Culture Clash Pt. 3
Leading off this week's discussion in our Culture Clash subject is Rev. Thabiti Anybwile. Many of you know of our brother and fellow elder from his blog called Pure Church. Among other things he serves as the pastor of the First Baptist Church of Grand Cayman and is the author of two books, The Faithful Preacher and the just released The Decline of African-American Theology. Brother 'T' is also a founding member of The Council of Reforming Churches.
Â
I want to know if my corporate worship needs to look like Tenth Presbyterian Church or if it can look like my PNBC (Primitive National Baptist Church) home church with more discernment in the music, Christ-centered preaching, and an absence of an altar call?
One of the main ends of corporate worship is the edification or the “building up� of the saints (1 Cor. 14:3-4, 6, 12, 19, 26). We should feel the freedom of Christ to do what edifies. I can’t think of any place in Scripture that tells us what corporate worship “needs to look like,� except those passages that insist on edification, unity and order. Beyond that, I’d encourage you to embrace the freedom that Christ gives us here—with one qualification.
We should not use our freedom in personal living or the corporate worship setting to make our brothers stumble or to prevent unbelievers from hearing the truth (1 Cor. 14:16). Maintaining the ability edify and evangelize are critical. Anything that begins to diminish edification or to obscure the gospel, shouldn’t be thought of as “black� or “white� but as unhelpful and self-defeating. We should do all to edify and evangelize. But those are big boxes inside of which there is great liberty in which we should rejoice.
Do my elders need to talk with the business savvy of CHBC's (Capital Hill Baptist Church) elders, or can they talk in (for lack of a better term) "non-white" in words and tones if they still speak in accordance with the truth and the Solas?
I’ve been a CHBC elder, and I can tell you that there isn’t always business savvy displayed around the table J. Every local church should be careful not to “measure themselves by one another and compare themselves with one another,� lest we be “without understanding� (2 Cor. 10:12). The exception to this would be love and generosity (2 Cor. 8:8). But even then, the true comparison is Christ (v. 9). So, I’d say dispense with the comparisons to others altogether.
Seems to me the language standard (which I assume you’re using as a proxy for some level of maturity, sophistication, and expertise??) really isn’t a standard that Scripture sets. The better standard is probably savvy in knowing, describing, diagnosing, and treating the sheep according to the word of God, with the soberness that comes from realizing we will give an account to God. As you know, that’s entailed in the shepherding and overseeing images of Scripture (for ex, Heb. 13:17). So, we should be cool with a brother speaking in patois or anything else understandable if they’re faithful shepherds laying down their lives for the sheep.
Do we sort of give up on senior citizen members of the congregation who are entrenched in traditional (secular/syncretistic/milk-not-meat) Black church thought and just run with those younger guns who are ready to take Reform to the next level, or is this inconsiderate of and unloving toward those who are rightly the objects of the very Reformation we desire?
“Running with the young guns� can look so appealing because it appears easier. But, Titus 2:1-5 indicates that not patiently teaching the older, perhaps more resistant members is indeed unloving. In Titus 2, Paul explicitly says that young Timothy is to teach older men and older women. So, we can’t be faithful and loving in our task and leave the older saints unserved.
Having said that, however, if Jesus doesn’t come soon, then a longer-term perspective may require intentionally grooming future leaders (i.e., younger people). We need investments in both groups, but the investment might look quite different.
Is there anything in the "Black Church tradition" (whatever that is) worth salvaging or should I go the white-is-right route in all things? (I know that's not fair or accurate.)
Yes. The Black Church tradition boasts a number of historical figures that were committed to the same biblical truth that the Lord has called us to love. We’d do well to call those folks forward out of the dustbin of history and remind our people where we come from.
That tradition has been consistently stronger in its understanding of the dignity of humanity created in the image of God and the unity of man—not just in sin but in creation. Acts 17:26 was a rallying cry for AA Christians in the fight for recognition of their humanity. We may give that to the world and appropriate it afresh.
There is a concern for both the gospel of Jesus Christ and a just society when the Black church tradition is at its best. That’s not a tension that’s easy to maintain. Yet, in the States, it’s the Black Church tradition that has at times sustained the priority and tension most effectively.
Even during the early days of the independent African church movement, the Black church tradition held a high view of the church, including emphasis on corrective discipline. We should salvage that history.
The “white is right� thing is a myth. Of course, the white man’s ice is not colder. And the point to be stressed is that we’re not thirsting for his ice or water to begin with. We’re after the water of life that Christ Jesus offers His people. It’s not a matter of being black or white at all, but of being biblical and zealous for the name of our God.
Comments
December 17, 2007
Lionel Woods
December 11, 2007