This has been a great series Tony. You’ve illuminated a foundational issue within the Protestant mainline that should get more airtime than it does. It needs to be said that while the “faith of Jesus” church is a significant element within the mainline, its basic perspective, as you describe it, is at wide variance from the New Testament witness to the person and work of Jesus Christ. That may not matter in a church that puts a Mary Oliver poem on par with the Bible. But it should. Indeed on this topic, the great liberal theologian Paul Tillich, sounds rather orthodox and even exclusive. In Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, Tillich writes that, “Wherever the assertion that Jesus is the Christ is maintained, there is the Christian message; wherever this assertion is denied, the Christian message is not maintained.” In our denomination, the United Church of Christ, that confession is part of the very name of the church. Yet, I fear that is now lost on members and clergy alike, who might prefer we be the “United Church of Jesus.” Nevertheless, one can reasonably ask, “as long as we’re doing good, does it really matter?” I think it does, greatly. The “faith of Jesus” branch is naïve about human nature, the reality of suffering, and our inability to “fix” it. Also, if, as the “faith of Jesus” church would have it, salvation is all up to us and our ability to follow the great wisdom teaching of Jesus and other “equally valid” spiritual teachers, I think it’s fair to say, we’re in deep doo-doo and there is no hope (although naïve optimism may persist). If however, as the New Testament redundantly claims, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ has wrought a cosmic transformation that is both “already and not yet,” then there is every reason for hope. If that is true, there is reason to align one’s life and witness with the work that God is already doing to bring healing and renewal, while not loosing hope or being overwhelmed by anxiety with every news cycle or election defeat. With this perspective, one might even live life with a sense of peace and joy!
Thanks so much, Tom, for this thoughtful response. Means a lot. I did work hard on this series, though that was facilitated by being semi "laid-up." I had taken a fall while hiking, foolishly climbing an 8' elk fence. Broke two ribs on the way down. So there wasn't much left to do but read, write. Anyhow, I really appreciate your insightful engagement.
This whole series has been so insightful. The language it’s given me to understand and articulate what is happening in the Church - the thinness of so much mainline theology, the sharpness of evangelicalism, etc. I long for robust revival.
Also glad to see Trygve’s essay pop up again. It’s so good. He preached at our installation as co-pastors.
Thanks so much Katherine for your response. Yes, I heard about Trygve's wonderful essay while listening to "Mockingcast," where Dave noted that you had called it to their attention!
This is why the recent split of the "United" (it has never been this!) Methodist Church, featuring the formation of the "Global Methodist" denomination, is justified by its leaders by a theology of scripture (not salvation or Christology). That is, a "progressive" or "liberal" Christianity is a departure from what scripture plainly says/teaches. I think your opening example, Tony, is a case in point. Scripture is rewritten to support something that it actually doesn't teach or say. And in this case the mission of the church, secured by the risen Lord's "great commission," is compromised. I should add, as you have, that scripture itself allows for a mutually-glossing conversation between a "faith in Jesus" (e.g., John) and a "faith of Jesus" way of salvation (e.g., James). Siding with one or the other, then, is inherently unbiblical. The interpretive question, of course, is how does the church moderate such a biblical conversation so that both sides are in play all the time--that we embody a profound trust in the efficacy of Jesus's death and resurrection as a purifying sacrifice for our sins whilst at the same time embody a radical imitiation of his self-sacrificial faithfulness and love of God?
This has been a great series Tony. You’ve illuminated a foundational issue within the Protestant mainline that should get more airtime than it does. It needs to be said that while the “faith of Jesus” church is a significant element within the mainline, its basic perspective, as you describe it, is at wide variance from the New Testament witness to the person and work of Jesus Christ. That may not matter in a church that puts a Mary Oliver poem on par with the Bible. But it should. Indeed on this topic, the great liberal theologian Paul Tillich, sounds rather orthodox and even exclusive. In Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, Tillich writes that, “Wherever the assertion that Jesus is the Christ is maintained, there is the Christian message; wherever this assertion is denied, the Christian message is not maintained.” In our denomination, the United Church of Christ, that confession is part of the very name of the church. Yet, I fear that is now lost on members and clergy alike, who might prefer we be the “United Church of Jesus.” Nevertheless, one can reasonably ask, “as long as we’re doing good, does it really matter?” I think it does, greatly. The “faith of Jesus” branch is naïve about human nature, the reality of suffering, and our inability to “fix” it. Also, if, as the “faith of Jesus” church would have it, salvation is all up to us and our ability to follow the great wisdom teaching of Jesus and other “equally valid” spiritual teachers, I think it’s fair to say, we’re in deep doo-doo and there is no hope (although naïve optimism may persist). If however, as the New Testament redundantly claims, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ has wrought a cosmic transformation that is both “already and not yet,” then there is every reason for hope. If that is true, there is reason to align one’s life and witness with the work that God is already doing to bring healing and renewal, while not loosing hope or being overwhelmed by anxiety with every news cycle or election defeat. With this perspective, one might even live life with a sense of peace and joy!
Thanks so much, Tom, for this thoughtful response. Means a lot. I did work hard on this series, though that was facilitated by being semi "laid-up." I had taken a fall while hiking, foolishly climbing an 8' elk fence. Broke two ribs on the way down. So there wasn't much left to do but read, write. Anyhow, I really appreciate your insightful engagement.
This whole series has been so insightful. The language it’s given me to understand and articulate what is happening in the Church - the thinness of so much mainline theology, the sharpness of evangelicalism, etc. I long for robust revival.
Also glad to see Trygve’s essay pop up again. It’s so good. He preached at our installation as co-pastors.
Thanks so much Katherine for your response. Yes, I heard about Trygve's wonderful essay while listening to "Mockingcast," where Dave noted that you had called it to their attention!
This is why the recent split of the "United" (it has never been this!) Methodist Church, featuring the formation of the "Global Methodist" denomination, is justified by its leaders by a theology of scripture (not salvation or Christology). That is, a "progressive" or "liberal" Christianity is a departure from what scripture plainly says/teaches. I think your opening example, Tony, is a case in point. Scripture is rewritten to support something that it actually doesn't teach or say. And in this case the mission of the church, secured by the risen Lord's "great commission," is compromised. I should add, as you have, that scripture itself allows for a mutually-glossing conversation between a "faith in Jesus" (e.g., John) and a "faith of Jesus" way of salvation (e.g., James). Siding with one or the other, then, is inherently unbiblical. The interpretive question, of course, is how does the church moderate such a biblical conversation so that both sides are in play all the time--that we embody a profound trust in the efficacy of Jesus's death and resurrection as a purifying sacrifice for our sins whilst at the same time embody a radical imitiation of his self-sacrificial faithfulness and love of God?
Appreciate this, thanks
Tony, insightful blog. Much of the progressive movement has washed out the message of the gospel to simply “tips and tricks” for a better you.
Yep