Back To Warren’s Invocation

Warren’s prayer was confusion on steroids. Take for example the reference to God as being “Compassionate and Merciful.” Now, certainly the God of the Bible is “Compassionate and Merciful,” but which God of which religion is typically addressed as “the Compassionate and Merciful one?”

You got it …

Allah.

Now combine that insight with the one I mentioned earlier where Warren opens the prayer dwelling on the Unity of God but conveniently stepping aside the issue of the Trinity — the name of God which all Christians are Baptized into — and it begins to look like Warren was fishing for least common denominator God.

Look, Rick Warren is not dumb. None of us are setting here thinking of angles that Rick Warren didn’t think of. There is a purposeful blending going on in this prayer. As I said earlier it is an an attempt to be Christian and pluralist at the same time.

Think of the prayer as a compromise document — the purpose of which is to satisfy everybody who hears it because they are going to interpret it through their grid. In my estimation this is what Warren was reaching for. Evangelicals could hear it through their grid and be satisfied. Pluralists could hear it through their grid and be satisfied.

Look, Rick’s problem, like the problem of legions of Evangelicals today is that he has, consciously or unconsciously come up with a twist on the first and greatest commandment.

‘Please men with every word and deed. Rather, please humanity.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like unto it: ‘To the fullest extent compatible with the first commandment, love the Lord your God with all your soul and with all your mind.’ All the principles of popularity, comfort and satisfaction hang on these two commandments. (Hat Tip — Keith LaMothe)

When you think about it, there really is a kind of twisted brilliance to it all.

One more thing on this score before I close. Recently, I got in on the tail end of a conversation with Dr. John Armstrong on this subject. Armstrong was defending Warren’s attempt as being “Missional” which he assured us was different from “emergent,” or “post-modern.” (Just as Johnny Cake is different from Corn-bread.) Armstrong insisted that Warren’s route is the way we have to go since the hegemony of Christian culture is dead. The idea Armstrong presented was that since Christians are no longer in the drivers seat culturally they must shape their gospel message to that reality.

Now once upon a time that meant that Christians shaped their gospel message to that reality by suffering persecution and martyrdom for the Gospel. But Armstrong’s idea seems to be that the way we shape the gospel message to this new post-Christian reality is by emptying the Gospel of its content. In short we must learn to be comfortable with the back of the cultural bus. John Armstrong said that unless we are willing to do that many of our young people are going to leave our Churches.

Rick Warren and John Armstrong being Evangelical leaders reveals that we are living in some dark times.

Author: jetbrane

I am a Pastor of a small Church in Mid-Michigan who delights in my family, my congregation and my calling. I am postmillennial in my eschatology. Paedo-Calvinist Covenantal in my Christianity Reformed in my Soteriology Presuppositional in my apologetics Familialist in my family theology Agrarian in my regional community social order belief Christianity creates culture and so Christendom in my national social order belief Mythic-Poetic / Grammatical Historical in my Hermeneutic Pre-modern, Medieval, & Feudal before Enlightenment, modernity, & postmodern Reconstructionist / Theonomic in my Worldview One part paleo-conservative / one part micro Libertarian in my politics Systematic and Biblical theology need one another but Systematics has pride of place Some of my favorite authors, Augustine, Turretin, Calvin, Tolkien, Chesterton, Nock, Tozer, Dabney, Bavinck, Wodehouse, Rushdoony, Bahnsen, Schaeffer, C. Van Til, H. Van Til, G. H. Clark, C. Dawson, H. Berman, R. Nash, C. G. Singer, R. Kipling, G. North, J. Edwards, S. Foote, F. Hayek, O. Guiness, J. Witte, M. Rothbard, Clyde Wilson, Mencken, Lasch, Postman, Gatto, T. Boston, Thomas Brooks, Terry Brooks, C. Hodge, J. Calhoun, Llyod-Jones, T. Sowell, A. McClaren, M. Muggeridge, C. F. H. Henry, F. Swarz, M. Henry, G. Marten, P. Schaff, T. S. Elliott, K. Van Hoozer, K. Gentry, etc. My passion is to write in such a way that the Lord Christ might be pleased. It is my hope that people will be challenged to reconsider what are considered the givens of the current culture. Your biggest help to me dear reader will be to often remind me that God is Sovereign and that all that is, is because it pleases him.

13 thoughts on “Back To Warren’s Invocation”

  1. We’ve advanced beyond persecution and martrydom Bret. Now that we live in a pluralistic culture our suffering is merely internal discomfort at having our views make fun of. But we know better than such naysayers. If we continue being nice, loving, and preach the Gospel of forgiveness (in Churches and personal conversations, mind you) we’ll be doing just what God envisioned and commanded. After all, who wouldn’t love a bunch of genteel, toothless man-huggers?

  2. That may be Joshua but I will guarantee you that such an approach, while sure to make everyone feel better about themselves, will not do what previous Reformations have done in redeeming culture. I predict that if the Church “succeeds” in re-making itself in the direction you suggest that future will hold terrible dystopian realities.

    Then the persecution and martyrdom will come.

  3. I’m not fan of Rick Warren nor of his inaugural invocation, but I really don’t think he was intending anything Islamic by calling God “compassionate and merciful.” It’s true that that’s a stock description of God in Islam, but it’s just as easily taken from Scripture.

    Certainly the whole thing was meant to be rather “ecumenical” in feel, but as he ended the invocation with the Lord’s Prayer (which is offensvie to Islam, calling God a “Father”), I can’t imagine that Warren was quite that slick.

  4. As you know, sometimes I think you over state your case. But, I can’t remember a time when you under stated your case … until now.

    “John Armstrong said that unless we are willing to do that many of our young people are going to leave our Churches.” If churches do what he suggest, they will no longer be Churches or at best they will be Apostate churches.

  5. Bret,

    My post was tongue-in-cheek as well. I don’t think we are beyond martyrdom and persecution, although I can imagine an r2kt thinking that to be the case (which was my attempted veneer).

    If you need to work on underplaying your case, perhaps I need to work on making mine a bit more noticeable :-D.

  6. Joshua,

    I didn’t mean to say that you were actually advocating that. I was speaking in hypotheticals.

    From what I’ve seen you make your cases just fine.

    Bret

  7. “From what I’ve seen you make your cases just fine.”

    I think myself a better writer than speaker and oral debater. But I’ve also had less experience in the latter.

    Do you fancy yourself a better speaker or writer?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *