“What would happen if theology took the mission of the church seriously?
In his (in my opinion very poor) book Recovering the Scandal of the Cross Joel Green asks what I think is very good question: what would happen if theology took the mission of the church seriously?
It’s a good question because it inverts our expectations. We ordinarily imagine that mission ought to take theology seriously: if only we get our thinking about mission right, we say, then we will mission more effectively. We believe I guess in a priority of theory over praxis. The problem with this view is ineffectiveness: revivals are not usually begun in the academy, you may have noticed. There is a tendency for theory to be closed to the questions people are actually asking.
On the other hand, I guess there are some of you who can already sense the artificiality of this: you have already been out there presenting the gospel and living it, and seeing lives changed and people won for Christ. Having to come and sit and think about it seems quite futile: it’s already going on! The problem with this view, I suggest respectfully, is pragmatism. Pragmatism means that we become like advertisers hawking products: we will do anything for a sale, including distort the message out of shape, perhaps casting aside or hiding uncomfortable parts of the scriptural teaching in order to fit in with the culture of context.
This is why Green’s question is a good one: because theology needs to realize the urgency of mission! Theology must not be indulgent or merely speculative. And on the hand, those engaged in mission have the weighty responsibility of speaking and acting in and with truth. Mission must remain faithful to its source in scripture or it will be unable to address cultures - it will only reflect them. If theology took the mission seriously, not only could theology be forced to rediscover its own deep scriptural resources, but also mission could be reinvigorated by the work done in the thinking about it.
16 comments:
Fascinating thoughts Michael. Have you got any idea of what it might look like in practice though?
Would you consider (for example) Dickson's "promoting the gospel" book as an example of theology informing mission?
G'day Michael,
I wonder if there can be a case to be made that sometimes we replace relationship with our risen Lord with intellectual knowledge of him.
By this I mean, when I read the Bible we read of people like Paul, Phillip, Peter, Ananias, etc all sent out to do specific missionary work under the guidence of the Holy Spirit.
Don't get me wrong, I believe we do need a working and thorough understanding of the scriptures, yet the danger can be to replace relationship with pure knowledge.
Also when I read of the modern church and revivals, a lot of the stirrers and shakers had this sense of God sending them to do a specific job.
What would be the reaction from the current principal of Moore College for example if one of the students told him he wanted leave to go back home and tell the church a message from God ...? Yet we see this happening with the young man Evan Roberts who was a major stirrer in the Welsh Revival, what would have happened if he was told, "don't be silly, God doesn't speak to us like that any more"
While I don't know about the current or previous principal, I have heard that Knox would have said to them to stop being silly that God doesn't speak this way any more.
I had an experience once, where I was sitting at a table for lunch with my wife at Boston Markets, at SilverWater and the Lord clearly told me clear as a bell to go an dhave a word with a man sitting on his own, and what to say to him.
It clearly hit home with him, though when i shared this story on the Anglican forum, so many people jumped on me saying how do you know it was God, God doesn't speak this way, many of them were students at Moore College.
Clearly theology is getting in the way of personal relationship if this is what Anglicans are taught and believe. Theology cannot replace relationship, and hearing Gods call on us to do his work is clearly part of being missionary people.
Blessings from the shower ministries :)
craig b
Craig: now, please don't take offence, because I mean it when I say that I have valued your prayerfulness and your contributions and I have learnt from you a great deal I have to say. So this is not meant "personally" at all (of course). Though, I ask you to consider:
I cannot agree with your assertion that "theology is getting in the way of personal relationships if this is what Anglicans are taught and believe". I think you are emphasising one possible way in which God may call us over against others because it is more spontaneous and direct (seemingly). The call of God in the scriptures is what are to listen to as a priority.
I think to be fair you have caricatured the Moore College position. I think in fact that we need to listen to good theology for the very reason that we need to exercise the proper discernment that God gave us minds for - so that we can hear the voice of God aright. For every terrific revivalist example (which I would not deny), I could provide a counter example of people claiming special knowledge from God which is then abused or used in some power play. It can reduce our relationship with God to mere subjectivity if we are not careful. I had people in my church who claimed to have the gift of special discernment, once... I can't tell you the grief this caused with their "words of knowledege". What then?
G'day Michael,
I actually agree with you in what you said.
All words, the same as preaching has to be sifted and judged to see if it is in line with Scripture, and while yes I have heard some horrific stories of misuse,in my earlier years at synod I saw some great examples of power plays and abuse. Thankfully it has been cleaned up now and synod is greatly different and is very enjoyable.
Perhaps I am guilty of cariture, I'm not sure. I do know that Knox used to say to any one, when asked why they wanted to study at Moore, if they replied because I feel God is telling me to - or calling me to this college, his reply was.
"Well I'm the principal, I'm sure he would have told me first", this is according to Gordon Cheng who made this comment publically. I also know a minister in Sydney who told him the same thing and was refused entry, he then became a minister through other avenues, over a period of time.
I agree we need to listen to what God is saying to us in the scriptures, we also need to be prepared to hear him speak as well outside of the scriptures, though keeping in line with the scriptures.
Sorry if I caused offence,
Also as the scriptures say all prophecy has to be judged, if those in your church were not willing to get it wrong, and to be corrected, then their heart was not right before God, yet at the same time - then because of that experience to quench all prophecy could be more detrimental.
I remember a time myself, I had a word, extremely accurate for someone, gave it to them and they responded positively and it was accurate, I then gave it to the another person thinking this is good and it fell flat as a pancake -- no wonder why. A lot of imaturity on my behalf, yet should that experience stop me from ever sharing what I thought the lord was saying ......
What I am saying is that I do believe theology is good, it is needed and is essential, otherwise I wouldn't be going back to college myself this year and finish a degree, we have to be careful that it is not the be all and end all, and it becomes the replacement for a personal relationship with our risen lord - I am sure you have met people like that, I certainly have.
BTW I'm not picking on Moore, more asking a question about what would happen NOW if a young first year student had an experience and was sure God was asking him to go back to his church to give them a message from God - like Evan Roberts did.
Blessings craig b
I realise that I may have started of on the wrong foot, and been a little critical.
To become more positive, I think that Sydney is certainly heading in the right direction with the aim of the mission, which does come about from theology and recognising Gods call to go out into the world we live.
I am speaking about the Anglican Church here as that is the denomination I fellowship with, that perhaps in looking at a theology of mission it needs also to relook at the theology behind the 3 fold order Deacon, Priest, Bishop and see if that is helpful or a hindrance to mission.
Mark Short has been helpful in discussions about this elsewhere, suggesting that while the order may not fit fully into the biblical account, it is not scripturaly wrong either, I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing with him here. One of the areas though that Sydney faces is the shortage of ordained people to fill the current role of the mission in regards to presiding at communion and there are many practical challenges to overcome, particulary where tradition becomes a hindrence in that, "We have never done things that way before"
I think in looking at the theology of missions, we need to revisit the whole theology of church as well, does our theology of church help or hinder mission prospects, does it create the knowledge that we are in mission, and our aim is to be strengthened as a body and individuals to go into the world, or does it create a thought that church is church and mission is some thing else, creating a christian compartmentalism and that mission is an option for some.
Blessings craig b
wow. there's quite a lot to chew on here. I think you are absolutely right about rethinking the church in the light of mission.
I took no offence, of course! Taking offence is the end of actual debate, isn't it?!
Where does the bible lead you to expect God to talk to you directly?
As far as I can see, it's clear that God has spoken to us in Jesus, and we need to listen to the prophets and apostles.
G"day Anyon
Jam 1:5 But if any of you (14) lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and (15) it will be given to him.
Jam 1:6 But he must (16) ask in faith (17) without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the surf of the sea, (18) driven and tossed by the wind.
Jam 1:7 For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord,
Jam 1:8 being a (19) double-minded man, (20) unstable in all his ways.
also,
Act 2:17AND IT SHALL BE IN THE LAST DAYS,' God says,
'THAT I WILL POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT ON ALL MANKIND;
AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR DAUGHTERS SHALL PROPHESY,
AND YOUR YOUNG MEN SHALL SEE VISIONS,
AND YOUR OLD MEN SHALL DREAM DREAMS;
Notice it says last days in a continual sense, not a one of event.
Acts is full of people having dreams and visions - not just the Apostles.
How God gives us wisdom is up to him, I have expereinced him doing so through dreams and visions, prophecy, Scripture, creation, other people and circumstance, and every time I need wisdom, i expect him to give it to me.
Blessings craig b
In case it's of interest, there's a really good article on "mission" (by S. Holmes) in the latest issue of the International Journal of Systematic Theology, arguing that "mission" is a divine attribute. It's great stuff!
Yes, but wisdom is a "supernatural" category in scripture... wisdom in the OT comes from God, but is accessed by using the "normal" processes of your brain. This includes what we may call "intuition" by the way. I think sometimes we supernaturalise what is really a very heightened gift of perceptive intuition.
I think that we have lost a great deal by underemphasising the category of wisdom in the scriptures...by overplaying the idea of a more "direct" divine voice.
(I do note that you point out the variety of ways God has spoken to you Craig)
G'day Michael,
I agree there is many forms of wisdom, in the context though of James 1:5, if we ask God to give us wisdom, we must expect the wisdom to have come from him, no matter how we recieve it.
Off Topic - there's a debate about some stuff your dad said on a fairly high profile political forum here
Craig - none of the verses quoted suggest God will talk to you directly.
G'day Anon,
None of those verses say he will not talk to you either.
Also another way God talks to me is through prayer. Sometimes / often when in a time of prayer and praise I will be burdened to pray into a situation or for a person for something that I have no way of knowing.
For example, one day I was praying for some friends who we don't get to see so often, and while praying for them I asked the lord to protect the unborn bubs.
After I prayed that I said, "Oh she is pregnant" and wrote it down in my journal. $ months later my friend rang and told me they were having a baby and that his wife was past the danger of having a miss carriage and didn't want to tell any one before hand as she had suffered some before.
I was able to say yes I know and show him the record in my journal.
This sort of thing has happened many times.
How God speaks to us is up to him, Paul also says that we are to "Eagerly desire to prophesy" note he says prophesy and not preach, there is a distinct difference, if we are to be eager to prophesy, then by reason of logic of how the gift of prophesy comes, one has to eagerly desire to hear God with the expectation of hearing him to speak.
Anon do you eagerly desire the gift of prophesy, and if not, why not?
Blessings craig bennett
Question is of course: what is prophecy? There is an assumption that it is the 'direct voice of God' type of thing (which it may be) and not a case of discernment using 'natural' wisdom - which it seems to be quite often in the OT prophets.
Partly I think behind the discussion - and the wider debate amongst evangelicals - is a false distinction between supernatural and natural - and the supernatural is always more attractive. But what we call the 'natural' is also entirely the act of God. I think what we see at play in this is the influence of the Romantic movement, with its preference for direct experience, emotions and spontaneity over dry rationalism.
Craig B - can you talk about it without resorting to personal experience? When you introduce personal anecdotal evidence to a discussion it is very hard for someone else to engage with. How can anyone deny what you have experienced without denying you at a deep personal level? I would suggest however that personal experience includes a fair degree of interpretation of that experience - and that is what I am interested in. How do you go about interpreting your personal experience?
(I say these things knowing of course that you enjoy a robust conversation Craig and that I have much to learn from you... :-) )
G'day Michael,
I do indeed enjoy a robust, yet dignified conversation, and you are far to gracious to me, I too am learning and have much to learn from you as well.
Firstly I agree that there is a false distinction between the natural and supernatural. All that is in the world is made out of the so called supernatural, including you and me, as God is the true natural. Once we get this perspective right the gifts of the Holy Spirit are easier for us to comprehend.
The first thing we have to understand about prophecy is that it always originates from the Holy Spirit,
2Pe 1:21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
So I think we need to be careful in saying it is using natural wisdom.
However part of stirring up the gift of prophecy is through prayer, asking God for his wisdom, James 1:6
I have always had to check out any personal experiences I have had, to see if they tally up with the scriptural account, remembering that most of the experiences I had I did not seek, they happened to me. I ask if they bring me closer to God or take me further away from God.
Also there is the testing of the spirits as John tells us to do, 1Jo 4:1-3. There have been times when something is happening out of the ordinary and I ask, "does this spirit behind this experience say that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh"
There is also the gift of Discernment of Spirits, 1 Cor 12:10. Notice it is discerning spirits, and not people. It is also a gift of the Holy Spirit and not a natural gift. Paul uses this in Acts with the slave girl with the spirit of divination, and we see it often in use with Jesus discerning whether a sickness was demonic or sickness.
Paul says to eagerly desire the spiritual gifts and in 1997 for a long period of months, I spent much time in prayer, fasting, seeking the lord for the gift of "Discernment of spirits" as I thought it would be fun to get involved in the deliverance ministry, as well as the gift of prophecy and had the minister and elders of the church lay hands on me, praying that God would give me those gifts.
I was wrong about the gift of discernment of spirits being fun, it has taken me many years to be molded by God to be able to look at people and not at any spirit that might be bugging them, such as taking a walk through the supermarket, I have had people turn and glare at me. Yet at the same time, it has been very useful in the healing and deliverance ministry.
Sorry about my ramble, it is hard to answer this without answering with personal experience, and the Scriptures do not make that distinction either.
I mean, look at Isaiah, told to go to the potters house, looked at the potter making something and the Lord spoke to him out of that experience.
Peter the Apostle was told by Christ in Matt 28:19 to go to ALL nations and disciple them, and then it is through experiencing a vision that Peter truly understands what Gods word meant Acts 10:17.
Often God will open up the true meaning of his word through a revelation of the heart, a mini or major vision, a time of having an AHA moment - thats what that means...which I am sure we all have had those moments.
Blessings craig b
Post a Comment