Thread: Song: "There is a Redeemer" = bad Pneumatology?

I am reading off and on in a book called "Through Western Eyes" by Robert Letham. (A book on Eastern Orthodoxy)

At one point while talking about the Trinity he makes these statements regarding hymnology and the Trinity (page 223):

The hymnology of the Western Church is sadly lacking in clearly trinitarian compositions. Even some of the best known hymns are defective in this way: 'My God, how wonderful thou art,' 'Great is thy faithfulness' (at best binitarian), 'Praise my soul, the King if heaven,' and so on. A recent chorus, trying hard to be trinitarian, falls into heresy in the attempt, with a refrain which runs 'Thank you, O our Father, for giving us your Son, and leaving your Spirit till the work on earth is done [my italics].'

Since we sing this song (There is a Redeemer) during our worship services his statement interests me. Aside from EP issues, would you agree that Letham is right?


Another statement I found interesting

Regarding the Eastern Church:

The Trinity is more central to the life and worship of the church than in the West, as Orthodox service books make transparently clear

If his basic premise is that if you mention one Person of the Trinity in a hymn, you must mention all 3, I'm not sure that that is a premise that I accept.

I hear ya Edward.

I was primarily thoughtful on his statement regarding part of the refrain of "There is a Redeemer" being heretical..."leaving your Spirit"

Originally Posted by matthew11v25

I hear ya Edward.

I was primarily thoughtful on his statement regarding part of the refrain of "There is a Redeemer" being heretical..."leaving your Spirit"

"for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you"- Matthew 10:20

"If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!”- Luke 11:13

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you"- John 14:26

"But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me"- John 15:26

"Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: - John 16:7-8

"This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear"- Acts 2:32-33

"But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you"- Romans 8:9-11

"For I know that this will turn out for my deliverance through your prayer and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ"- Philippians 1:19

"Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. To them it was revealed that, not to themselves, but to us they were ministering the things which now have been reported to you through those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things which angels desire to look into"- 1 Peter 1:10-12

(Just had to include that last verse...astounding verses! My pastor once pointed out that, as much as we might want to live in the time of David and Joshua and Abraham, they'd want to live in OUR time!)

Originally Posted by matthew11v25

...'Thank you, O our Father, for giving us your Son, and leaving your Spirit till the work on earth is done [my italics].'

How is that statement "heretical"?

"There is a Redeemer" is one of my favorite Keith Green songs, btw!

I have always enjoyed the song as well.

I am just trying to wrap my brain around why he thinks it is heretical. He talks alot about modalism in Western Culture before that but I still dont know why he would think the phrase "leaving your spirit" is such a big deal...

If we really understand preaching, then we won't miss out on encountering Holy Spirit in worship. His job is to WITNESS to Jesus Christ, and NOT to himself. He is the intentionally "shy" person of the Trinity.

So, perhaps we ought to make a greater effort to remember him. True. And pastors should make more of the Trinitarian identity of God in prayer and preaching, so putting the True God before the congregation. I try to remember to invoke the Triune God, by name (F,S,HS) after the call to worship twice each Sunday.

But I don't think we need to beat ourselves up over our "neglect" of Holy Spirit, provided we are seeking the Father through the Son. If Christ really is central to our worship, we can't help but seek him through the only available channel--Holy Spirit himself. We can, however, do this with greater self-consciousness.

Of course He "left" His Spirit...how else would we have the blessing of His ministry ? Surely "left" is a synonym for "sent."

If no one on this board can come up with a reason why that song is heretical, well, I'd say it's passed a pretty rigorous test.

I haven't read that book, but his book on the Trinity is filled with the same kind of remarks - some of them repeated several times throughout the book. However, some of his "supporting evidence" is simply absurd - Aquinas starts with the essence and only then treats the persons - this is supposed to reflect the tendency towards modalism that the West has had since Augustine.... It doesn't make very much sense, and it didn't give me any sense that there's a need for me to go on reading what Letham writes. He struck me as very quick to detect unfortunate tendencies almost everywhere he could, without being very fair about context or balancing statements.

I'm not sure what his confessional subscription is, but one thing that confessional people need to keep in mind is that Protestants are not free to be Orthodox. We are Catholic: we believe that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. If you want to give that up, you haven't just given up some minor point - you've turned your back on a fundamental point of Protestantism. Being Reformed involves rejecting distinctively Orthodox doctrines.

As to the song itself, I don't know it and can't place the phrase in context. I suppose it depends on what "leaving" is supposed to mean. Obviously the Spirit is omnipresent; obviously Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all mutually indwell one another, so from either one of those angles it's absurd to speak of the Spirit being "left".

Originally Posted by matthew11v25

"Through Western Eyes" by Robert Letham. (A book on Eastern Orthodoxy)

The Trinity is more central to the life and worship of the church than in the West, as Orthodox service books make transparently clear

At one point while talking about the Trinity he makes these statements regarding hymnology and the Trinity (page 223):

The hymnology of the Western Church is sadly lacking in clearly trinitarian compositions. Even some of the best known hymns are defective in this way: 'My God, how wonderful thou art,' 'Great is thy faithfulness' (at best binitarian), 'Praise my soul, the King if heaven,' and so on. A recent chorus, trying hard to be trinitarian, falls into heresy in the attempt, with a refrain which runs 'Thank you, O our Father, for giving us your Son, and leaving your Spirit till the work on earth is done [my italics].'

Since we sing this song (There is a Redeemer) during our worship services his statement interests me. Aside from EP issues, would you agree that Letham is right?


Another statement I found interesting

Regarding the Eastern Church:

If by this the author means the Eastern Orthodox Church, he fails to note that in their official doctrine, at least, it does not hold to the eternality of the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son.

Because of this, it caused the second greatest schism in church history (the largest being that of "Protestants").

In this I would say the "Western Church" gets it right biblically, the Eastern substantially misrepresents it.

Originally Posted by py3ak

As to the song itself, I don't know it and can't place the phrase in context. I suppose it depends on what "leaving" is supposed to mean. Obviously the Spirit is omnipresent; obviously Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all mutually indwell one another, so from either one of those angles it's absurd to speak of the Spirit being "left".

By your standard above it would also be absurd to speak of the Spirit being "sent" but the Scriptures do. I always wondered about that myself knowing that the Spirit has always been working throughout history. Was Pentecost similar to when God gave the Spirit to the leaders Moses appointed? Although the Spirit fell on more than just leaders of the Church it seemed to fall on everybody.

Originally Posted by py3ak

I'm not sure what his confessional subscription is, but one thing that confessional people need to keep in mind is that Protestants are not free to be Orthodox. We are Catholic: we believe that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. If you want to give that up, you haven't just given up some minor point - you've turned your back on a fundamental point of Protestantism. Being Reformed involves rejecting distinctively Orthodox doctrines.

Last I checked, Letham was a minister in the OPC.

Originally Posted by Augusta

By your standard above it would also be absurd to speak of the Spirit being "sent" but the Scriptures do. I always wondered about that myself knowing that the Spirit has always been working throughout history. Was Pentecost similar to when God gave the Spirit to the leaders Moses appointed? Although the Spirit fell on more than just leaders of the Church it seemed to fall on everybody.

Not necessarily: you have, obviously, Scripture precedent for "sent", and it is not at all hard to understand that in terms of mission and work. I recollect no Scripture precedent for "left" and it has a connotation of division which is not present with sent.

Originally Posted by Archlute

Last I checked, Letham was a minister in the OPC.

Then he should be as Catholic as Westminster.

Thanks for the input!!!

I have not read the whole book, but the chapter I was reading was essentially arguing that ever since Augustine Western Christians have been emmersed in a view of the trinity that is modalistic and a view of the Spirit that considers him simply a "bond of love between the father and the son" (Augustine's view according to Letham)...that being said he states numerous times that the Eastern Orthodox Church has a higher view of the trinity. I agree that we could use more hymns that actually define the trinity as opposed to just paying lip service to the word "trinity" or giving the Father, Son, and Spirit their own verse in a hymn.


Here is a little more for context on the quote I mentioned:

Page 223

A tendency towards modalism - by blurring the distinctions between the three persons - is therefore endemic in Western trinitarianism, even in more recent theology. Following this, the trinity has been increasingly divorced from the life and worship of the Western church. For the overwhelming majority of Western Christians it is hardly an exaggeration to say that it is considered more a mathematical conundrum than a vital matter of everyday faith and worship. The most common expressions used to refer to the deity are 'God' or 'the Lord'. These could equally be used by an orthodox Jew. There is nothing explicitly trinitarian about them. A random sample of Western Christians, asked what the trinity means to them, would invariably respond with blank stares. The hymnology of the Western Church is sadly lacking in clearly trinitarian compositions. Even some of the best known hymns are defective in this way: 'My God, how wonderful thou art,' 'Great is thy faithfulness' (at best binitarian), 'Praise my soul, the King if heaven,' and so on. A recent chorus, trying hard to be trinitarian, falls into heresy in the attempt, with a refrain which runs 'Thank you, O our Father, for giving us your Son, and leaving your Spirit till the work on earth is done [my italics].'.

Originally Posted by matthew11v25

Thanks for the input!!!

I have not read the whole book, but the chapter I was reading was essentially arguing that ever since Augustine Western Christians have been emmersed in a view of the trinity that is modalistic and a view of the Spirit that considers him simply a "bond of love between the father and the son" (Augustine's view according to Letham)...that being said he states numerous times that the Eastern Orthodox Church has a higher view of the trinity. I agree that we could use more hymns that actually define the trinity as opposed to just paying lip service to the word "trinity" or giving the Father, Son, and Spirit their own verse in a hymn.


Here is a little more for context on the quote I mentioned:

Page 223

A tendency towards modalism - by blurring the distinctions between the three persons - is therefore endemic in Western trinitarianism, even in more recent theology. Following this, the trinity has been increasingly divorced from the life and worship of the Western church. For the overwhelming majority of Western Christians it is hardly an exaggeration to say that it is considered more a mathematical conundrum than a vital matter of everyday faith and worship. The most common expressions used to refer to the deity are 'God' or 'the Lord'. These could equally be used by an orthodox Jew. There is nothing explicitly trinitarian about them. A random sample of Western Christians, asked what the trinity means to them, would invariably respond with blank stares. The hymnology of the Western Church is sadly lacking in clearly trinitarian compositions. Even some of the best known hymns are defective in this way: 'My God, how wonderful thou art,' 'Great is thy faithfulness' (at best binitarian), 'Praise my soul, the King if heaven,' and so on. A recent chorus, trying hard to be trinitarian, falls into heresy in the attempt, with a refrain which runs 'Thank you, O our Father, for giving us your Son, and leaving your Spirit till the work on earth is done [my italics].'.

I think those kinds of statements from Letham are troubling on two grounds. One is that they give a credibility to EO which it doesn't deserve (in his book on the Trinity Letham quotes Gunton's argument that the West's supposed tendency towards modalism has resulted in the widespread atheism and agnosticism we see at the moment; well, perhaps, but then what does the phenomenon of communist regimes say for the East's Trinitarian doctrine?). I don't see (especially, again, given a subscription to Westminster) how it is at all consistent to treat the East with kid gloves while almost any stick is good enough to beat the West with.
The second is that it seems quite careless towards the teachers who have preceded us (Augustine and Aquinas I thought he was particularly unfair to, but maybe that was just because those were the two he referenced unfavorably whose writings I have more acquaintance with), and towards the genuine piety of God's people today. The book on the Trinity finally, at the end, made a few qualifications but I felt like it was too little, too late.
Here is the fact: if you a true Christian, your experience is trinitarian. You know God as your Father, you know Christ as your Savior, and you do not think that they are two Gods, nor do you confound the distinction between them. That doesn't mean that most Christians couldn't learn more about the doctrine, couldn't do more to cultivate that Trinitarian consciousness, couldn't be taught to express the doctrine more fully and clearly; but it does mean that it's overstating the case to say that the Trinity is nothing but mathematical speculation. Consider how a Reformed doctrine of atonement, with Christ presenting a sufficient sacrifice to God, assumes and makes quite vivid the distinction of persons. The Trinity pervades Reformed thinking, from the covenant of redemption made in eternity past, to the end when Christ delivers the kingdom to the Father. The need for more, and more explicit teaching and meditation on that topic doesn't alter the fact that you can't have the distinctively Reformed doctrines without that foundation, and so Rahner's dictum, quoted as an accurate lament on the state of Western theology, that you could take away the doctrine of the Trinity and nothing would change in the case of Reformed theology is patently false, whatever might be true of liberal theology.

Originally Posted by py3ak

Originally Posted by Augusta

By your standard above it would also be absurd to speak of the Spirit being "sent" but the Scriptures do. I always wondered about that myself knowing that the Spirit has always been working throughout history. Was Pentecost similar to when God gave the Spirit to the leaders Moses appointed? Although the Spirit fell on more than just leaders of the Church it seemed to fall on everybody.

Not necessarily: you have, obviously, Scripture precedent for "sent", and it is not at all hard to understand that in terms of mission and work. I recollect no Scripture precedent for "left" and it has a connotation of division which is not present with sent.

Galatians 4:6
And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

John 15:26
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me...

I haven't looked at the Greek these could be imperfect tense verbs.