personal trainer

Disciplos Verde

If you would like an insight into the recent initiative by some evangelical leaders regarding global warming, you might read the chapter entitled "Why I Am Green" in Brian McLaren's Generous Orthodoxy.  After positing, with a broad sweep of the brush, that Evangelicals are in the back pockets of corrupt capitalists, bent on raging consumerism, driving gas-guzzling SUV's, and tossing their McD's fry bags out the windows while anxiously awaiting God to rapture them out of this hell-hole (I exaggerate, but the steroetype McLaren paints is unfair), McLaren presents a "theological succession" he sees looming on the horizon.  Here are his six elements:

1.  The standard, stagnant theology of creation/fall is giving way to a more vigorous theology of continual creation.

McLaren thinks Western Christianity has taken the doctrine of original sin too far.  The "ontological fall" leaves nothing in God's handiwork to love and appreciate; we only exploit an already dying world.  He looks "to the Eastern Orthodox tradition and to emerging narrative theologies" for a more sacred view of a creation that is still seen as "very good." 

2.  The eschatology of abandonment is being succeeded by an engaging gospel of the kingdom.

Evangelical-dispensational eschatology is the natural by-product of modern-day Christians who perceived nothing but ultimate destruction as the ultimate future for a society rooted in the values of secular humanism.  "Pop-Evangelical eschatology" ignored the failed conclusions of previous generations in this regard, as well as the teaching of Jesus about the presence of the Kingdom of God.

3.  Increased concern for the poor and oppressed leads to increased concern for all creation.

The same forces in the world that cause pain among the less fortunate of society, also bring hurt upon nature itself.  Championing the cause of social justice will naturally lead to ecological justice.  St. Francis and Mother Teresa breathed the same air, namely, the air of the spirit of Jesus.

4.  There is a succession in our understanding of ownership.

McLaren imagines a world where words and concepts such as private, ownership, and enterprise are replaced by communal, fellowship, and mission.  He contends "private ownership currently fuels a greed-based economy" versus a model of stewardship that "could someday fuel a new grace-based economy."

5.  There is a succession from the local/national to the global/local.

McLaren envisions a world where the fictions of national boundaries and political states are erased, or at least subjugated, by global concerns and ecological habitats.  The compartmentalization of the modern must give way to the globalization of the postmodern.

6.  A new understanding of neighborliness is replacing an old sense of rugged (a.k.a.) individualism.

Our thinking must extend beyond the self to the larger structures that surround us as we serve our neighbors and future generations.  The conservation actions of the individual (recycling, reusing, abstaining) must expand to impact the systems of transportation, farming, advertising, farming, etc.  McLaren suggests the nuclear family be replaced by the molecular family--an intentional family where extended members live in interdependence.   

Just a couple incomplete and unthorough thoughts (not intended to be a full review by any means): 

First, while he may indeed be pointing out a mote in the evangelical eye, like much of McLaren's writing, the stereotypes and glittering generalities, sans documentation, get difficult to swallow.  Perhaps he did not drink from the healthier streams of evangelical thought earlier in his ministry, but that is no excuse to paint the entire community as morally concerned for only family values, nationally concerned for only a strong military, socially concerned for only the better life, and theologically concerned for only the salvation of souls and the eventual, hopefully soon, abandonment of the planet. 

It is true there is a contingent of evangelicals who roam the halls of political power seeking moral reformation, and beat only the drum named "here we have no continuing city," but there are others who have developed a full-orbed theology of common grace, Christian responsibility, and biblical stewardship of creation while we await the return of our Lord.  While reading D.A. Carson's Becoming Conversant With the Emergent Church, I came across a reference to an article by J. Gresham Machen entitled, "Mountains and Why We Love Them" found in his Selected Shorter Writings.  It is a first-person account of Machen's ascent of the Matterhorn in the 1930's.  The article is significant because it is a glimpse into the mind of a theologian who sees the political world around him imploding.  He looks out at a boiling Europe from the unchanging peak and ponders Mussolini and Hitler.  Nevertheless, the transcendent beauty of the Matterhorn dominates the scene; respect for the mountain jumps from the page.  And this from a theologian battling in, and shaped by, the modernism McLaren so despises and considers extinct.  Machen even laments a vast industrial machine, the destruction of forests in Maine, and the child-labor amendment.  He will say such things as:

One thing is clear--if you are learn to love the mountains, you must go up them by your own power....There is one curious thing about means of locomotion--the slower and simpler and the closer to nature they are, the more real thrill they give.  I have got far more enjoyment out of my two feet than I did out of my bicycle; and I got more enjoyment out of my bicycle than I ever have got out of my motor car; and as for airplanes--well, all I can say is that I wouldn't lower myself by going up in one of the stupid, noisy things!

I'll forgive Machen his attitude toward flight (he may have changed his mind had he lived to see the earth from Apollo), but I am impressed that deep Protestant orthodoxy rooted in foundationalist thought produced a mind and a man very much a steward-lover of his Creator's handiwork.

Second, McLaren is too ready to dismiss evangelical positions as the product of modernist thought, and consequently, too eager to have his theology shaped by post-modernist thought.  Is contemporary dispensationalism simply the reaction of a frightened people to a modern world bent on self-destruction, or is it the product of a coherent system of interpretation?   Is the doctrine of original sin, and its attendant consequences on all of creation, the brainchild of  neo-platonic theologians, or the result of careful biblical exegesis?   Are the ideas of personal property, nationalism, consumerism, individualism, and the like, totally incompatible with scripture, or is it possible to grasp these things in a kind of tension as we seek heavenly values and earthly good?  Have these concepts contributed to the development of cultures?  What do cultures resemble that prize McLaren's suggested values (communal, fellowship, mission) sans a biblical worldview (in Africa for example)?  Mclaren's chapter is noteworthy in its lack of biblical references.  He makes no attempt to deal with texts regarding the extent of the Fall or the subsequent human condition. 

At the end of the day, I don't think McLaren advocates an any richer view of creation stewardship than has already been expressed in biblical orthodoxy, albeit at times veiled in practice.  What McLaren does do, however, is express a kind of self-hatred that seems motivated by a negative exposure to one wing of evangelicalism.  I wonder as well, if he has sipped very much from the well of reformed theologians who grasp the truth of Christ and culture in paradox?  His low view of original sin allows him to propose solutions that seem hopeless outside of a community over which Christ reigns.   I am all for Christians (the community of the redeemed) fleshing out Kingdom values in all of life, but the fruit of redemption that McLaren seeks, may not be ours to give.  We await the coming King who will make all things new.  In the meantime, I'll wait to throw out my milkshake cup until I get home.

The Futures of Evangelicalism (pt 2a)

I have agreed to do a book review for a webring I participate in with Biblical Ministries Worldwide.  The book is The Futures of Evangelicalism: Issues and Prospects (Kregel, 2003) ed. by Craig Bartholomew, Robin Parry, and Andrew West.  I will break the review into posts on individual chapters as they are topical and distinct from one another.  The first entry in this series is here.  The second chapter is Evangelicalism and the Church by Kevin J. Vanhoozer.  Since the chapter is long (60 pages) and the blog lends itself to shorter entries, I will break this one up a bit. 

As he introduces the topic of Evangelicalism and the Church, Vanhoozer borrows a phrase and notes this is the best of times and the worst of times for Evangelicalism.  Some might regard these as years of plenty because of increased political influence, gains in academia, credible confrontation of threats to the faith (biblical criticism, secular humanism, and scientific naturalism), apparent growth of evangelical churches, a seat at the ecumenical table, and cultural engagement.  On the other hand, Vanhoozer regards these as lean years because of a serious lack of biblical and theological substance especially regarding the doctrine of the church (poor reflection).  Not only is evangelical ecclesiology at a "near poverty level," but there is also a breakdown between what is confessed and how life is conducted (poor practice).  Finally, the lack of careful thought and practice shows up most conspicuously in "dumbed down" public gatherings (poor worship). 

Poor reflection:  Ecclesiology is the most neglected pillar in the theological foundation of Evangelicalism.  The para-church nature of the evangelical movement along with the emphasis on the salvation of the individual are cited as possible causes.  Vanhoozer notes that studies on ecclesiology are rare or absent, and that the phrase, "I believe in the holy catholic church, the communion of saints," from the Apostle's Creed seems non-existent in evangelical life.

Poor practice:  Vanhoozer laments that evangelical success seems to have come at the expense of unique evangelical identity; the world has set the agenda for the church.  Evangelical theologians look and sound like their liberal counterparts; evangelical congregants seem remarkably similar in their lifestyle to non-evangelicals.  He asks, "What kind of character is being formed in evangelical churches?" and then paraphrasing Robert Gundry, "...Evangelicals have lost their fundamentalist edge...they are no longer opposed to worldliness but in bed with it."  Maybe a good dose of Johannine sectarianism would put the church in good stead.  Vanhoozer notes the insights of David Wells diagnosing this condition, "Evangelical churches are increasingly inclined to adapt to culture rather than sustain an intellectual and spiritual antagonism towards it.  The irony, says Wells, is that in order to be relevant, the church has to be different, otherwise it has nothing significant to offer."

Poor worship:  Vanhoozer is critical of the success syndrome that has crept into the church and created a "poverty of its worship."  User-friendly styles, seeker-centered services, marketing strategies, and gospel packaging (music, entertainment, therapy, and food) have created a product that is soon boring because it is offered elsewhere.  What is not available elsewhere is Word, sacrament, and theology.  What kind of disciples are being formed over the long haul?  How can we best worship God and avoid the idolatries of our culture that make man the measure of all things?  "The failure of the Church's worship stems not from offering people too much or something too deep, but from offering too little or something too shallow....Christian variations upon a secular theme." 

Vanhoozer concludes this introduction by stating that in reality this is the most urgent of times.  The contrasting viewpoints of contemporary Evangelicalism (is it boom or bust?) point to the need of the hour.  Regardless of one's perspective, long-term Evangelical "success" is not to be found in the continued privatization of religion.  So Vanhoozer proposes this thesis:  "the best of times for evangelicalism must be church times, and the best church times must be evangelical times." 

In the next section he will propose a mere ecclesiology. 

The Futures of Evangelicalism (pt 1)

I have agreed to do a book review for a webring I participate in with Biblical Ministries Worldwide.  The book is The Futures of Evangelicalism: Issues and Prospects (Kregel, 2003) ed. by Craig Bartholomew, Robin Parry, and Andrew West.  I will break the review into posts on individual chapters as they are topical and distinct from one another.  The first chapter is Theology and the Futures of Evangelicalism by Alister E. McGrath. 

McGrath begins the chapter by noting the general hostility Christian culture has to the academic pursuit of theology.  He believes there are two main reasons. 

First, theology is marginalized because the Christian community tends to embrace the pragmatic and utilitarian before the philosophical and reflective.  Especially in America, there is a love for the practical that eclipses the theoretical.  McGrath illustrates the point by noting the emphasis a megachurch will place on pastoral technique versus theology.  He also references an interesting phenomenon in minister's libraries--a cut-off point when pastors stop buying theological works and start buying practical "how to" books; their brain dies.

Second, theology is little esteemed because of the perceived elitism of academic theology.  The theologians speak a different language and have a separate agenda.  McGrath remembers a prof he experienced in seminary who referenced spending time with little old ladies over tea in parish ministry.  McGrath said that when the man completed his absolutely irrelevant lecture, the students wished he had spent more time sipping tea with the little old ladies.  He says, "It was after that lecture I decided that I did not want to be a theologian, and would go into parish ministry as a corrective to my academic tendencies." 

Next McGrath takes up the topic of evangelicalism and theology.  The unique, and in some places despised, contribution of evangelical theology is its insistence on the centrality of scripture to the theologian's task.  Christian theology is subservient to scripture; it is shaped and reshaped by scripture.  Though evangelicalism has been regarded as anti-intellectual in the past, it has gained ground since the Second World War, and demonstrated a balance between the academy and the faith community.  Nevertheless, McGrath still believes a large segment of the evangelical community is ambivalent toward sustained theological engagement.  He lists four reasons:

First, the lingering influence of fundamentalism:  McGrath believes the initial fundamentalists of the 1920's divorced a generation from scholarly work by refusing any kind of cultural engagement.  In an over-reaching comparison, he likens the experience to the "Cultural Revolution" in the People's Republic of China. 

Second, a pragmatic approach to theology and church life:  Returning to a theme mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, McGrath laments the therapeutic culture of much of North American evangelicalism.  The church has yielded wholly to pragmatism and utilitarianism in pastoral and evangelistic methodology.  He notes the work of David Wells (No Place for Truth) in documenting this decline.  He also believes that theology itself must demonstrate its own relevance to the faith community.  This will only happen with a revival of sorts in evangelicalism itself.  The result of a deeper evangelicalism will be a more sustained theology.  "A vibrant tradition of theological reflection is the outcome, rather than the cause, of a dynamic community of faith."  For McGrath, evidence of this life is evangelistic activism, the vigorous pursuit of sustainable spiritualities, and an increased engagement with social and political issues."

Third, the elitism of academic theology:  The evangelical theologian is suspicious of a secular academy with a decidedly anti-Christian worldview that considers him to be naive.  The profession of learning is no longer identified with wisdom and personal integrity; therefore, the evangelical does not bow to the authority, so-called, of the secular academy.  Contrary to the academic theologian, the evangelical theologian stands within his community, and serves his community from the inside.  He is not over, or outside of, the church.  He serves the needs and life of the church.  This is distinct from the theological elite who grace their ivory towers in detached contempt from the realities of everyday life. 

Fourth, evangelical theology is rooted in popular piety:  Though McGrath praises the ability of evangelicalism to speak to the ordinary, he is concerned that evangelicalism will leave its theological roots for the shallow waters of populism.  Only the deep roots of the historic Christian faith will provide an appropriate anchor to span the generations.  Too many small ideas are being pitched with each successive generation.  McGrath says, "Given both the widespread contempt for the concern of ordinary Christians by academic theologians and the shallowness of populist theology, evangelicalism would do well to encourage the emergence of sustained serious theological reflection from a committed standpoint within the Christian community, and see the theologians as believers who think for themselves and for others within the community of faith."  He believes John R. W. Stott is an excellent model for this kind of theologian who comes from within the church and earns a place of authority based on who he is, rather than how he is credentialed.  "The best intellectuals may exist and operate outside of the academy!"

Finally, McGrath takes up the benefits of theology for evangelicalism.  He lists three:

(1) Theology enhances our appreciation of our faith (e.g. a rich, trinitarian theology), (2) theology helps us to engage our emotions responsibly (e.g. Isaac Watt's hymnody), and (3) theology enables us to behave appropriately (e.g. Jonathan Edward's sermon The Christian Pilgrim).   

Conclusion:  This chapter was not what I initially expected.  I was looking for an analysis of the theological challenges facing evangelicalism at the dawn of this millennium (e.g. open theism, postmodernism, hermeneutics, etc).  Instead, McGrath is more interested in outlining practical ways for theology to serve the evangelical community and leap over a couple of the barriers he perceives as obstacles to that reality.  The chapter serves as a good reminder of the "isms" that seek to snuff out good theology, of the centrality of theology to nurturing faith in a pastoral setting, and also of the need for theologians to work from within the church.  As pastors, we must be certain our libraries do not contain that tell-tale line of demarcation that indicates our brain died and we stopped doing theology.   

Barnhouse

Interesting bio of Donald Grey Barnhouse.

In his last recorded radio message he gives counsel which is both prophetic and important:

“I pity the young Christian who leans upon some pastor, some teacher, some other Christian.  Oftentimes it’s necessary for some great crisis to take place which removes the individual who has become the foundation so that the believer may find himself with no human resource.  Then he is forced to lean upon God, and thus he becomes established, firm on the Rock.  Do we detect this in Isaiah’s experience, ‘In the year that king Uzziah died, I saw the Lord…’ Did he have his eyes on the king rather than on the Lord?  Then God removed the king and the prophet could see past his ideal, his earthly ideal, and let his gaze come to rest upon the Lord Himself.  O this must be the experience of everyone who is to grow mightily in the Lord.  If anyone is leaning upon you, point them away from yourself and to the Lord alone.  If you are leaning on some human leader, ask the Lord to turn your eyes above and beyond the one who may have been the means of bringing you rich blessing, on to the source of  all blessing.”

Attractive Worship

S. M. Hutchens makes some observations about a worship service he recently attended.  After a serious critique (which must be read), he gives the following conclusions:

"No liturgy can be justified to any degree whatever by the level of attraction or repulsion it exercises—especially on those who are in no position to evaluate the ways of a church for which they not only do not bear pastoral responsibility, but to which they do not even yet belong! Legitimate attractiveness of the worship service must always be a by-product of sanctification, and so of the ability to understand and appreciate beauty in the broadest and deepest senses, the beauty of God in Christ as reflected in the sounds and acts of worship. Education in the knowledge and love of God is also growth in the understanding of the transcendentals, of the good, the true, and the beautiful, and so in the objective validity of one’s attractions."

Hutchens continues:

"Attractiveness as a criterion of value in worship, which includes the demented notion that everyone present should be able to understand everything that is said and done in it, apart from elevation of the heart and mind (sursum corda!), is simply a way of justifying pearls before swine—and here I do not refer simply to the gentile, but the swinish nature within, with which every Christian must do battle. The beauty of the liturgy, no matter what culture it arises from or what collective taste colors it, must strike those who observe it from outside as coming from above the confines of their own worlds, as “something else,” as having a justification that involves the elevation of the mind and its senses because it comes from beyond and is by no means answerable to it. Which is to say that a large number of churches have things precisely backwards."

Trainer Takes

Digitus, Finger & Co (you must read where that name originated) is hosting the 54th Christian Carnival.  Neil has taken the time to read each post and comment on them--wow!  Again, this is a great way to be exposed to some good blogs.  Yours truly posted his article on Just War and got mentioned by La Shawn Barber (thanks!).  La Shawn crept into my fairy tale for the KOTB contest because she is one of the real Queens of the Blogworld.

Tim at Challies has a good post on Protestant confession.  We have been giving more attention to that in our worship lately. 

Dory at Wittenberg Gate invites you to play a little game of fallacy hunt with her.

The Evangelical Underground is hosting the First Annual Evangelical Blog Awards.  There is a lot of first ever stuff going on in the blogworld right now. 

Mels at Transparency invites you to test your skills at Germany geography.  You should read about her washer saga as well.  It's the little things in life....

Rob is back to blogging in Mwanza, Tanzania.  He has a nice update on the family after their trip to Nairobi.

Entertainment: An Evangelical Heresy

Going right along with our little series on The Christian and Culture, I found this set of extended quotes from A. W. Tozer.  Please keep in mind who Tozer is (an excerpt from Dictionary of Christianity in America): 

"Tozer, Aiden Wilson (1897-1963):  Christian and Missionary Alliance minister and popular evangelical author and mystic.....Self-educated, Tozer read widely, with a special love for poetry, the Church Fathers and the mystics of the church....A prolific writer, Tozer wrote approximately thirty books.  His first published volume, Wingspread (1943) was a biography of A. B. Simpson....Other volumes included The Pursuit of God (1948), and The Knowledge of the Holy (1961).  As editor, author and speaker, Tozer ministered to the evangelical community in North America and abroad, making him one of the most influential American evangelicals of the mid-twentieth century."

In other words, Tozer is not a stick-in-the-mud calvinist who is not happy about what he sees in the contemporary evangelical church.  Just note the year he died, 1963, and ask yourself if he wasn't a bit of a prophet.  You can keep up with Tozer on a daily basis here.

James Dobson in the NYT

James Dobson promises Dem heads will roll if they don't lay off W's judicial nominees.  This is not new, he is just stirring up the troops.

Ray Pritchard

I've added a link to Ray Pritchard's blog on my blog.  Ray is a pastor and author in the Chicago area.  His book, Anchor for the Soul, is an excellent gospel presentation that has been instrumental in watering gospel seeds in our congregation.  Ray blogs about a variety of topics, covering everything from his regular bike rides to church life. 

Church Discipline

In my continuing attempt to expand your view of the kingdom of blogdom:  Challies is running an interesting discussion on the topic of church discipline.