see and hear Christ preached.
2. Evangelism and Discipleship
Jesus called us to make disciples and this includes evangelism. Jesus modeled evangelism as a part of his disipleship. In many cases, Jesus sent out his disciples before him. These two things go together. When we do not model how to share our faith, we cannot expect that our disciples will ever multiply themselves.
3. Boldness and Clarity
Boldness corresponds to preaching the gospel. Clarity corresponds to showing the gospel in relationship. Paul did both.
4. Immanence and Transcendence
Immanence emphasizes God’s nearness. Transcendence emphasizes God’s bigness and incomprehensibility. Both are true and both need to be reflected in our personal and corporate worship. Some like to emphasize God’s immanence at the expense of his transcendence (Pentecostalism). Some like to emphasize God’s transcendence at the cost of his immanence (Liturgical). We need to help people see both and not just pander to one or the other. Who cares about the form of worship style if God is presented in both his immanence and transcendence.
5. Preservation and Adaptation
We need to honor the vast tradition of the history of the church – preservation. We need to innovate to adapt to the language of the culture (obviously, without over-contextualizing).
6. Individual and Communal
We are saved as individuals. We are called out to a community. We are not saved by merely being in the church while we are called out to a church.
7. “Already/Now” and “Not Yet”
Christ has already risen from the dead; Christ has not yet returned. We stand between two worlds and must yearn for the one to come, while seeking to affect change on the one we reside.
8. Reaching-up and Reaching-in and Reaching-out
Reaching-up is the vertical ministry of our relationship with God. Reaching-in is the horizontal and inward ministry of those in our church. Reaching-out is the horizontal outward ministry to the world. If we fail to do any one of these, we have been deficient as a church.
9. Orthodoxy and Orthopathos and Orthopraxis
All of the previous balances can be summarized in this final one. Right belief, Right emotion, Right practice. Balance is critical here. If we are seeking sound doctrine it ought to produce right practice and right emotion. If we are seeking right emotion it ought to produce right belief and right practice. If we are seeking right practice it ought to produce right doctrine and right belief.
What balances would you add?
Moving forward, balance is critical. Up next, we will look at some summarizing thoughts regarding evangelicalism in the future.
Evangelicalism’s goal ought always to be right belief (orthodoxy), right emotion (orthopathos), and right action (orthopraxis). The church exists to glorify God by expanding His rule, reign, and authority everywhere.
[T]heology [is] “the application of the Word of God by persons to all areas of life…” I would define application as “teaching” in the New Testament sense (didache, didaskalia), a concept represented in some translations by doctrine. John Frame, Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, p. 81.
Here, John Frame is rightly defining theology as application. Remember this, write it on your arm or whatever – theology is doctrine is application. There ought not ever be a dichotomy between theology and application.
The problem with evangelicalism is that for a long time there has been an unchallenged belief that theology and application were two separate things. Many have had the attitude that, ‘I am concerned with application’ and ‘those smart people and professional Christians (Pastors, Professors, and such) can be worried about all that fancy theology.’ The problem is that even the absence of a theology is a theology. Everyone has a theology, even if it be staunchly anti-intellectual.
Moving forward, evangelicalism (whether Reformed or populist) desperately needs doctrine, sound doctrine. Consider what the Apostle Paul says regarding doctrine in I Timothy alone [emphasis mine]:
1 Timothy 1:3 As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine
1 Timothy 1:10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine
1 Timothy 4:6 If you put these things before the brothers, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, being trained in the words of the faith and of the good doctrine that you have followed.
1 Timothy 4:16 Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers.
1 Timothy 6:1 Let all who are under the yoke as slaves regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine may not be spoken against.
1 Timothy 6:3 If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness
I hope that we have established that doctrine is necessary, but whose doctrine? Paul exhorts Timothy AWAY from different doctrine and TOWARDS our, good, and sound doctrine that agrees with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ. But every aspect of the church claims that their teaching is the Lord’s teaching, so who is more accurate? The doctrine that is the most accurate will be the doctrine that is in harmony with all of the Scripture. The doctrine that is the most accurate will be the doctrine that ultimately produces right action and right emotion. It is important to do theology in community because when we do theology on an island it often strays to heresy. It is important to do theology historically considering what all Christians have believe for 2000 years, namely our common creeds/councils (Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed, Chalcedonian Creed, and Athanasian Creed) and confessions/catechisms (Heidelberg Catechism, Belgic Confession, Canons of Dordt, Westminster Standards, and London Baptist Confession of 1689). Neither history nor tradition trump Scripture but there is great value in listening and learning from 2000 years of Christians (and this is not in violation of sola scriptura). To ignore church history is neither wise nor safe. Jesus did not die in a vacuum.
Evangelicalism is not the height of church history. Sorry, to all the manifest destiny Americans who think they are height of human history thus far. Evangelicalism needs doctrine badly. We need to rediscover afresh sola scriptura and the wonderful interpretive idea that the best interpreter of Scripture is all other Scripture. This is how we have sound doctrine. This is how we have sound action. This is how we have sound emotion.
Up next we will look at the crucial centrality of a Biblical worldview to evangelicalism moving forward.
“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times,” that classic Dickens opening, is so apt in describing my experiences within the broad and oft strange group we call Evangelicalism. For better or for worse, I have spent my entire life as an insider into the evangelical movement. I have been to Christian Missionary Alliance churches, Southern Baptist churches, megachurches, church plants, Evangelical Free-churches, non-denominational churches, charismatic churches, house churches, Reformed Baptist churches, and Presbyterian churches (PCA). I have known the inner-workings of the largest evangelical parachurch ministry in the world, Campus Crusade for Christ. I have seen dinosaurs and humans together, young-earth creationism, and premillenial pretribulation rapture dispensationalism be the core curriculum at youth group. I have heard long sermon series on demonology. I have heard pastors go on and on about their political agenda, neglecting to feed the sheep with the Word. I have also seen some really healthy examples where the people were well taught, well shepherded, and making a difference in their spheres of influence. I have seen severe anti-intellectualism and I have seen people who take the life of the mind seriously. I have heard staunchly semi-pelagian teaching and I have heard sound Reformed doctrine. It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…
The culmination of these years of experiences lead me to a few thoughts moving forward. We will look at several key things that I feel the evangelical movement will have to acquire or navigate. Specifically, we will look at: doctrine, worldview, urbanization, globality/mobility, no cultural center, contextualization, and balance. Like anything else, evangelicalism’s goal ought always to be right belief (orthodoxy), right emotion (orthopathos), and right action (orthopraxis).
Up first we will look at the role of doctrine in evangelicalism moving forward.
The First Great Awakening [1730s and 1740s] (as well as the Second that followed [1790-1840]) relied heavily on mass marketing to get people to the revivals. Whitefield would send assistants up to two years in advance to a city to setup venue and distribute flyers. Once there, people were confronted with a serious and emotional display of their status before God apart from accepting Christ. People responded to this bad then good news by equally emotional responses. Consider what Nancy Pearcey says regarding these revivals:
This kind of intense emotional conversion experience is exactly what the camp meetings of the First and Second Great Awakenings aimed to produce. No profound teaching, no high church ceremonies, no theological subtleties, no solemn hymns. Instead the revivalists used simple vernacular language and catchy folk tunes, delivered with lively theatrics to catch people’s attention and move their emotions. Evangelical preachers broke with the older pattern of using sermons to instruct, and began to use their sermons to press hearers to a point of crisis, in order to produce a conversion experience. Instead of talking about a gradual growth in faith through participation in a church, evangelicals began to treat a one-time conversion event as the only sufficient basis for claiming to be a Christian. – Total Truth, p. 263.
The revivals were controversial. The whole of Presbyterians in America were split in two in the Old Side-New Side controversy. It is easy to empathize with people being heated over the matter. On the one hand, the Holy Spirit appeared to be doing a great work and regenerating many hearts, bringing repentance and faith all over the colonies transcending denominational lines. On the other hand, how many of these people were legitimately changed? Were people just whipped into an emotional fervor and coerced into conversion? Were these people ever connected to a local church to be nurtured, catechized, and discipled?
Jonathan Edwards, although not a Presbyterian, sought to bring some peace and truth to the matter and wrote Religious Affections. Edwards evenhandedly carves out a Biblical middle-ground appropriately defending the role of emotions and the heart. In essence, Edwards correctly saw that right beliefs (orthodoxy), right emotions (orthopathos), and right actions (orthopraxis) all go together.
Unfortunately, not everyone read Edwards, Religious Affections. Consider some of the seeds the First Great Awakening planted among infant evangelicals:
The focus on an emotional response; the celebrity-style leader; the engineered publicity; the individual detached from his local congregation. Pearcey, Total Truth, p. 268.
At times, we can see these seeds grown full and writ large in evangelicalism. No sub-group is immune. The Reformed types love their heroes, dead and living. The charismatics can get carried away at times. The para-church can become de facto church surrogate. The big box/megachurch/Christ-Depot/Willow Creek/Saddleback folk can sometimes get caught up in the mass marketing publicity and business model approaches.
Next time, we will look at the Second Great Awakening…