|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Protestant denominations and intellectual approaches to theology
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
When I became a Christian, I was in Reformed-influenced conservative evangelical Anglicanism, before going up the candle. At all 'stages' of the candle I was in (con-evo, gently-charismatic liberal evangelical, relaxed liberal Anglo-Catholic), the intellectual approach to theology has been seen as important, but particularly by the evangelical church. Reading theological books was done by most in the congregation - there was a bit of a class divide, but even those that didn't regularly read theological books had heard of them because of them being quoted so much in the sermons! Even now, with me being used to the blessed 10-minute sermon, theologians get quoted fairly often, albeit more briefly.
My experience of other denominations is admittedly limited, but certainly amongst mainline Protestants (Methodists, Baptists, URC etc) IME, it's not dissimilar. Christian friends from such denominations regularly ask for books on apologetics and other theological issues for Christmas/birthdays, for example.
However, with friends from charismatic free church backgrounds (mostly in the form of white, working-class, rural - not dissimilar to Welsh Pentecostalism but not actually Pentecostal) and (open) Brethren backgrounds, it's very different. I was shocked at none of them knowing who John Stott was! Even C.S. Lewis is barely known for his theological works amongst them - or if he is, he's seen as suspect for being Anglican. It doesn't seem to be a class thing either - I've seen it in solidly middle-class congregations. Can it be a charismatic thing? I wouldn't call even open Brethren charismatic though....
I see this as sad, and like my friends are missing out - reading theological works has been very enriching for my Christian life, and even though I disagree with a lot of authors I read in my evangelical church, I still value having read them.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I see this as sad, and like my friends are missing out - reading theological works has been very enriching for my Christian life, and even though I disagree with a lot of authors I read in my evangelical church, I still value having read them.
I gather there is something of an anti-intellectual trend in parts of the charismatic movement, where it has been displaced by a more personality-driven approach. I find this sad too; both because people are missing out on treasure from our ancestors and because reading widely can act as a corrective against wild flights of theological fancy.
I can hear Gamaliel's footsteps getting louder - I'm sure he'll have plenty to contribute on this topic!
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
How Reformed are charismatic churches in the UK at least, generally?
Could the lack of focus on intellectual approaches to theology be a way of marking charismatic churches out as 'different' (unconsciously or consciously)?
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
I'm about as Methodist as people come anymore, and I find apologetics foul and most theology unreadable. There are a few wonderful exceptions -- for example, I love to read Girard and Alison and have found Jack Miles' books delightful. But mostly, I think it is a sign of intelligence to stay away from that steaming pile of piety.
OTOH, I find Biblical scholarship infinitely engaging. I could read Alter and Fox all day long; I find Flusser a treat (wrapped in a painful academic style, alas); I delight in Paula Fredriksen's writings; and I think that the new school of Pauline scholarship has been essential to redeeming Paul from two millennia of Church excess in his name.
I might add that Wright manages to bridge the gap between Biblical scholarship and theolological writings in a way that seems to manage to keep from offending just about everyone -- no small accomplishment. I imagine that, if I were going to recommend a theologian to an intelligent layman, I would probably start there.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
In Lutherland there can be a great divide between what clergy and "insider" laity read and what the average Joe and Jane in the pew read. Intellectually engaged Lutherans love reading theology. The less engaged tend to stick with devotional books, usually from the local Christian bookstore instead of from a Lutheran publishing house. This disconnect is not very healthy, IMHO, and we wind up with people who come to church but really have very little idea of what we believe, teach and confess other than what Cliff Notes style Lutheran theology the pastor can jam into a 15- or 20-minute sermon.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
This reminds me of the pronounced tendency I have observed in students of philosophy to drop names. Surely the ideas are of much greater value than the trivia of who said what!
I think vast numbers of people have lived their lives and striven to be good Christians ("to act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God") without reading formal theology.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Clip-clop ... clip-clop ... Gamaliel's trotters clatter across the cobbles, his pointed tail swinging behind him ...
![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Seriously, and sorry to disappoint perhaps, I'm not sure it does to generalise ...
To be fair to the charismatic restorationist stream with which I was involved between 1982 and 2000, whilst people didn't tend to read 'heavy' theology, the leaders did try to keep abreast of trends and thinking. There was a much broader curriculum in the in-house theological training there than one might have expected.
Consequently, I'm surprised to hear that people in the outfits that Jade Constable cites were unfamiliar with John Stott, for example.
I can't comment on the current scene so much, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's been some diminution of interest/engagement with theological reading and issues.
That said, the very absence of such things can cause people to shift for themselves and to make their own investigations.
Around 2003 I heard people from several conservative evangelical groups say that they were encountering increasing numbers of disaffected charismatics who were coming to them - if not permanently - but on occasion in order to find out more about the scriptures or wider issues of theology.
I can't speak for the Vineyard, either, South Coast Kevin can do that, but I can speak for what I've seen of charismatic Baptists and my impression is that they read and study more widely than the standard texts and favourite authors on the charismatic circuit. This is certainly true at a ministerial level.
My impression overall though - and this is going to sound elitist - is that among the charismatic rank-and-file most people will only read the popular testimony paperbacks and novels like The Shack or the latest Christian best-seller.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
@HCH, I don't think Jade Constable is suggesting that you HAVE to read formal theology in order to live a thoroughly exemplary Christian life.
It's more that, as South Coast Kevin has indicated, in some ... I said SOME ... sections of the charismatic scene this sort of thing is actively discouraged in favour of personality cults and so on.
To be fair, again, to the restorationist house-churches of the 1970s - 1990s, because they believed they were 'doing a new thing' they did actually make an effort to mug up on the 'old thing' in order to justify why a new one was needed ... ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Ok, so their approach to church history and theology was highly partial but they did at least attempt to thrash out an ecclesiology and so on. It wasn't simply about pastor-so-and-so and his big ministry nor a kind of free-wheeling revivalism ... at least, not in the early days it wasn't ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I know the OP is about Protestant denominations, but I do wonder how many of the 'rank and file' in Orthodox and RC churches regularly read formal theology either?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
My impression overall though - and this is going to sound elitist - is that among the charismatic rank-and-file most people will only read the popular testimony paperbacks and novels like The Shack or the latest Christian best-seller.
Although.... is the situation actually any different in other flavours of church? Maybe those churches in which intellectual / reflective theology is discouraged are just a small minority of churches, even of charismatic churches.
Thinking of my own church, there are plenty of people who read serious-ish theology (I mean people like Philip Yancey and Dallas Willard) but also plenty for whom reading isn't really their thing. But certainly there's no obvious anti-intellectual strand within my church, indeed the leadership team encourage reading, thinking and questioning (for which I am tremendously grateful).
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I know the OP is about Protestant denominations, but I do wonder how many of the 'rank and file' in Orthodox and RC churches regularly read formal theology either?
I didn't bring it up because I just don't know enough 'rank and file' in either denomination to comment. I wouldn't take the Orthodox and RC Ship members to be representative!
I would imagine there to be more emphasis on theology in Jesuit circles, although that is just guesswork really. For all that the printing press drove the success Reformation, the Reformation drove the success of the printing press too - and thus, the Counter-Reformation. UK universities being Anglican-only for so long probably helped Anglican theology in the UK too. It's probably the case that Reformed and Anglican laity are the odd ones out here...
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
Up to a point, Lord Copper…
In my experience this is largely a generational issue.
I grew up in a mainstream, middle-class Methodist church in which no-one read or discussed theology, but just accepted what the minister told them – after all, that was his area of expertise, in the same way as one’s own area might be accounting, or real estate.
When I moved into the evangelical (and particularly Brethren) world, it was dominated by males who believed that they were responsible for working out their own theology, but also believed that this could be done by any believer with a KJV, a notebook and pencil, a prayerful attitude and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
These were men who had come through the Depression and WWII, but had left school at fourteen, and had an aggressively anti-intellectual attitude which came out in references to theological “cemeteries” instead of “seminaries”, and claims that the only BA one needed was a “Born Again”.
Universities, it seemed. taught nothing but “science falsely so called” (ie evolution) and “philosophy and vain deceit”.
All this changed with we baby-boomers, who were given the opportunity to finish secondary schooling and go on to tertiary courses.
In my own Brethren church we have doctors, lawyers, engineers, and legions of teachers, nurses and IT people.
Figures such as Stott and Lewis are widely known and valued.
And while I am not a penty or charo myself, I have known plenty who are, have lectured part-time in one of their Bible colleges, and have encountered amongst them a very positive attitude toward scholarship in general and theology in particular.
The cerebralisation of Pentecostalism seems to have emerged, pari passu, with the standardization and authoritarian choreography of its previously unpredictable and corybantic worship.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
I find it sad that so many young charismatics seem not to have heard of the late, great John Stott. I suppose he's only really pushed in con-evo circles. Stott deserves a wider audience.
Too many Christians only read within their own particular constituencies, it seems ... if they read at all, that is. There's a reason why so many Christian bookshops have closed in the UK!
I'm a lay preacher and have built up a library of Biblical commentaries from a variety of publishers across (it's much better to mix and match rather than buy stuff from the same stable). A wide variety of evangelical scholarship is represented on my bookshelf, but also liberal-evo ... no six-day creationism for me, thank you. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
My general reading list has included C.S. Lewis, Philip Yancey, Eugene Peterson, Richard Foster, Dallas Willard, Tom Wright, Paula Gooder, Henri Nouwen, Ronald Rolheiser (I like him, with some reservations) ... even some Walter Brueggemann (a little weightier than my normal reading!)
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vade Mecum
Shipmate
# 17688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
I'm a lay preacher and have built up a library of Biblical commentaries from a variety of publishers across (it's much better to mix and match rather than buy stuff from the same stable). A wide variety of evangelical scholarship is represented on my bookshelf, but also liberal-evo ... no six-day creationism for me, thank you.
My general reading list has included C.S. Lewis, Philip Yancey, Eugene Peterson, Richard Foster, Dallas Willard, Tom Wright, Paula Gooder, Henri Nouwen, Ronald Rolheiser (I like him, with some reservations) ... even some Walter Brueggemann (a little weightier than my normal reading!)
But no glossa ordinaria? No patrologia Graeca?
--------------------
I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Posts: 307 | From: North London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I know the OP is about Protestant denominations, but I do wonder how many of the 'rank and file' in Orthodox and RC churches regularly read formal theology either?
As Kaplan posts further down - I suspect thisi s the case everywhere - there plenty of middle of the road churches of every stripe where people more or less accept what is told to them and get on with the rest of their life without theologising heavily about it.
Sometimes I wonder if this is not a healthier approach anyway.
Certainly there are also auto-didactic circles, with or without a distrust of intellectualism, where because they are approaching theology from outside one of the 'historic' streams - they tend to read the people they hear about, rather than in any sort of systematic way. I think this is still the case with many charismatic and pentecostal churches - and it can sometimes lead to odd ideas (they read one book without necessarily reading everything else that is interacting with that book).
[Good to see you back, btw.]
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
But no glossa ordinaria? No patrologia Graeca?
*raises eyebrows*
No.
(I'll bet many ordinary Catholics haven't read them either.)
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
Too many Christians only read within their own particular constituencies, it seems ... if they read at all, that is. There's a reason why so many Christian bookshops have closed in the UK!
Yeah, but that has much to do with the internet as anything else. 'Back in the good old days' most christian bookshops were badly run and narrowly sectarian.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think there's a broad consensus here and that most posters on this thread share a similar background in small r reformed-ish evangelicalism of one form or other.
I've noticed the autodidact tendency in some full-on Calvinistic circles too ... notably Reformed Baptists and independent conservative evangelical circles with a more Calvinistic flavour. Jengie Jon would probably - quite rightly - consider them to be narrow and deficient in their understanding of Calvin as well as the broader aspects of the Reformed tradition.
I can't speak for the RCs and the Orthodox either but I suspect Jade is right that those we have here on the Ship aren't particularly representative. The same probably holds true for those of us from evangelical backgrounds too.
As a general rule of thumb I find the most 'well-read' - if highly partial - people come from groups which either:
- Have a particular 'take' or position that they need to justify in some way.
I know an Adventist guy here who meets with a dozen like-minded people in a tiny, tin tabernacle. He reads widely and is very eirenic, but I get the impression that the others tend only to read material that bolsters their particular position on things.
- Attract converts from other Christian traditions.
I know some Orthodox boards which are full of autodidactic and quite virulent converts from Rome or from Protestantism who're always banging on and snapping at everyone else for not being part of the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic ChurchTM.
- Where theological reading is seen as part and parcel of developing one's faith rather than a bolt-on extra.
I'd include various conservative evangelical outfits in this category.
I've often surprised more MOR or liberal clergy because I'm reasonably well up - as they see it - on theological issues etc. They seem surprised to find someone who is interested in those aspects but who isn't a minister or an ordinand.
I suspect that this is simply because their own congregations don't tend to contain people who are interested in those aspects - which isn't to say that they aren't serious about their faith etc etc.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
Too many Christians only read within their own particular constituencies, it seems ... if they read at all, that is. There's a reason why so many Christian bookshops have closed in the UK!
I think they've closed simply because there aren't enough Christians around to keep them going.
To be honest, I don't read much in the way of theology, despite being bookish and educated to postgrad level. The impression I get is that it's largely irrelevant to my issues and my life. Few (Methodist) ministers or lay preachers I've come across make any attempt to encourage their congregations to read theology. Maybe in highly intellectual congregations it's different. Otherwise, the subtle message that's sent out is that theology doesn't really matter, that it's not for ordinary Christians.
I'm a bit more into black and postcolonial theology. It seems more current, more relevant to what's going on in the world and to the majority of Christians, and better reflects the issues that affect my wider family and the environment where I live my faith.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
I have always had a tendancy to read what I would call middle-brow theology. My usual range is something along the lines of Michael Ramsey, C S Lewis, the occasional dip into William Temple on the one hand, and J I Packer, Griffith-Thomas and John Stott on the other. However, I tend to find books of essays and addresses more use than anything else. My time for reading is often constricted, so if I can get a general idea about something in 20-30 minutes or an hour I am a very happy bunny.
Most of my congregation do not read theology, and if they do it is Christian (TM) Bookstore toilet paper. A few years ago I was heartily sick of 'The Shack' and I am quietly dreading the next bestseller. That said I do have a minority that read serious theology, and in a sense they are one of the plusses to ministry.
I do however, think there is a very strong anti-intellectual streak to some of the Revivalist/Pentecostal denominations. However, the degree to which this is true varies from congregation to congregation, or even person to person.
PD
[ 29. June 2013, 06:48: Message edited by: PD ]
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
IME fundamentalist charismatics are fond of 'prophecy scholarship' and 'creation science', which most people here would probably regard as nonsense, but which mirror the trapping of intellectualism. Which suggests a belief that intellectualism is a Good Thing, imitation being the sincerest form of flattery and all that.
OTOH the kind of 'charismatic-lite' movement that seems to be common in Anglican suburban churches, and whose congregation mostly consists of middle-class professionals, does seem to be distinctly non-intellectual. I would hesitantly guess that in these circles charismatic practices scratch the same sort of itch for such people as yoga or meditation do for their colleagues - IOW, it isn't really about intellect, but about wholeness or mindfulness.
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I've often surprised more MOR or liberal clergy because I'm reasonably well up - as they see it - on theological issues etc. They seem surprised to find someone who is interested in those aspects but who isn't a minister or an ordinand.
I suspect that this is simply because their own congregations don't tend to contain people who are interested in those aspects - which isn't to say that they aren't serious about their faith etc etc.
In my experience MOTR churches just don't have any forum where the laity would discuss theological issues. So MOTR clergy don't have any opportunity to learn whether their flock are interested in theological issues or not.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think that's probably right, Ricardus. I've certainly come across both charismatic and conservative evangelicals who mug up to quite an extensive degree - albeit in a highly partial way - over various 'pet' issues be it Israel (and this happens both from a Zionist/Christian Zionist and anti-Christian Zionist perspective), creation/evolution or whatever else floats their boat.
At the risk of offending some posters here and fully admitting that I've not actually read that much high-brow theology myself, the kind of theology/authors that have generally been cited here in defence of the theological reading habits of charismatic or conservative evangelicals are generally pretty middle-brow.
Neither Lewis, Stott or other authors cited by evangelical posters on this thread would, strictly speaking, be classed as front-rank, academic style theologians.
Which isn't to say that their material isn't worth reading and can't be read with profit. Of course it can.
I think Kaplan's raised an interesting point about how a growth in theological engagement among certain Pentecostal groups mirrors a move towards a more authoritarian leadership style. There's an interesting conundrum there.
I'm rather on the same page as the sociologist Andrew Walker when it comes to his assessment of the Pentecostalism he grew up amongst in South Wales - which is where I come from too now, isn't it?
His assessement is that these people certainly weren't 'thick' and had a particular working class 'nouse' which enabled them to see through some of the more faddy aspects of the more middle-class charismatic movement. They weren't particularly well-educated but they weren't stupid either.
I'd totally concur with that. I've seen far better educated people fall for a lot worse things than the classical Penties ever did.
Ricardus's thing about suburban charismatic-lite Anglicanism is enlightening too. Our vicar threw a dicky-fit recently when the liberal vicar down the road had music-and-movement sessions during Lent which included Tai-Chi movements. He allegedly once tore up a leaflet that one of the parishioners brought in to photocopy on the parish photocopier to advertise a yoga class she was organising ... she works as some kind of sports-injury, exercise therapist.
Both our vicar and the local Pentie minister raised merry hell when someone was thinking of laying on Raiku sessions somewhere. Anyone would have thought they were going to be dancing naked in front of a statue of Astarte and eating babies for breakfast ...
I've often thought that - as well as the obvious theological differences - the reason the Penties so often clash with the local JWs is because they are each targetting the same demographic ... upper-working class/lower middle class ... (in UK terms that is).
I'm beginning to think that suburban charismatic-lite vicars might be clashing with the practitioners of alternative therapies and so on for the same reasons ... they see them as competition.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
I have always had a tendancy to read what I would call middle-brow theology. My usual range is something along the lines of Michael Ramsey, C S Lewis, the occasional dip into William Temple on the one hand, and J I Packer, Griffith-Thomas and John Stott on the other. However, I tend to find books of essays and addresses more use than anything else. My time for reading is often constricted, so if I can get a general idea about something in 20-30 minutes or an hour I am a very happy bunny.
Most of my congregation do not read theology, and if they do it is Christian (TM) Bookstore toilet paper. A few years ago I was heartily sick of 'The Shack' and I am quietly dreading the next bestseller. That said I do have a minority that read serious theology, and in a sense they are one of the plusses to ministry.
I do however, think there is a very strong anti-intellectual streak to some of the Revivalist/Pentecostal denominations. However, the degree to which this is true varies from congregation to congregation, or even person to person.
PD
Be grateful you're not a woman and never had to read Captivating or Marriable! Although Wild At Heart is pretty dire (and of course the John Eldredge has to weigh in on the woman's book but Stasi doesn't have to with the man's book...).
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
Can I be somewhat "proud" of the fact that I have never heard of any of the authors/books you mention? I am afraid that they are all somewhat off my beat.
I am definitely a Central Churchmen, so I tend to favour moderate Anglo-Catholic and the more sensible Evangelical theologians without really wanting to commit to either position. I tend to be Evangelical on Justification, but sanctification and the sacraments are more of a theological priority for me than for the average Evangelical.
PD
[ 29. June 2013, 14:26: Message edited by: PD ]
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
The Reformed tradition does really seem to have taken reading and reading connected with faith in particular seriously and not just for the ministers. The evidence for this is the Scottish Education system which way before the English one had most children reading (but not intriguingly writing).
However even given this the percentage of members who tackle academic as opposed to popular theology is limited. Perhaps between 5% and 10% of the normal congregation. I suspect we cannot assume that that all ministers have an acquaintance with academic theology although I am pretty sure that up to recently you could assume such an acquaintance at least when they were training.
I have a friend who has a theology degree, people in congregations could sense she was intelligently connected with her faith but they kept on recommending popular theologians when she was seriously academically connected.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'm sure that's right, Jengie.
It strikes me, though, that what appear serious theologians to some are popular theologians to other. That doesn't mean that there isn't good popular theology, of course there is.
But I suspect that very few people - other than ministers - are reading the really serious stuff. And that probably applies right across the board.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I regret to have to say this, but it might be because far too much serious theology is badly written, hasn't got a great deal to say, and takes far too long not saying it.
And even the stuff that could be quite interesting is often unengagingly written.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrs whibley
Shipmate
# 4798
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I regret to have to say this, but it might be because far too much serious theology is badly written, hasn't got a great deal to say, and takes far too long not saying it.
And even the stuff that could be quite interesting is often unengagingly written.
I agree. Theology, like any academic subject tends to be somewhat impenetrable in that it is not clear to the layperson what to read or where to start. When you add to this the volume that seemingly has to be consumed before you can get anything like an overview and the price of the individual books it is not surprising that even the moderately keen don't get very far.
This is exactly like my own professional subject of microbiology, where really the only advice I could give a keen layperson would be to enrol on a degree course!
--------------------
I long for a faith that is gloriously treacherous - Mike Yaconelli
Posts: 942 | From: North Lincolnshire | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Heavenly Anarchist
Shipmate
# 13313
|
Posted
I can't imagine anyone at my chari church doesn't know that CS Lewis wrote books other than Narnia. He's referenced often enough in the sermons. As for Stott, I'm quite certain he's been mentioned too and I would expect at least a dozen church members to have one of his books, I have at least two (bought in my con-evo days admittedly). The church does lots of recommendations for further reading in relation to sermon theme, we have book reviews on the church website and in the forum and on the whole there isn't much difference in the sorts recommended here to when I was at St Helen's, probably slightly less exegesis but our congregation has a very different make up to St Helens evening service, we're generally older both in age and in Christian experience.
As mentioned in other posts above, I doubt there is much difference between churches, there will be those people who read more and those that don't. People engage with biblical knowledge at different levels and in different ways and at different times and this is great, we all have our own approaches. I also guess that a lot of people with families and busy work lives don't have much time for serious theological study. I read a lot of theology in my mid-twenties but haven't read any for years, I have other priorities now. Happily, God doesn't seem to mind ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
[ 30. June 2013, 15:32: Message edited by: Heavenly Anarchist ]
--------------------
'I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.' Douglas Adams
Dog Activity Monitor
My shop
Posts: 2831 | From: Trumpington | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
When I mentioned at the local charo-evo church that I was collaborating with colleagues in the theology department a look of shock came across the faces of a few people I was chatting with. All they needed to hear was 'university' and 'theology' and they knew the Enemy was amongst them. Or so they thought anyway.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
Sorry, missed the edit window. I meant to say that this follows some of the patterns above. They 'theology' they tend to read is apologetics and the self-help Christian crap you can only buy in Christian book shops.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think that's true to a certain extent, Komensky, but as ever, there are exceptions.
@Heavenly Anarchist ... sure, they'll name-check Stott and Lewis. But how often does Tertullian or Aquinas, Moltmann or Kung or Balthazar or Neibuhr or Barth or Tillich or Cornelius van Til or Jaroslav Pelikan or Miroslav Volf or St Simeon the New Theologian or John Zizoulas or Hopko or ...
... get a mention?
Charismatic evangelical fellowships have a middle-brow theology at best.
There's nothing wrong with that of course, but to say, 'My church quotes Lewis and Stott ... or even Tom Wright at times ...' does not make for deep theology in and of itself.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Heavenly Anarchist
Shipmate
# 13313
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think that's true to a certain extent, Komensky, but as ever, there are exceptions.
@Heavenly Anarchist ... sure, they'll name-check Stott and Lewis. But how often does Tertullian or Aquinas, Moltmann or Kung or Balthazar or Neibuhr or Barth or Tillich or Cornelius van Til or Jaroslav Pelikan or Miroslav Volf or St Simeon the New Theologian or John Zizoulas or Hopko or ...
... get a mention?
Charismatic evangelical fellowships have a middle-brow theology at best.
There's nothing wrong with that of course, but to say, 'My church quotes Lewis and Stott ... or even Tom Wright at times ...' does not make for deep theology in and of itself.
I was answering the opening post which mentions those names, I don't think they are serious theology either. But I don't think the average member of ANY church would have heard of more than one or two of the people you are mentioning, if at all. I've only heard of two and not read any, and I'm quite an average person, no intellectual pretensions at all.
[ 30. June 2013, 21:47: Message edited by: Heavenly Anarchist ]
--------------------
'I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.' Douglas Adams
Dog Activity Monitor
My shop
Posts: 2831 | From: Trumpington | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Heavenly Anarchist
Shipmate
# 13313
|
Posted
Too late to edit, but I don't mean 'not serious theology' but 'not high brow' instead. They do still have a lot to say.
--------------------
'I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.' Douglas Adams
Dog Activity Monitor
My shop
Posts: 2831 | From: Trumpington | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, agreed. I can't pretend to have read much of these guys either - although I've read snippets of some and a fair chunk from one or two.
The point I was making was similar to yours. If any of us - irrespective of tradition - were going to make out that people generally engage with serious theology then we are kidding ourselves.
And yes, middle-brow theology does have much to say.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
I find it interesting to see who is in my quotes book. This is basically where I write those useful snippets that are going to be used in upcoming sermons.
The quotation demolition Derby produced a rather interesting result which revealed that I seem to quote J. C. Ryle, J. I. Packer, W H Griffith-Thomas, and Martin Luther most often, but the catholic side of Anglicanism gets referenced far more often but there is a far wider range of writers. However, there has also been a shift away from the more catholic writers towards the more Evangelical over the past three-four years.
PD
[ 01. July 2013, 01:43: Message edited by: PD ]
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
@Heavenly Anarchist ... sure, they'll name-check Stott and Lewis. But how often does Tertullian or Aquinas, Moltmann or Kung or Balthazar or Neibuhr or Barth or Tillich or Cornelius van Til or Jaroslav Pelikan or Miroslav Volf or St Simeon the New Theologian or John Zizoulas or Hopko or ...
... get a mention?
And what do any of these names mean to the ordinary person in the pew, let alone the street?
Of course I'm grateful for the people who DO read these heavy-weights. I don't have an evangelical prejudice against serious theological study, far from it. I would never look down on people whose intellects are greater than mine. I'm grateful for them.
But any suggestion that people in general should be aspiring to this would strike me as being somewhat ... forgive me ... elitist. ![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
It's necessary to challenge people and that includes intellectual challenge, but I am far more interested in exploring how the gospel impacts my every-day life. That is the real challenge.
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
You misunderstand me, Laurelin.
I'm not saying that everyone should be reading these theological heavyweights. I've certainly not read them and those bits I have read I've struggled to understand! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
No, all I'm saying is that some people here appear to be saying, 'Well, our vicar/pastor/minister quotes Stott or C S Lewis so we can't be that theologically challenged ...'
All I'm saying is that Stott and Lewis, excellent though they undoubtedly are, don't exactly represent high-brow theology.
We all tend to read stuff that favours our particular flavour of church. I've not read any Dallas Willard, for instance, but I wasn't surprised to see that South Coast Kevin cites him as someone who is likely to be read by those with a keen theological interest in his Vineyard church.
I'd have been very surprised, for instance, if he'd have said that they were reading Barth or Balthasar or Moltmann or the Orthodox theologian Thomas Hopko or some RC theologians ...
Just as I'd be surprised if Mousethief came along and told us that Don Carson was required reading in his Orthodox parish.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twangist
Shipmate
# 16208
|
Posted
For what it's worth my recent quotes in sermons include Volf, Vanstone, Gregory of Nyssa, Calvin, F.F. Bruce and Matthew Henry - so a mix.
IMHO the point and beauty of the middlebrow guys is that they combine accessibility with substance.
We tend to produce a small list of recommended reading to accompany each sermon series. So there is an expectation that our people think about what we are covering.
--------------------
JJ
SDG
blog
Posts: 604 | From: Devon | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
That's good to hear, Twangist. For all my reservations about New Frontiers etc I will concede/agree that they often draw on a wider frame of reference theologically than many independent evangelical charismatic groups ... and many Anglican evangelical parishes come to that ...
I might still have some reservations about the way the references are applied ...
But more power to your elbow. I'm sure those sermons were well worth hearing. Which is a lot more than I can say for the sermons in our evangelical Anglican parish, sweet though the vicar is he doesn't give the people an awful lot t to chew on ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
