Category: Theology

  • The world is not overcome by demolition but by reconciliation. (Bonhoeffer)

    Nan Watson died just over 10 years ago. She was a diminutive septuagenarian when I met her, and osteoporosis had reduced her height further. But size and height are no guarantee of presence, and capacity to influence those around. Her dry crackly voice was always a blessing to hear, not least because of the wisdom and counsel it conveyed. She had an instinctive kindness held in check by hard won commonsense and a rather ruthless conviction that independence was one of the fruits of the spirit Paul never got round to mentioning, and some Christians needed to pursue!

    Her sharp mind  probed into the hard to negotiate regions of life, and coming from a generation when educational opportunities were sacrificed for the sake of putting bread on the family table, she never was able to realise her potential  in any formally recognisable way. Which for all practical purposes didn’t matter – because she was also of that generation that did lifelong learning and personal development before it was all new discovered, and formalised, and reduced to programmes and processes.

    Bonhoeffer So no surprise when after an evening service she asked if I could recommend any books that would help her get a handle on Bonhoeffer. For the next few months I had conversations with her about Finkenwalde, the Confessing Church in Germany, even the nature of Christian ethics as freedom acting in love and centred on the Word made flesh. I quoted Bonhoeffer when I took her funeral – and I wish Sabine Dramm’s book, Dietrich Bonhoeffer. An Introduction to His Thought had been available to give her those years before. It isn’t a popular book, yet it is accessible and written by an enthusiastic scholar whose enthusiasm doesn’t get in the way of clear exposition and fair critique. Now and then over the next few weeks I’d like to post a few reflections on Bonhoeffer in the course of reading this book and some of Bonhoeffer’s key texts. Stuart has lent me the new critically acclaimed DVD which I’ve slotted into a couple of hours of peace during my holidays.

    For now, here is Bonhoeffer’s classic statement on what it means to live with the realities of the world and in the reality of Jesus Christ:

    Ecce homo – Behold, what a man! In Him, reconciliation of the world with God was made perfect. The world is not overcome through demolition but through reconciliation. Not ideals, programs of action, not conscience, duty, responsibility, virtue, but simply and only the consummate love of God is capable of encountering reality and overcoming it. Nor is it a generalised idea of love, but God’s love truly lived in Jesus Christ, which accomplishes this. This – God’s love for the world – does not withdraw itself from reality in a rapture of noble souls foreign to the world, but instead experiences and suffers the reality of the world in all its harshness. The world does its worst to the body of Jesus Christ. But he who was martyred forgives the world its sins. This brings about reconciliation. Ecce homo.

    (Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics. Edited Clifford Green, Works, Vol. 6, (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005)

  • Liberation, structural sin and human flourishing

    911_ejohnson_2 Sister Elizabeth Johnson’s chapter on Liberation Theology has a number of fine passages, and disturbing asides. On page 72 she quotes the Puebla Document and its use of the image of the human face, the faces of the poor, as a way of demonstrating what is at stake in political theology. Vagrant children, sexually exploited minors, marginalised indigenous peoples, ill-paid labourers, women trafficked and enslaved, old people cast off as unproductive….and the list goes on, of human beings whose faces tell a story, and it is a story of those who hunger for liberation.

    What Liberation Theology seeks to articulate is the outraged cry that rises to heaven, as it did when the Israelites were in bondage in Egypt. The liberation theologian believes in a God for whom bondage is a scandal, oppression a contradiction of God’s intention for humanity, and poverty that leaches life of joy, meaning and fruitfulness a condition at odds with the benevolence and generosity of the Creator.

    Johnson’s critique of money as a divinised source of oppression, a universally sought after means to power, faces head on the capacity of finance to dominate and enslave, to dehumanise and oppress. So in common with liberation theologians she wants the focus of the Gospel to be fixed, not on the nonbeliever struggling for faith, but on the nonperson struggling for life. Life, liberation, fruitfulness, human fulfilment:

    "Liberation is the signature deed of the saving action of God in history. To liberate is to give life, life in its totality. Consequently it becomes clear that God does not want humankind to suffer degradation. Far from happening according to divine decree, the sufferings of the poor, oppressed and marginal  people are contrary to divine intent. The dehumanising and death-dealing structures that create and maintain such degradation are instances of social sin. they transgress against the God of life….. (p. 79)

    Speaking of the Americas, but incorporating in the same argument the impact of unrestrained economic globalisation she reflects:

    Starting with the conquistadores and continuing for five centuries through successive ruling systems up to multinational corporations today, greed has divinised money and its trappings, that is, turned them into an absolute. Core transgressions against the first commandment have set up a belief system so compelling that it might be called money-theism, in contrast to monotheism. (p.80)

    Bishop Irenaeus gifted to the church a four word motto I think I’d like to get put on a T-shirt in both Latin and translation:

    Gloria Dei,

    vivens humanitas –

    "The glory of God is the human being fully alive"

    Liberation theology has taught us to give important weight to freedom from oppression and establishing justice for the poor and dispossessed as definitive of the Kingdom of God and of the God whose Kingdom will come. as Holy Week approaches, and we begin to have a sense of our own individual unworthiness, it may be that God’s greater requirement of us is to look on a money-theistic world, and repent of our idolatry. Structural sin is much harder to confess, and to turn from.

  • Grasped by the mystery of who God is

    Lectio Divina is a way to God, which when persevered in, becomes a determined pilgrimage from where we are to wherever God’s invitation takes us. Spiritual reading, which I think is very different from other reading (whether academic or devotional) has given me my richest moments of encounter with God. My own spirituality is inextricably linked to words as sacrament; words undoubtedly convey spiritual truth freighted with meaning  that touches me in the depths of who I am.  The Jewish reverence for Torah, is demonstrated by the importance of writing the scroll by hand, each word then has to be thought about, meticulously constructed, meditated upon as it is written with a calligrapher’s care for beauty, precision and accuracy.  A spiritual reading journal which I write now and then, also acts as an important vehicle for careful, considered respect for  words. In such a journal what is most important is not quantity and regularity of entry – but thoughtfulness, attentiveness, so that what is written is only that which communicates the sense of truth and presence, that intimates the reality of God.

    41cnryuvrml__bo2204203200_pisitbdp5 Reading Elizabeth Johnson’s reflections on the importance of being able to ask questions, as a defining characteristic of being human, opened up for me yet again, the essential mystery of the God whose incomprehensibility both evokes ultimate questions and eludes final answers.  She mentions that the first words of Karl Rahner’s doctoral thesis are, "One asks". One important way we as human beings relate to God is, “A person asks a question”. After that, the limitless horizon of knowledge, including sacred knowledge, opens up. The true theologian prays, so that when we pray a true prayer we are being theologians. One way or another, God is the epistemological presupposition of our lives – the starting place and ending point of wisdom. "One asks" – and question becomes prayer.

    .

    “The concept of God is not a grasp of God by which a person masters the mystery; but it is the means by which one lets oneself be grasped by the mystery which is present yet ever distant.”

    .

    Words like these act as brakes on that intellectual hubris that deludes us into thinking that God is there to be known. Humility encouraging  receptiveness, patient longing as the passive activity of desire, curiosity as an outward looking trustfulness seeking answers to inner questioning – but these grasped by the mystery which draws us out of ourselves, towards the mystery of who God is.

  • The reward of tireless searching

    Here are some words from Elizabeth Johnson’s new book, Quest for the Living God. Mapping frontiers in the Theology of God, (New York: Continuum, 2007).

    The profound incomprehensibility of God coupled with the hunger of the human heart in changing historical cultures actually requires that there be an ongoing history of the quest for the living God that can never be concluded. Historically new attempts at articulation are to be expected and even welcomed. An era without such frontiers begins to turn dry, dusty and static.

    Christianity today is living through a vibrant new chapter of this quest. People are discovering God again not in the sense of deducing abstract notions but in the sense of encountering divine presence and absence in their everyday experience of struggle and hope, both ordinary and extraordinary. New ideas about God have emerged for example from the effort to wrestle with the darkness of the Holocaust; from the struggle of poor and persecuted people for social justice; from women’s striving  for equal human dignity; from Christianity’s  encounter with goodness and truth in the world’s religious traditions; and from the efforts of biophilic people to protect, restore and nurture the ecological life of planet earth. No era is without divine presence, but this blossoming of insight appears to be a strong grace for our time. (p.13-14)

    41cnryuvrml__bo2204203200_pisitbdp5 A couple of things strike me about Johnson’s view of things. First, she takes seriously the importance of seeking as itself a form of love for God, and a recognition that the living God remains a profound mystery of love eternal who goes on seeking the response of creation. Second, she sees such theological developments as post Holocaust Theology, feminist theology, liberation theology and many other contextual and historically  specific developments in Christian theology as offering important insights from the theological and spiritual experience of those who have had to live with life circumstances very different from my own. From such articulations of the presence and absence of God I have a lot to learn about God, about human life, and about my own limited capacity for God as only one, male, middle-aged, Western, un-poor, white human being, whose own experience of God is equally valid, but mustn’t be made the norm by which to judge the truth of God in Christ that others have come to discover in their very different lives.

    I haven’t lived under a military dictatorship, or in a country near bankrupt by corrupt centralised power – liberation theologians have. I am white, so have to listen humbly to the insights and affirmations of African and Asian theologies. As a male I need women to explore and express and explain their experience of God, and to listen to the hurt caused by an entire tradition that finds biblical warrant for marginalising female experience, excluding women from places where decisions are made and influence nurtured. Nor can I as a person whose own religious convictions make me who I am, ignore the presence in my neighbourhood, our country and our world, of others whose religious commitments are as genuinely held, felt, believed and practised, and with whom I have to live on this planet. Speaking of the planet, I am also one of those responsible for the sickness of our planet, the depletion of those important processes and resources that make this planet livable for human beings and for the rest of God’s creation.

    So rather than hide behind my own certainties and limited insights, I have to grow up, and be mature enough in Christ to listen to all those other voices who are also singing God’s praise, praying out of the hurts and joys of their very different lives, and calling in question some of my own cherished certainties with truths that I can’t simply dismiss – lest in doing so I dismiss the presence, and the seeking voice, of the living God. Being aware of the pluralist nature of Christian theology does not make me a pluralist – but it should make me a humble listener and a more humble talker when it comes to our experience of God.

    Johnson’s previous theological writing is provocative, and I have serious reservations about some of her proposals. But her voice is an important corrective, and a much more generous response to the diversity and vitality of global Christian thought, than those voices which want all God’s children not only to sing from the same hymn sheet, but to read from the same theology books!

  • Non sacramental experience and the Church’s loss

    A sacrament has been described as like the experience of encountering the expression on someone’s face. We look and find ourselves looked upon. The smile, the eyes, convey the living personality behind the face. A sacrament is a sign that carries with it the living reality of what it signifies.

    So why is it that few contemporary books on spirituality, prayer and Christian life mention sacraments or communion at all? The best known introduction to Christian faith, the Alpha course, completely omits it. Contemporary worship songs show little interest in it. For a great  many people today an encounter with Christian worship and prayer will be a non-sacramental experience.

    These words are from David Runcorn’s very fine Spirituality Workbook (London: SPCK, 2006), 68.

    41kz59mvfxl__aa240_ This is one of the most enjoyable, articulate, spiritually sensible books I’ve read on spirituality for a long time. Runcorn aims at providing an integrated vision of Christian spirituality, based on a course of lectures given over some years to some very fortunate generations of students of Trinity College, Bristol. I’ll do another post later on the Scottish Baptist College blog and outline the contents and overall usefulness of this book. But reading it this morning I was halted by his beautiful description of sacrament, and by his justified complaint about the inexplicable neglect of Holy Communion at a number of levels in our contemporary practice.

    As a Baptist I already worry about the downgrading of the Lord’s Supper, so often appended to the service, at times stripped of liturgical depth, lacking spiritual beauty and omitting careful setting in the context of worship of the One whose real presence is an assumption of every community of believers gathered in Jesus name. Partly that’s because there is a fear of sacramentalism, and a corresponding insistence on simplicity, insisting it is only bread and wine, and avoiding any suggestion that anything happens of a miraculous nature – they are mere symbols, memorial elements.

    Dechaunaclatejuly3 And yet. Broken bread and poured out wine were Jesus’ own chosen vehicles to convey the truth and grace of who He is. Our fear of sacramentalism too easily becomes evasion of mystery, and reducing sacrament to mere symbolism empties the gifts of bread and wine of that rich evocative giftedness that transforms bread into nourishment and wine into healing and refreshment. Even our prayers of thanksgiving for the bread and wine, which at their best are a grateful remembering of Jesus’ death, can become reduced to mere remembering of Jesus’ death. That is, at the communion table, when we break bread and share it, pour wine and drink it together, we are not merely remembering, we are proclaiming – the death of Jesus Christ – but also the resurrection of Jesus, the life-giving gift of the Spirit to the community of Jesus Christ for the renewal of creation, the love of the Father and Creator revealed in created things, and the future hope ’till he come’, and when God will be all in all. The Gospel is a richly textured, theologically overwhelming story, which in bread and wine, in the community of Jesus, is ineffable truth condensed through faith and love into an affirmation of the redeeming activity and presence of the Triune God.

    So yes. I think Runcorn is right to warn us of contemporary Christian worship, praise songs, evangelism that provide a non-sacramental experience. The inexplicable yet inexhaustible love of God in Christ, embodied in the human life of Jesus, given in love and in mercy broken, forever living in the reality of the Risen Lord, creatively, subversively, transformingly active in a renewed and reconciled people, pushed out into a world groaning with impatience for redemption, yes, all of this, and far more, is implied in the sacrament of Holy Communion, the celebration of God in Christ reconciling the world to himself.

    A communion service that captures something of all that rich spiritual complexity, and a community that vitally and joyfully lives out of sacramental experience as God’s gift of himself in Christ through the Spirit, may be one of the most effective occasions for witness available to a church, perhaps too often looking for more dumbed down, marketable and convenient diets of worship.

  • Jurgen Moltmann: Academic Theology and Christian testimony

    51urzon0g0l__aa240_ Testimony is always more persuasive, more human, less argumentative, less concerned with point scoring and logical victories as a form of personal witness, perhaps because testimony and witness point beyond ourselves to the One of whom we testify, and to whom we bear witness. Thus what is at stake isn’t the otucome of an argument, but the reality of our experience. Unless theology arises out of the church’s witness to the Gospel, and unless Christian theologians are able to speak of God from experiences of God’s presence and absence, then theological discourse will be ‘academic’ in the least useful sense of that badly abused word.

    In Christian terms, academic theology at its best is a form of prayerful reverent study, a reflective dwelling in the essential and crucial realities of our existence, as those to whom God has come in the glory and grace of Jesus Christ. Jurgen Moltmann is an academic theologian in this sense; his writing and teaching combine personal testimony, Christian witness and what he calls speculative systematic theology. Speculative but disciplined by the constraining cords of the biblical, ecclesial and doctrinal traditions of Christian faith, in all their changing continuity and diversity.

    Hand1 I guess one of the reasons I read Moltmann both avidly and critically, is that even when his ideas and speculative suggestions are wide of where I think the mark is, I never doubt that he is seeking to faithfully and truthfully understand more of the love and grace of God in Christ crucified. His emphases on eschatology and the future Kingdom’s ‘nowness’ (my word), his passionate belief in the passion of God, his willingness to be caught out in inconsistency if new thinking leads him to review and revise earlier positions, his refusal to ignore the political implications of faithfulness in following Christ today; these and much more, make me pause, ponder and if necessary, dissent. And yes, he admits that what he offers are contributions to systematic theology rather than a finished systematic theology with a tidy overarching comprehensiveness. But Moltmann so often has said what needs saying, and what pastors need to hear. I still remember the coincidence of reading The Crucified God at Easter while accompanying several families through terminal illness and bereavement.

    As a pastor, for me serious theology, yes academic theology, has always mattered, because human life and people’s deepest experiences deserve our best thought. People’s perplexities, their struggles to understand, the sheer effort just sometimes to go on being faithful, deserve from us that attentiveness to truth and such sensitivity to human longing and hurt, as only grows in minds and hearts patient of God’s incomprehensible ways, and impatient with all ad hoc paperback solutions to those problem areas of our lives where what we seek is not solutions, but God. Just God.

    All of which is by way of saying Moltmann’s theological story, told through his life, and his life told through his theology, is yet another important ‘contribution’. The now characteristic mixture of testimony, theological exposition as familiar themes are revisited and further summarised, and with the occasional page or two where eyebrows go up and I want to politely, but appreciatively, dissent.

    Something of what I find so attractive about Moltmann’s spirit is the humility and gratitude to God that is the low background music of this book (and of a number of the others). Here’s just one such doxological hint:

    Ricoeur for his part convinced me about the ‘logic of undeserved overflow’ in Pauline theology, implicit in the phrase ‘how much more’ with which Paul extols the overmastering power of grace over against sin, and Christ’s resurrection over against his death on the cross. (page 107)

  • Reinventing English Evangelicalism 3 Vision Inflation

    Spstandard_9781842275702 Entrepreneurial Evangelicalism arose within the conversionist activist, predominantly charismatic axis of the movement, and Warner examines this in relation to the spectacular and symbiotic growth of the Evangelical Alliance and Spring Harvest from 1980 to around 2001. Pragmatist enthusiasm, product branding, vigorous and franchised marketing, features normally associated with business growth and management, came to be applied to a movement that had previously been modest in its social and political goals.

    ‘Calverism’ is Warner’s term for the centrality of Clive Calver in the rise of both Evangelical Alliance and Spring Harvest as focal points for Evangelicals hungry for identity and influence beyond their own constituency. Calver’s driven personality, charismatic leadership, expansive vision, punishing personal itinerary and extensive network within Evangelicalsm are depicted as the primary engine behind the early mushrooming of personal membership of EA and the increasing popularity and influence of Spring Harvest. However Warner’s analysis of personal membership figures, claims of EA to represent over a million Evangelicals, and other factors behind the presented success story, suggest that such claims were either exaggerated, or unsubstantiated by official statistical data.

    A sociological examination of a movement, and of the influence of a prominent leader seeks explanations through causes, influences, personalities, historical happenstance, and is always likely to sound reductionist. There are times when Calver’s influence and personal impact does indeed seem to have been a decisive factor. What Warner calls the ‘collapse of the Calvinistic hegemony’ in the late 60’s and early 70’s, left the way open for EA to reinvent itself under Calver by including large constituencies of Pentecostal and charismatic new churches within its orbit. Spring Harvest became a recruiting ground for EA personal membership, and the annual gathering a place where styles of worship, teaching emphases, corporate experience of learning and listening in seminars and large worship gatherings, began to present a new brand of Evangelicalism increasingly confident in the relevance, influence and public expression of an Evangelical programme mediated through EA and Spring Harvest and their branded products.

    Warner has serious questions about claims about EA personal membership, (potential 100,000, actual highest 50,000+), and indeed he demonstrates that the higher figure was always an aspirational claim rather than data supported realities. In addition, he argues that personal membership taken out at an emotionally charged gathering such as Spring Harvest, did not imply that from then on, new memebrs were committed to evangelical activism and significant funding of EA once the fervour of the big occasion cooled. The failure ‘to sustain the period of meteoric growth’ Warner attributes to the fact that ‘personal members were passive, and unwilling to become active recruiters’ of others. So personal membership was never an accurate guage of active committed support expressed in funding, activism or recruiting.

    The point of all this for Warner, and his argument has to be read in its detail and complexity, considered critically, and weighed honestly, is that through Calverism, the conversionist-activist axis of English Evangelicalism underwent significant transition. That transition may have triggered short term rapid growth – but the long term effects of ‘vision inflation’ will be felt within Evangelicalism as a whole, and may not be a fruitful legacy. Here are three observations Warner makes, which give a flavour both of his critique and his conslusions about EA in the last 20 years.

    Many Evangelical had unconsciously made a transition from traditional evangelicalism that affirmed the truth of the gospel, to late-modern entrepreneurialism that assumed wholehearted adherence to the gospel guaranteed success for the church. (page 63)

    The EA failed to deliver, not because of lack of effort, but because its visionary goals were unrealistic, not merely in terms of propsepcts for future recruitment of personal members, but because of a wholesale  failure to grasp the corrosive effects upon evangelical influence and identity of the ineluctable cultural transitions of secularization and postmodernity. Evangelicals lacked a coherent socio-political critique and had failed to come to terms with the implications of a secularized and pluralistic culture; enthusiastic rhetoric and ethical conservatism are no substitute for rigorous and reflexive analysis. (page 64)

    The legacy of evangelical boom and bust is apparent; disappointed expectations, a sceptical distrust of subsequent expressions of ambitious vision, and a shift in attitude towards the Alliance so that allegiance to the organistiaon became more provisional, more episodic, more post-institutional. (page 65)

    Warner’s style is at times unsparing of mistakes more easily discovered with hindsight; and he was himself a participant in much that he now critiques. But the underlying impression I have is of one who now sees the serious theological and strategic miscalculations evangelicalism makes when it buys into a consumerist approach to faith sharing and faith celebration. Bono’s scathing observation that joiners of mail order organisations are less "members" than "consumers" of a cause, providing only "cheque-book affiliation", is embarrassingly to the point.

    Amongst the uncomfortable questions raised (for me at any rate), by Warner’s case study of EA, is whether entrepreneurialism, market penetration, pragmatic activism, evangelical branding and franchising, the search for political influence and social recognition, are anything more than reflections of core values and principles inimical, or at least secondary, to a people seeking first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness……. but more of this anon.

  • Reinventing English Evangelicalism: 2 Evangelicalism divided

    "Being ‘born again’ can be profitable. Jesus saves, but Jesus also sells. Evangelicalism is big business".

    Not only big business, but with aspirations to political and social clout, as witness the unseemly scramble of US presidential candidates to talk up their religious credentials. In Britain since the 80’s and 90’s, Warner argues, English Evangelicalism has also claimed to be an important movement, to be taken seriously as capable of making a transformative impact in politics, media and other cultural expressions of social life. The claim however, goes alongside the inescapable evidence that religious decline shows no partiality and Evangelical communities have not been immune to its ravages.

    Rob The introductory section of Warner’s book is unsettling for those who fondly imagine an Evangelical unity that remains inclusive and widely representative of those who hold to shared Evangelical principles. The last 20 years have seen a process of increasing polarisation, as Evangelicalism has gone through a period of reinvention, redefinition and realignment. Warner is unsparing in his criticism of those whose critique aims to privilege that particular expression of Evangelicalism which answers to their own doctrinal commitments or ecclesial and missional practices. Warner contends that David Wells and particularly Don Carson, two of the more trenchant internal critics of Evangelicalism, demonstrate an increasingly hard-edged rejection of legitimate diversity, and a refusal to enter into open dialogue with other professed Evangelicals unwilling to subscribe to statements of doctrinal rectitude mapped to Reformed dogmatics.

    However this is only one instance of the underlying malaise Warner’s study seeks to expose, explore and explain. The historic movement of pan-Evangelicalism, has in the past been held together despite many internal tensions, by agreed principles generously interpreted. These were identified by Bebbington as the centrality of the cross, the authority of the Bible, the necessity of conversion and the evangelistic activist imperative. What Warner argues is that in late 20th century English Evangelicalism, these four essentials in the Evangelical bar code have through a process of bifurcation split the Evangelical movement into two axes. The first is the crucicentric biblicist axis which is essentially Reformed, doctrinally defensive, leans heavily towards fundamentalism and is increasingly separatist. The other is the conversionist activist axis, which is entrepreneurial in style, pragmatic in approach and mainly driven by and ecclesial pragmatism baptised in the Spirit, but less doctrinally precise. Both are increasingly discredited.

    The first Warner argues is tied to Enlightenment categories of reason and epistemology, which are no longer intellectual currency with effective purchasing power in the modern marketplace of ideas. The second borrows uncritically from a modernity founded on consumerism, technology and rampant individualism. Between these two axes there are further and emerging strands of cautiously open Evangelicals and progressive Evangelicals, each to varying extents unwilling to be identified with, and no longer satisfied with, either of the two axial options. What this adds up to is that Evangelicalism is now a contested tradition, with the emerging progressive strand still in process, and its commitments yet to be settled, and the cautiously open likely to opt for one or other of the axial divisions. What is clear is that Evangelicalism is now in process of decisive theological reconfiguration, a process that will consign the notion of an inclusive pan-Evangelicalism to an earlier, more generous era, now sadly gone.

    The conceptual framework Warner constructs borrows critically from, and extends, Bebbington’s quadrilateral. Warner adds to the Bebbington’s four, Christocentrism, transformed life, and revival aspirations. These are also constants in Evangelical theology and spirituality and it would be hard to argue against any of them as characteristics of Evangelicalism. Bebbington’s point though was that the four he identified are, when applied cumulatively, sufficient as identity marks. The three Warner adds are each equally characteristic of Evangelicalism, but are surely not absent as features of other Christian traditions. If all seven are applied I’m  not sure what more is added that makes the seven a better conceptual tool than the four, providing the four are agreed to achieve the same end, identity marks which taken cumulatively amount to a definition.

    The rest of the introduction is a careful review of secularisation theory, outlines a justification for Warner’s ‘revisionist account of the historical narrative of pan-Evangelicalism, notes the hotly debated relationship between Evangelicalism and fundamentalism, and takes time to explain the sociological significance of Evangelical sub-cultures. There is then a careful defence of his own position which started as observer participant and moved to participant observer, signalling Warner’s own felt need for critical distance and personal integrity. All in all this first 35 pages is an education in what Callum Brown called the ‘integration of history, sociology and religious studies in the examination of Christianity in the context of contemporary secularisation.’ And it is carried through by one who is an informed insider, now highly critical of aspects of a movement to which he has been a major contributor and leader; it may be that one of his most important contributions is to enable Evangelicalism to face up to the reality of its own failure to make essential theological transitions, within a legitimate diversity held together by common commitment to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

    Charles Wesley, that too easily neglected ecclesiologist, at the watershed of the Evangelical movement, wrote about the work of Christ perfecting the church below. Twenty first century Evangelicalism could do with a mighty dose of that ‘Love divine, all loves excelling’, which, if not included in any quadrilateral, with or without additions, is nevertheless the core of all Evangelical religion:

    Love, like death, has all destroyed

    rendered all distinctions void;

    names and sects and parties fall

    Thou, O Christ, art all in all.

  • Reinventing Evangelicalism 1.

    Reinventing English Evangelicalism, 1966-2001. A Theological and Sociological Study, Rob Warner, (Carlisle: Paternoster, 2007), £19.99. ISBN 978-1-84227-570-2

    Spstandard_9781842275702 This is a book that compels contemporary Evangelicalism to become more self-critical and less self-congratulatory, more aware of changing social, cultural and global realities and less absorbed in preserving partisan self-interest. It is a study that presents astute social analysis rooted in historical research, displays theological acumen which combines sympathetic exposition and at times astringent critique, and draws upon personal experience of the high points and subsequent developments of late 20th Century Evangelicalism as one who played a central role in some of those developments. It is a hugely important theological and sociological audit, based on empirical data, carried through with honesty and clarity, and providing a reality check for a movement not averse to ‘vision inflation’.

    The central thesis can be stated succinctly: in under 40 years, a homogeneous yet diverse movement, grew rapidly through entrepreneurial vision building, paralleled within the movement by another wing much more theologically conservative. The theological transitions Warner charts during these years expose the growing bifurcation between those increasingly committed to a form of fundamentalist conservation of Evangelical essentials, and others seeking an Evangelicalism more accommodating and progressive in its response to the mission situation of the third millenium. This is not a comfortable conclusion, but it is supported in the book by evidence-based research, cogent argument, and a clear understanding of the various trajectories already well plotted within and beyond the current English Evangelical scene.

    This is, in my view, the most important analysis of Evangelicalism in Britain since David Bebbington’s ground-breaking account published in 1989. It is of course a different kind of study, and in important ways, moves the discussion forward. Bebbington  provided a detailed survey of Evangelicalism as a movement rooted in the Enlightenment, influenced by Romanticism, responsive to social and cultural changes, and for that reason capable of remarkable degrees of adaptation and self-reinvention. Bebbington explored with characteristic precision and authority, definitions, origins, core theological values, historical analyses of Evangelical diversities which were nevertheless containable within a set of shared characteristics.

    Warner’s study intentionally covers only the two latest generations, and deals with recent developments; but by so doing he provides a diagnosis so accurately evidenced, so current to the present scene, and supported by his personal inside experience, that his overall argument, and offered prognosis has to be taken very seriously indeed. And the prognosis is not reassuring for those of us who wish to go on using the term Evangelical in the hope that it still expresses something meaningful about ‘the fellowship of the Gospel’, and that it will go on representing a tradition that enriches the Church with its own peculiar yet vitalising emphases.

    The real questions that arise in my mind as I compare Bebbington and Warner can be asked three ways:

    1. at what stage does a movement’s capacity for adaptation to environment become accommodation?
    2. who safeguards the tradition if refusal to change closes down the possibility that ‘the Lord has yet more light and truth to break forth from his word’?
    3. who decides when change has gone so far that continuity with the original tradition is harder and harder to trace?

    This book will be the subject of a number of posts, as I try to weigh the implications of questions like these as they impinge heavily on the future of British Evangelicalism.

  • Autism and Religion Symposium

    Accedbod This weekend I am in Aberdeen (Bridge of Dee in photo!), attending the multi-disciplinary symposium on Autism and Religion. Over two days we will discuss a very wide range of papers from various professional perspectives – theological, psychological, neuro-biological, religious phenomenology, and from people from several different faith traditions. The papers reflect both the area of expertise of the participants, but also aim at enabling the wider discussion by a cross fertilisation of knowledge, ideas, and experiences.

    .

    Central The symposium is under the auspices of the centre for Spirituality, Health and Disability and is held at King’s College, University of Aberdeen. There is an important element of humility and reserve required in such a symposium, not least because this complex human experience is explored almost exclusively by people who are not themselves diagnosed as being on the Autistic spectrum. Autism itself is such a varied and experientially diverse condition that it includes people whose autism is so severe they require others to be their advocates, while it also includes people well able to speak for themselves, and indeed to be advocates for other people with autism. And between these, many, many people who live their lives with great courage and perseverance, both people with autism and their carers and helpers.

    My own interests are rooted in personal and pastoral friendships with families where one or more people have autism. My personal theological commitments raise important issues about how we relate to others who perhaps do not have the sense of connectedness we too easily assume in others, and in our working definitions of community, identity and spirituality. So my paper is entitled ‘Is a Sense of Self Essential to Spirituality?’ This is part of a wider set of questions I am currently thinking through as a theological reflection on the nature of our humanity, and how we think of ourselves and others, how we think of God and how God is experienced, how we respond in gestures of redemptive and embracing love, to those who because of various conditions, have an impaired sense of self. I am looking forward to listening, exploring, learning, reflecting, and of course talking – but I hope our talking will be at its most creative in the context of significant pastoral and theological care, as issues are identified, and understanding deepened, within the rich texture often only possible in a conversation where minds are both receptive and generous.

    Later in the week, when thought has clarified I’ll post an update.