The Word Became Flesh: Advent and Evangelism

I was raised in the American evangelical tradition, in Baptist churches in New Jersey. These are the sorts of churches that would be non-denominational in other parts of the country. They are independent but not fundamentalist, preaching from the Scriptures and baptizing confessing believers. I don't know if they were members of any convention, but they were certainly not under the governing authority of any other body.

The traditions of my family are also decidedly non-liturgical. The idea of a sacred calendar or a catechism seemed foreign and even vaguely Romish to me. Reciting creeds and chanting in unison was done on occasion, but more an exercise of congregational unity and instruction than a matter of ritual or liturgy. After all, ritual is Pharasaic: perhaps beautiful, perhaps useful in some ways, but ultimately legalistic and contrary to a gospel of freedom.

A Gospel of Grace - I would not have used the term three years ago except perhaps at random. Since my complete giving over to Reformed soteriology (or Calvinism, as it is commonly called), I have had occasion to participate in some forms of worship that I would have previously considered questionable. I have recited parts of the Westminster Shorter Catechism, joined in congregational readings from the Book of Common Prayer, and even meditated on the Heidelberg and Belgic Confessions.

I am still not a member of a formal liturgical denomination. But recently, among Presbyterians, I was struck by the concept of "Advent" (and by extension the concept of a "sacred year" that runs in tandem with the calendar we consult daily). The season of Advent is one of expectation; as R.C. Sproul describes in his thoughts on Christmas, history was so pregnant with this moment of the incarnation that it could not have been a moment sooner or a moment later.

So this is the season of expectation, of reflection that God the Son was preparing to lay aside his glory and come to earth to walk among mortals - as one of them! I have remarked on the scandal with which John confronts his readers when he declares simply "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us". The image we want to have is that of pure, ethereal spirit, like clear and burning light, suddenly being mired in the basest of elements, the creaturely, secreting, digesting, procreating flesh.

If you'll indulge me, these are the words to a song by the Christian group Downhere. I think they pose the question well:

How many kings, stepped down from their thrones?
How many lords have abandoned their homes?
How many greats have become the least for me?
How many Gods have poured out their hearts
To romance a world that has torn all apart?
How many fathers gave up their sons for me?
Only one did that for me

This is the season of expectation of this miracle. The recalcitrant question, of course, is: why?

There are books on the subject, so I just want to address a few points of "why". Probably the most rehearsed answer is "love", citing John 3:16. This is legitimate, of course; the Scriptures are unambiguous that it was the Love of a God Who is Love that motivated Him to partake in this glorious and gruesome redemption. But this is not a complete answer to the question "why". The problem with the incompleteness of this answer is that it has left open the door to what I consider misunderstandings of the nature of the redemption.

A recent news story about a Times Square jumbotron ad got my attention on this subject.  

The American Bible Society shares my awe about the Deity choosing to mire Himself in His creation, and they even capitalize on the season of Advent in prompting us to reflect on the impending arrival of our God-Man Redeemer. And so their message, "God came near because you were worth the trip" is even more starkly misplaced. Am I being a grinch about this, over-analyzing what was meant to be an exposure for the Gospel in perhaps the nation's busiest intersection?

The problem is that we were patently not "worth" the trip. The Bible tells the story that true Love is making the trip for those who are not worth it. What is this love that God has shown the world? Paul tells us in Romans that God's love is demonstrated by fact that He sent His Son while we were yet sinners, and he is rather unequivocal about the fact that sin makes us worthless enemies of a just and holy God. Jesus, after exhorting His listeners to return evil with good, explains a little further: "But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil."

This "love" that is the answer on every tongue when asked why God came to Earth is a very precious love. It is a love that loves the unworthy. And this is the crux of the problem: Jesus was born, lived, died, and rose not by any means because you were worth it, but rather, to make you worthy! "For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified." Like the centurion in Luke 7, we must be ready to say "Lord, do not trouble yourself, for I am not worthy..."

I submit that the message of the Gospel is not that a loving God saw the plight of a people with intrinsic worth and "made the trip" to do something about it. Rather, God, according to His good pleasure, loved a fallen and unworthy people and demonstrated it by making some of them worthy.

The video is well-intentioned and correct in that it means to communicate that Jesus Christ came to save sinners, and you, reader, viewer, listener, are a sinner. So in the midst of your walk to Lord and Taylor (or wherever people go as they walk through Times Square) or before you click over to Amazon or NewEgg (for my readers) observe the season of Advent by reflecting on this incomprehensible truth:

God came near even though you were not worth the trip.

Merry Christmas to all.

And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

Comments

[Matt Warren]

Hey,

It seems that you and I grew up in very similar contexts (Non-denom/Baptistish/independently governed/etc.). I would have to say that mine was a bit fundamentalist, however. I'm also having my first real (and positive) experience with Advent this year. So, I have some thoughts.

First, I think it's too broad a stroke to say that all ritual is Pharisaic. Ritual for its own sake, yes. Or, even more, ritual as a means to attain favor, absolutely. But I don't think that we can say that ritual, no less liturgy is inherently legalistic. If someone tells me that I have to celebrate Advent, or Christmas, or take offering during church in a certain way, then I think he is placing manacles on the "gospel of freedom." Same thing with drinking. If you say I can't, then pass me a Sam Adams so I can express my freedom. I used to be highly suspicious of liturgy, but I am valuing it more and more; probably because I'm hanging around a bunch of Presbyterians. At the very least, higher liturgy--and it's not that high at my church--is helping me to worship and offer praise to God in deeper and more meaningful ways. I will be taking a course this spring on the liturgical year, so we should talk more about that in a couple months.

About the you're worth it/you're not deal, I get you're point. I also get annoyed by such sayings. They're trite, sentimental, and theologically imprecise. You and I both want to say that God has redeemed for his own sake. His election is unconditional. Grace must remain free grace, or it is not grace. So, if "worth it" means that we deserve God's redemption, then it's a phrase for the trash heap. But I do think that we can say that God redeemed us because we are "worth it" in a different sense, a sense that brings our value and God's love together. What I mean to say is that we are "worth it" insofar as God has loved us from before the foundation of the world. God supplies us with "our" worth. We are worth it in that he's counted us as valuable. Our worth lies in God's deeming us worthy, not us being worthy in and of ourselves. If God didn't not think us worth it in some sense, then he would not have redeemed us.

I hope all is well. Thanks for the post.

Matt

[S L Whitesell]

Matt -

I was hoping you would read and I am delighted that you have commented. As to your first point, the phrasing I used was meant to express my frame of mind owing to my upbringing. I endorse everything you have said about liturgy. I am excited to explore it further in the coming months. I actually anticipated your misunderstanding but decided to leave it just so that we could have this very discussion!

And as for the second, I think you and I must be kindred spirits, since that point occurred to me as well. I still want to say that God determined in love according to His own good pleasure to come and make worthy some creatures who were decidedly not worthy. But I see your semantic point: we may term as "worth" whatever operative principle outside of ourselves was at play in God's own good pleasure. And in defining worth in this way, we are worthy. So we are in agreement on both points, and I thank you for drawing out this precision.

I hope this will impart some enabling grace:

O God, who hast caused this holy night to shine
with the illumination of the true Light:
Grant us, we beseech thee,
that as we have known the mystery of that Light upon earth,
so may we also perfectly enjoy him in heaven;
where with thee and the Holy Spirit
he liveth and reigneth, one God,
in glory everlasting. Amen
1979 Book of Common Prayer

[Mom]

well, I am certainly not as talented as you or your other commenters. One thing that stands out to me right away is the "liturgy".
In my uneducated opinion, liturgy should be saved for those more mature in thier faith,and foundation in their relationship with Christ. It is these practices that can lend to feelings of security and safety in ritual and familiar "behaviors/acts".
I do not see that you intend to say this, but there is no salvation in said liturgy. The lost and frank unbeleiver, could get caught up in this, confused, and frustrated.
For certain new beleivers that hail from cult-ish churches like Catoloics, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, could feel confused by our claims of Salvation by faith alone, through Christ alone...

This has only become more clear to me lately as I am bombarded daily by the lost, who are at home in these cults. It is quite pervasive in this part of the country.

[S L Whitesell]

Matt and I would probably agree that liturgy has the potential to be confused with regenerative ritual. We may have been the well-intentioned participants of an over-reformation: instead of contextualizing liturgy and relegating it to its proper role, the hyper-individualism of American Christianity has largely banished it.

[lauris]

In the first part, I think you're talking 'form and function'. The function/objective is get increasingly intimate and connected with God - whatever helps you to do that. He seeks true worshippers who worship in spirit and truth. The second part has to do with why God does what He does. He reveals some of His reasons but certainly not all. I'm just so glad He does what He does and included me.