A few years ago Robin Phillips wrote an article arguing that Reformed liturgics is nominalistic. What he meant by that was if something is beautiful and glorious in worship, then it takes away glory from God. Practically speaking, for a church to be "glory to God," it needs to be ugly as sin.
I responded that is a false straw man. And went back and forth for a while. I think when you look at the Magisterial Protestants, Phillips' argument falls flat. However, when you frame it towards RPW-advocates today, he is spot-on.
But it isn't just ugly church buildings. It's what you say in the liturgy. When the liturgy commands you to command angels to praise God, are you really commanding angels, or is it just "Mere words?" If it is just words saying what angels already do, which seems to be the response I am getting, than it is nominalism, since the thing is just "mere words."
I responded that is a false straw man. And went back and forth for a while. I think when you look at the Magisterial Protestants, Phillips' argument falls flat. However, when you frame it towards RPW-advocates today, he is spot-on.
But it isn't just ugly church buildings. It's what you say in the liturgy. When the liturgy commands you to command angels to praise God, are you really commanding angels, or is it just "Mere words?" If it is just words saying what angels already do, which seems to be the response I am getting, than it is nominalism, since the thing is just "mere words."
No comments:
Post a Comment