A Call to an Ancient Evangelical Future

I found the statement below at ancientfutureworship.com. (Hat Tip Presbyweb) Now this is a statement I can buy into.

A CALL TO AN ANCIENT EVANGELICAL FUTURE

Prologue

In every age the Holy Spirit calls the Church to examine its faithfulness to God's revelation in Jesus Christ, authoritatively recorded in Scripture and handed down through the Church. Thus, while we affirm the global strength and vitality of worldwide Evangelicalism in our day, we believe the North American expression of Evangelicalism needs to be especially sensitive to the new external and internal challenges facing God's people. 

These external challenges include the current cultural milieu and the resurgence of religious and political ideologies. The internal challenges include Evangelical accommodation to civil religion, rationalism, privatism and pragmatism. In light of these challenges, we call Evangelicals to strengthen their witness through a recovery of the faith articulated by the consensus of the ancient Church and its guardians in the traditions of Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, the Protestant Reformation and the Evangelical awakenings. Ancient Christians faced a world of paganism, Gnosticism and political domination. In the face of heresy and persecution, they understood history through Israel's story, culminating in the death and resurrection of Jesus and the coming of God's Kingdom.

Today, as in the ancient era, the Church is confronted by a host of master narratives that contradict and compete with the gospel. The pressing question is: who gets to narrate the world? The Call to an Ancient Evangelical Future challenges Evangelical Christians to restore the priority of the divinely inspired biblical story of God's acts in history. The narrative of God's Kingdom holds eternal implications for the mission of the Church, its theological reflection, its public ministries of worship and spirituality and its life in the world. By engaging these themes, we believe the Church will be strengthened to address the issues of our day.

1. On the Primacy of the Biblical Narrative

We call for a return to the priority of the divinely authorized canonical story of the Triune God. This story-Creation, Incarnation, and Re-creation-was effected by Christ's recapitulation of human history and summarized by the early Church in its Rules of Faith. The gospel-formed content of these Rules served as the key to the interpretation of Scripture and its critique of contemporary culture, and thus shaped the church's pastoral ministry. Today, we call Evangelicals to turn away from modern theological methods that reduce the gospel to mere propositions, and from contemporary pastoral ministries so compatible with culture that they camouflage God's story or empty it of its cosmic and redemptive meaning. In a world of competing stories, we call Evangelicals to recover the truth of God's word as the story of the world, and to make it the centerpiece of Evangelical life.

2. On the Church, the Continuation of God's Narrative

We call Evangelicals to take seriously the visible character of the Church. We call for a commitment to its mission in the world in fidelity to God's mission (Missio Dei), and for an exploration of the ecumenical implications this has for the unity, holiness catholicity, and apostolicity of the Church. Thus, we call Evangelicals to turn away from an individualism that makes the Church a mere addendum to God's redemptive plan. Individualistic Evangelicalism has contributed to the current problems of churchless Christianity, redefinitions of the Church according to business models, separatist ecclesiologies and judgmental attitudes toward the Church. Therefore, we call Evangelicals to recover their place in the community of the Church catholic.

3. On the Church's Theological Reflection on God's Narrative

We call for the Church's reflection to remain anchored in the Scriptures in continuity with the theological interpretation learned from the early Fathers. Thus, we call Evangelicals to turn away from methods that separate theological reflection from the common traditions of the Church. These modern methods compartmentalize God's story by analyzing its separate parts, while ignoring God's entire redemptive work as recapitulated in Christ. Anti-historical attitudes also disregard the common biblical and theological legacy of the ancient Church. Such disregard ignores the hermeneutical value of the Church's ecumenical creeds. This reduces God's story of the world to one of many competing theologies and impairs the unified witness of the Church to God's plan for the history of the world. Therefore, we call Evangelicals to unity in "the tradition that has been believed everywhere, always and by all," as well as to humility and charity in their various Protestant traditions.

4. On Church's Worship as Telling and Enacting God's Narrative

We call for public worship that sings, preaches and enacts God's story. We call for a renewed consideration of how God ministers to us in baptism, Eucharist, confession, the laying on of hands, marriage, healing and through the charisma of the Spirit, for these actions shape our lives and signify the meaning of the world. Thus, we call Evangelicals to turn away from forms of worship that focus on God as a mere object of the intellect or that assert the self as the source of worship. Such worship has resulted in lecture-oriented, music-driven, performance-centered and program-controlled models that do not adequately proclaim God's cosmic redemption. Therefore, we call Evangelicals to recover the historic substance of worship of Word and Table and to attend to the Christian year, which marks time according to God's saving acts.

5. On Spiritual Formation in the Church as Embodiment of God's Narrative

We call for a catechetical spiritual formation of the people of God that is based firmly on a Trinitarian biblical narrative. We are concerned when spirituality is separated from the story of God and baptism into the life of Christ and his Body. Spirituality, made independent from God's story, is often characterized by legalism, mere intellectual knowledge, an overly therapeutic culture, New Age Gnosticism, a dualistic rejection of this world and a narcissistic preoccupation with one's own experience. These false spiritualities are inadequate for the challenges we face in today's world. Therefore, we call Evangelicals to return to a historic spirituality like that taught and practiced in the ancient catechumenate.

6. On the Church's Embodied Life in the World

We call for a cruciform holiness and commitment to God's mission in the world. This embodied holiness affirms life, biblical morality and appropriate self-denial. It calls us to be faithful stewards of the created order and bold prophets to our contemporary culture. Thus, we call Evangelicals to intensify their prophetic voice against forms of indifference to God's gift of life, economic and political injustice, ecological insensitivity and the failure to champion the poor and marginalized. Too often we have failed to stand prophetically against the culture's captivity to racism, consumerism, political correctness, civil religion, sexism, ethical relativism, violence and the culture of death. These failures have muted the voice of Christ to the world through his Church and detract from God's story of the world, which the Church is collectively to embody. Therefore, we call the Church to recover its counter-cultural mission to the world.

Epilogue

In sum, we call Evangelicals to recover the conviction that God's story shapes the mission of the Church to bear witness to God's Kingdom and to inform the spiritual foundations of civilization. We set forth this Call as an ongoing, open-ended conversation. We are aware that we have our blind spots and weaknesses. Therefore, we encourage Evangelicals to engage this Call within educational centers, denominations and local churches through publications and conferences.

We pray that we can move with intention to proclaim a loving, transcendent, triune God who has become involved in our history. In line with Scripture, creed and tradition, it is our deepest desire to embody God's purposes in the mission of the Church through our theological reflection, our worship, our spirituality and our life in the world, all the while proclaiming that Jesus is Lord over all creation.

This Call is issued in the spirit of sic et non; therefore those who affix their names to this Call need not agree with all its content. Rather, its consensus is that these are issues to be discussed in the tradition of semper reformanda as the church faces the new challenges of our time. Over a period of seven months, more than 300 persons have participated via e-mail to write the Call. These men and women represent a broad diversity of ethnicity and denominational affiliation. The four theologians who most consistently interacted with the development of the Call have been named as Theological Editors. The Board of Reference was given the special assignment of overall approval.


Comments

10 responses to “A Call to an Ancient Evangelical Future”

  1. I’ll just say “me too!”

  2. Yeah, this is solid. It’s got such a great focus on our call as a church today.

  3. Sophia Sadek Avatar
    Sophia Sadek

    Thanks for the posting.
    This call is especially poignant in a time when people are coming to realize that the sacred scriptures have been poorly represented over the centuries. It’s good to see that that tradition is still alive and well. You are providing an excellent example of what to avoid.

  4. Thanks for your comment Sophia but I was a little unclear about your point. I’m I understanding correctly that you dislike this call because you view it as a continuation of corupted Christianity? If so, I am curious what aspects of it indicate this to you. Peace!

  5. Sophia Sadek Avatar
    Sophia Sadek

    I’m sorry if I came across as expressing antipathy. In observing someone who has stumbled, we do not detest them. Instead, we point out the stumbling block so that others do not trip on it.
    The doctrine of the Trinity was created for the express purpose of power politics. It is a tool of subjugation, not liberation. It belongs to Ceasar, not to Christ.

  6. “The doctrine of the Trinity was created for the express purpose of power politics. It is a tool of subjugation, not liberation. It belongs to Ceasar, not to Christ.”
    Thanks Sophia. That helps me understand what you are objecting to. I have seen this anti-Trinitarian view popping up in a couple of places and I am unclear what is driving it. The word “trinity” does not appear in the Bible but the concept is every where: Jesus and the Father are God; the Holy Spirit is God; there is one God; Father, Son and Spirit are each persons.
    The Bible is not a theological textbook laying out a systematic theology. I understand it as witnesses testifying to acts of God in history. Rodney Stark in his book “Victory of Reason” points out that Judaism and Islam look back to a code written by Moses or Mohammad and seek to live according to the code and theology they wrote down. We can’t do that in Christianity because Jesus didn’t write anything down. What we have are testimonies, each written with different emphases and purposes. From these testimonies we have to reason our way, with God’s help, to the truth and to ethical implications. We don’t have a manual and it is erroneous to treat it as one. Because it isn’t specifically identified and named in the “manual” doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
    The Apostles Creed as we have it appears to have been formalized about 212 CE. The scholars I have read believe that versions of this creed (that differed in some aspects but followed its Trinitarian formula) extend back well into the first century and likely precede the authoring of some books of the Bible. People affirmed it prior to baptism. The word “trinity” was in use by at least 190 CE, when Clement of Alexandria referred to the “Holy Trinity” and seems be using it as an expression that he assumes his readers are familiar. However, the Hueleatt Manusrcipt (50 CE) and the letter of Barnabas (74 CE) both make reference to Jesus as God’s equal. From Artistides 140 CE “[Christians] are they who, above every people of the Earth, have found the truth, for they acknowledge God, the creator and maker of all things, in the only-begotten Son and in the Holy Spirit”
    So am I unclear where the idea comes from that is comes from Caesar (Constantine and Nicea in the Fourth Century?). Furthermore, I am unclear how it is a tool subjection.

  7. Michael,
    Thanks for sharing this. I can say, Amen! too.

  8. You are welcome.

  9. Sophia Sadek Avatar
    Sophia Sadek

    At the time of the Nicene Council, there were a variety of traditions that shared the same apostolic creed. Each one has a subtle difference in the way that they perceived Father, Son, and Spirit. The role of trinitarian doctrine was to outlaw those who did not agree with the official, caesar-sanctioned perception.
    In order to understand the doctrine as a tool of subjugation, you would have to look at the history of how the doctrine was applied in practice. You would also have to be open to the possibility that those who perceive Father, Son, and Spirit a tad differently, may have a valid reason for doing so. These are things you may not be prepared to do.

  10. Thanks Sophia. While I have read on these topics I certainly would not hold myself out as an expert. I have read enough about Nicea to know that it was about a very complex web of theology, politics and cultural forces. It seems reductionistic to me distill this down to bare knuckled power play. Some things are true of God and some are not. Arius denied that Jesus was co-equal with God, despite this being attested to repeatedly throughout the intervening period from Jesus to Nicea. That error had significant implications for how we understand the work of God in the world and had to be corrected.
    One way in which I know the doctrine of the Trintiy is being abused right now is to teach that there is a hierarchical relationship between the members of the trinity. Many conservative evangelical and fundamentalist camps like the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and theologians like Wayne Grudem teach that Christ is eternally subordinate to the Father and women are to be subordinate to men. They claim “equal in being, different in function” and by different they mean hierarchy or subordination. But if someone is eternally subordinate – that is to say their only moral choice is to be subordinate – then they are not equal in being. This is a novel doctrine that has emerged in the last thirty years and it is just another version of the error of subordinationism. The only other time we have seen this doctrine emerge in recent eras is with people like Charles Hodge in the nineteenth century in his defense of slavery. He taught that women are subordinate to men, and that slaves are subordinate to masters, just as the Son is subordinate to the Father (in being and function.) I reviewed a great book about this topic last week: “Jesus and the Father: Modern Evangelicals Reinvent the Doctrine of the Trinity” by Kevin Giles. A Book Review
    I say all this to make this point. I think it is important to distinguish between false teaching and sound teaching that has been used falsely. In the case above, the problem is not the doctrine of the Trinity. It is a distorted version of the Trinity that has been used to subjugate others. Returning to the historic doctrine of the Church is what provides the corrective to subjugation in this case. Any doctrine or idea can be perverted into something evil. I think the aim should be to recover truth not abandon it when false teachers abuse it.
    As to being open to other possibilities, there are degrees of openness. There is an openness that says that I may be in error about the assessment of someone’s character I just met. Then there is openness that says to leave my mind open to the idea that the world is flat. The Trinity falls closer to the latter than the former for me so, yes, it would take some persuading but I would like to think I am open to dialog.
    Thanks again for this conversation!

Leave a Reply to Michael KruseCancel reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading