Inspired by Darryl Dash’s (no relation) post on how to cope with not attending the Gospel Coalition conference (pointed out to me by one of our southern correspondents), I decided to use the theme to explore further differences between pietism and confessionalism.
Dead Orthodox
1) Save money for trip to Vegas
2) See more hot women at Happy Hour than at the Conference
3) Won’t miss appointment to have tattoo of Heidelberg Q&A 1 imprinted on my rear end (right cheek if you must know) at the parlor linked from the Acts 29 website
Confessional
1) Won’t miss cigars and single-malt night with the guys from the office
2) Won’t miss catechizing children
3) Won’t miss son’s first Little League practice (where the shortstop’s mother is rather attractive)
4) Get to finish first season of Treme
5) Won’t miss meeting with boss on opening the new facility in Richmond
Pietist
1) Can catch up on missed readings in M’Cheyne’s schedule
2) Won’t miss mid-week prayer meeting
3) Can finish Dallimore’s biography of Whitefield
4) Won’t miss watching American Idol with wifey and kids (J Lo is so funny)
5) Won’t have to listen to Julius Kim or any other professor from Westminster California
Old Life 
Well the list could have just one entry.
1) Don’t have to go to Chicago.
LikeLike
That’s for all three categories, right Rev. Glaser? (smile)
LikeLike
Dr. Hart,
Sorry, I just don’t get it! I find the post humorous, but can’t see any clear distinction between those who are pietiests and confessionalists. I consider myself to be both, and can easily pick and choose between interests in your last two categories.
Jerry Koerkenmeier
LikeLike
This was a good laugh! You’re son must play shortstop, huh. Although, downtown Chicago is nice (imo).
LikeLike
What was the purpose of this? Forgive me if I don’t get it, but was it to make fun of James McDonald, Al Mohler, et al or the people attending it? What’s so bad about the Gospel Coalition?
LikeLike
Thanks for this post! I needed a good laugh this morning. ‘Course, bear in mind that the boys from WHI were there this week. But I’m sure they’d find it just as humorous.
LikeLike
Great humor and link, Dr. Hart, always appreciate sharp wit! [she offers a toast with her beer and a deep bow with all the flourishes]
LikeLike
Rebecca, I think Dr. Hart’s purpose was to illustrate a few more differences between pietism and confessionalism, not to make fun (too much) of the Gospel Coalition.
LikeLike
Won’t be trampled by Mark Dever’s entourage.
LikeLike
We all know that Dead Orthodoxy doesn’t exist.
LikeLike
‘Fornication and indecency of any kind, or ruthless greed, must not be so much as mentioned among you, as befits the people of God. No coarse, stupid, or flippant talk; these things are out of place; you should rather be thanking God.’ Ephesians 5:3,4.
“But what I tell you you is this: If a man looks on a woman with a lustful eye, he has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Matthew 5:28.
Far from being a kill joy, I am more than uneasy with the edgy humour in this post about tattoos and men leeching at women anywhere, even if it is based on known circumstances or just fiction. None of us are exempt from these ‘eye’ temptations and the consequences if sin follows through is devastating. Gentle, ironic, and subtle humour, perhaps best exemplified by P.G. Woodhouse, is the best for making a point or simply raising a good laugh.
Bypassing the points of difference between pietists and confessionalists, there is though one massive reason I can think of for ditching all the para church meetings, which need sustaining with large dollops of money. The money which folks spend on the GC, and the books by the speakers could be far better used in helping men prepare for the ministry by funding them through the right church and denomination channels, and also the money could help Seminaries like Westminster California. Imagine what a difference those millions of dollars spent at these conferences could make if they instead were better used to support men called to this vital ministry.
LikeLike
Paul UK,
With all respect and deference, may I please offer some thoughts in hopes that a different perspective may have some value? Please accept them in the spirit I wish to offer them for I wish to submit them as another way to look at things.
Re: Humor
Coming from a tradition that honors Luther, we see value in all kinds of humor when dealing with men who are leading others astray. We believe that contending for a clear gospel cannot always be irenic and are comfortable with polemics when needed. For us, a clear gospel means the difference between life and death for the church and address the problem as such. Thus, edgy humor has it’s place and can support a point well.
Re: Money
Money is not the issue – the gospel is the issue. Please remember to keep primary things primary and secondary things secondary. I listened to the part of the panel discussion from the GC conference. I could only listen to part of it because it was agony to listen to such blind talk. When a man talks about spending hours and hours considering what the word “steal” means and trying to understand it’s relationship to Christ, I want to pull the covers over my head and give up. When they talk of how to use imperatives drive themselves to obedience, I want to impound them. They see themselves as preachers of Christ-centered preaching, yet they are blind to Christ. From my point of view, Christ and the gospel are being mangled, muted, and denied as the answer God has given to the church for all sin. It is a clear gospel that needs to be contended for as primary and money is merely a detail. Pax.
LikeLike
Paul, sorry to give offense. Ever since my days in the CRC I’ve heard the charge of sputin (making light of sacred things). I don’t think you would want to read these NT verses in a way that would prevent you from reading some of the Old Testament (Gen. 38 and Song of Solomon). But I hear you and will take your cautions to head if not to heart. Your comment does make me wonder if it is possible for Christians to write good fiction of any kind. I’m not trying to paint you into a fundamentalist corner. It just seems to me, given the incredibly poignant portrayals of the human condition in artistic expressions as diverse as The Wire Jonathan Franzen’s The Corrections, that your implicit reading of these texts would prevent Christians from reading and writing such material.
But that seems to me to be a denial of a believer’s real humanity — warts and all — and turns us into little spiritual engines that could. This is not the view of the saints we receive from the OT.
The subject for another post.
LikeLike
I found DG’s mention of immoral or borderline behavior in each of the three types, dead-orthodox, confessionalist, and pietist, a fairly subtle effort to show that the actions of each of the persons in the groups is not the way to judge the strength of the ideas they profess. I did not find it an endorsement of said behavior.
LikeLike
Jerry K. Here’s one important difference: dead orthodox and confessionalists know, unlike pietists who can’t admit it, that J Lo is appealing for reasons other than her humor.
LikeLike
Pietists watch American Idol? Sad. I could almost have been one…
LikeLike
Seriously, though, how can any pietist endure the continuous stream of taking the Lord’s name in vain on any “reality” tv show?
LikeLike
Paul (UK),
“Gentle, ironic, and subtle humour, perhaps best exemplified by P.G. Woodhouse, is the best for making a point or simply raising a good laugh.”
His name is spelled ‘Wodehouse’. Do not forget Plum’s “Good God”‘s and “Church Militant” type comments, making light of Christianity, etc. despite the fact that he knew the Bible quite well. From what I recall, I don’t think he had much to do with the visible church.
To mutually admire his writing with you, Paul, Plum’s writing abilities and potential to churn out a simile were amazing. I wish I could write like him.
LikeLike
J Lo isn’t funny. Belushi was almost right about the fairer sex and humor, but then came Sara Silverman, Amy Poehler and Tina Fey who helped showe us the difference between a male chauvanist and a male chauvanist pig. Which brings us to another advantage of not attending: not missing “Parks and Recreation” and “30Rock.”
LikeLike
Also, not there, we don’t listen to Ray Ortlund Jr sit in judgment on Reformed pharisees.
He writes:”The pharisees went to temple, the place of substitutionary sacrifice, and they believed in with their head but not in their head.” Ortlund seems not to know what the Bible says about the “heart”. But he is still ready to judge others for judging.
Does he need to find other people who are judging so that he can judge them for judging?
A guy who writes: “we need somebody to scapegoat” does not think of himself as part the we: he is ready to scapegoat those who scapegoat .
He is ready to exclude those who exclude. He needs those who need somebody to be wrong to be wrong. Their thoughts are not bold and independent and noble like his thoughts about them.
But some of us do not fear the “legalism against legalism” party which fights against the five points against Arminianism. Even when they judge us in the name of love and tolerance and the broad coalition.
The people with whom we coalition do indeed tell us much about the doctrines of our hearts.
LikeLike
Mark Mc, tru dat (sorry for the street idiom but I just finished a couple episodes of The Wire and I’m feeling mighty Omarish).
LikeLike
Do you watch episodes a second time? I am waiting for Al Mohler to find the time and place to teach what the Bible says about definite atonement for the elect. The sociology of a coalition with Arminians who believe in the supernatural (the southern baptist convention) makes the politics of doing that a little tricky. (Note: saying that Owen’s Death of Death has influenced your life doesn’t count, see Packer, Dever, In My Place…)
LikeLike