Is sound doctrine all that makes the church a viable organization in our postmodern world? Or is there something more? In Recovering Mother Kirk, church historian Darryl Hart argues that it is impossible to gain a proper understanding of Reformed doctrine, its worldview, or its piety apart from the experience of the worshiping body of believers. Recovering Mother Kirk discusses the church's commission, contemporary worship, office and ordinances, Presbyterian parochialism, and revival. Although he writes from a Presbyterian and Reformed perspective, Hart believes that every Protestant denomination faces a pressing need to put theology into practice through worship. Anything less, he says, is a form of Christianity that will have little appeal to either spiritual seekers or regular worshipers. Hart attempts to restore the balance between sound doctrine, which is vital to the health of the church, and sound practice. He argues that historically, members of the Reformed tradition have emphasized doctrine to the detriment of practice. In a postmodern world that craves connectedness, the need to restore the vitality of the worshiping faith community has never been more urgent. Recovering Mother Kirk is a thought-provoking manifesto that will be useful to pastors and laypeople within the Presbyterian and Reformed tradition, as well as those who seek to gain a greater appreciation for the relationship between doctrine and the public worship of the church.
Darryl G. Hart (Ph.D., Johns Hopkins University) directs the honors programs and faculty development at the Intercollegiate Studies Institute and serves Westminster Seminary California as adjunct professor of church history. He has written or edited more than fifteen books, including Defending the Faith, a biography of J. Gresham Machen. He is coeditor of the American Reformed Biographies series.
Covers quite a range of worship-related topics but all leading to the same general conclusion: Presbyterians should look to their heritage. They should not follow modern fads, as these contradict their creeds; and they need not look to Canterbury, Rome or Constantinople for a glorious liturgy. To this end they need to reassess their commitment to revivalism (kicked off by Whitefield), they need to reacquaint themselves with Geneva and especially Calvin's Strasbourg liturgy.
Our liturgy is an extension of our theological beliefs; or it ought to be. We need to look at why the Reformers reformed worship in the way they did. We need to ask ourselves why we have only a desperate rag-tag collection of parts to our worship when our fathers had a definite liturgical order that took the congregations of God's people through what might be called a covenantal renewal.
To aid us in this endeavour we should give attention to a number of important works. One such is by Hughes Oliphant Old 'Worship: Reformed According to Scripture' and other books by the author. Another author, who will greatly help us to recovery the theology of the Church that our forefathers held but was lost with the Great Awakening, is John Williamson Nevin.
Along the way Hart covers the issue of Confessional Presbyterianism (on which he is good) and issues surrounding the 'two kingdom' controversy (on which he is woefully bad).
I think the afterword is helpful in describing the differences between Reformed and evangelicals (including those who call themselves Reformed Baptists as the latter.) I could see myself recommending this chapter to people who want to know why we aren't evangelicals despite believing the things evangelical is supposed to mean. I'm kind of curious on the book about Reformed in the Bible belt that Hart mentions as well. There are many differences. One I would hope for more elaboration on is the very different view of the work of the Holy Spirit.
As for a review of the book, I don't tend to write much of one. I'll say that I would strongly recommend this book to others, especially those new to the Reformed faith or to those who are curious about it, and may be leaving their Baptist/evangelical ways behind.
Several of these chapters would alone be worth the cost and time for this book.
I read this book hoping for, as the subtitle puts it, a "Case for Liturgy in the Reformed Tradition," but was fairly disappointed. It's actually a collection of Hart's essays (a somewhat poorly edited collection at that) in which he lets loose on American popular evangelicalism and ways he believes that conservative Presbyterianism has sold out to it. I agreed with quite a few of his critiques but was so turned off by his polemical tone in advancing them that I had trouble getting through the book. I found it dishearteningly uncharitable, and, as my husband put it, the people who might benefit most from the gist of his arguments would likely be too alienated by his tone to really hear them.
When I look honestly at where I've been in recent years, I probably identify more with aspects of confessional Protestantism than with popular evangelicalism. I also want to see the evangelical church recover more of a sense of historical consciousness, a stronger spirituality of the church, and other things Hart advocates. However, this is not a book I'd recommend to like-minded evangelicals, much less skeptics. Reformed liturgy is a subject I'm trying to learn more about, but I don't feel encouraged to track down Hart's other books on the topic.
A clarion call for Presbyterians to end, once and for all, their flirtation with evangelicalism and return to the churchly, sacramental, liturgical, means of grace piety of the Reformed confessions. With the exception of the material on uniform prayer-books and neo-2K theology, I heartily agree with the author's arguments. While anything written by Darryl Hart is very engaging, this book was a collection of various previously published articles. In general, this factor did not adversely affect the holistic feel of the book, but there was at least one chapter which did not belong in the volume and there was a fair amount of repetition (though that is not necessarily a bad thing). Fans of George Whitefield might wish to avoid it, however. ;-)
once I realized this was a series of independently published essays, it was hard to stay motivated to finish. While there are general themes and arguments running through, this book is better off as a reference work when dealing with specific issues - ecumenicism, music in worship, American presbyterian history. Wish this work was more cohesive, as it is presented as treating the central topic of "The Case for Liturgy in the Reformed Tradition".
When somebody who is familiar with actual Reformed historical theology encounters such statements in this book as, "The evangelical concept of dead orthodoxy was virtually unknown prior to the revivals of the eighteenth century" (p. 37), you cannot help but doubt either the integrity or the competency of the book's author.
At least half a century before the Great Awakening, the foremost of the Scottish Westminster divines admonishes us,
"We often feed ourselves with the _bonum secundum_ [the good that follows], the pleasantness in the duty, which is our sin, except the sweetness of the holiness of the duty be our delight, and the beauty of pleasing God allure us, but feeling being away we find how hard it is, to delight ourselves in the Lord... We are to look to deadness of heart in all the branches of it... [Including] Deadness in going about the service of God, Psalm 119:37. 'Quicken me in thy way' ..." --Samuel Rutherford, "The Covenant of Life Opened" (1655)
And almost a full century before that, the same Friedrich III. who sponsored the Heidelberg Catechism also sponsored the Palatinate Liturgy, which reads:
"As concerns the singing of psalms, the apostle Paul admonisheth that it take place not only with the mouth, but also with the heart, and that it all should serve to the edification of the church." --Pfälzer Kirchenordnung (1563), trans. from original my own
I realize making this much ado about a single quote from the book may seem like a small nit to pick, but when the friggin' TITLE bears the implication that The One True Original Reformed Faith™ was utterly devoid of heart-religion until it was contaminated by Spener's Pietism via Wesley's Methodism, that one little quote says quite a lot about the orthodoxy of the author's arguments. (Note: What really happened in history is that Spener heavily borrowed the theology of practical pious living from Theophil Großgebauer, who in turn borrowed it from the English Puritans. It is more correct to say that we Reformed contaminated Lutheranism.)
Geschreven binnen de Amerikaanse context, maar herkenbaar voor de Nederlandse situatie, ook hier moesten traditionele gereformeerde kerken zich verhouden tot een kerkelijke stroming vanuit opwekkingsbewegingen, 'revivalism'. De auteur pleit voor een hoogkerkelijke calvinisme, zoals de reformatoren dat oorspronkelijk hebben bedoeld. Dat betekent wat formeler, een liturgie die theocentrisch is, gericht op het Woord, bescheiden en eerbiedig in een dialoogvorm tussen God en Zijn volk plaats vindt. Hij neemt angst weg voor formuliergebeden en wat minder subjectievere praktijken in het algemeen. Een christen is in de eerste plaats een christen omdat hij naar de kerk gaat, deelneemt aan sacramenten, bidt en onder de prediking zit. Revivalism verlegt de spits van het christenzijn naar para-kerkelijke activiteiten en bezigheden buiten prediking en sacrament om. Beetje het interessante, voor de rest veel geschiedenis en feiten uit de Amerikaans presbyteriaanse context.
Ik wil in ieder geval na het lezen van dit boek een toga.
[2006, 2007, 2008:] been working my way through this collection of essays off and on for some time. subtitled /the case for liturgy in the reformed tradition,/ hart points out in the introduction that his emphasis is on 'reformed,' noting that all worship has its liturgy, but that he is interested in making a case for liturgy that is reformed. very solid set of essays. the essays are collected under the following five sections: the church's commission, contemporary worship, office and ordinances, presbyterian parochialism, and worship and revival.
as is often the case when i read hart, i find myself thinking that he has expressed more clearly and convincingly what i think about various issues, but have been unable to articulate myself. this is also the case w/ A Secular Faith, which i'm also currently/periodically reading.