Posts filed under 'Authors'
May 16th, 2012
|
|
Where Has Oprah Taken Us?: The Religious Influence of the World’s Most Famous Woman – Stephen Mansfield
Thomas Nelson (2011)
Topic: Christian Culture; New Age
Summary: A critique of the spiritual beliefs of Oprah Winfrey and her influence on American popular spirituality.
Rating: 
|
The influence of Oprah Winfrey on popular spirituality and her promoting of some rather questionable authors is a topic that could make a fascinating book in the right hands. Thus I was very interested in reading Stephen Mansfield’s Where Has Oprah Taken Us? – his critique of the talk show host’s pervasive influence on current religious beliefs. Unfortunately, his have not turned out to be the right hands and the book is often as distorted as Winfrey’s ramblings on religious matters.
Mansfield begins with a mini-biography of Oprah Winfrey culled from popular sources that include a “scandal sheet” biography setting Winfrey’s life in the most sensationalistic terms. Along the way, the author inserts what are supposed to be Winfrey’s positions on spiritual matters at various points of her life and outlines a slow process from a redeemed and devout Christian “good girl” to her falling back on past “loose ways” that are then somehow linked to her embracing “New Age” ideas. The problem here is that there is little solid evidence for much of his conjectural reconstruction of Winfrey’s psychological state and the links between her spiritual beliefs and her sexual morals is assumed because it fits his message.
Mansfield also spends time tying Winfrey’s spiritual ideas to all sorts of movements from Anton LaVey’s “Church of Satan” to Charles Manson. While the some New Agers have connections to the drug culture, others are strick vegans who eschew any sorts of chemicals. You cannot infer Winfrey to New Age to drugs to Charles Mason unless you have been blinded to any sense of perspective. How would Mansfield appreciate being linked to Jim Jones or some of the scandalous doings of televangelists merely because they identified themselves as Evangelicals?
Mansfield does considerably better when outlining the beliefs of some of Winfrey’s frequent guests and why they are problemmatic. Unfortunately, here he only interacts with their views at a rather shallow level where it is bad because it is not Christian and many readers may immediately reject his concerns. He seems to assume the public will be shocked at his revelations even though he admits Winfrey reflects the spiritual restlessness of her generation. Well, if that is true, then did Oprah Winfrey influence her audience’s beliefs or did she merely articulate what they were already thinking and become the voice of an emerging “baby boomer” spiritual concensus?
A study of the popular influence of Oprah Winfrey on the American popular spirituality is a fascinating topic for discussion. A solid evaluation of her influence would aid Christians in underatanding and properly addressing such movements. Unfortunately, much of “Where Has Oprah Taken Us?” has far too much of an axe to grind to give Christians a point from which they can articulate a response those who have followed Oprah in her spiritual path.
May 9th, 2012
|
|
Rome Sweet Home: Our Journey to Catholicism - Scott & Kimberly Hahn
Ignatius Press (1993)
Topic: Catholicism
Summary: Scott & Kimberly Hahn’s account of their conversion to Catholicism
Rating: 
|
Scott and Kimberly Hahn are the current poster couple of Roman Catholic apologetics. Young, likable, and enthusiastic converts from Reformed Protestantism, they are among the most popular Catholic speakers with an extensive catalogue of books and tapes to their name. Between Scott’s emphasis on theology and Kimberly’s concentration on family issues, they are the one-two punch of the new Catholic apologetics.
Rome Sweet Home is their conversion story spanning their seminary days to Scott’s tenure as pastor in a small Presbyterian denomination to their gradual coming to terms with historic Christianity. Their story may echo familiar themes to those who have watched with interest the tide of evangelical pastors moving to historic communions, but the Hahns were among the earliest of these converts and their story greatly influenced the move of others in a similar direction.
Each takes giving their thoughts at various stages of their move to Rome. The differences in personalities and the dynamics between them are bared early as Scott is the crusader for doctrinal purity (a trait common among young male Christians with a theological bent) while Kimberly is the romantic who dreams of an ideal marriage and family life in God’s service. The former works against the latter as Scott’s growing infatuation with all things Roman threatens to dash her perfectly planned existence. Eventually, she grows to accept Scott’s growing move towards Catholicism and then moves in the same direction although at a decidedly slower rate. In the end, all is well as the joyous couple find a home in the Roman fold and a desire to share it with others.
The storyline traces their personal conversions to Catholicism and is not intended as a systematic defense of Roman doctrine. Issues of greater importance to them (sanctity of life, authority) are emphasized and those with different priorities may remain unconvinced. However, for those looking to Rome as an escape from the growing triviality of contemporary Evangelical Protestantism, their witness might be quite compelling.
Despite the limited nature of the book, there are some glaring omissions where informed opponents of Roman Catholic claims – even those who agree with the Hahns’ indictment of the ahistorical tenor of modern Protestantism – could legitimately object. While emphasizing their admiration for the contributions of Christians outside the Roman Communion, their depictions are often skewed and a double standard applied to Rome and other Christian traditions.
For example, differences between Catholicism and other Christians is often presented in terms of an either/or dichotomy. We must either take the tradition of the Roman Catholic Church as the infallible determiner of Church doctrine or go it alone. Never really considered are the possibilities that Tradition is the Faith of the Apostles handed on with Holy Scripture as both an infallible witness to and epiphenomena of the Tradition (the Orthodox view) nor of Tradition as a generally reliable but not infallible interpreter of Holy Scripture (as held by many Anglicans and Lutherans). The denial of any role for ecclesial traditions may be common among rank and file Evangelicals in the United States, but this is not the case with more thoughtful Evangelical scholars who recognize the role of their own ecclesial traditions without claiming they constitute an infallible witness.
There are also double standards applied when comparing Catholicism to other Christians in their practice. Churches are often far more appealing in theory or through the words and lives of their most saintly practitioners than when you are faced with the average folks who inhabit the pews on a weekly basis. For example, Hahn rejected Orthodoxy as a possible choice because of their ethnic dividions. Clearly, this was a problem more with the Orthodox faithful than the Orthodox faith but he counts it as a fatal flaw. On the other hand, he does not believe the lackluster faith found among many Catholics is an issue since it does not reflect upon the Catholic faith but only individuals. Similarly, while he rightly criticizes the triviality of much of Evangelical Protestant worship, he overlooks the banality of the ICEL translation of the Roman liturgy and the dreadful music used in many Catholic parishes since the 1970s. Although it appears some welcome changes will soon be implemented, this was not the case when this book was written and the current Roman liturgy will still fall far short of the majestic liturgy used in Orthodox parishes. Such uneven comparisons indicate he may have already decided upon Rome as his final destination and his explanations were after the fact.
Despite these flaws, the Hahns do manage a heartfelt case for their restlessness in the chaotic atmosphere of Evangelicalism without conveying any lingering bitterness toward other Christians. Those on their way to Rome will find encouragement for the journey while those with well thought out reasons for rejecting Roman claims will not find their case a convincing one. Yet, for those who reject Roman claims, Rome Sweet Home may provide them a better understanding for why many Protestant clergy have left for Catholicism and other historic Churches. Rather than conjecture about purported psychological reasons for their departure, they need to fact up to the fact the widespread triviality in their own ranks. Such an approach might well lead to a reform of current Evangelical beliefs and practices according to the standards of the Holy Scriptures and that is something any good Protestant should support.
May 2nd, 2012
|
|
Baptist Successionism: A Critical Question in Baptist History – James E. McGoldrick
Rowman & Littlefield (2000)
Topics: Protestantism; Church History; Restorationist Movements
Summary: Critique of the Landmark Baptist movement
Rating: 
|
When fundamentalist Christians are faced with the relative novelty of many of their cherished beliefs and practices within the context of Church history, they could react in one of three ways: first, they could acknowledge the facts of history but dismiss the importance of any historical support for their ecclesial tradition as irrelevant; second, they could acknowledge the historical evidence and adjust their beliefs to be more in accordance with historical Christianity; third, they could dismiss the evidence as biased and construct a rival Church history more to their own liking.
Even though any extensive research into Church history renders the latter choice as hopeless, it is all too common within a subculture where conspiracy theories are taken seriously as historical evidence. Through numerous error filled volumes (e.g., J. M. Carroll’s Trail of Blood), revisionist histories have been constructed wherein a supposed alternate strain of Christianity conforming to the faith of the Baptists, Seventh Day Adventists, Oneness Pentecostals, etc. (according to whomever is doing the reconstruction) is traced in opposition to the known Church of history. This “other” church supposedly can be followed through dissident groups who were persecuted by the Church as heretics but who were in reality the “true Christians”.
James Edward McGoldrick deals with the claims of the “Landmark Baptist” movement (where many heretical movements are considered precursors to the Baptists) in Baptist Successionism. As a former adherent of the movement, McGoldrick understands the appeal of the revisionist product. After all, what Christian wouldn’t prefer to think their movement went back to the Apostles rather that some disgruntled Christians a millennia and a half later? Has the grace of God not been operating all these centuries? Did the Holy Spirit take a vacation?
Landmark Baptists and similar movements solve this problem by placing a rival Church of God alongside the corrupted so-called Church whose “apostasy” is usually blamed on the Emperor Constantine. Of course, one cannot argue from silence and so candidates for the “true Church” are needed and found in various sects throughout history. The effort has been so persuasive in some circles that some Baptists believe they are not Protestants but can trace their lineage back to the Apostolic Church in an unbroken succession.
McGoldrick, a professor of history at Cedarville College, was swept up by such views as an undergraduate but in his later investigations into Church history discovered them to be historically untenable. Such revisionism focuses on a few beliefs where dissident groups might agree with them but ignores the greater picture that demonstrates such groups do not resemble Baptists or any other Protestants and their motivations have nothing to do with Baptist principles. His analysis is comprehensive, impressive, and irrefutable: there were no Baptists prior to the Protestant Reformation and efforts to project Baptist beliefs upon these earlier groups are based upon wishful thinking.
McGoldrick places dissident group after dissident group under the historical microscope: Montanists, Novations, Paulicans, Bogomils, Petrobrusians, Arnoldists, Henricians, Albigenses, and Waldenses. Each group is shown to have no basic affinity to standard Baptist doctrine. Some were in schism on certain issues from the larger Church but had far more in common with them than anything we would consider Baptist. Others were so tainted by dualism as to only be “Christian” in a nominal sense. In no case is any group even remotely attached to Baptist beliefs and practices.
As an example of the methodology Landmark Baptists often employ, McGoldrick examines and refutes the claim that St. Patrick was a Baptist. This contention is ridiculous but it shows how revisionists argue from silence. For example, St. Patrick wrote very little and so they argue since he did not specfically endorse certain Catholic doctrines in writing, he must be a Baptist. The absurdity of this view, not to mention the complete absence of any evidence for the existence of Baptists, should easily disprove such attempts to produce Baptists ex nihilo.
McGoldrick also considers the claim that the Anabaptists were in the Baptist succession. That one could make such claims for a movement known to have sprung from the radical end of the Protestant Reformation is a mystery to all but those with successionist blinders, but McGoldrick patiently examines the claim and easily refutes it. Ending with a careful review of the true history of the Baptist movement, he reaches the obvious conclusion: Baptists are Protestants.
One might consider it unfortunate that a book needed to be written to demonstrate the obvious. However, given the trusting nature of many Christians and the ignorance of Church history within much of Protestantism, McGoldrick is to be commended for taking the time to answer these claims and perhaps preventing others from being swayed by this historically untenable conspiracy theory. Although aimed specifically at the Baptist successionist movement, it also answers similar claims from any group purporting to be the “other Church”. McGoldrick’s unanswerable reply is “What other church?”
April 28th, 2012
|
|
The Grace of Everyday Saints: How a Band of Believers Lost Their Church and Found Their Faith – Julian Guthrie
Houghton Mifflin (2011)
Topic: Catholicism
Summary: Struggles of a Catholic parish and to reopen its beloved building against the opposition of its own church’s leadership.
Rating: 
|
What happens when the Church becomes Goliath and seeks to vanquish the righteous David? This is one of the rivers crossed in Julian Guthrie’s fascinating tale of St. Brigid’s Catholic Church in San Francisco. Against all common sense and with little explanation, a vibrant parish existing for over a century was scheduled to be closed and, as would be discovered later, the historic building sold to developers to demolish for high rise condominiums. The reasons for this bizarre action would later turn out to be the emerging sexual abuse crisis and the easy cash to be made selling a valuable piece of real estate. The one thing the leadership of the Archdiocese of San Francisco did not count on was the determination of a scrappy group of parishoners to protect their beloved St. Brigid’s.
This is one of those stories you would think ridiculous fiction were it not true. A motley collection of loyalists to the cause of their parish putting aside the great differences between them and struggling against the powerful while simultaneously struggling to not fall apart. A scrappy lawyer attracted to lost causes, a shy but faithful convert from another land who is losing her sight by the day, a writer struggling with his sexuality and the scandal it might bring, and average Catholics in the pews who continue to fight as they protest, keep a candle lit on the steps, and do not allow the exterior to deteriorate.
The story takes us from the announcement of the closing, the battles under various leaders to keep open the parish, the effect the scandals of the chuch and the lies fed to this small group of Catholics had on their resolve, and all the triumphs and tragedies over the many years of the longest parish protest in the United States. Guthrie is superb in vividly painting the interplay of personalities and their joys and disappointments as they saw their church without the rose-colored glasses and found an inner strength within themselves they never imagined possible.
The one fault with Guthrie’s account is her allusions to a supposed connection between the sexual abuse crisis and positions of the Catholic Church with which she disagrees (ordination of women, gay marraige, etc.) but these are mercifully few and far between. In response to such passages, one could ask if similar scandals involving the teaching profession indicate something deeper about public education? The problem was that the leaders of the Catholic Church, when faced with this problem, sought only to protect its own interests and not those it serves. This “circle the wagons” mentality happens in many large organizations from churches to schools to (as seen recently in Japan) the management of nuclear power plants. The tragedy is those they serve end up paying for their poor judgment. It is a shame these interjections of the authors’ personal judgment in ecclesial matters mar an otherwise excellent book.
Despite this fault, The Grace of Everyday Saints is a very good book that speaks to what happens when trusted leadership turns its back on those it serves and only seeks to cover up its misdeeds. While Christians should be respectful of those God has placed in authority, this does not mean blind obedience or putting one’s head in the sand. Both heresy and misconduct often start at the top but are paid for at the grass roots.
April 21st, 2012
|
|
The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind – Mark A. Noll
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (October 1995)
Topics: Christian Culture; Protestantism
Summary: Critique of the current state of intellectual life in the Evangelical movement
Rating:
|
Mark A. Noll starts The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind with a staggering indictment: “The scandal of the evangelical mind”, he writes, “is that there is not much of an evangelical mind.” With those words begins one of the most sobering critiques of the place of Evangelical Protestantism within major intellectual currents shaping the culture. This accusation was most striking as it came from within Evangelicalism itself by one of its leading scholars. Since the book’s publication, some have applauded and others attacked its major theses, but most will grant that the intellectual landscape of the Evangelical movement was greatly impacted by Noll’s criticism and future appraisals of Evangelicalism’s place in shaping modern American culture issue have wrestled with points made in Noll’s book.
In the book’s four sections (covering the importance of the scandal, an historical analysis of the scandal, negative repercussions of the scandal, and some hopeful signs of a renaissance in Evangelical thought), Noll meticulously builds a case that the Evangelical disengagement from intellectual pursuits has rendered it impotent to interact within the major intellectual currents of the day. Unable to develop a uniquely Evangelical approach to issues of higher culture, the Evangelical response – if any – is often dependent upon the work of scholars from Roman Catholicism and other Protestant traditions. This sterility of thought fosters a retreat into an “Evangelical ghetto” where the lack of interaction with competing ideas leaves faulty presuppositions unchallenged and its own fruitful sources untapped.
Noll is particularly strong in his insights into the genesis of the current intellectual malaise. Pointing out the efforts of Puritans such as Jonathan Edwards to vigorously address major intellectual themes of their day (following a long tradition of such efforts by Protestants since the Reformation), he traces a number of interwoven factors that produced the uniquely American strain of Protestantism. These include the populist revivals of the Great Awakening, the “common sense” Baconian approach to all inquiry promoted by the Scottish Enlightenment, and the spirit of anti-intellectualism in reaction to modernist views of the Bible and debate on Darwin’s evolutionary theories.
Noll sees in current Evangelical Biblical studies a recycling of ideas discarded elsewhere in the Church as lacking a proper appreciation for historical and cultural contexts. Locked into a system of thought indelibly marked by the nineteenth century, many Evangelicals find themselves unable to respond to intellectual movements far more complex than their narrow categories can handle.
Becoming more optimistic in the last section of the book, Noll focuses on signs of a possible renaissance of Evangelical thinking. Interestingly, much of what Noll views as positive signs are the result of influences from interactions with other Christians. In the process of pointing out many Evangelical distinctives are not essential to Christianity, Noll seems to inadvertently suggest the way for Evangelicals to become more intellectually rigorous is to become less Evangelical.
There has been a reawakening of sorts within Evangelical intellectual pursuits since the book’s publication with many Evangelicals interacting with current intellectual currents in ways that may not have seemed possible a generation ago. It remains to be seen, however, whether this reform of Evangelicalism that downplays those aspects of the movement Noll found most disturbing (anti-intellectual strains of populism, self-righteous separatism, strict interpretations of Biblical inerrancy, methods of hermeneutics based upon outmoded theories of textual objectivity, dispensational approaches to eschatology, attacks on scientific theories) alter the Evangelical landscape so much as to lose any realistic claim of continuity. In other words, can a Christian who eschewed the imminent rapture, did not approach the Bible as a source of “proof texts”, and reconciled his faith with evolution be identified as an Evangelical? Furthermore, Without the emotional hold of these distinctives, would Evangelicalism then descend into the same malaise as undermined mainstream Protestantism?
Noll is not off target in his criticism, but the solution may not lie in Evangelicalism. Many thoughtful Evangelicals, disturbed by the same shallowness Noll decried, have begun absorbin influences from patristic and existing traditions with greater historical roots where a richer theology exists, a more dignified worship of God prevails, and intellectual inquiry is accorded a more vital role. Thus the best solution to the problem of the Evangelical mind may well lie in Evangelicalism turning its back on its recent history.
Regardless of the future resolution of these issues, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind is among the most important books on the state of American Christianity written in the last fifty years. For anyone attempting to understand the place of Christianity in American life, it is a must read. For Evangelicals themselves, it may be shocking to grasp the biases within their approaches to their faith, but it may also lead them to a more faith rooted more in the Gospel than in nineteenth century America.
April 14th, 2012
|
|
Who Was Jesus? – N. T. Wright
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (March 1993)
Topics: Jesus, Revisionism and Orthodoxy
Summary: Refutation of various revisionist theories of Jesus
Rating:
|
Each year at Christmas and Easter, news magazines trupeting the the “latest scholarship” on the “historic Jesus” greet us with new “discoveries” about Jesus Christ. That very little of what appears will have any standing a decade later is of little concern to reporters attracted to sensationalism and scandal. The experience of the Jesus Seminar and the Da Vinci Code being deposited in the dustbin only a few years after they were on front pages were not lessons learned for a cynical media knowing stories about Jesus that shock ordinary Christians will get wide play. There is little concern such ideas often represent ideas at one extreme end of scholarship or even fringe beliefs lacking any credibility with scholars in the field of New Testament scholarship.
N. T. Wright, one of the world’s leading Biblical scholars, provides in Who Was Jesus? a potent antidote to three faddish characterizations of Jesus popularized by the press at the time it was written. With clarity and power, he destroys the efforts of a trio of popular revisionists with comparative ease. By placing Jesus in the proper historical and cultural setting, the pet theories of these fringe contributors to the study of the historical Jesus are found to owe more to the temperaments and presuppositions of the writers than anything remotely related to the true life and times of Jesus.
Wright begins with an overview of the quest among scholars for the historic Jesus. While sympathetic to the goals of many of these investigations, he points out they are often as guided by their own prejudices as many forms of traditional Christian belief. The beliefs of many Christians about Jesus may be distorted at points but they are not without historical basis. Indeed, the beliefs of the Church certainly have a greater correspondence with the historical realities of the time than the pet theories of many revisionists. Wright assures traditional believers that any honest investigation into the Jesus of history should leave them with a more robust rather than a weaker faith.
Wright then turns to the pet projects of three popular revisionists: Barbara Thiering, A.N. Wilson, and John Shelby Spong. Rather than dismissing them outright, Wright considers their ideas seriously and applies the same critical analysis to them given to any serious scholarly hypothesis. In many ways this proves to be even more devastating than outright dismissal, as rather than attempting a knockout blow, he counters their claims with surgical precision and leaves their novelties to die of a thousand cuts. His careful examination and methodical dismantling of these theories exposes exactly why these theories are not worth considering as serious contributions to the topic.
The first examined is Thiering and she is particularly skewered as both historically and archaelogically ignorant of the topics she addresses. For example, her concept of “pesher” has nothing to do with the reality of the pesher technique in Second Temple Judaism but is employed as justifcation for her own flights of speculative fancy. When Wright is finished, the fuss over her work is seen as quite laughable in retrospect.
Of the three authors, Wright shows the most empathy for Wilson for at least attempting to place Jesus within Judaism, but the rather bland figure from Wilson’s account could hardly have been expected to found a movement to concern both Jewish and Roman authorities. Wilson’s peculiar explanation of the Easter event (the Apostles mistook James for Jesus) comes in for severe criticism as an ad hoc conjecture giving no likely explanation for subsequent events. It is worth noting that Wilson himself has recently decided his ideas were faulty after all and has returned to Christian belief.
Spong, the final subject of Wright’s examination, is calmly refuted as someone taking part in a discussion far over his head. Spong attempted to paint the Gospels as an exercise in midrash , but as in Thiering’s use of pesher, the description did not meet the reality. Spong simply has no idea what midrash is and misapplies it in an attempt to make the Gospels say something they do not. The critique by Wright exposes the lack of scholarly acumen on Spong’s part and his ideas are left in ashes.
Wright finishes with an outline of the major points for any honest evaluation of the historical evidence about Jesus to consider. First, the events chronicled in the Gospels must be understood in the context of a Judaism that had endured the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem and their being taken into captivity, the rebuilding of the Temple and Jerusalem under Persian rule, the attempts to Hellenize the Jews under Greek dominance, and the current humiliations of pagan Roman occupation. It was these Jews, looking for the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecies, to which Jesus came. The language of the New Testament must be read within the literary foms of first centuy Judea and not conformed to later Western patterns. By moving forwards from first century Judaism and backwards from the Gospel, we are most likely to grasp the true Jesus. Most importantly, Wright sees nothing in such an endeavor to threaten the Jesus of faith. Wright even suggests the New Testament accounts of the resurrection make little sense as a developed tradition unless it actually happened.
N. T. Wright has issued a challenge to both believers and skeptics alike for a greater appreciation of historical and cultural settings when interpreting the Gospel. Who Was Jesus? may seem a bit dated now as Thiering, Wilson, and Spong no longer have center stage. It may be Wright did his job too well for the book to remain current but he does demonstrate how other such arguments should be confronted. Moreover, the book gives a clear explanation of why all such sensationalistic theories ultimately fall short. For that alone, it remains an important read even if not as timely as at its publication.
April 4th, 2012
|
|
What are Spiritual Gifts?: Rethinking the Conventional View – Kenneth Berding
Kregel Publications (October 2006)
Topic: Ecclesiology; Protestantism
Summary: A reconsideration of the commonly held view of spiritual gifts within Evangelical Protestantism
Rating:
|
The discerning of spiritual gifts is a common theme in evangelical Protestantism. Local churches, denominations, and parachurch ministries all encourage Christians to discover the hidden talent that God has given them (it is naturally assumed such a talent exists) and answer the call to use these special gifts in His
service. There are frequent seminars and courses designed to assist Christians in the discernment process. So pervasive is this trend that it is rarely challenged or even given a second thought.
Kenneth Berding, a professor of New Testament at Biola University, is one of the few to buck this trend. In What Are Spiritual Gifts?, he has given the topic careful consideration and concluded the conventional wisdom, however well-intentioned, has little Scriptural support. He effectively argues this common view fails to grasp the scriptural context and imposes an interpretive framework foreign to the understanding of the New Testament writers.
After an introductory section presented in question-and-answer format, Berding gets to the heart of his thesis by refuting the common assumptions within the evangelical tradition concerning spiritual gifts. Rather than special abilities conferred to an individual, he argues spiritual gifts should be seen as ministries conferred
to the church, and it is through the Holy Spirit working within the body of Christ that these ministries are properly conducted.
The passages in the New Testament concerning spiritual gifts are thoroughly examined and, in a careful exegesis, Berding convincingly demonstrates the weaknesses inherent in the conventional view. Citing passages in the epistles of Paul commonly used to encourage Christians to discover their “special gifts,” he points out this is a complete misunderstanding of the apostle’s actual intent in outlining the functions of the early church. Anticipating counterclaims, Berding also clinches the argument in advance.
Berding then fleshes out his arguments within a richer setting for understanding the larger context of the epistles. He considers key elements in the passages (i.e., ministry and service, the role of the Holy Spirit in the church) and gives the larger picture painted by Paul in order to properly understand the more limited context that is the topic of this book. In so doing, the poor foundations for the common Evangelical view of these passages becomes readily apparent.
The final section of the book moves from theory to practice and examines the implications of the previous discussion and its applications within the church. Examples of the use of the spiritual gifts within the church are taken from the New Testament and suggestions as to how the general blueprint given in Holy Scripture may be
applied today are considered. An important conclusion to be drawn is that the focus on a potential role within the church is to be less concerned with any innate ability of our own than it is to consider where we may be needed to build up the body of Christ.
Some have criticized Berding’s view as overthrowing the longstanding view with novelties. One should certainly be suspicious of basing key elements of ministry on ideas that have never appeared in two millennia of Christianity. However, it is the “conventional wisdom” that is the novelty as it has a lineage of less than a century. It could be argued that Berding is making the case for an earlier view overshadowed by individualistic
emphases at the core of modern Evangelicalism and he wishes to return the spiritual gifts to their proper context within the normal means of grace given to the church.
Kenneth Berding has provided a careful, Biblical examination of a topic preoccupying much of the church’s energy. As the Church has sought answers to this problem in a wave of classes, surveys and tools adopted from both the corporate world and pop psychology, Berding has returned to an often ignored source of inspiration: the HolyScriptures. By lending clarity to a muddled situation, What Are Spiritual Gifts? is a
much-needed antidote to the misapplications of foreign methodologies clouding the topic.
March 28th, 2012
|
|
Recovering Mother Kirk: The Case for Liturgy in the Reformed Tradition – D. G. Hart
Baker Book House (2003)
Topic: Liturgy & Sacraments; Calvinsim/Reformed; Protestantism
Summary: Call for the Reformed Churches to return to their historic liturgical practices
Rating:
|
Increasingly one hears of Protestant pastors concerned over a trivial approach to worship, an individualistic understanding of doctrine, and an ahistoric perspective of the Church, turning to historic Christianity as the answer. These converts have often sacrificed promising careers in the Protestant ministry for the chance to experience liturgical and doctrinal roots stretching beyond the last few centuries. Less noticed is a move among Protestants who, while agreeing with some of the criticisms of those who left, believe the Reformation was right in its stand for the supremacy of Holy Scripture and other doctrinal positions expressible only within Protestantism. Rather than sacrifice these Protestant distinctives for a richer worship and a more historically rooted theological approach, they sound a call to recapture the ideals that fueled the Reformation and rethink the direction Protestantism has drifted for over a century. This includes the reaffirmation of the traditional Protestant use of liturgy and its understanding of the historic beliefs of the Christian Faith enshrined in the Creeds.
An important entry in this reevaluation of the direction of Protestantism is Recovering Mother Kirk by D. G. Hart. The title indicates the attachment to the Presbyterian cause of the author but this should not dissuade others from benefiting from his well reasoned analysis. The ills of the modern Church are not isolated by denominational boundaries and, although the author is primarily concerned with the Reformed tradition, his points can apply (with appropriate adjustments) to others as well.
Hart begins by noting the neglect of worship in Reformed circles among even those who are sticklers on matters of Reformed belief and practice. Rejecting the current trend to conform to the theology of Evangelical Protestantism, he counters the Reformed Tradition is better placed among the magisterial Protestants (e.g., Lutherans, Anglicans) and the current drift is a marked departure from their heritage. Although the Reformed Tradition emphasizes doctrine, cultural transformation, and piety, none of this can be properly understood without the context of Reformed worship. The importation of revivalist patterns into Reformed settings inevitably cause confusion and a weakening of adherence to Reformed distinctives elsewhere.
The main part of the book consists of essays on five topics (the Church’s commission, the contemporary worship scene, offices and ordinances, ecumenism, and the influence of revivalism on Reformed worship). In each section, Hart presents evidence, both historical and theological, supporting his thesis that the Reformed Tradition properly belongs to the “high church” end of Protestantism but was sidetracked by the importation of revivalist theology. The chief culprit, according to Hart, was the Great Awakenings and its blurring distinctions between evangelistic outreach and worship. This error, he concludes, continues to this day with the “church growth” and other modern manifestations of the same confusion between worship and evangelism.
Hart closely examines historical sources in painting a picture of a Reformed worship centered upon Word and Sacrament. Although it shares many aspects with “high church” liturgical traditions, it is governed by the “regulative principle” of using only that with biblical warrant. Important to this Reformed understanding of worship was the development of liturgies heavily dependent upon Holy Scripture and the singing of the Psalter. The net result is a worship both reverent and austere.
Overall, Hart presents a compelling case for the place of the Reformed tradition in the Church. He roots much of his alignment of the Reformed Tradition as a high church manifestation of Protestantism by pointing to Calvin’s high view of the Church and call for a weekly Eucharist as evidence. As with others who have made related claims (e.g., Michael Horton and Keith Mathison), there is truth in the claims but it may not be quite as simple as its supporters contend.
Unlike the Lutheran and Anglican reforms that reformed (however successfully) existing practices by pruning what was perceived as excess, the Reformed Tradition began more with its own distinctives and constructed its worship from a new template. These changes could often be highly sectarian splits within the movement appeared almost immediately. The force of Calvin’s theology restored more of a sense of historical order, but some points of his program (e.g., a weekly Eucharist) were never implemented even in Geneva. Straddling the boudnary between catholicity and sectarianism has often left the Reformed less agreed on doctrine than attitude. These contradictory visions have left them prone to division and subject to the idiposyncratic interpretations of individual Church leaders. Even the slogan “Reformed, Ever Reforming,” while intending to indicate the submission to Scriptural authority, also hints at an inherent ecclesial and doctrinal instability.
Another issue that can be raised is the application of the regulative principle itself. Although aspects of worship are considered in Holy Scripture, much of it is not explicitly discussed. This is not surprising since much of early Christian worship had already developed a basic form and was not a point of contention in the writing of the New Testament. The restriction to explicitly provided aspects may in fact give us an unbalanced view of the worship of the Apostolic Church. Indeed, the historical research into early Christian worship gives us a picture far different than that implemented by Zwngli, Calvin, et al who were influenced by historical and social currents not relevant in a first century context.
Yet for those in the high church side of the Reformed faith, Recovering Mother Kirk is a powerful presentation of their beliefs. As a blueprint for what Reformed Christianity should be, this book and other recent releases have identified the movement some call “the Catholic Presbyterians” as one to watch closely. If the Reformed continue their assimilation into the Evangelical mainstream (on the right) and the liberal mainstream (on the left), they at least have been shown another way. Thoughtful Reformed Christians like Hart are now asking the right questions. It will be interesting to see how many other Reformed believers disillusioned by current conditions find in this movement their answer.
March 21st, 2012
|
|
The Vindication of Tradition – Jaroslav Pelikan
Yale University Press (1986)
Topic: Christian Culture; Church Tradition
Summary: Lectures on the role of tradition
Rating: |
In the midst of writing his five volume magnum opus The Christian Tradition, the late, great Church historian Jaroslav Pelikan was invited by the National Endowment for the Humanities to deliver the Jefferson Lectures for 1983. The strange juxtaposition of having one of the most distinguished scholars and defenders of the Christian tradition deliver lectures named for someone who opposed that tradition was not lost on Pelikan. He incorporated this tension into his presentation and the resulting four lectures was compiled in The Vindication of Tradition where Pelikan gives a clear exposition of the role tradition plays in Western culture – even when it has been explicitly denied.
The four lectures cover different aspects of tradition: the rediscovery of tradition, the recovery of tradition, tradition as history, and tradition as heritage. Pelikan surveys the insights historical research has given to our understanding of the development of tradition and makes clear the fracture with the past that grew out of its modern rejection. He makes quite clear the legitimate concerns that led to the overthrow of a corrupted tradition while noting the loss that came through negating tradition’s role in culture.
Pelikan contrasts the legitimate use of a living tradition and the mere regurgiation of outmoded forms with a statement designed to shock both supporters and detractors of tradition’s role in culture. Classifying the acceptance of tradition for tradition’s sake as “traditionalism,” he bluntly states: “Tradition is the living faith of the dead, traditionalism is the dead faith of the living.” It is perhaps his best known quote, and deservedly so. In one sentence, he has crystallized both the strengths and weaknesses of traditionalist movements. As a vehicle to explore deeper truths, it is an essential component of the culture. As an end in itself, it is an albatross that stifles maturity. When a Luther, Jefferson, or Emerson rejected tradition as a source of knowledge, they were railing against a stifling traditionalism that had taken hold of their cultural environment. Any living tradition embodies the best of its cultural heritage. Dead traditionalism holds its culture hostage.
These lectures are a brilliant apologia for the role of tradition in society. Although here it is considered in a more general context and not the specific case of tradition in the Church, the principles principles obviously apply there and are exploredat various points in the lectures. For Christians trying to understand the role of tradition in both Church and culture, The Vindication of Tradition is an indispensable asset.
March 14th, 2012
|
|
The Liturgy Explained – Thomas Howard
Morehouse Group (May, 1981)
Topics: Liturgy & Sacraments; Anglicanism
Summary: Introduction to the Anglican liturgy
Rating:
|
Thomas Howard may be the best choice to explain the nature of liturgy to curious Evangelicals. Raised in a heralded Evangelical/Fundamentalist family and gifted with the ability of literary expression, Howard has written numerous books on the spirituality of his new homes in the historic Churches: initially Anglicanism and then later Roman Catholicism. In The Liturgy Explained, a little booklet of less than 50 pages penned during his Anglican period, he provided a wonderful introduction to Christian liturgy for those searching for a more reverent worship but unsure of the purpose behind traditional liturgical practices. While it is not intended to be comprehensive, you do, as Howard points out, have to start somewhere.
In the introduction, Howard focuses on outlining the true purpose of worship, the use of ritual and ceremony, and the nature of Sacraments. Much of Evangelical worship centers on worship as an “experience” shared by the congregation. Howard counters this entire apporach is wrong as the true focus of Christian worship should always be what God has called us to do rather than what we experience.
The main portion of the booklet is divided into two sections corresponding to the Anglican expression of the two main divisions of the historic liturgy of the Church. The first of these concentrates on the Liturgy of the Word. This initial phase of the service begins with an opening acclamation and a collect (prayer) for purity of heart. The congregation then sings two hymns: the first asking for God’s mercy (Kyrie Eleison) and the second a hymn of praise (Gloria in Excelsis Deo). This is followed by a collect for the day (corresponding to the appropriate day in the Church calendar). This is followed by a lesson from the Old Testament, a Psalm, a reading from the New Testament epistles, a Gospel reading, and a sermon based upon one or more of the readings. The people then respond by stating their beliefs (The Nicene Creed), offering prayers (Prayers of the People), asking God for forgiveness (Confession) and having their sins declared forgiven (Absolution). The close of the Liturgy of the Word is the passing of the Peace of Christ. Howard manages to offer clear outlines of each step – not only explaining the practice, but also demonstrating why it is in its proper place in the service.
The second section corresponds the the second main liturgical division: the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Beginning with the collection of gifts (Offertory) and hymns of adoration (Sanctus, Benedictus), to the prayer of consecration, and the Holy Communion, and ending with the Benediction and dismissal, Howard paints a picture of a great mystical drama where Christ feeds His Church through faith by the means He ordained. A fine line is walked here as the Anglican understanding of the Eucharist affirms the Real Presence but allows for differing opinions of the mode of that presence. Howard stays neutral on this and other thorny subjects – thus admirably submitting his personal opinion to his Church in areas of public teaching (this booklet was intended as catechetical material – in other works intended as personal opinion, Howard affirmed his more “high church” beliefs). As in the earlier section, the explanations of liturgical practice are clearly presented.
Howard finishes with an appendix on certain liturgical practices and customs that may be used in some parishes and not others. Such items as Saints’ Days and incense are far more common in high church Anglicanism. Howard explains the rationale for allowing them although they are left optional.
The Liturgy Explained is a straightforward tool for catechesis for Evangelicals considering the historic worship of the Church as well as those in these churches confused by elements of their own liturgical practice. There is often a need in parishes for a “Liturgy 101″ course and for that purpose this little booklet should be ideal.
March 7th, 2012
|
|
The Early Church – Henry Chadwick
Penguin (1993)
Topic: Church History, Patristics
Summary: Overview of the history of the Church in the patristic period
Rating:
|
The resurgence of interest in Church history, while opening many to the riches of historic Christianity, also has fostered a tendency to quote (or misquote) the Church Fathers as support of one’s own theological positions. Some recent popular books on the topic seem to have as their primary purpose the “spinning” of historical facts to validate theological presuppositions. Such polemical volumes are usually aimed at a lay audience while more impartial and accurate works are often academic tomes poorly suited as an introduction to the patristic era.
Henry Chadwick’s The Early Church resolves much of this problem. Written as part of Penguin’s History of the Church series, this little book is a great place to begin a study of early Church history. Chadwick arranges the sections thematically rather than chronologically, allowing a clearer focus for the reader, and masterfully covers all the major currents in the patristic era without leaving his audience adrift in a sea of minutiae. Beginners to the subject may find it useful to read the book, digest the information, and then reread it, as they will be better prepared to see how the various theological and political currents interacted in the development of Christian orthodoxy.
Those approaching the topic with a theological axe to grind will find little solace here. Chadwick is nothing if not an honest historian and both sides in the Protestant/Catholic struggles may find some of their most cherished assumptions challenged. The centrality of the Eucharistic liturgy as the defining act of Christian worship from the Church’s inception, the implementation of the episcopacy as the main defense against heresy, and the long and arduous process of arriving at a canon is contrary to much of the contemporary Protestant ethos. On the other hand, Catholics will feel somewhat uneasy at the scant evidence for anything resembling the modern papacy in the early Church. Indeed, after reading Chadwick’s work, the reader may conclude the many battle lines drawn during the Reformation would have seemed alien territory to early Christians with an entirely different set of theological concerns.
While there are certainly more comprehensive works on the patristic period available, one would be hard pressed to find a better introductory book on the subject than The Early Church. For its clarity, thoroughness, and impartiality, Henry Chadwich has given us the best place to begin our investigations of the theology of the patristic period.
