Recapturing Our Theological Identity: Beyond Lament

After the Lament

I recently lamented about the lack of theological concern among many in church culture.  I did so in such a way that sought to highlight a twofold problem, as I see it, in church life today: 1) lack of theological pursuit, and 2) lack of concern for theology demonstrated by substituting either pragmatism or politics (or both) for the Christ-centered mission of God through the Church (see my previous blog entry).  Below, I want to give four suggestions, which I call “introductory” or “basic” suggestions, simply because they represent only a small part of a more complex and ongoing solution to the theological malaise of denominations like my own.  I suggest these to remind myself and to be self-critical more than I say them to point out flaws in others.  But I do think they are practical ways to continually move us toward a concern for being part of the mission of God in the world in a way that more adequately reflects the revolutionary elements of the Kingdom of God that Jesus came to proclaim, to live out, and to invite us to. 

Four Basic Suggestions

1. Realize we really are a theological institution.

There are many approaches to church life that can help a church grow and be organized.  Models from business, politics, and the social sciences have at times made helpful contributions to the health of many churches.  However, problems have arisen in regard to our theological depth and our long-term sense of mission when these models overtake and outrank our theological vision.  By theological vision, I mean the sense in which we are rooted in the person and work of Jesus Christ as primary, in such a way that all other ways of being take a back seat to His ways.  So, because we are an institution (an organized group of people) centered around God (theos in the Greek), then we are indeed a “theological institution” before we are any other kind of institution.  Our primary concern is to be about God, God’s ways of doing things (even if they are not as “efficient” as other models), God’s definitions (of things like “success”, for instance), and God’s purposes (i.e., What gives God the most influence?).

2. Do not fear mystery.

There is nothing wrong with being helpful and practical.  There are many helpful, practical things that can be learned in Scripture, and many of those things can be transferred into even secular realms of living.  “Do unto others”, for instance, is a good way of doing business, precisely because it is, as Jesus reminds us, a good way (the best way) to live.  However, when everything in the Bible becomes a neat and tidy self-help, how-to session, we miss out on some of the most challenging and life-changing parts of Scripture.  The reason is that in the times when we, like some of His encounters with the disciples and other hearers in the Gospels, leave on Sundays asking, “What was that all about?” (see Mark 6:20 and Luke 9:7, for instance) it forces us to lean heavily on the Spirit of God and on further exploration of Scripture for clarity.  This does not imply that we should be purposely unclear.  It does mean that we should not feel the urge to make everything fit so comfortably in a 30 minute sermon that people only walk away with ways of living at peace in a world that is alien to the Gospel!  People should leave on Sundays consistently challenged with the mystery of how God can call us as Christians to be so radically different from the world, while at the same time seeking to live in the world (see Jesus’ prayer in John 17).  A valid critique of situation comedies (sit-coms) is that they take the most difficult issues and resolve them in 30 minutes with a laugh and a hug at the end.  Life is not that way.  The Gospel is a lifelong pursuit, and so allowing hearers to wrestle with the mysteries of the text and of the faith is part of our growth as Christians.

3. Have an “aggravation shelf.” 

For years now I have had what I call an “aggravation shelf” in my library.  In fact, it I has since grown to several shelves.  Former students and current church members often ask to see it when I mention it in the classroom or in a message.  It is a shelf filled with books that often challenge me to the point of aggravation: writers who wrestle with the same faith issues I wrestle with, but from a different perspective than mine.  These writers are intelligent and most of them are Christians, yet their perspectives differ in some degree from my own.  By reading them, I am challenged in my faith, and I am forced to continually remove God from the box that I try to keep God in.  Reading these authors all the time would probably be too frustrating, but making myself read these authors consistently has changed my life in a very positive way.  In fact, a few have, in my view, “corrected” my theology in such a profound way that it has drawn me closer to this God I thought I knew.  Some do not even stay on my aggravation shelf, but become regular sources of theological exploration and devotional help.  This kind of engagement in the wrestlings of the larger Body of Christ in the world, as well as engagement with leading non-Christian writers of our day, also keeps me out of my box!  In other words, the challenging words and approaches of others force me to seek God, and not just a smaller “version” of God with which I am comfortable.

4. Fully Commit to God’s Ways Above All Else

At first this seems too broad of a statement, but at its heart is a desire to let the ways of God, expressed in His Son Jesus Christ and led by the Holy Spirit working through the history of God’s people become the primary lens through which I view reality.  Consequently, this lens becomes my key to interpreting, teaching, and seeking to represent Jesus and His mission in the world.  Furthermore, this lens replaces other lenses that I as a Christian leader am tempted to use – often by other church leaders! – in approaching the calling and mission of the Church.  I am often tempted to simply parrot the techniques of prominent business leaders, politicians, or media pundits.  When I refuse to let the lenses of Christ filter these approaches, the Church loses its credibility and prophetic voice.  When I engage these lenses as filters, then I am more likely to engage in the true mission and message of Christ, even when fellow-Christians seem dissatisfied.

Being the Church in Contrast to the World 

The call to be the Church in contrast to the world, according to ethicist and theologian Stanley Hauerwas, is the greatest gift the Church can give to the world.  This call is easily forgotten in times of vast media and political influence upon our culture and upon church leaders.  However, Jesus seems more and more determined to do what He originally set out to do: build His Church (Matthew 16:18).  As Jesus does this, those things that are not essential to the mission of Christ will lose their power and influence, and those who refuse to build His Church His way will become more and more disillusioned, as have many church members and leaders whose goals were different from the goals of Christ.  The greatest concern I have as a pastor is that of passing along to my children and to those around me the life-changing, world-challenging, prophetic nature of the Church that many have died to pass along.  That means that God and God’s ways – theology – must again become the primary concern of those of us who seek to lead as “under-shepherds” of the Great Shepherd of the Church.

When Theology Mattered: A Lament

A Lesson From Ephesus and Nestorius

In a small and relatively peaceful village near the city of Ephesus around 431 A.D., crowds left their meager homes, led by their local priests, and took to the streets.  A nearby Christian teacher had been teaching that the Virgin Mary was the Mother of Christ: that she gave birth to Jesus when she was a virgin (as Scripture attests and as has always been part of orthodox Christian teaching), but Jesus “became the Christ” at His birth, or at least some time later.  In other words, this teacher, who was following the teachings of a key Christian leader named Nestorius, was saying that while Mary was the mother of Jesus, she should not be called “Mother of God”, since Jesus was not always God; rather, He became infused with divinity after His birth.  This nuance seemed too small for the increasingly popular Nestorius and his disciples to bother with.  After all, they were “close” in regard to their formulation of doctrine. 

This teaching was so offensive, even to the largely uneducated laity around Ephesus, they took to the streets in protest shouting, “Blessed Mary, Mother of God!  Blessed Mary, Mother of God!” This protest became widespread until the Christian teacher spouting Nestorianism (as it came to be known) left the village.  This protest was in affirmation of the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD, which decried Nestorianism as heresy – against official biblical and Church teachings.  The people of Ephesus, though largely lacking in formal education and literacy, would not compromise their faith and shouted loud enough to clearly proclaim what continues to be official Church teaching: Mary should be called “Mother of God,” not because she is divine, but because Jesus was from eternity fully God, as well as fully human.

Theology Once Mattered

As a historical theologian and a pastor, I guess one would suspect I would enjoy this story, which I read in a work of a Catholic historian several years ago. 

We still protest things these days, and often they are very important things.  But in our American church culture, including my own denomination, concerns about theological issues, including the radical nature of Jesus’ own teachings, sometimes take a backseat to other things.  In fact, theological foundations are often not even invited along for the ride! 

I do not think we should walk around as doctrine police, attacking those whose doctrine does not exactly match ours.  Too often Medieval Christianity did this, even to the point of fighting bloody battles, and Christianity has reaped the sad consequences of this kind of dogmatism.

However, I confess that I do miss the days when theology really mattered to Christians.  

Did you know that some of the best-selling books of previous centuries were books on theology?  The earliest days of the printing press saw mass production of sermons by great Christian leaders, including Martin Luther and John Calvin.  Christianity in eighteenth century exploded with even secular leaders providing preaching and writing opportunities for theologians and preachers, like Jonathan Edwards, John Wesley, and George Whitefield.  Newspapers printed theological debates between the likes of these ministers and theologians!

The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries boasted books from the likes of Paul Tillich and Dietrich Bonhoeffer (theologians who opposed Nazism and set forth key works of theological discussion), as well as a plethora of Catholic and even Evangelical theologians whose works were taken seriously by religious scholars, religious people in the pews, and even secular media.  Writers like R.A. Torrey, Carl Henry, Jurgen Moltmann, Reinhold Niehbuhr, and Karl Barth, whose works often targeted academic and clergy audiences, often found their way into bookstores and mainstream conversations among non-clergy and non-academics of all backgrounds.  Even as recently as the 1960s and 1970s, religious works by the likes of Harvey Cox, Martin Luther King, C.S. Lewis, Francis Schaeffer, and Catholic writers like Hans Kung could be mentioned in sermons and in discussions in many Christian settings with at least some recognition. 

Sadly, those kinds of writings and discussions have been largely cast aside outside of ever-decreasing academic circles.  They have been replaced by (Christian) self-help gurus, popular TV preachers, and even business and money management writers from outside of the Christian faith.  These are the books we are largely discussing today, and so, when theological issues arise, our first questions are questions of popularity and politics and not of theology.

Fruitful Sadness

This is a lament: a sad reflection on a sad situation.  Therefore, at the moment, I can offer very few suggestions in regard to actual solutions.  My hope is that when enough people get sad or even angry at the situation as it is, more people and groups will take it upon themselves to intentionally seek change.

The problem, which I contend is indeed a problem, is not that we no longer take to the streets when someone within our own Christian fold misstates or misrepresents basic Christian doctrine.  Rather, the problem is that we usually do not even know when Christian doctrine has been misrepresented or misstated.  We only know what popular opinion or the most listened to political gurus have to say, and we follow blindly.

Our churches tend to be governed by marketing principles more than doctrinal boundaries.  Our universities, meaning Christian universities, tend to be governed by the loudest donor voices (which take their cues from the same political gurus or pop culture preachers), instead of the doctrinal foundations upon which they were established.  Agree with the loudest voices, regardless of your doctrine, and you will have a strong hearing and following in today’s Christian circles.  And your “fruitfulness” (i.e., your ability to garner a following) will be rewarded.

Give the most money, and your way will often be heeded, regardless of the nuances of its doctrinal content.  It is no longer common for words such as “heresy” to even be in fashion, and when it is used, it is often misused or used for political gain, not for spiritual enlightenment.  Many popular movements within Christianity were once opposed, simply because they were doctrinally unsound.

Poor Nestorius: He was born much too early.