A summation of "Progressive" Christianity beliefs.

In addition to the aforementioned works, I should endeavor to add that BWV 545 always brings a smile to my face, and is particularly suited as a prelude and postlude for church services in Eastertide and other festal seasons I think. It is very happy sounding and yet it has a strong impactful driving rhythm on the lower pipes. And of course BWV 639

The best pipe organs I have seen are in Leipzig, which is home to the Thomaskirche, with two lovely organs, the 19th century Sauerorgel, which has a lovely powerful 19th century orchestral sound, and the replica Baroque Bachorgel, which was constructed to play Bach’s fugues using the original tuning, rather than the ISO tuning which most modern organs are built to (it is a replica of the organ that existed in the Thomaskirche while JS Bach was alive, with the same exact tuning. The Thomaschoir, a boys’ choir which Bach used to conduct, still sings there.

Nearby is the Nicholaskirche, which was also under Bach’s musical direction as Thomaskantor, and this church is of extreme recent historical signifigance, since it was there that the protests were held which began the downfall of the DDR in 1989, led by a Lutheran pastor and concerned local citizens. The Stasi and Volkspolizei at one time tried to force their way into the church with a battering ram, but it was no match for the 18th century reinforced oak door. When I visited the church in 2000 and 2001, the paint on the kneelers in the pews, which had not been repainted since the fall of the DDR, was worn off from the fervent vigils people had held there during the oppression in the 1980s. This church also has an incredibly beautiful organ whose pipes make the sweetest, loveliest sound of any organ I am personally acquainted with, and I have heard quite a few, since I collect organ music.

Across the street from the Thomaskirche (and with convenient access to the Nicholaskirche) is Bach’s house, which was located there for convenience sake as he was Thomaskantor, not just in charge of the music of the two main churches of Leipzig, but also in charge of the Thomaschor, in respect of which he was not merely the boys’ music instructor but their headmaster and principal instructor in all subjects and responsible for their wellbeing, and by all accounts Bach did a very good job, maintaining order while allowing the boys to develop their musical abilities and to enjoy doing so. Bach himself had sixteen children but sadly eight of them died in childhood, which was so often the case back then. How sorrowful it must have been in that time, and how precious life must have seemed; no doubt people in the middle class with pensions, such as Bach, who were not in all cases dependent on some of their children reaching adulthood for survival as was the case with farmers, raised large families in part so that the love from their surviving children could offset the heartbreak from those who succumbed to the various illness of the day. In his elder years, after he had become deaf and blind, Bach was aided in composing by his children and grandchildren, as he could still feel the keys on his clavichord, harpsichord or gravicimbalo, and in playing them could indicate the note to be written down. He would gather with his sons several times of years to have parties where they took turns challenging each other to improvise upon each others music and played various games of musical composition.

And in this manner Bach raised his sons including, but not limited to, JC Bach and CPE Bach to be supremely good composers in their own right, with JC Bach’s Requiem Mass being one of the most beautiful known to me, one which I should like to be used as part of my own funeral, along with the Officio Pro Defunctorum of Cristobal de Morales and the Pannikhida (Eastern Orthodox memorial service) of Pavel Chesnokov, among others (multiple Pannikhidas are served following one’s repose).

MarkRohfrietsch said:

Almost Correct; we are in fellowship with SELK Selbständige Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirche | SELK - Home, Latvia and Lithuania are part of the ILC Home - International Lutheran Council but no fellowship agreements have been formalized that I know of. There are other small independent synods with which we are in fellowship with or with whom we are exploring possible partner ships. The mission diocese of Finland and Iceland recently joined LCC in a full fellowship agreement. Other discussions continue. Polity of these synods and their structure are of no concern to us; purity of doctrine and practice is paramount. The Lutheran Churches in Turkey and Bulgaria are the most recent too join the ILC; African membership is huge! Members - International Lutheran Council

Click to expand...

Forgive me for the confusion - the fellowship I referred to was that listed on the LCMS website: LCMS Partner Church Bodies - The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod , and also the membership of the Latvian and Lithuanian churches in the ILC. I had perhaps incorrectly assumed that that fellowship was shared by the LCC?

By the way, did the Bulgarian church leave the CELC? Or can a church be members of both the CELC and the ILC? Because Wikipedia is still listing the Bulgarians as members of the CELC, and I can’t find them on the membership page of the ILC that you linked to. The CELC is the body that the WELS, WELS-Canada* and ELS are members of.

*That name really ticks me off; they could have come up with about a hundred better names for their churches in Canada which do not include the name of an American state but which rather would suggest a Canadian identity.

Ain't Zwinglian said:

Here is series of articles I formulated together into one class for adults a number of years ago.

Some features of the AMERICAN EVANGELICAL BIG BOX Worship form.

• Name change from "worship service" to "worship experience." NOTE: The historic name of the worship service/experience is changed from "Divine service" as in EO, RCC, historic reformation churches--- Lutheranism, Reformed and Anglican worship.

The Worship "experience" is now highly choreographed, where even spontaneity of the work of the Holy Spirit in historic AOG, Pentecostals and charismatics churches, is now carefully time crafted and staged. Research indicates that praise worship leaders of the 70's and 80's vintage are defecting from Big Box churches, knowing that the usage of lights and songs are emotionally manipulating individuals in the audience. Every second counts in the Big Box worship experience.

• If pop evangelical worship forms are done correctly, you should never be able to clearly tell when the church service starts. At this point, I don’t know why an unclear starting point occurs, only that it does.

• Due to a non-starting point, the name of the true God (F, S & HS) is not articulated, therefore the audience doesn't know who God is, or the name of the true God who is being worshipped. Is this purposed? Unknown. Contrast this to Liturgical services....all know the true name of God form the get-go.

• Pre-worship music which may or not contain a current secular song. Normally a smaller part of the praise team. Pre-Worship service contains normally three songs.

• Praise team performs (normally 4-6 songs). First three normally fast tempo. (Have to get the Holy Spirit rev’d up in us) Last three corporate singing. Middle song is pejoratively known as the Jesus love ballad. Very slow with words “Jesus I just love you in the morning and and evening, by the sea and by the lake”…which one can substitute name “Jesus” for a significant other and the song still make sense. A little sarcastic there but you get the idea. The last song is of moderate tempo…a moderate tempo subjectively suggests something neutral is going to happen…but there is a bait and switch …which leads into the….

• Announcements: These are not the typical announcements at a traditional church like a mis-print in a bulletin. These announcements are mini-promotions of the church itself.

The selling point what makes us different. It is at this point that some denigration of other denominations may occur, and we are different…because we don’t follow “traditions of men” (Mark 7) or usage of "vain repetitions." (Matt 6). [Way out of context] This is where sheep wrestling may occur.

Announcements are also apart of the application part of the sermon, especially where to find your pledge card and get information or instruction class. Action plans on the topic of the sermon are also discussed. Make no mistake about it…the announcement part of the service is key understanding how the Big Box church operates. It primes the pump for some kind of action on part of the listener. This is where "sheep rustling" occurs, because they (your church tradition) don't ask you to do something this next week like we do! See your pledge card!
• The pastor is a person who looks just like you. I compare him to the Sham-Wow TV salesman, where enormous amounts of time are spent trying get hair to look as randomly out of place as possible. (Humor?) Five out of the six mega-theologies, EO, RCC, Lutheran, Reformed, and Anglican mark the pastor has looking different due to the nature of the pastoral office. Baptistic theology which modern evangelicalism has evolved, doesn't mark the pastor as appearing different and modern big box follows this in the vein, but without the neck tie; but the Sham-Wow pastor has that nasty habit of publically sipping a Starbucks latte delivering a sermon.

• The sermon. It is geared to the unbeliever, with a life lesson. Examples: Three keys to being a good father, better prayer life, better you or God's purpose for your life including your work, relationships, health, etc. The sermon is based upon the Bible as being a “procedure for life,” “quality handbook”, or “instruction manual” from God to man. In historical contrast, the Scriptures are a book about Jesus...and should be clearly articulated by Law and Gospel preaching.

• The sermon doesn't not offer the third element of apologetics. Pre-evangelism, clearing obstacles to faith, and thirdly, THE RIGHT REASON FOR REJECTING CHRISTIANITY: Failure to see themselves as sinners, in need of forgiveness via Christ's atonement.

Modern evangelical sermons are more about moral and socio-therapeutics. How can one see the need for forgiveness if the sermon is about becoming a better you, a better employee or a better parent? This again comes from seeing the Bible as a quality handbook, than about Jesus.

• The pledge card. (some Big Box Churches omit this) The pledge card is for the listener in the service to actually “do” something after the service has ended on the topic of the sermon. The pledge card is mentioned at the end of the sermon. However, during the talk of the pledge card in the sermon, the keyboardist from the praise band plays a soft and warm comforting melody (this is usage of music as emotion to compel an action).

• Success or church growth is seen by the number of pledges each week.

In evaluating the Big Box Pop Evangelical worship experience, one finds the reconstituted methodology formulated from Charles Finney’s “Revival Lectures of 1835.” Finney (himself a Pelagian) knew that revivals only lasted four days, so he formulated a “program” to get the unbeliever to “repent and believe” under tremendous time constraints. Hence, the “anxious bench.” Pop Evangelicalism has honed this four day period to one hour. However, the action placed upon the listener is not “repent and believe” but “doing” what is on your pledge card or action plan. This is considered success.

If unbelievers start agreeing with 100% what the church says from the get-go, then the church is more likely teaching something wrong, aberrant, or false. St. Paul’s “stumbling block” to the Jews and the “foolishness of God” to the Greeks is substituted by cozy carpet. The “Done” of Jesus work is changed into the “do” of the action plan/pledge.

When worship is done right: We come in dirty, and leave Clean. We come as sinners and leave as forgiven.

Click to expand...

Beautifully written. Part of what caused me to become Orthodox was that where I lived in Southern California, there were no conveniently located confessional Lutherans, so after my friend Fr. Steve retired from the Episcopal Church, all the nearby churches were either engaging in the style of worship you describe above, or else had become insufferably “progressive.” I recall one mainline Protestant minister expressing an Arian sentiment, and an ELCA pastor speculating about whether Jesus Christ was married, on Easter Sunday! This was unacceptable, as was the murder of Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Christians, and members of the Assyrian Church of the East, the Ancient Church of the East, and various Eastern Catholic churches, in Syria, Iraq, Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East, and I had a fascination with Eastern and Oriental Orthodox liturgy and theology, so it was obvious where I needed to go.

But this is also why I have continued to embrace Lutheran Orthodoxy and traditional Anglo Catholicism, not to mention traditional Congregationalism of the CCCC as well as liturgical authentically Wesleyan Orthodox Methodism focused on his teaching of the Orthodox concept of Theosis, which he called entire sanctification, together with his spiritual experience listening to Martin Luther’s Commentary on Romans, in a Moravian chapel in the City of London ward of Aldersgate, and his insistence on the use of the Book of Common Prayer. And this is also why I have worked with such churches, since really my goal is the eventual attainment of a league of traditional liturgical churches to take on both those who embrace heterodox “progressive” theology and those who embrace the self-centered “contemporary worship” with the rock band and related practices I have found to be irreverent and contrary to the needs of prayer.

FireDragon76 said:

Emptiness is about the lack of individual essences of things, in that way it's more about that concept of fullness than it might be immediately obvious. Alot of Buddhist temples are elaborately decorated, similar to Orthodox churches.

The minimalist aesthetic is more of a western Christian thing. Perhaps due to movements like the Cistercians and Franciscans, and later Reformed Protestants and various Dissenter sects.

Click to expand...

The Cistercians stressed an elegant simplicity in reaction to the opulence of tne Cluniac Benedictines, but Franciscan churches actually have always tended to be rather splendid. Rather, the regrettable innovation of the Franciscans and the Dominicans was removing the rood screen and insisting that the celebrants at the high altar had to be visible to the laity throughout the whole Solemn High Mass, and not just during the Elevation, which was an unnecessary change, since people at that time received communion at low masses (customarily, a low mass celebrated by a favorite priest their family was acquainted with) which were held at side altars which normally had and continue to have only a railing, so the laity can easily see what is going on throughout the service.

Additionally, the Reformed and Congregationalists thankfully dispensed with the Iconoclasm in the 19th century, both architecturally and theologically, thanks to a related series of liturgical movements collectively known as Reformed Catholicism, such as Mercersburg Theology in the US and the Scoto-Catholic movement in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK, which followed in the brave footsteps of Anglo-Catholicism.

The result of this is that by 1900, several of the most beautiful and elaborately decorated churches were Presbyterian or Congregationalist, and the Congregationalist minister Rev. John Hunter had published Devotional Services for Public Worship, which remains the most beautiful liturgical text originally composed primarily in the English language, far surpassing the prolix and polemical Cranmerian style that characterizes the Book of Common Prayer.

FireDragon76 said:

The minimalist aesthetic is more of a western Christian thing. Perhaps due to movements like the Cistercians and Franciscans, and later Reformed Protestants and various Dissenter sects.

Click to expand...

When I was single I could fit all my possessions in a Honda Civic. I have fond memories of these minimalist days. Perhaps I actually have some reduced sensitivity tolerance. There must be a better name for it. That is probably why I was enamored by those Trappist chapels.

But I can also appreciate the beauty of a well designed church. So, are the Cathedrals of Las Vegas and Las Angeles examples of Progressive Theology in architectural design?

I had to Google it:

Akita Suggagaki said:

When I was single I could fit all my possessions in a Honda Civic. I have fond memories of these minimalist days. Perhaps I actually have some reduced sensitivity tolerance. There must be a better name for it. That is probably why I was enamored by those Trappist chapels.

But I can also appreciate the beauty of a well designed church. So, are the Cathedrals of Las Vegas and Las Angeles examples of Progressive Theology in architectural design?

I had to Google it:

progressive archetctural church design - Google Search

www.google.com

Click to expand...

I would say yes actually insofar as their iconography intentionally rejects the normative standards of how our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ is depicted.

I would argue the prototypical “progressive” church architecture was the very poor decision to not rebuild two churches destroyed during World War II, but to leave fragments of them and then construct a harsh, brutalist structure amidst these ruins, namely the Coventry Cathedral in destroyed English city and the Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church in Berlin (which was built in memorial of Kaiser Wilhelm der Grosse, who along with Bismarck was instrumental in facilitating German unification, and not the understandably deeply controversial figure of Kaiser Wilhelm II).

One reason why I specifically praised the Frauenkirche in Dresden being rebuilt in its pre-war splendour earlier in the visitor that might be of specific interest to @MarkRohfrietsch and @Ain't Zwinglian was not because i am a fan of the current state of the Evangelical Church in Germany (although I would note they were not, if I recall, as liberal as they are now when the Dresden church rebuilding was first completed in the 2000s) was because that church had been intentionally left in ruins by the DDR (Communist East Germany) as a “war memorial” but really also as an iconoclastic statement about Christianity, as it implied that at a minimum, Christianity belonged to the world destroyed by the war, or worse, that it had been responsible for it.

What is worse, there were proposals from many leading French architects to not restore Notre Dame to its historic appearance following the nightmarish 2019 fire but rather to rebuild it in a similiarly iconoclastic manner to how Coventry Cathedral and the Kaiser Wilhelm

My view is that the ideal way to memorialize the lives lost in World War II would not be through the construction of these intentionally ugly structures in Berlin and Coventry but through the rebuilding of the original structures in an even more beautiful way, with beautiful new memorial chapels for the memory of the lives lost.

Now, there are some styles of 20th century church architecture that I regard as elegant. Frank Lloyd Wright designed a controversial, but I think very beautiful Greek Orthodox Church, the Church of the Annunciation in Wauwautosa, Wisconsin. Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove, California, very near Disneyland, and now known as Christ Cathedral, serving as the headquarters of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange County, and for that matter Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, both made famous through the work of two of the three great American televangelists, Rev. Robert H. Schuller and Dr. James Kennedy (the other being a friend of Rev. Schuller, Archbishop Fulton Sheen), are very beautiful. Indeed I could spend all afternoon talking about certain recent churches that I like.

However one thing they tend to have in common is that where they use iconography, they respect norms, and I would also note that I have seldom, if ever, seen a church with postmodern or deconstructionist architecture that I thought was elegant or appropriate; indeed, I think these architectural styles are in many cases built atop a philosophical system which is loved by progressive Christianity but which is quite incompatible with traditional liturgical Christianity.

One of the very rare examples of something which some people might consider postmodern, although I would disagree with that assesment, that I like, is the round altar installed at St. Stephen Walbrook in the City of London in the 1980s, but this altar is a single beautifully polished stone, built atop a round, three-stepped colorful platform, which I believe is intended to symbolize the unity and eternity of God, and for Anglican purposes it seems quite nice, and they did also leave the old high altar in place. The only problem, which is not related to the new altar, is that they illegally removed from the north wall of the church, quite inexplicably I should add, a famous painting by Benjamin West, Devout men taking away the body of St Stephen. This important painting is now being restored in the US. The normally iconoclastic 18th century reredos in the case of St. Stephen Walbrook feature paintings of Saints Abraham the Patriarch and Moses the Prophet. The new altar at St. Stephen works extremely well with the liturgical arrangement of the church, and the church continues to celebrate Holy Communion according to the Book of Common Prayer (well, technically I think it’s the traditional rite in Common Worship, but basically, the same service but with the Revised Common Lectionary) every Thursday, which is live streamed on YouTube and which I often enjoy watching, although at present restoration works are being undertaken and the congregation is meeting in another beautiful City church, St. Mary le Bow, which unfortunately does not have, according to the secretary of St. Stephen Walbrook, who graciously replied to my e-mail inquiry, any recording equipment (and apparently they can’t improvise something), which is also appropriate as that church is among other things where the Court of Ecclesial Causes Reserved presided over by the Dean of Arches meets, which last met in the 1980s to decide whether or not the new altar could be installed at St. Stephen Walbrook, as it is not fully compliant with C of E architectural canons.

What makes the altar work is the way it incorporates into the worship the beautiful dome that the church features, and the excellent way it supports the Advent Wreath and other seasonal decorations, including during Holy Week a crown of thorns, and also as someone who has been an Anglo Catholic and who loves Anglo Catholicism, i would note that the layout of the church sidesteps the issue of worship ad orientem as opposed to versus populum as opposed to the unusual rubric in the Book of Common Prayer in which the priests were supposed to celebrate the Eucharist standing on the north side of the altar, it being unclear whether they mean geographically north or liturgically north relative to the Apse, but the result I suppose could be called celebration ad meridiem, and I have seen Methodist elders do this, and it looks strange, and also some BCP purists who historically would have been regarded as low church, but now, compared to the Holy Trinity Brompton evangelical set, are generally regarded as high church but not Anglo Catholic, will still celebrate it in this manner also. At any rate, at St. Stephen Walbrook, depending on where you sit you can experience the liturgy according to how traditional you are, and to what tradition you prefer, the Traditional Anglo Catholic approach or the High Church Anglican BCP Purist approach, or you can be a modernist and sit facing the priest and experience the liturgy versus populum. Now, I wouldn’t want the design of St. Stephen Walbrook to become the norm; indeed, that would be incompatible with most liturgical rites, however, for a church in the City of London used primarily by pious bankers, lawyers, insurance brokers, government workers and tourists on Thursday afternoon, who take time out of their busy workweek or vacation in order to glorify God, I quite like it.

That said, churches in the round are not a new thing - there is the presently disused nave of the nearby Temple Church in London, and other churches built by the Knights Templar before they were suppressed, and in Ethiopia there are two traditional configurations: cruciform churches, such as the beautiful rock hewn churches at Lalibela, and round churches, which tend to be made of wood, and for a time the Ark of the Covenant was housed in one built by the martyred Emperor St. Haile Selassie, who was murdered by the Derg, before it was moved to a nearby hermitage built out of reinforced concrete blocks. Thus, in Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox parishes, and in the City of London, I am supportive of this architecture as it is part of the established liturgical patrimony.

Ain't Zwinglian said:

Thanks but I am always amazed at your breath of knowledge of the History of Christian as it pertains to the Liturgy.....

Click to expand...

Thank you, that is very kind. However, I particularly dislike the kind of aliturgical worship you describe, and I don’t think I would have the patience to write that much about it, with such eloquence. Thus I admire your skill here in the sub specialities of divinity, that is to say, the study of theology, known as sacramental theology and liturgical theology, in that your post investigates the subject matter of reverence and worship and how this ought to be conducted in principle (and indeed, this has actually been the focus of most of your excellent work on CF.com, for example, your initial posts critical of Zwinglian sacramental theology, or lack thereof we might say, and your more recent criticism of those who demand credobaptism and regard the baptism of infants and young children as improper, which I regard as a profound error, not taught by any Early Church Father or by Scripture, contrary to the manifold assertions to this extent we see by various members not associated with traditional liturgical Christianity.

God bless you my brother!

I am unframiliar with these but shall listen to them over the next few days.

Click to expand...

Splendid! I expect you will recognize at least two of them.

Akita Suggagaki said:

When I was single I could fit all my possessions in a Honda Civic. I have fond memories of these minimalist days. Perhaps I actually have some reduced sensitivity tolerance. There must be a better name for it. That is probably why I was enamored by those Trappist chapels.

But I can also appreciate the beauty of a well designed church. So, are the Cathedrals of Las Vegas and Las Angeles examples of Progressive Theology in architectural design?

Click to expand...

I don't think progressive theology has dealt much with architecture or aesthetics. Progressive churches use a variety of architectural styles. A fair number of progressive churches meet in repurposed buildings.

FireDragon76 said:

I don't think progressive theology has dealt much with architecture or aesthetics. Progressive churches use a variety of architectural styles. A fair number of progressive churches meet in repurposed buildings.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but lately I have come to think that theology is the unacknowledged driving force behind a lot going on in our lives and a lot of decisions we make.

Akita Suggagaki said:

Maybe, but lately I have come to think that theology is the unacknowledged driving force behind a lot going on in our lives and a lot of decisions we make.

Click to expand...

Of course. If religion, for instance in the thought of Paul Tillich, is conceived of as dealing with values of ultimate concern, then alot of what motivates our behavior is going to be acknowledged or unacknowledged theology.

Post-war "Death of God" theology had alot to do with Mainline Protestant churches early embrace of late modern architecture. The Jesus People movement of the 60's, focused on informality and authenticity, had alot to do with Charismatic churches embracing the auditorium as a worship space, something that continues today in many contemporary churches.

FireDragon76 said:

Of course. If religion, for instance in the thought of Paul Tillich, is conceived of as dealing with values of ultimate concern, then alot of what motivates our behavior is going to be acknowledged or unacknowledged theology.

Post-war "Death of God" theology had alot to do with Mainline Protestant churches early embrace of late modern architecture. The Jesus People movement of the 60's, focused on informality and authenticity, had alot to do with Charismatic churches embracing the auditorium as a worship space, something that continues today in many contemporary churches.

Click to expand...

Yes, the auditorium church phenomenon seems tome to express a Jesus as friend we hang out with Christology. Or maybe not, Maybe it is just a very mature recognition that we can worship the transcendent in any place. At any rate, it is certainly not a conservative or orthodox choice.

And while talking about "conservative" and "progressive" are we also talking about orthodox (small o) Non orthodox.

In A Layman's Guide to Protestant Theology William E Hordern starts with Orthodoxy, then Liberalism, Neo-Orthodoxy

In Blessed Rage for Order, David Tracy maps it like Orthodox, Liberal, Neo-Orthodox, Modern, Post=-Modern, Radical theology then introduces Revisionist/Process.


Today we are seeing a push for Christian Nationalism which is actually a Fundamentalist/Conservative version of Christianity. Also leaning into Manifest Destiny as if divinely ordained for America the expand and dominate.

Akita Suggagaki said:

Yes, the auditorium church phenomenon seems tome to express a Jesus as friend we hang out with Christology. Or maybe not, Maybe it is just a very mature recognition that we can worship the transcendent in any place. At any rate, it is certainly not a conservative or orthodox choice.

Click to expand...

I actually visited a church like that last weekend. I don't think it's about "Jesus as friend" per se. I think it has alot to do with the 60's counter-culture and how some of their values have become mainstream.

Maybe like you say, it represents a kind of evolution of spiritual consciousness and those of us used to stodgy traditions just don't get it. However, I think it's also possible to see in it how much capitalism and pragmatism have influenced our psyches: a church with the aesthetics of a Wal-Mart or McDonald's? Is it a manifestation of an incarnational spirituality, or just shallow? This might shock some people to learn (being as I am a liberal/Progressive Christian), but I think I put a higher value on tradition, whereas it seems like with modern Evangelicals, there is ahistoricism/amnesia about tradition.

Akita Suggagaki said:

And while talking about "conservative" and "progressive" are we also talking about orthodox (small o) Non orthodox.

Click to expand...

I really don't see a clear cut difference. What is orthodox and non-orthodox isn't so clear cut, being as there are so many different interpretations of Christianity. I prefer to think of Christianity as a religious movement rather than along strict dogmatic lines.

FireDragon76 said:

This might shock some people to learn (being as I am a liberal/Progressive Christian), but I think I put a higher value on tradition, whereas it seems like with modern Evangelicals, there is ahistoricism/amnesia about tradition.

Click to expand...

It sounds like you have a "Neo-Orthodox" reaction. .. or would we call it Post liberal? Yes, modern Evangelicals seem ahistorical. They actually do not have very deep roots. (Maybe 17th century?)

FireDragon76 said:

I really don't see a clear cut difference. What is orthodox and non-orthodox isn't so clear cut, being as there are so many different interpretations of Christianity. I prefer to think of Christianity as a religious movement rather than along strict dogmatic lines.

Click to expand...

Yes, trying to sort it out does disservice to the differences. But the theological landscape, I think, needs to be better understood. Even you described yourself as a liberal/progressive who values tradition. Same here. Maybe it is a fruitless endeavor but I am trying to see the landscape better because it it all arounds us. I may be annoying , but I sometimes ask people about their beliefs. "What do you make of the creation account in Genesis?" "Do you think there really was a Job or is that fictional?" "What do you think the main Gospel message is?" "What did Jesus mean when he spoke of being a wise steward?" "Do you think Jesus will come again?" "What do you think happens after you die?"

I am very interested in what people believe and how those beliefs affect their decisions. I find Pew research polls fascinating but I would also like to ask people directly and have deeper conversation.

With the division in our society on so many issues I think we need ore calm discussion.

FireDragon76 said:

When I was younger I was attracted to "high church" smells and bells, but I've learned not all that glitters is gold. It's not the one thing needful.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is hard to say what Martha's house looked like, but we know that Mary had the best seat in the house!
In the NT there appears to be a variety of settings described for Christian gathering.

• Various homes
• The lecture hall of Tyrannus in Ephesus
• Solomon's portico

While there are certainly some settings that draw you more readily into worship, that does not seem to be essential.

We did enjoy visiting the local EO church, which is a small, but very beautiful setting.

The Liturgist said:

One of my major complaints about the SDAs is their churches lack crosses, which I find baffling.

Click to expand...

A few Adventist Churches will feature crosses. Many don't. In one rural church they objected to having a cross engraved on the side of the pew because it was too "Lutheran!"

Here is an Adventist church that does have a prominent cross, though the styling overall is quite modern.



An Adventist church which prominently displays the cross on the exterior:

tall73 said:

A few Adventist Churches will feature crosses. Many don't. In one rural church they objected to having a cross engraved on the side of the pew because it was too "Lutheran!"

Here is an Adventist church that does have a prominent cross, though the styling overall is quite modern.

View attachment 351517

An Adventist church which prominently displays the cross on the exterior:


View attachment 351518

Click to expand...

Not Lutheran enough it would appear. LOL

jas3 said:

Fundamentally, the error of theological progressivism is the idea that there is no need for the Church today to have continuity with the Church founded by our Lord.

Click to expand...

I don't think all hold that view. But it does raise the question, How do we maintain continuity with the Gospel while at the same time recognizing the value of what we have learned since then? "Heresies'" have been around from the beginning of Christianity. Defining just what the Gospel is, what Christian fundamentals are and how they are significant to this day and time is the work of all but the most conservative.

Were the reformers progressive? That would make even todays conservative evangelicals progressive because the original Church founded by our Lord was apostolic and pretty solid until East-West schism in 1054. Then, of course it all blew up in the 16th century.

Akita Suggagaki said:

But it does raise the question, How do we maintain continuity with the Gospel while at the same time recognizing the value of what we have learned since then?

Click to expand...

A fundamental difference between theological progressivism and traditionalism is the idea that there even can be something "learned" which must be "recognized" as part of the faith.

Akita Suggagaki said:

Were the reformers progressive? That would make even todays conservative evangelicals progressive because the original Church founded by our Lord was apostolic and pretty solid until East-West schism in 1054. Then, of course it all blew up in the 16th century.

Click to expand...

The radical reformers were, but the magisterial reformers at least attempted to explain how they were in continuity with what came before them. As for today's conservative evangelicals, yes, in many ways they are actually theological progressives: they tend to practice open communion with grape juice instead of wine; to the extent that they can be said to practice ordination, many of them ordain women; the vast majority of them would probably not be able to describe how they're even in continuity with the Church of the 15th century, let alone the 8th or 4th.
That's not to say that most of them aren't practicing theological conservatism with what they've received (in that they don't want it to change in a more relaxed or less reverent direction), it's just that what they've received is a product of 19th and 20th century progressivism.