Quote of the Day

“It is not the right human thoughts about God which form the content of the Bible, but the right divine thoughts about humanity. The Bible tells us not how we should talk with God but what he says to us; not how we find our way to him, but how he has sought and found the way to us; not the right relation in which we must place ourselves to him, but the covenant which he has made with all who are Abraham’s spiritual children and which he has sealed once and for all in Jesus Christ. It is this which is in the Bible. The word of God is within the Bible.” (Karl Barth, The Word of God the Word of Man, Harper and Row Publishers New York, 1957, p.43)

Management, Mega-trends and Plasma Screens, or the People of God Gathered? Part 2 of 2

The King might be naked, but how are we dressed?

I believe it is all too easy for Ministers and Churches to savage the methods of Mega-Churches and become like a clanging cymbal. Often, even if the critique carries some truth, it comes off sounding bitter and petty. However, we do as Ministers have a responsibility to reflect on such matters and critique our own approach and understanding of ministry. If I may be pragmatic for a moment:  “The truth is, no matter what we say, nor matter how loudly we protest, Mega-Churches are never going to change! All we can do is ask the questions of ourselves and hope that we become a witness for what feel is a better representation of what it means for a community to live faithfully as the people of God“.

It is concerning that the church (generally) appears to be continuing on a road of pragmatic methodology driven by corporate ideologies. Mega-Churches such as Planet Shakers are simply the tip of the iceberg. They are the “catalogue” churches that advertise to the wider body what success looks like! If I might borrow a phrase from Eugene Peterson, the church has, “Gone whoring after other gods.” I think if we are honest, Mega-Churches are not the only one’s who fall prey to this kind of ‘whoring’. How many times have you visited a smaller or medium sized congregation only to find it trying so desperately to look like its larger sibling up the road? I wonder, when did Ministers and churches start believing the lie that in order to live faithfully as the people of God the church needed plasma screens and video of the singers on the screens with the words superimposed over the top? When did we fall for the temptation to take control of that which the Spirit is at work in? The church is, and can only ever be ‘built up’ by the work of the Sprit. In fact, as Barth would argue, “The Holy Spirit is the quickening power with which Jesus the Lord builds up Christianity in the world with his body, i.e., as the earthly-historical form of His own existence, causing it to grow, sustaining and ordering it as the communion of His saints, and thus fitting it to give a provisional representation of the sanctification of all humanity and all human life as it has taken place in Him.” Karl Barth CD IV.2

I will give the final word to T.F. Torrance in which he reminds us of the church’s foundation and continual reality in the world, “The Church is grounded in the being and life of God, and rooted in the eternal purpose of the Father to send his Son, Jesus Christ, to be the Head and saviour of all things. The Church does not exist by and for itself, and therefore cannot be interpreted out of itself. Both the source and goal of the church are in the eternal love of God, which has overflowed in the creation, and redemption of the world. God has not willed to live alone, but to create and seek others distinct from himself upon whom to pour out his Spirit, that he might share with them his divine life and glory, and as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, dwell in their midst forever.” (T.F. Torrance, Theology in Reconstruction, SCM Press, 1965, p.192)”

Karl Barth: Conversations with a pastor III

When it comes to preaching I have high expectations; especially of my own. My expectations do not relate to the delivery and performance as much as the preparation. I expect that I will prepare my message with integrity and exegete the text prayerfully and academically in a manner that is faithful to God and the congregation I serve. However, what do I expect of God once the sermon is being delivered? Do I expect that God is present? Do I expect that my words, as feeble and unsatisfactory they may be, will add anything to the text read? Do I expect that God will awaken the weary traveller to the goodness of his grace?

As the community of God’s people gather on Sunday (or whatever day of the week the community chooses) and the songs are sung and the Word is preached God is with them! The people gather with their questions and their doubts. They gather trying to reconcile the seeming contradictions of life and faith. Although perhaps not always aware, they gather with an expectation that God is indeed present to them. And, the true hope of the gospel, and therefore of preaching, is that God wills to reveal himself and will do so despite our best efforts as minsiters to take control! In this I find great comfort.

“As the minister of the people who come or do not come to church on Sunday, he (sic) must first give them the answer; and as the minister of the Bible he (sic) must be the first to be prepared to submit to God’s question by asking the question about God, without which God’s answer cannot be given. If he answers the peoples question but answers it as a man who has himself been questioned by God, then he speaks – the word of God; and this is what the people seek in him and what God has commissioned him to speak. For being truly questioned by God and truly questioning about God, he will know God’s answer and so be able to give it to the people, who with their question really want God’s answer, even when they do not realise it. When he (sic) does do that, what event in the world is more decisive and momentous than Christian preaching? ” (WGWM, p.122)

Why I struggle with Barth and Barthians.

For a long time I have struggled with Barth. I have wrestled with many questions and often find myself loving what is being said yet wondering why or how it is correct. At one stage I had considered a Master’s Thesis on an aspect of Barth’s theology. That is no longer the case. Not too long ago I picked up the index of Church Dogmatics and read through the section summaries. What I began to notice (and I could be wrong) is that Barth is first and foremost a ‘Practical’ theologian. That is, he writes from the viewpoint of the minister and the specific situations and events that continually confront the minister week in week out. It was this aspect of Barth that I cherished most. So many times I felt as though we journeyed together and that he had wrestled with the same aspects of ministry that I had. When I read Barth I often find myself reflecting on ministry in the light of Christ’s ongoing ministry of reconciliation in the world. To turn to Barth for historical or even literary exegesis is pointless. Barth doesn’t help me become a better exegete; he helps me be a better minister!

However, two things bug me about Barth: Firstly, when Barth makes an argument I often find myself agreeing with what he says or at least thinking about it deeply. Yet, I am left wondering how his argument has developed and from where did he form his conclusions? There seems to be a very shallow foundation of Biblical text to what is being said. What has lead him to this conclusion? Is it his own thoughts and reflections in the light of his ministry and academic experience, or, has it developed as part of his overall Biblical/Systematic theology? I suspect that it comes from a truly robust biblical theology not only grounded in one specific text but in the overall biblical narrative, however, I still wonder! Secondly, Barthians frustrate me to no end! Why do they become so obsessed with Barth and what he has written? One hopes that at some point they will become obsessed with the God to whom Barth points and not Barth himself as seems to be the current level of Barthian study! Surely that is what the Great Swiss theologian would have wanted! As someone once commented in regards to Barth and my questions; “if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, it’s probably a duck” Perhaps Barth is correct, I just wish it were clearer!

Theologian in Residence Part 4

“The preacher who believes in Christ will never present himself to his congregation in such a way that they will suppose him able to bestow on them Christ and the Spirit, or think that the initiative in what is done is his. God is not superfluous; he is the author of what is done. We can act only in obedience to the task given to us; neither our aims nor our methods are our own devising” (Karl Barth, Prayer and Preaching, 1964, p.68)

Within my role as “Theologian in residence” I seek, as Anderson explains, “to interpret scripture, tradition and praxis, in order that the contemporary praxis of both church and world can be transformed” (The Shape of Practical Theology, 2001, p.33). As a minister I am seeking to help our church understand who they are as the people of God and what it means within our particular context. Therefore, theological reflection is the method in which I seek to adjust or recalibrate the two horizons of gospel and mission so that they are aligned. As Torrance says, “In order to think out the relation of the Church in history to Christ we must put both these together – mediate horizontal relation through history to the historical Jesus Christ, and immediate vertical relation through the Spirit to the risen and ascended Jesus Christ. It is the former that supplies the material content, while it is the latter that supplies the immediacy of the actual encounter” (as cited by Anderson, 2001, p.33). As Anderson goes on to argue, “Theory and practice are united within this from of practical knowledge which works itself out within the praxis of the church” (The Shape of Practical Theology, 2001, p.33). However, for the Minister, the task of theological reflection must not become a “purely” academic exercise. It takes place as an act of prayer and submission to God. It is explored within the context of relationship, with God and the community of His people. As we worship and pray, as we seek to listen to God, and discern the movements of his grace in our midst, we are reflecting on the God revealed in Jesus Christ who is our “Immanuel”. As “Theologian in Residence” I am a “Theologian” in service to God and his people, calling the church to its task of a missionary community established in Christ and propelled out by the Spirit!

Theologian in Residence Part 3

“The Holy Spirit is the quickening power with which Jesus the Lord builds up Christianity in the world with his body, i.e., as the earthly-historical form of His own existence, causing it to grow, sustaining and ordering it as the communion of His saints, and thus fitting it to give a provisional representation of the sanctification of all humanity and all human life as it has taken place in Him.” Karl Barth CD IV.2

A helpful metaphor in understanding my own vocation as a minister is, “Theologian in residence”. It is important that this metaphor not be used as permission to lock myself away in the Minister’s study and pour over scripture and the church fathers seeking to develop my own theological agenda. Rather it is permission to escape ministry as a business or management. It helps me to see my role as more than the day to day needs of the church. It is a vocation explored within the context of the community for the community. The distractions that I mentioned are the very outworking of Christ’s ministry in our midst. The phone call, the visits, the paperwork and even the sermon preparation are the necessary tension to theological reflection. As Eugene Peterson might say, ,“this is where we see Christ at play” and where we reflect on the nature and work of God revealed to us! It is in ministry that we find a playground for the unpacking of our theology.

Barth’s Critique of Bultmann

“Bultmann is an exegete. But it is impossible to engage him in exegetical discussion. For he is also a systematic theologian of the type which handles the texts in such a way that their exegesis is controlled by a set of dogmatic presuppositions and is wholly dependent upon their validity.” CD III.1, p.445

Is this the pot calling the kettle black?

New Edition of the Church Dogmatics at the Printers

So says the T and T Clark blog. For those so inclined the new “Study Edition” of Karl Barth’s 13 volume church dogmatics has a new type face, Greek and Latin translations. However, the biggest change is the format. According to T and T Clark, “The text is presented in a new reader friendly format. We hope that the breakdown of the Church Dogmatics into 31 shorter fascicles will make this edition easier to use than its predecessors.”

Anyone who has read the old editions would know that the dogmatics are presented in what has to be the worst font ever for reading; especially reading something as intricate as Barth. I will not be rushing out to buy the new edition, my old ones will suffice and if I had the money and desire I would by the Digital edition. Nevertheless, for a new generation of Barth readers this is a great resource. One just hopes that they become obsessed with the God to whom Barth points and not Barth himself as seems to be the current level of Barthian study! Surely that is what the Great Swiss theologian would have wanted!