The Moscow Mood for DeYoung, Restless, and Reformed

Every now and then the Lord tees one up for you. And this He has done in Kevin DeYoung’s critique of the Moscow mood. You have certainly heard of this piece by now, in which DeYoung exemplifies his careful analysis and honest assessment, which really boils down to, “Yes, the Moscow thing has done some good, but I’m very concerned about the long term spiritual effects of the Moscow mood, a mood which pretty much doesn’t comport with Christian virtue.” I say that the Lord has teed this one up, because DeYoung’s critique is both quite plausible to a good portion of the Reformed and Evangelical world, and it is at the same time a critique that has significantly missed the mark and exposed problems in that slice of the Reformed and Evangelical world that appreciates his critique. When something like that happens, we really do need to discuss it. But first let me point you to some key responses.

Toby Sumpter and Joe Rigney have both responded. Because they cover a good bit of the terrain, I am going to focus on one central theme in my reply. I do highly recommend you read those responses which field and reply to Kevin’s critiques about the serrated edge and too much funny business going on rather than sermons and doctrine straight up the middle. Those are plausible critiques from DeYoung which are ably handled by Sumpter and Rigney. I would normally address more of Kevin’s critiques. But, I think these other replies have done the job, so I’m pressing in another direction here.

Here is my reply, plain and simple: Kevin could not be more wrong about his supposed detrimental and long-term spiritual effects of the Moscow mood. Because I know the world from which he writes quite well, I understand how plausible that critique may sound. But, in truth, the Moscow mood is something for which to be grateful. It has had good spiritual effects for some time and it looks to be on a trajectory to continue to bear some great long-term spiritual fruit. Indeed, I commend this Moscow mood to that community formerly known as the Young, Restless, and Reformed, that community which attempted to do something like Doug has done in Moscow, but failed miserably.

It seems to me that humility dictates you thank God for good examples, showing honor where honor is due. DeYoung, honestly, failed in this regard. I recall going to Together for the Gospel conferences, and I recall attending a Gospel Coalition Conference. I remember looking on with intrigue when the Gospel Coalition showed its first signs of decay as it gave Voddie Bauchum the Left Hand of Disfellowship when he began to say too many true things about Ferguson. I recall also watching the Gospel Coalition crumble into a platform promoting weird singleness articles and deep insightful analysis of Taylor Swift’s debauched evenings with men who used her. The goal at the outset was to establish true piety in the city. But the result was that Babylon bent the Young, Restless, and Reformed over her knee and spanked them like an angry step mother. 

Now, I move to Moscow two years ago and I find genuine piety: Psalm sings, hospitality, generational faithfulness, sacrificial patriarchy, happy women, Bible reading plans, regular old evangelical men’s prayer meetings like you’d find all over the country, the arts, Herodotus and Thucydides, Bach and Handel, a flourishing downtown due to the entrepreneurship of the people of God, and a good deal of mirth and cheer in the face of Genghis Khan being at the gates of this formerly Christian nation. There are people who will wrongly bind on to something like Moscow, of course. We look to correct that kind of thing when it happens. But, that was not Kevin’s critique. Kevin’s critique was that the mood cultivated in Moscow is one that does not comport with Christian virtue, which is to say that Kevin has discovered that grapes really do come from bramblebushes (Luke 6:44).

But Grapes Don’t Come From Bramblebushes

Kevin himself said that Doug “offers the world and the church an angular, muscular, forthright Christianity.” He added that, “his family loves him and loves Christ.” He went on to describe the notable institutional output coming from this little northern Idaho town. But, then he turns to say that the mood cultivated here is going to bear bad fruit, spiritually speaking. But, how does that square with our Lord’s teaching about men not gathering figs from thorns? I smell a false dichotomy between good cultural fruit and good spiritual fruit. But why must we choose? And doesn’t the latter lead to the former?

Related, Kevin laid out two roads, to options for Doug to take: “He could use the eighth decade of his life to devote his considerable writing talents to persuading unbelievers to consider Christianity, to passing on the Reformed faith, and to offering a deep, penetrating cultural analysis. I believe he could do all this if he wanted to. Or he can pepper his writing with naughty words, play with blowtorches, and make fun of Southern Baptists. That’s the other option. It will be hard to take both approaches at the same time.”

But here’s the thing. Doug has been taking both approaches for decades. I repeat, his approach has been getting the job done and the good news is, it has been getting the job done without Doug having to spend anytime in purgatory. DeYoung evidences yet another false dichotomy: Good cultural analysis and doctrine pure and simple, or write like Wodehouse and play with fire in November. But, I have good news for you: You don’t have to choose, you can have both.

But Piety and a Flamethrower Go Together Quite Nice

I would add that I commend both to you. I am not simply saying that you can have both. I’m saying there’s something to having both. Piety and the flamethrower is a combination that Kevin insists you cannot enjoy. But, I’m telling you that they go together like cheese and wine, like peanut butter and jelly.

In short, mood matters. I believe Kevin knows this. He started his critique by saying that the attraction to Moscow is visceral more than intellectual, that doctrinal changes like that of postmillennialism are lagging indicators rather than leading indicators. He writes as if this is wrong. But there is nothing wrong about it. Humans are embodied creatures, not rational computers. If we are to avoid the influence of mood, ethos, or aroma, then why are the saints called to be an aroma of Christ (2 Corinthians 2:15-17), and for Pete’s sake, why are we to adorn the gospel of God (Titus 2:10)? Don’t adorn it! Isn’t it perfectly true enough without you wooing people to it with some mood draped all over it?

Rules for Reformers

I said that DeYoung’s piece exposes problems in a certain slice of the Reformed and Evangelical world. Let me see if I can boil them down for the note takers. That world thinks that Classical Christian Education can’t pair with flamethrowers, that ministers can’t write like Wodehouse, that piety cannot pair with poking fun at Southern Baptists’ folly, that the language of the old testament prophet’s cannot be paired with a new testament ministry, that the Puritan’s prayers cannot be paired with Puritan political theology, that justifying faith cannot be paired with obedience [insert FV charge here], that a shoulder’s loose Narnian spirit cannot be paired with Ezra weeping over the famine of God’s Word, that heaven cannot be paired with earth, that the spirit cannot be paired with the body, that the Great Commission cannot be paired with the dominion mandate, that doctrine cannot be paired with application, and that reformers cannot be paired with actually reforming anything. 

Many books come to mind that would remedy all of these false dichotomies. But the best place to go if you want to Moscow mood even harder is Rules for Reformers, highly recommended.

In conclusion, Spurgeon’s point about Reformers is just as true today as it ever was:

“We admire a man who was firm in the faith, say four hundred years ago…but such a man today is a nuisance, and must be put down. Call him a narrow-minded bigot, or give him a worse name if you can think of one. Yet imagine that in those ages past, Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and their companions had said, “The world is out of order; but if we try to set it right we shall only make a great row, and get ourselves into disgrace. Let us go to our chambers, put on our night-caps, and sleep over the bad times, and perhaps when we wake up things will have grown better.” Such conduct on their part would have entailed upon us a heritage of error. Age after age would have gone down into the infernal deeps, and the pestiferous gobs of error would have swallowed all. These men loved the faith and the name of Jesus too well to see them trampled on… It is today as it was in the Reformer’s days. Decision is needed. Here is the day for the man, where is the man for the day?”

The post The Moscow Mood for DeYoung, Restless, and Reformed appeared first on REFORMATION & REVIVAL.