Oooo... Shiny...

I do not have ADD, and I love art and music, but I have to admit the sensory overload of music and artwork in the catholic churches we talked about this morning would be too much for me.  With so much to take in, I don't think that I personally could focus on worship.
In this aspect, I think Calvin had a valid point. Take it all down and leave no distractions.  Make the worship an actual corporate worship experience focused on God and his Word instead of a concert focused on beauty and performers.

Commented on Rebekah's "No Lesser Values of Scripture"

Palistrina vs. Calvin

Coincidentally, I've been taking music appreciation this semester, so listening to music for most of a class period is not out of the ordinary at all. Luckily, we just studied the Renaissance period in music, so I got to hear Palistrina. Hearing it again while talking about Calvinism and Catholicism put a different spin on it though. I loved hearing Palistrina with all the honors people, but it made me think about what worship music really is and if someone should restrict worship music like Calvin wanted to. Are we allowed to do that? Are we allowed to say what kind of worship everyone should offer? Since we're all different people with different backgrounds, I think it would be like imposing who we are another person. I think what matters the most is what the heart of the worshipper is. It's all about glorifying God and that might look different to different people. P.S. Commented on Skylar's

Music during the Catholic Reformation: Majestic to Simple

Today in class were listened to and talked about the  music before and after the Catholic Reformation. We talked about how the main purpose to reforming music from the grandeur and majestic version of Palestrina to the more simple and "catchy"  music was because it provided a way for people to participate. It also allowed people to focus on the words of the songs and not the actual music.

In today's society we are encountering a similar problem where people get lost in the music and not in the purpose behind the music, which is to worship. While I understand the purpose of making music simpler to allow people to focus on worshiping and not on the complexity or build of the music, I also don't think we should minimize the beauty music can have. In my opinion, God gave man the ability to create music and we are also called to give our all to Jesus. Therefore, if God calls us to music in any shape or form creating simple songs and not putting forth your best effort when creating music and worship songs is probably not what God had in mind. While I have no ability to know or say what God is thinking or intends for other people, I do believe that both forms of worship can coexist. A great worship song to me is one that holds great truths in it's lyrics while also displaying a beautiful melody that evokes the ear to listen and points to the hand of God. Therefore, reforming music to the extremes of the Catholic reformation may not be necessary but making sure that the lyrics equal the importance of the music is in today's society.

p.s. commented on Rebekah Dye's No Lesser Values of Scripture

Calvin and Dante

I know that I do not know or fully understand everything both Dante and Calvin believe, but I think they are very interesting and seem to contrast. I think it is interesting that for Dante, we choose our own Hell. Our sin turns into our own punishment, and that there is justice in that. For Calvin, God is the dispenser of justice, and it seems to have nothing to do with our own choice. On this ground I don't fully agree with Calvin. I think in a way it is a bit of a double standard, for it is all God who saves us, but it is also all God and all man that causes damnation. For each sinner had one sin that dominated his life and consumed him not with God. I think that is more realistic than saying passive man had no part in his ultimate destination.
I don't know, not to start a theological debate. Just some thoughts.

Calvin & The Regulative Principle of Corporate Worship

In Christianity there are two opposing principles that govern corporate worship: normative and regulative. In the normative principle, the church may do anything Scripture doesn't prohibit--this would include liturgies, instruments and images. In the regulative principle, the church only does what Scripture prescribes--prayer, singing the Psalms and reading Scripture. John Calvin falls neatly on the regulative side.

Regulative worship restricts, but the purpose of restriction is not cold restraint, but freedom from sensuality. Calvin believed simple, reverent worship where the Word is central enables the church to praise God as he so desires. Controversies over the form of liturgy and congregational preference do not enter into his scheme; instead the church is free to worship simply with a clean conscience.

In his view, regulative worship offers freedom from idolatry. Calvin asserted that "the human heart is a factory of idols," and as such, people are prone to corruption even in the worship of the true God--hence simplicity was necessary. In 1543, Calvin wrote The Necessity of Reforming the Church, addressed to Emperor Charles V. He said,

But since God not only regards as fruitless, but also plainly abominates, whatever we undertake from zeal to His worship, if at variance with His command, what do we gain by a contrary course? The words of God are clear and distinct, 'Obedience is better than sacrifice.' 'In vain to they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men,' (I Sam. xv. 22; Matth. xv 9). Every addition to His word, especially in this matter, is a lie. Mere "will worship" is vanity. This is the decision, and once the judge has decided, it is no longer time to debate."

To us this seems narrow-minded, perhaps legalistic. Weaned on youth group, Sunday morning praise bands and a paradigm of all-inclusiveness, we are prejudiced, culturally conditioned against his way of thinking. We are slow to hear and quick to react, saying, "How is it good, or even Scriptural, to restrict other kinds of heart-felt God worship?"

First, Calvin would warn us against excess in corporate worship, a legitimate danger. Church can become more like a rock concert than anything worshipful. There have been abuses of the normative principle in our own day, with churches playing AC-DC's "Highway to Hell" just because Scripture doesn't prohibit secular rock music in the divine service. Worship becomes banal when we lose the centrality of the Word.

Second, he would tell us regulative worship is Scriptural precisely because it doesn't go beyond what is written. What may seem to us stuffy, dull and emotionless to us may be another man's idea of pure and heart-felt worship before God.



EDIT: Commented on Jannah Lyons' Predestination and Susan Berner's Calvinism.

No Lesser Values of Scripture

In the reading for today, there were lots of times when Luther referred to Scriptures he believed were more or less significant then others. He liked to say things such as, Jesus' works and words were less important than say, Peter and Paul's...and other such things. I had some interesting feelings on this.
I cannot really fathom the idea of a certain Scripture being more or less important then another. And I think to put more value on a certain Scripture is a horrible mistake. The Bible specifically says, "All Scripture is inspired by God". Therefore, it is all worth His mentioning. :) I go back and forth on how I feel about Luther... I think he had a few sort of twisted perspectives.

I commented on Jannah Lyon's, "Predestination" blog.

Predestination

    I know, I know this is a first, I'm posting before a Thursday night! Alright, now that we have that cleared...I'll get on with the real reason I'm here, John Calvin and his writing on Predestination.
     First off, I want to say I agree with Calvin, for the most part.  One has to admit that as Calvin says, "God foreknew what end of man was to be before He made him and he foreknew it because He had ordained it by His decree," is indeed correct. Also that God's will is necessity and it is shameful of us to accuse God of injustice by 'unequally' distributing grace.  Now, this is where I argue with Calvin.  Does God actually unequally distribute grace?   2 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance."  God's will is not for some to perish... It says so right here. God is not wanting anyone to perish, He wants all to come to repentance. Though, God through His justice will allow man to make their own decisions, and they will have to decide between God's grace or death. When they choose death, God will give them what they chose. 
     Is predestination real? For sure, but maybe not in the way Calvin describes it. Any believer will have to admit that predestination exist in the life of a Christian, the Bible says it does.. But not so much where people cannot choose whether to be saved or not. Calvin would like to say that Salvation isn't a choice, instead God forces salvation upon you or denies it of you.  Clearly, this is not how God operates. Take John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life." If God forces salvation upon the Christian would it be belief or trust?   
     No matter if you believe in Calvin's Predestination or not, Calvin makes an excellent point.  The Christian does not know who is an 'elect' in Christ, or who is predestined. So, the Christian's purpose does not change, he still has to spread the Gospel to all, because someone he speaks to could be predestined. We still have to preach to Gospel to Jerusalem, Samaria and the ends of the world.