Book Review Series- "What's So Great About the Doctrines of Grace?"- Chapter Two

As it is written:

“None is righteous, no, not one;
no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”

The Apostle Paul (Romans 3:10-12)

Having established in chapter one of his book "What's So Great About the Doctrines of Grace" that "the sovereignty of God at work in our salvation" is what the doctrines of grace are all about, Richard D. Phillips now begins his examination of the five classic reformed doctrines commonly referred to by the acronym "T.U.L.I.P". The first doctrine to be examined is total depravity.

Phillips begins by noting that there is sound insight in beginning the presentation of these doctrines with total depravity. He reminds us of the truth taught by Calvin, that "one may begin a study of theology in either of two ways, either with God or with man, since to know either correctly you must correctly know the other." If one begins with God-- as Isaiah did in his vision of the awesome, sovereign, holy God-- one's darkness becomes revealed in the holy light of God's presence. Yet one may also come to the same revelation by beginning with man, for the Scriptures continually declare that the heart of man is desperately evil, and its testimony is ratified by all the wicked acts of all men (including our own). An honest look in the mirror should provide ample evidence of our utter sinfulness.

Phillips argues that the understanding of man's sin that total depravity provides is critical to appreciating the gospel, thus it is fitting that total depravity is the "first" doctrine of grace. The teaching of total depravity, he surmises, is perhaps the central controversy among the doctrines of grace. This is because it shoots down the pride of those who ask "I am not really so depraved, am I?" and forces them to acknowledge the ugly, but essential reality, that yes, they really are that depraved. We all are. "It is against the backdrop of this terrible news about man in sin that we see the good news of the gospel as something far more wonderful than we have ever imagined." We know then, he writes, "what we are being saved from" and we better "grasp the glory of our salvation."

So what does exactly does total depravity show us about ourselves?

To explain this, Phillips first quotes Lorraine Boettner's definition of total depravity:

This doctrine of Total Inability, which declares that men are dead in sin, does not mean that all men are equally bad, nor that any man is as bad as he could be, nor that anyone is entirely destitute of virtue, nor that human will is evil in itself, nor that man’s spirit is inactive, and much less does it mean that the body is dead. What it does mean is that since the fall man rests under the curse of sin, that he is actuated by wrong principles, and that he is wholly unable to love God or to do anything meriting salvation.

The chapter then continues with Phillips demonstrating that these truths are indeed taught in Scripture, and Phillips focuses especially on Paul's portrait of the human condition depicted in Romans 3:10–18. Here is an outline of various points made:

Unrighteousness
1. Man is universally unrighteous (Romans 3:10), but God requires that man be justified according to a standard of perfect obedience to the law (Romans 2:13, James 2:10). Therefore man's most profound need, is not companionship, employment, training in life skills, self-esteem, purpose, etc. but to "gain righteousness before God" and thus be "saved from the wrath of God" (the problem of justification).

Depraved Mind
2. Mankind is under the wrath of God because of its many sins, including the fact that he has a depraved mind that:

a) Makes him blind to the spiritual reality of God’s glory and righteousness (Romans 3:10, John 3:3).
b) Makes him unable and also unwilling to perceive spiritual truth (1 Cor 2:14, John 8:43).
c) Causes him to manufacture idols in his heart that he worships rather than seek God (Romans 3:11)[see also Romans 1:18-25]. "In his quest for meaning, truth, and salvation, fallen mankind will turn everywhere except to God."

Phillips writes that man wants the benefits and blessings God has to give, so long as "he doesn’t have to deal with God Himself". This is why the seeker-sensitive approach to conversion is so off-target biblically. Man isn't seeking God but he wouldn't mind going to a church that has "contemporary music", a "health and fitness center", a "casual and informal" atmosphere and teaches him "life-skills".

[Note: the following paragraph are my observations, building on Phillip's thought in the chapter].

If we design church to cater to these superficial needs yet neglect man's most urgent need --to be saved from the wrath of God through the justification found through faith in Christ alone-- we betray the gospel. We give the false impression that the Christian life is primarily about utilizing Jesus and His principles to get "your best life now", rather than leading people to the truth that the Christian life begins with the God-wrought miracle of salvation through faith in Jesus (Eph 2:1-10, 1 Cor 1:30, - and continues with grace-empowered faith (1 Cor 15:10, 2 Cor 5:7, Gal 2:20, 5:5-6, Col 2:7,12) that teaches us to locate all satisfaction in Him through whom all treasures flow (Romans 8:32, James 1:17, 1 Cor 15:28, Eph 1:11-14, 22).

Moral and Spiritual Bondage
3. Man is enslaved to sin:

a) Wicked speech (Romans 3:13–14,quoting Psalms 5:9,140:3,10:7).
b) Evil behavior (Romans 3:15-17)[see also Romans 1:28-31]
c) No fear of God (Romans 3:18)
d) His will is in bondage, not only to sin but also to the Devil(John 8:34,44).

"With sin corrupting our every faculty, we are no more able to will after God than a blind man can see, a deaf man can hear, or a mute man can speak." Phillips sums up:

This is the state of man’s will after the fall: enslaved to the desire of the Devil. Man’s bondage in sin results not from the lack of opportunity to do good and love God, but from the bondage of his heart that causes him to love evil and hate God. Here is the rub when it comes to total depravity: despite the glorious opportunity afforded to man in the gospel of Jesus Christ, such is our total depravity that we are not able in and of ourselves to turn to God.

Having completed this very unflattering portrait of the desperate state of humanity in its sin, one might ask, "what's so great about the doctrine of total depravity?"

As he did with his teaching on God's sovereignty, Phillips wants to show that these doctrines indeed have practical, "great" benefits for those who take them to heart. Thus he proceeds to examine the benefits of believing the truths involved in total depravity.

One benefit already mentioned is that the knowledge of how far we have fallen and how evil we are by nature-- so evil that we would not even turn to God-- increases our marvel and appreciation that God would save such "wretches" as we.

Second, an understanding of this doctrine is "vital to all true spirituality" for it causes us to be humbled before God (Luke 8:14), knowing that we cannot take any credit whatsoever before God in our salvation [1 Cor 4:7].

Third, the doctrine exalts the cross in our eyes and fills our hearts with a holy delight. Phillips writes, "Awe and gratitude drive the true Christian life and draw us joyfully to God’s grace in Christ. It is from the pit of our lost condition that we gaze up toward a God so high and perfect in His holiness. But from that vantage point we come to see fully at least one of those four dimensions of the cross that Paul would long to have us know: its height. The cross of Christ then rises up to span the full and vast distance that marks how far short we are of the glory of God, and that cross becomes exceedingly precious in our eyes.

I will give thanks to you, O Lord, for though you were angry with me, your anger turned away, that you might comfort me. Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and will not be afraid; for the Lord God is my strength and my song, and he has become my salvation (Isaiah 12:1–2)

Further Reading:
Arminianism vs Reformed Theology Series

Total Depravity of Man (abundant resources at Monergism.com)

Tags: doctrines of grace, Richard D. Phillips, What's So Great About the Doctrines of Grace?, total depravity, benefits of the doctrine of total depravity

Book Review Series- "What's So Great About the Doctrines of Grace?"- Chapter One

Many treatments of the doctrines of grace order their explanations of the doctrines by examining sequentially the doctrines represented by the letters of the well-known acrostic "T.U.L.I.P." (Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, Perseverance of the Saints). In his book, "What's So Great About the Doctrines of Grace?", Richard D. Phillips also follows this outline, but rather than begin with total depravity his first chapter explores the sovereignty of God. In his view, the doctrines of grace are synonymous with "biblical teaching about the sovereignty of God at work in our salvation". Accordingly, it is implied, an understanding of God's sovereignty is foundational to comprehending the doctrines of grace. He explains:

The doctrines of grace offer a perspective on salvation in which God truly is God, so that everything depends on His will and works to His glory. As with all God’s attributes, sovereignty is not a mere abstraction, but a reality that shapes the warp and woof of our experience. The real God is a God who really is sovereign over all reality.

I agree, and would add the doctrine of the sovereignty of God is perhaps an underlying theme that runs through all the doctrines of grace, for in each of the doctrines there is revealed a God who works powerfully and effectively to achieve the purposes of His will. To illustrate what a profound effect a proper understanding of God's sovereignty ought to generate in believers, Phillips points to Isaiah, whose life was forever impacted by his vision of God as the high and exalted One, seated in His throne room, reigning supreme above all things and worshiped by the majestic angels. When Isaiah experienced this incredible vision he cried out, "Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!" (Isa. 6:5). Phillips writes that "Isaiah despaired of himself and all his works. You know you have met with God when you cry, “Woe is me!” This is what self-awareness produces when accompanied by God-awareness."

Furthermore, we see in Isaiah, "the link between the sovereignty of God’s grace and the self-abandonment that flows from the doctrine of total depravity. These truths go together, like two parts of a locket. When these pieces click, the good news of God’s grace in Jesus Christ makes sense as it never has before," writes Phillips. A true apprehension of God's awesome sovereignty leads to a deep awareness of one's utter sinfulness before a transcendentally holy God.

Now Phillips defines God's sovereignty this way:

By sovereignty, we mean that God actively governs everything. By everything, we mean all things that happen, from the greatest to the least of occurrences. “Are not two sparrows sold for a penny?” asked Jesus. “Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father” (Matthew 10:29). So sovereignty means “according to God’s sovereign will.”

Logically, Phillips includes salvation as also being under the rule of God's sovereignty. He writes,

"God’s sovereignty in salvation means that believers are saved for this sole ultimate reason: "according to God’s sovereign will." Or as Paul wrote, our salvation was "predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will" (Ephesians 1:11). That sums it up about as well as possible: we are saved according to God’s sovereign purpose, by God’s sovereign working, according to God’s sovereign will. Salvation truly is "from him and through him and to him" (Romans 11:36).

And the practical result of believing such truths about the sovereignty of God in our salvation, or as Phillips describes it, "when this truth breaks into our minds and hearts", is that "we glory in God forever."

As discussed in the preface, Phillips aims not only to explain each of the doctrines of grace using simple language, but also, to draw out practical implications for application. He writes that "everything in a believer’s life changes when he or she grasps the truth of God’s sovereignty." For example, he examines how Isaiah's experiential revelation of the unique, holy sovereignty of God produced four responses in Isaiah, responses that will also be ours as we come to grips with God's sovereignty: a readiness to serve; humble, trusting obedience; holy boldness; and reliance on sovereign, saving grace.

4 Responses to the Vision of God's Sovereign Lordship
Regarding the "readiness to serve" that the vision of the sovereignty of God produces, Phillips writes, "Since God is the true sovereign, there is no greater privilege than to serve Him. Awe before His glory makes other pursuits diminish." Furthermore, Phillips points out that really knowing that we serve an exalted, sovereign King produces both the inner compulsion to serve Him and to delight in His service.

Secondly, Phillips argues that it was Isaiah's radical recognition of God's awesome sovereignty that caused him not to question, and never complain about, the wisdom of God's instructions, even though his God-given assignment was singularly unpleasant. Isaiah was called to preach a very challenging, "in-your-face" message that would "bring about a hardening in Jerusalem", and "cause calluses as a prelude to judgment." Yet, Phillips points out, Isaiah's vision of a "sovereign, saving God" had produced in him the humble willingness to obey without questioning orders.

Thirdly, holy boldness is produced within God's people as they become conscious of the fact that their God is sovereign above all earthly rulers. He quotes the Scottish Reformer John Knox, who when asked why he could be so bold in defying the Queen of Scotland, replied, "When you have just spent time on your knees before the King of Kings, you do not find the Queen of Scotland to be so frightening."

And finally, the vision of God in His sovereign glory makes His servants trust and rely completely upon the power of sovereign grace to see His work accomplished.

This is seen in the sign Isaiah gave to King Ahaz. Isaiah urged this sign on Ahaz to enliven his faith. It was a sign that was foolish in the eyes of the world, but glorious in the eyes of God: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14). In the presence of Ahaz’s apostate unbelief, Isaiah laid his hand on the greatest sign of sovereign grace of which he could think: the virgin who would be with child.

Despite the reaction that a hostile, unbelieving world may have, Phillips writes, Isaiah's vision of God as Almighty sovereign was one by which the Spirit inspired him to preach prophetically to Ahaz of the coming Savior. Phillips concludes, "true gospel ministry can succeed only if a virgin girl gives birth to a son." He means that the ultimate success of ministry lies in the power of a miracle-working, sovereign God whose grace alone is be trusted in and relied upon.

Isaiah’s sign of the virgin birth tells us not to trust human wisdom, even as we must not despair in the face of human difficulty or personal failure. For if we, like Isaiah, gain a vision of God’s sovereign glory, especially in the salvation of sinners, we will count it our privilege to serve this sovereign Lord, who brought our Savior into the world through a virgin womb, and who will bring many to salvation as we likewise rely on His sovereign, saving grace.

Observations
I believe Mr. Phillips book has been successful thus far in achieving his aims of presenting the doctrines of grace simply, clearly and with a view towards their application. Musing on this first chapter, which describes so eloquently the importance of deeply knowing God's sovereignty, lead me to consider what happens when/if we don't have such a recognition. I think there are many possible effects of having a weak view of God's sovereignty, but it's outside the scope of this review to fully explore them. However, I'll briefly present a few ideas on these lines for your consideration.

Blame It on the Devil Lifestyle
One result of a weak consciousness of God's sovereign rule might be a distorted picture of the Christian life, one that gives Satan way too much prominence and thus leads believers into blaming Satan or demons for everything bad that happens. The truth is that God's sovereignty extends to ruling over the devil and his demonic forces, who actions are as God permits and are ultimately overruled by him (see the book of Job).

If we don't view Satan, as well as all that happens, as being under God's sovereignty, and if at the same time, we lose sight of the way God is providentially working together all things for the good of those who love Him, we may be prone to try to figure out the "why" in every bad circumstance (was it the Devil, was it God, what does it mean?).

I think that Scripture, in books such as Ecclesiastes and Job, shows that such speculation is not profitable. We mostly won't receive answers from God as to "why" certain things happen. But we do know from Scripture that the God who created and controls this universe watches over it, and that He cares for believers, who may please Him by living according to faith in His Son and in His great promises.

"Experiencing" God
Another possible consequence of not seeing and trusting in God's sovereignty may be the contemporary tendency to want to "hear from God". Does God promise to personally and supernaturally give us moment-by-moment instructions on all decisions of life, so that our task is to learn how to hear His voice and sense His directions inwardly? Surely the biblical record shows that God has revealed Himself in spectacular and direct ways to various servants in times past, but the Bible does portray such supernatural guidance as normative. How does this relate to having a vision of God's sovereignty? The impulse to get specific revelations may be due to a defective understanding of God's sovereignty. The Bible tells us "His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence (2 Peter 1:3)". The Bible also claims special status as God's revelation to his people, one that is sufficient to guide us through life. Therefore by faith we must trust that God's word is inerrant and infallible because it was God's sovereign power that produced and preserved the Bible for us.

Returning again to the book review, we observe that Mr. Phillips is a pastor and his writing style is reminiscent of well put-together sermons. His desire then, to not only explicate but help his audience to be personally changed by these truths, seems driven by pastorly concern. In this first chapter I would say that he has been quite successful in these goals. In a time when the doctrines of grace or Calvinism are so often disparaged, I think this book serves a good purpose in showing that the doctrines, understood properly and applied properly, bring powerful blessings into the life of Christians because they are rooted in Scripture.

Stay tuned for the next chapter.

Tags: doctrines of grace, Reformation Trust, Richard D. Phillips, What's So Great About the Doctrines of Grace?, sovereignty of God

Book Review Series- "What's So Great About the Doctrines of Grace?" by Richard D. Phillips

Tonight I begin a chapter-by-chapter review series on the forthcoming book "What's So Great About the Doctrines of Grace?" by Richard D. Phillips, senior minister of Second Presbyterian Church in Greenville, S.C. Slated for release in just a few weeks (April 1, 2008), it's being published by Reformation Trust, a publishing imprint of Ligonier Ministries (R.C. Sproul).

According to the book jacket, Mr. Phillips (M.Div., Westminster Theological Seminary), in addition to his pastoral duties, is also the author of numerous books, including "Jesus the Evangelist" and the "Hebrews in the Reformed Expository Commentary" series. His preaching is heard weekly on the radio program God’s Living Word, and since 2000 he has chaired the Philadelphia Conference on Reformed Theology, founded by James Montgomery Boice. Prior to his calling to the gospel ministry, Rev. Phillips served as a tank officer in the U.S. Army and was assistant professor of leadership at the United States Military Academy, West Point, resigning with the rank of major. He lives with his wife, Sharon, and their five children in the Upcountry of South Carolina.

Before delving into the book's preface, I'd like to open this series with a few brief introductory remarks on the topic of the "doctrines of grace".

What is so great about the "doctrines of grace"? Many today would say, "not much". For these classic reformed truths are not necessarily cherished in our day, and in fact are often viewed with hostility, alarm and apprehension. Why is this so? Why should these doctrines, from which most, if not all, Protestant denominations today trace their roots, be viewed with such suspicion by many contemporary Protestants?

One reason, I believe, is that the specific content of the "doctrines of grace" is not taught from many pulpits and is unfamiliar to large numbers. Though most Presbyterians and Lutherans, some Baptists, Sovereign Grace Ministries (and others too, I'm sure) know these doctrines and preach them, yet there are huge segments of the contemporary American church that likely have never been exposed to, nor critically examined, the doctrines of grace (sometimes referred to by the acrostic "T.U.L.I.P", or by the nickname "Calvinism"). As a result many can't explain the difference between the two most prominent theological systems of Protestant history- Calvinism and Arminianism, nor would they be able to answer the question, "Are you a Calvinist or an Arminian?" What they have heard about Calvinism may be nothing more than superficial and dismissive hearsay. One may think (as I used to) "Well, I have heard a little about these Calvinistic teachings--Limited Atonement, Unconditional Election-- and they just don't sound correct or biblical."

Additionally, you may be thinking, so what? Does it really matter anyway, to prefer one ancient set of creeds, over another ancient set of creeds? What practical difference would choosing sides in an ancient theological debate make to my life right now as a Christian? Isn't the important thing to get busy loving each other as Christians and showing God's love to the world?

This is precisely, I believe, the issue that Mr. Phillip's new book aims to address: to show why the doctrines of grace are indeed great and why they matter for us today. His method however, is not to offer an exhaustive argument in defense of the doctrines of grace, nor thorough refutation of Arminianism or other theological systems. Rather, he wants to share his love and enthusiasm for these doctrines even as he demonstrates that they are indeed biblical and therefore highly relevant. In order to do so, he writes in the preface of having two purposes in his book. First:

I seek to exposit definitive passages as they pertain to the respective doctrines. My approach is to present and explain the doctrines as plainly as possible by drawing out both the clear teaching of the Bible’s text and the necessary implications thereof.

His second purpose, which he thinks is equally important but often neglected in books on this topic, is:

...to help believers feel the power of these precious truths in their lives. In other words, I aim not merely to teach the doctrines of grace, but to show what is so great about them. And how great they are! If we really believe the Bible’s teaching on the sovereign, mighty, and effectual grace of God, these doctrines not only will be dearly beloved, they will exercise a radical influence on our entire attitude toward God, ourselves, the present life, and the life to come.

It is especially this second purpose, which Mr. Phillips so eloquently describes here, that makes me excited about reading and reviewing this volume. Despite this positive bias, however, I aim to write a critical and constructive review of the book.

For Further Reading:
Arminian vs Reformed Theology series

Tags: doctrines of grace, Reformation Trust, Richard D. Phillips, What's So Great About the Doctrines of Grace?

Review of Chaos and Creation in the Backyard, by Paul McCartney. A Grownup Work from a Genius of Pop

Before I begin my review, I would like to retire a false legend about the Beatles, one that has circulated for a long while. Please bear with me as I address this issue briefly; it will be relevant to the album review.

The myth is this: that John Lennon was the true artist of the Beatles; their leader, and the driving force behind their magic. This legend of course misses the obvious fact that the music of the Beatles was produced by the alchemy of four unique talents, each of whom made an important and significant contribution to the mix. It was the combination of their voices, inspired songwriting, their cohesiveness as a band, and their winning personalities that made the Beatles so special-- even the Beatles themselves often claimed that they felt like four parts of the same person. So their success is not owing to any one of them alone.

Lennon certainly was a natural leader within the group and had an originality that was critical to the Beatle's sound. But his songwriting partner, McCartney, was no less an original, and it's almost certain that Paul took the lead in Beatle creative sessions on songs for which he was the primary originator (and this was probably more than half of their recordings).

Especially in their earlier work, Paul and John's songwriting was a true collaboration. But as time went on, they wrote more as individuals, and would bring in their ideas for the rest of the group to work on. One began to see the contrast in their musical personalities.

It's when we examine their output as solo artists we more readily see the differences (and similarities) in the style and temperament of Lennon vs. McCartney. Paul was clearly the sunnier personality, reflected both in his lyrics and in his more upbeat tunes. The darker Lennon exposed the pain and even neurosis of his psyche, usually with good results musically. One way that they were similar, however, is that both were Romantics [definition of Romanticism: An artistic and intellectual movement originating in Europe in the late 18th century and characterized by a heightened interest in nature, emphasis on the individual's expression of emotion and imagination, departure from the attitudes and forms of classicism, and rebellion against established social rules and conventions].

Perhaps one of the best examples of this Romanticism is that each of them wrote tender, sensitive odes to love/lover (Paul: My Love, Warm and Beautiful and countless others, John: Oh My Love, Woman, and lots more).

Paul was more of a craftsman in his approach to writing and producing, polishing final productions to a sheen; whereas it seems John generally preferred a more raw sound, one he viewed as more spontaneous and authentic. Of the two, Paul was almost certainly the more versatile musician, with a wider scope of styles in his writing and playing. But again, these generalizations are limited, for Paul could be rough and raw-sounding, and John's music shows he was quite able to create smooth, polished pop songs when he chose to.

Paul was much more prolific in his post-Beatles output, even before Lennon died in 1980. It's hard to imagine him taking off five years from releasing any music, as Lennon did in the mid-70's. His ability to generate so many ideas is a mark of Paul's genius-- yet it has at times resulted in his putting out material that is just not up to his own high standards, nor up to the high quality of the Beatles catalog. Whether writing together or separately, these two great writers sparked one another's creativity and raised each other's game, if not through collaboration, then often by competition. So we must retire all the nonsense about Paul being a no-talent, and John the true genius.

With his overflow of musical ideas, McCartney has quite often recorded what sound like "snippets" or even drafts of songs. Sometimes he molds these into great songs, but often he has just released such material "as is", with not great results. I think this is one reason why critics have not always been kind to Paul's solo work. But another, as mentioned above, is the myth that Paul was not as inspired or as edgy a talent as John. Thus Paul's solo career has been underrated by many critics, but I believe that in due time his work will garner the respect and appreciation it deserves as outstanding pop music.

Nevertheless, especially from a lyrical standpoint, it does seems that Paul has always had need of a strong editor; one that he could respect and who would unflinchingly provide honest appraisal of his ideas along with constructive advice. One imagines that John was that kind of writing partner for Paul. But writing without a partner, Paul has sometimes given in to his worst tendency-- sentimentality-- and produced mawkish lyrics or cornball songs. Every artist has idiosyncrasies that contribute to their strength as an artist, but the same strength at extremes turn into weakness. Lennon, for example, had a gift for being bluntly truthful in his lyrics, in a way that seemed to connect with many. Yet songs like "Mother", or more so, "I Found Out", are probably too revealing of the dark side to be "listener-friendly".

Likewise McCartney's gift of generating lots of musical ideas, his seeming perfectionism in the studio, his wonderful gift of melody and his optimistic nature often have combined to produce works of pure pop genius. Yet those same strengths can be liabilities. He has had a tendency either towards overproduction, or the seeming opposite tendency to release half-finished tunes. His tendency to put on his "brave face" has perhaps caused him to be a little too glib and superficial in his lyrics.

But on Chaos and Creation, working with a fresh producer, Nigel Godrich (Radiohead, Beck) Paul reins in some of these negative tendencies. The lyrics are more mature and reflective. The spare, tasteful musical arrangements complement the thoughtful quality of the words perfectly. The complex essence of Paul's musical personality emerges: optimism (Fine Line) is juxtaposed with melancholy (Jenny Wren, At the Mercy); nostalgia (English Tea) contrasted with anticipation (Promise To You Girl). Apparently Godwin persuaded Paul to leave out his band and record almost all the parts himself (something Paul has done before but not since McCartney I and II). The result is an album that feels "organic": all the parts relating to one another well. And best of all, McCartney's voice sounds incredible (it's hard to believe he's 63!)-- it's strong and confident on the uptempo tracks, and vulnerable, wise, and, for lack of a better word, beautiful, on the more mellow numbers.

Chaos and Creation in the Backyard opens strongly, with Fine Line (also the first single), an up-tempo number that may not grab you on the first listen but hooks you if you listen more than once. It has a good lyric, of more depth than usual for a McCartney pop single. This is followed by "How Kind of You", a moody, mellow piece that reflects on the kindness of a friend (lover?) who was there in a time of need. Like many of the songs on this album, it grows on you with repeated listening.

The beautiful, haunting Jenny Wren is next and features lovely acoustic guitar by Paul, in the tradition of some of his great guitar work on songs such as Blackbird, or Calico Skies. Its minor key and lovely chorus are well-matched to the simple, evocative lyrics. The plaintive solo (by Pedro Eustache, on an instrument called the duduc) is one of the high points of the album. I think this song may join the McCartney canon of greats.

At the Mercy, to my ears, has classical music elements; there are many interesting twists and turns to follow in this complex tune. The complexity of the tune perhaps makes it less easy to remember, but this is one of the best songs on the album.

McCartney has said that on the next number, Friends to Go, he felt inspired by George Harrison-- and the song does have a "“Travelling Wilburys"” kind of feel. In fact, it is the kind of tune George might have written, in his later career. It's a very likable tune and good tribute to George, if that is what it is meant to be.

English Tea changes the mood again with its opening, which sounds like a passage imported from one of Paul's classical pieces. The song itself seems to be a mild parody of aristocratic life. It reminds me a bit of "Piggies" from the White Album, except where Piggies was an attack on the aristocracy, English Tea shows affection for the old English ways.

Too Much Rain opens with chords that sound familiar (they remind me of the song Lonely People by America). But it turns into another beautiful melody from Paul, and the song has a lovely piano/guitar arrangement. The lyrics may sound trite at times, but the song works anyway. A great pop piece.

On A Certain Softness, McCartney creates a Latin-flavored piece which really works well, due to another well-conceived and executed arrangement. The song adds yet another bit of variety in texture to the overall album. The melody is excellent, if not quite as instantly memorable as some of McCartney's best work along these lines (And I Love Her, for example). Being a fan a Latin-flavored music, this is one of my favorites on the album. Paul'’s harmonies on the middle section are gorgeous.

Riding to Vanity Fair marks perhaps a first for McCartney, in that he reveals bitter feelings, the result of betrayal in friendship. The song's slow, atmospheric quality heightens the feeling of dazed confusion expressed by the words. The orchestration is excellent, recalling the song "Distractions", but is more understated here. I think McCartney should keep writing in this vein, because the lyrics in this song feel more real and more honest than the perfect ideal described in the very next song, Follow Me. One wonders, to what human being could these words be expressed ("I can rely on you to guide me through any situation"? Interestingly, since I write from a Christian point of view, this song, which seems to be about God, should probably appeal to me. But its melody isn't quite as inspired as other songs on this album, and one isn't so sure if there is heartfelt conviction in the song. For these reasons, Follow Me was probably my least favorite track.

Promise to You Girl is another great pop song from McCartney, inserting a needed burst of energy into this mostly mellow album. Paul, "looking through the “backyard of my life"”, realizes it's "“time to sweep the fallen leaves away"”. The song expresses the idea of taking stock and looking to the future with a determination to leave behind a positive mark on this world. And it does so with a catchy, fun tune that is typical Paul. This would be a good choice for the next single.

On This Never Happened Before Paul has crafted yet another gorgeous love song, with chord changes reminiscent of Burt Bacharach. In an interview, Paul relates how he lent out the song, prior to its official release, to a couple getting married (very sweet).

The album closes with a pair of love songs. Like Too Much Rain, Anyway also opens with a familiar-sounding chord progression (remember "People Get Ready" by Curtis Mayfield?). Still, Paul's song veers into much different musical territory after that. The song is a plea for lovers to re-unite (it feels perhaps as if they have been parted by a quarrel). But the narrator believes that their love is "strong enough to take it on the chin" and to "cure each others sorrow". He waits for her to "make that call", "anyway" she can. Both This Never Happened Before and Anyway could be criticized for their simplistic lyrics, but the music expresses emotional nuances that fills in what the words do not. Perhaps if the words were more complex, they might clash with the musical expression of emotion.

Finally, there is a instrumental jam that follows the last song, Anyway, that has points of interest, although it is not very cohesive. It sounds like three different musical passages strung together, but the best of these passages is the piano section.

If you're planning on purchasing the album, I'd strongly recommend buying the Special Edition version, which includes along with the CD an entertaining and informative 50 minute DVD, in which Paul talks about the making of Chaos and Creation.

Chaos and Creation is a grownup work from an artist who obviously still has lots of creative juices flowing. Some fans and critics may lament the lack of "rockers" on this album, but it seems Paul's latest batch of inspiration just didn't include those types of songs. Working with a strong producer was definitely a good move for Paul: this is a thoughtful, well-crafted album with no "clunkers", as have appeared on previous albums. Paul no longer needs to stake his reputation on the body of work he created with the Beatles, as wonderful as that body of work was. His body of work as a solo artist, and with Wings, is equally impressive. It remains to be seen whether or not this album contains songs that will live up to very high standards set by all of Paul's past work, to become his new classics. Still, McCartney is a true genius of pop, and he can (and should) hold his head up high with this album.