Peter Leithart's The End of Protestantism: Pursing Unity in a Fragmented Church is a flawed attempt at a worthy cause. The mission statement should be encouraged, the practical exhortations are needed, but the material presentation is lacking.
Torrey Gazette is the combined work of everyday Christians blogging on books, family, art, and theology. So pull up a seat and join us. Family Table rules apply. Shouting is totally acceptable.
All tagged Peter Leithart
Peter Leithart's The End of Protestantism: Pursing Unity in a Fragmented Church is a flawed attempt at a worthy cause. The mission statement should be encouraged, the practical exhortations are needed, but the material presentation is lacking.
For Leithart's vision of a unified church, latent racism and individualism — to a certain extent congregationalism — are unacceptable within the church.
People are reading Leithart under the presumption that he has all the answers. But he never claims such. He sees the unification of the church as a pneumatological event.
Lord only knows much ink has been spilled over Jesus’ famous words “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” (Matthew 5:17).
Jesus has initiated this glorious redemption and he has ascended to the right hand of God the Father Almighty from whence he has poured out His Spirit on His Church who will continue the work of redemption until all of Christ’s enemies have been made a footstool under his feet (Psalm 110:1).
By allowing the Gospel of Matthew to tell the story it wants to tell (rather than telling the story of a doctrine) Leithart brings out
Once you begin to understand the ways in which the Bible refers to itself, you begin to peel back layers to passages that before were seemingly shrouded in mystery and hid their glory from you.
Eschatology must submit to the story of Scripture and follow the story as it leads us to Christ. Too often eschatology (and theology in general) has abandoned the narrative of scripture. This can only lead to confusion and ultimately away from Christ.
History belongs to God. He is the great author. To look at periods of time in history and assume that God is not acting is to think like a pagan.
Before recent times, church architecture meant something. Recently the protestant faith in the West has come to be understood in (almost) entirely intellectual terms. “Belief” is the core and sole tenet. Due to this emphasis on an intellectualized faith, aspects like architecture, city planning, and aesthetics in general, have gone by the wayside.
Infant baptism, in part, looks to redeem the created order that God established in Adam. Were sin to not have entered into the world there would be no distinction between a child’s growth in godliness and their “natural” growth as a human (both physically and psycho-socially)
The Old and New Testaments build on and relate to each other as much as the chapters of a really good book; even more so actually. Thus, if we are to understand both testaments as we should, we need to be intimately acquainted with both, not just the New.
Individual choice, instant gratification, and sensory titillation are stalwarts in the American church because they are stalwarts in American secularism: the true enculturating power behind much of American Christianity. The church has been called to be a new world within the bounds of an old world. Yet we seem to content ourselves with the ways and world of the first Adam even while we are called to pray for the kingdom of the second Adam to come on Earth as it is in heaven.
As moderns, we tend to believe that we are capable of objectively removing ourselves from our relationship with Christ and stand outside of it and judge it properly. Not only is this impossible, it would be a sinful approach to things even if we were capable of doing it.
Salvation isn't a punched ticket to heaven. Grace is not some sort of ephemeral substance that must be used like gasoline, but only for the human soul.
If Christians begin to think this way about salvation then there is a strong chance the vitality and centrality of the church would not be overlooked as it so often is in our individualistic culture.
Leithart wants to show that there is a pattern “mutual indwelling” to the created order. This mutual indwelling is seen most clearly when we understand that the vitality of the way objects and people relate to one another is through their inhabiting of one another. This co-inhabitation does not blur the lines of difference between objects but rather is created by the distinct differences inherent to the objects.
In the same way that a newborn child learns it’s given name through symbols so too does an infant who is baptized learn it’s Christian name.
We are all uniquely individual. But our unique individuality can only be understood as it is born through the indwelling of others (like mothers through whom we are literally born).