The Medium and the Message

A recent post over at Save the LCMS! got me thinking about the greater scope of things going on in our synod these days. Here’s the quote that caught my eye:

1. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is at stake. Where the Gospel is at stake, the souls of men and women for whom Christ died are at stake, as is the article upon which the Church stands or falls. This is really the second round of a war that began in the 1970’s. Then, the formal principle of our theology was at stake - the Holy Scriptures. Today, the material principle of our theology is at stake - the message of justification by faith alone through grace alone for Christ’s sake alone. This conflict is really nothing more than a continuation of unresolved conflicts of the “Seminex” era.

I agree and I disagree. I agree that the battlefield for the “Battle for the Bible,” was the “formal principle,” the source of the message, the Scriptures. In the current battle, the scene has shifted to the “material principle,” or the message itself. This is a helpful observation in framing the issue theologically.

I disagree that there is some hard connection between the two. The seminex bunch were also Gospel reductionists - all Gospel, all the time. One of the great ironies of that era is that there were many fine preachers and liturgists. The current battle does not attack the Gospel directly. In fact, most proponents of the new emergent, seeker-sensitive, purpose-driven Lutheranism would vehemently deny that any such thing was taking place. “We preach solid Law/Gospel sermons,” they vigorously declare. And many indeed do, as well they must, given what else is being said and sung.

The seminex era controversy was an academic and intellectual battle that trickled down to the masses as a “battle for the Bible.” The current controversy is a radical reformation from below that is only now beginning to appear on the theological radar screen. It’s an issue of identity and the old “style and substance” distinction promoted by David Luecke in his highly influential book Evangelical Style and Lutheran Substance: Facing America's Mission Challenge (CPH, 1988). Luecke’s basic premise is that Lutheran doctrine can wear any style of dress and still retain its core identity.

Early experiments with cautiously “blended” services that dropped a guitar-accompanied praise song or two into the historic liturgy have given way to full-blown contemporary tent revivals that rigorously exclude any “traditional elements” such as the Creed or the Our Father. In fact, a service today is not considered canonically “contemporary” if it contains any traditional element at all. While contemporary pastors insist they are preaching “solid Law/Gospel sermons,” the video record on the internet is starting to tell quite a different story. The recent push toward seeker-sensitive, emergent forms of worship have buried Lutheranism’s historic, catholic roots and its Christocentric, sacramental distinctives like so much loose change in the cushions of the coffeehouse couch. Marshall McLuhan was right: The medium is the message.

Dr. Arthur Just, in his lectures on liturgical worship, speaks of “primary theology.” One’s primary theology is what one holds nearest and dearest, what one encounters first and foremost, repetitively, week after week. Historically, a Lutheran’s primary theology was shaped by the creeds, the catechism, and the hymnal of liturgy and hymns. Today’s contemporary theology is shaped by 40 days of purpose, felt needs, and Evangelical praise songs rolled up in an urgent call to reach the lost by any means possible. Ultimately, this is going to have a profound effect on how we interpret the Scriptures and the message we proclaim.

The problems are becoming more and more obvious, even to the casual observer. The Scriptures are now a gold mine of divinely inspired nuggets to justify man-made programs and principles rather than the proclamation of Christ for the justification of the ungodly. “Life applications,” “biblical principles,” and “relevance to today’s world” are the evidence of the erosion of the “Word of Christ,” the material principle, the “stuff” of the Christian faith.

A great lesson from church history is the continual tendency for the church, even in its early days, to revert back into a kind of “Christianized Pharisaic Judaism” when Christ is not the hermeneutical center. The apostle Paul wrote vigorously on this, especially in Galatians and Romans, encapsulated in this one verse: “Christ is the end (goal) of the Torah for justification to all who believe” (Romans 10:4). Luther identified this as the very key to interpreting the OT, indeed the entire Scriptures. Where Christ and justification are not central, the apostolic message will be distorted.

I don’t mean to suggest that the proponents of the new emergent, seeker-sensitive, purpose-driven Lutheranism are intentionally undermining or denying the Gospel. They have a zeal for God, but it is without knowledge. Their medium is introducing a huge static into the message, and the distinctive voice of Reformation Lutheranism is beginning to sound like a weak AM radio station broadcasting in the middle of nowhere.