This is brilliant. Chris Wright talked more on this at Lausanne in 2010, which you can see here. In light of some of the events of the past week in the evangelical world, what he's saying here is really important.
In the middle of December I was on a bit of a rant tweeting about how Christians so often misunderstand work and vocation. I find myself returning to this topic more and more because I think it is so important. Browse through the gallery to see the tweets:
Then Steve Bishop posted this cartoon the other day and I thought that it did a good job illustrating the way the church often adds to the problem.
It's my hope that in 2012 churches will do a lot more to help believers think about their work from a Christian perspective.
Over the past month, I have (very) slowly been making my way through William Willimon's book, Pastor: The Theology and Practice of Ordained Ministry. In a section discussing different images and models of pastoral ministry, Willimon suggests the recovery of a classical form of Christian ministry:
There is much to be said for the pastor being educated in the classical forms of Christian ministry. The church has much experience as a minority movement. We need to draw from that experience today. In that regard, I predict a recovery of the classical shape of ministry: to teach, to preach, and to evangelize through the ministries of the Word, sacrament, and order. I sense the end of a proliferation of ministerial duties and a reclamation of the essential classical tasks of Christian ministry. Because so many of our people have not been well formed in the faith, pastors must now stress doctrine, the classical texts of our faith, our master narratives, the great themes. The culture is no longer a prop for the church. If we are going to make Christians, we must have a new determination to inculcate the faith. In some ways our age parallels that of the Reformation, in which the church was faced with a vast undereducated, uninformed, unformed laity and clergy. Pastors need to be prepared to lead in catechesis, moral formation, and the regeneration of God's people.
He argues that we no longer live in a culture where Christianity holds a prominent place. As Christians, we are now living in a context in which the idea of being aliens and strangers in the land must be recovered. This was the situation of the early church, and it shaped the way they carried out their ministry. In particular, they invested a great deal of time and energy into the formation of believers. As we now find ourselves in a similar context, Willimon suggests that
more of our pastoral time, in this missionary situation, will be spent in catechesis, the formation of Christians who have the equipment they need to survive as Christians.
I often hear people react against the idea of catechesis because of an assumption that it is mere indoctrination, drilling purely intellectual and academic theological propositions into the heads of children. This, unfortunately, may have been the experience of some – to be honest, this was partly my own experience – but Willimon helpfully points out that catechesis instead is about the holistic formation of believers, equipping them with the tools necessary not only to think rightly, but to live rightly in the world.
In order to understand more fully what catechesis is supposed to entail, it is helpful first to have a well-rounded definition of the practice. The Catechism of the Catholic Church provides one such definition:
Catechesis...[includes] especially the teaching of Christian doctrine imparted, generally speaking, in an organic and systematic way, with a view to initiating the hearers into the fullness of Christian life....catechesis is built on a certain number of elements of the Church's pastoral mission...[including] the initial proclamation of the Gospel or missionary preaching to arouse faith; examination of the reasons for belief; experience of Christian living; celebration of the sacraments; integration into the ecclesial community; and apostolic and missionary witness (II, 5-6).
Catechesis is not just about intellectual matters, but it is about the whole of the Christian life. Recovering this sort of ministry is crucial for discipleship, and thus of great importance for pastoral ministry.
Recently, I came across something called The Colossian Forum, a new initiative to designed to facilitate conversations on the relationship of faith and science, especially for those who are preparing young students to go to university and out into the world. One of the people behind the project is James K.A. Smith, professor of philosophy at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
What I find most encouraging about their work is that they are not attempting to hold one position above another, or to take sides on different points of contention, but they are giving people the tools to think about the often controversial relationship of faith and science and how Christ can be exalted as Lord in the midst of differences of opinions on this matter.
Here's an 8-minute clip in which members of the Forum talk a bit more about their work.
Update:Stefan Paas has produced a transcript of his lecture in PDF form, which is available for download here. The paper also clarifies some points and addresses some of the questions that were raised by his talk.
-----------
Stefan Paas is a professor at the Free University of Amsterdam, holding the J.H. Bavinck Chair for Church Planting and Church Renewal. He was at the recent Redeemer City to City Europe conference in Berlin where he gave a talk entitled "A European Perspective on Church Planting." If you're involved in ministry in the UK or Europe, I think you'll find this to be very interesting. He raises a lot of important questions to consider about the nature of ministry here and the vision and aims of the church on this continent.
Below is the audio of his session as well as the slides he used during the presentation, which he has now made available.
If you are interested in the rest of the audio sessions of the conference, including some by Tim Keller, they can be found here. Do note that you need to register in order to be able to get access to all of them.
Simon Smart, of the Sydney-based Centre for Public Christianity, sat down with Kevin Vanhoozer to talk a little bit about the importance of looking at culture through a theological lens, and the responsibility of the church in the world. Vanhoozer contributed to a book a few years ago called Everyday Theology, which forms the basis for their discussion, and looks at the calling and challenge of living as a faithful disciple of Christ in all parts of life. The two part, 15-minute discussion is below:
Our church's home groups are studying Romans 12-16 this term, and this past week we looked closely at Romans 12:1-2. We spent quite a bit of time discussing the idea that we must be 'transformed by the renewing of your minds', and how we work this transformation out in practice. The group that meets at our home talked about the importance of recognising the role of Scripture in this renewing of our minds. This meant devoting ourselves to sitting under the preaching of the Word, engaging in the study of the Bible in groups and individually, and so on.
Some years ago, I remember reading a portion of Don Carson and Douglas Moo's book, An Introduction to the New Testament, that related to this discussion of the importance of the Word of God in our transformation. In their chapter on the book of Acts, they write this:
An easily overlooked theme in Acts is the power of the word of God. Again and again, Luke attributes the growth and strength of the church to the dynamic activity of God's word. Preaching the world of God is what the apostles do wherever they go. 'Received the word of God' is another way of saying 'became a Christian' (Acts 11:1). Especially striking are those places where Luke, usually in transitional summaries, claims that the word of God 'grew' or 'spread' or 'increased' (Acts 6:7; 12:24; 13:49; 19:20). For Luke the word of God is especially the message about God's gracious redemption through Jesus Christ. For all Luke's emphasis on the importance of apostolic preaching, therefore, he makes clear that it is only as they are faithful witnesses to the Word that spiritual transformation takes place. As C. K. Barrett notes, 'Luke's stress on the proclamation of the Word...shows that the Word itself was the decisive factor,' and that the church is an agency of salvation 'only in so far as it provides the framework within which the preaching of the Word takes place.'
It really testifies to the significance of Scripture in the transformation of people that Luke gave it so much emphasis in Acts. And as we see in Romans 12, Paul felt the same way. If we are to be truly transformed, we must allow the Bible to have a prominent place in our lives. As David simply and honestly writes, 'How can a young man keep his way pure? By living according to your word' (Psalm 119:1).
Last week I suggested that our theological formation should be something more than simply adopting the thinking of celebrity figures (or anyone, for that matter) in the church, and stated that instead we should understand theological formation as something that happens locally. I finally found some time yesterday to jot down a few thoughts in this vein.
The first thing to note is that doing theology is a communal task. This simply flows from the reality that the church is a community of believers united in Jesus Christ who together determine, by studying and indwelling the revelation of God in his Word, what they must believe and how they are to live. Throughout history, theology has always been done in the context of community. The early church councils were groups of leading churchmen gathered together to address certain points of theology (and other matters). The creeds and confessions of the Reformation were produced by a gathering of church leaders. Even when men like Calvin produced their theological works, the intention was that they serve the community they were a part of.
What's more, theology is always done in a specific context. Both place and time factor into the theology that emerges. This is not to say that theology is only relevant for a certain time and place, but merely that theology is not produced in a vacuum and is always to be understood within the context it emerged from. For instance, during the second and third centuries, the church was developing its theology regarding the person of Christ and how to understand the Trinity. The purpose was not just to construct these doctrines at random, but to answer the myriad of heresies that were emerging with orthodox formulations. The church needed to be able to say, 'Here are where the boundaries are; you cannot go beyond this.' Their Christological and Trinitarian formulations are no less valid today because they were produced centuries ago, of course, but without the historical framework we cannot understand why we speak certain ways about the person of Christ and the Trinity.
Theology is never a completed task. We have never said all there is to say. To be sure, we must take the formulations from history and from our traditions that are biblical and adopt them as our own. Sometimes this may require some reconfiguration so that a particular doctrine makes sense in our current context, and sometimes it means holding fast to the understanding that has prevailed for generations. But we have never said all their is to say about everything; God, for example, is an infinite being who can only be partially comprehended by those who he has created. The Bible is a treasure mine so vast that even if every person spent every day studying it, we could never uncover all it says to us. And so we must recognise that the act of doing theology is never complete.
Because of this ongoing task, we need to always be thinking and continuing our theological formation. In the previous post, I may have implied that every Christian must be an original thinker. One of the more regular commenters on the blog noted that perhaps not every Christian needs to be original, but they do need to be independent thinkers. He is right, and that is more or less what I was wanting to say, even if it didn't come across as clearly (see, this is why I am grateful for those of you who comment). The point I wanted to make was simply that Christians have a responsibility, as they grow in Christ, to cultivate some sort of theological framework that enables them to understand their faith and gives them a tool for looking at the world and learning how to live faithfully in it.
I do think, though, that among the leadership of our churches there must be minds that are theologically astute and able to think with a degree of originality. This does not mean that every leader in the crhurch should have a doctorate in theology, but that there should be people in the local church – pastors, academics, and so on – who are capable theologically, who can clearly articulate the doctrines of the Christian faith, and who can help the believers in their midst make sense of reality and of their calling in the world. It should be clear that theology, then, is not limited to how we talk about Christ or the church or salvation, but encompasses a great deal more.
Theologians are important to the local church because, first, the church needs guides. The people of God need others who will say to them, 'This is what you need to believe about X, and this is why.' It should be said that this is not some sort of heavy-handed imposition of a particular belief, but instead is instruction and guidance that is borne out of love. There must be those who will open up Scripture for the people of God to help them see what it says about Jesus or about the Spirit, and so on. And not only that, but believers must also be helped to see the whole unified story of the Bible, each act of creation, fall, and redemption, how God has been active in history and how they can understand their place in this great narrative.
Reading Scripture requires theological lenses in order to provide a framework for interpreting them. Though many claims to the contrary have been made throughout history, an individual cannot approach the Bible and read it without any sort of theological paradigm coming to bear on his interpretation. As strange as it may sound, there is a sense in which we can say to an individual, 'The Bible is not for you.' By this I certainly do not intend to abrogate an individual of the responsibility of reading and studying Scripture, but want to recognise that the Bible was given to the church. When a person approaches Scripture they are unwise to do so without first looking to the church as their guide. What was noted above about thinking independently is important here, because using the church as a guide always requires the believer to take this teaching and weigh it against Scripture.
Second, in order for the people of God to live faithfully in the world, they need to learn how to do so. We can best understand this by talking about worldview. Al Wolters, in his masterful book, Creation Regained: Biblical Basics for a Reformational Worldview, says, 'Our worldview functions as a guide to our life. A worldview, even when it is half unconscious and unarticulated, functions like a compass or a road map. It orients us in the world at large, gives us a sense of what is up and what is down, what is right and what is wrong in the confusion of events and phenomena that confronts us' (4). This sort of roadmap requires us to think theologically about all kinds of things (indeed, perhaps everything), from business, to politics, to justice, to vocation, to art, to education, and so on. As we think about these things, all kinds of big questions will be raised that we need to deal with. And so we study the Scriptures together in our local communities, working together to answer our questions and formulate a worldview that is thoroughly biblical and that acknowledges the Lordship of Christ over all of life.
And this is where it really becomes important to do theology locally. All these big questions certainly have answers that have universal application, but there are also a lot of context-specific applications that need to be figured out. How do we do that? One thing I am sure of is that we do not simply take the answers from celebrity leaders or from those in different contexts without careful consideration of their conclusions. This is far too often the case and the very reason I raise the subject in the first place (as I noted last time). What we can do with the conclusions of others is to take their insights, weigh them against Scripture, evaluate them for our specific context, and determine what is good for us. To some degree, that may sound like some sort of relativism, but I am certainly not advocating that. At this point, I am just not sure how to state it differently. I hope you understand what I mean.
Further, here is where the idea originality comes into play. In some cases, some of the questions we are asking may not have any good answers so far. Perhaps others have reached unbiblical conclusions, or no one has even addressed the question yet. In this case, let's not wait for our celebrity leaders to give us the answers, but let us together think through these things and produce a theological response that will benefit not just our community, but maybe even the church as a whole.
Theology has so often been construed, especially in evangelical circles, as something that takes place far away in the halls of academia. But theology can and should be done in our local churches and communities. When we are confronted with big questions, we shouldn't ignore them or push them aside hoping that someone else will answer them for us, but we should embrace the opportunity to think together and read the Bible together as we seek to find an answer that will help us in our ongoing quest to bring our beliefs in line with Scripture and to live faithfully in this world. This is part of our life together as a local community of believers.
These conversations happen all over the place – in church fellowship halls, in classrooms, in coffee shops and pubs, on street corners, in living rooms and around dinner tables, in cars on long drives. There is no one place because these are conversations that we can be having all the time. Theology does not need to be a formal affair. If we believe that theology is not only about believing the right things but also about our ongoing formation as disciples of Christ, what better place to do it than in our local communities where we are together working out what it means to follow Jesus?
