In Christ Alone, the controversy for almost a decade about a modern hymn

 And how do you interpret this hymn? "In Christ alone" by Stuart Townend and Keith Getty.

In Christ alone, Who took on flesh,
Fullness of God in helpless babe!
This gift of love and righteousness,
Scorned by the ones He came to save.
Till on that cross as Jesus died,
The wrath of God was satisfied;
For ev’ry sin on Him was laid—
Here in the death of Christ I live.

In our traditional service this Sunday (Oct. 9) we sang "In Christ Alone" which is a contemporary song, but I do like it and it fit the sermon theme, sort of. After the service I asked one of the pastors who's also a musician about the words in the second verse, “on that cross, as Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied.” Isn't that Calvin's interpretation, I asked. He assured me, it's in Lutheran theology. But it appears I'm not the only one asking.  Some people just don't sing that verse.

After our wonderful Sunday dinner which was sort of like my mom's (over done beef roast because it had to go in the oven before we went to church) I googled it. WOW. All sorts of controversy and that very line kept it out of some hymnals, including a Presbyterian!

I don't think it fits the whole O.T. sacrificial system we've been following up to the Cross, and God does come off sounding kind of nasty and petty, punishing someone for what others did instead of Jesus voluntarily offering a sacrifice we (humankind since Adam and Eve) haven't been able to do. But I know from being at a gazillion Bible studies over the last 50 years, that is how many Protestant denominations see that.

So what does your church do? Just sing it lustily and don't pay attention to the words just the emotion? Revise that verse and violate copyright? Receive it and believe it?

Here's just one article I looked at it. I shook my head and thought, "This is why there are 35,000 Protestant/Bible based denominations." https://www.psephizo.com/biblical-studies/did-jesus-die-to-satisfy-gods-wrath/

And others: The Wrath of God Was Satisfied: Wondrous Love in the Awful Cross | Desiring God   The wrath of God satisfied? – Theology Everywhere   Wrath or Love? Calvin on Why Jesus Goes to the Cross | Reformedish (derekzrishmawy.com)   (PDF/Books) The Wrath Of God Satisfied Download FULL | Automation Journal (this one sounds really good, but I didn't download it) and from Augustine How Augustine Viewed the Cross | Billy Kangas (patheos.com)

And this one with a long quote from N.T. Wright, a prominent Anglican theologian: The Bible Guy | “The wrath of God was satisfied”? (steventuell.net)  Another N.T. Wright fan: 3a9f50ff-0846-417a-85a2-7623c472877f.pdf (calvin.edu)

But I did read a lot of viewpoints, and some fairly lengthy articles on copyright, and how hymns can form theology long into the future.  But this blogger from Australia fit my understanding best:

"Sydney Anglican blogger David Ould helpfully pointed out in the online debate that God’s wrath is not satisfied by severely punishing an unwilling child. Nor is the Father like a sadistic teacher.

“The solution to all this, the Scriptures teach, is that one dies in our place. The entire OT sacrificial system models this and then Jesus Himself comes and does it. He is no “abused child” and there is no “lashing out by God”, rather He chooses Himself to lay down His life (John 10:11, 15, 17-18). Those last two verses are stunning how they tell of the unity of purpose between Father and Son:

John 10:17 “The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.’” The Wrath against Wrath: “Till on that cross as Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied.” - Eternity News

Is anyone in charge here?

Yesterday I came across a slick brochure advertising IF:Gathering 2016, which seems to be an ecumenical live gathering with lots of high tech underground and over reach--blogging, twiitter, Pinterest, tumblr, etc.--supposedly reaching about 400,000 women for the last event as reported by Christianity Today and Huffington Post. The brochure made no mention of the ministry or resurrection of Jesus which always gives me pause in publicity for massive "Christian" events. Is that to be "seeker" friendly, or was it an oversight by the proof reader? No theology, Christology, ecclesiology, or any isms or ologies that I'm familiar with that point back to the New Testament church. Just lots of good vibes and emotion, plus some social justice links to well known Christian groups. "A fresh, deep, honest space for the next generation of women to wrestle with essential questions that plague their generation." I can find no "authority" or church leader higher than the woman (and her husband) who organized it. I'm feeling my age today--and the multitude of events I've seen come and go in the last 40 years. Thoughts? Have you attended one of these?

You gotta have faith

A few weeks ago we went to the movie Philomena after church at the Lennox theater near OSU campus and were surprised to find the parking lot full at 11 a.m. There were 3 services there of the Rock City Church. There was an article about the lead pastor in the December issue of the magazine 614, the cover story of which was "You gotta have faith." http://614columbus.com/article/you-gotta-have-faith-chad-fisher-6056/

For 40 years (as long as I've been paying attention) I've heard pastors and church members say their church isn't about "religion," but about "a relationship." They sort of campaign (subtly) against organized religion. But without that in their background, going back the church fathers, the reformation, the great awakening, etc., they wouldn't be around to preach the gospel. And if they are successful in their mission, eventually they too are "religious."

I think these informal, non-religious, non-churches are a form of church renewal, and apparently necessary since Christians have been doing it for over 2000 years. However, Christians who say they don't like liturgy or hymns or structure apparently haven't paid attention to their own services, which when I attend, I always see or hear a pattern, form, and style that is comfortable and meaningful for that group. Maybe they don't say, "In the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit," and make the sign of the cross, but they do say, "Lord, we just come before you today, . . ." or "Can I get an Amen here?" Maybe they don't have robes or stained glass windows or an organ, but they have 24 Peaveys hanging from the ceiling, loud guitars and special lighting to create a mood and emotion.

A painful twang at least to my ears

So many singers have this sound: someone is sitting on his chest to place a clothes pin on his nose.
It seems to be both secular and religious genre. Latest one I heard was on Catholic radio, but that painful twang can be heard just about universally, with either acoustic or electric guitar, whether singing to God or the girlfriend.