Category Archives: Christianity

DOGMATIC WOMEN

Dogmatic women.

God bless them!

Dorothy Sayers was dogmatic.  See her wonderful book, Creed or Chaos?

Flannery O’Connor also loved to proclaim the glories of dogma.  In fact, Ralph Wood of Baylor writes in his terrific book, “[Flannery O’Connor] boldly capitalized it, confessing in the upper case that, ‘My stories have been watered and fed by Dogma.'” 

(Contending for the Faith, p. 124)

HISTORY LOVERS

 

The following interview is also posted today on Jesus Creed (Scot McKnight curator).

John and LIndsey Scholl are dear friends.  We met them during my interim pastoral ministry in Brenham, Texas.

The Scholls met at the University of California, Santa Barbara.  Both earned PhDs there.  Lindsey’s emphasis is ancient history.  Lindsey did her doctoral dissertation on Augustine and the Pelagian controversy.  John has a love for all things medieval including a special interest in heretics/heresy which has loads of practical implications for the church today. 

The Scholls faced challenges in graduate school which made them wrestle afresh with the truthfulness of the Christian faith.  Lindsey’s counsel from her mom is a good reminder to all of us.

The Scholls had the opportunity to live in Italy for an extended time due to a Fulbright scholarship John received for his stellar doctoral research. 

Currently, Lindsey is the Logic School Academic Coordinator for Trinity Classical Academy in Houston.  Lindsey is also finishing the third and final volume of her fantasy, The Advocate Trilogy.  John teaches history to college students.

Moore: You guys met at UC, Santa Barbara.  Tell us about how that happened.

Lindsey: We had entered our PhD program in the same year, and we were both TAs. So we worked together. John was one of the few Christian graduate students I knew, and so he and another friend of ours, Brian, became good friends. In our second semester there, John and I were taking a class on early Christianity taught by a professor who had openly expressed disregard for evangelical Christianity. So we had to rely on each other quite a bit for encouragement.

Moore: Lindsey, without getting too technical, you did your dissertation in an area related to Augustine.  Would you recommend a non expert trying to read Augustine today?  If so, where should one start?

Lindsey: Yes, I did my dissertation on the Pelagian controversy, which revolved not only around the issues of free will and predestination, but also around legalism and grace. Pelagius was a monk who became so intent on his free will position that he became quite a legalist. Augustine, partially through his commitment to predestinarian theology, made God’s grace a central platform in the controversy. But I wouldn’t recommend reading his Pelagian works first. Rather, one should start with Confessions. It’s a beautiful, short work that will introduce you not only to Augustine, but to the world of Roman Christianity. Some people try to start with City of God, but I wouldn’t recommend it. It would be like trying to swim the English Channel your first time in the water.

Moore: John, your dissertation addressed false teaching during the Medieval period.  Again, without getting too technical, would you tell us why you were led to research and write on it?  Also, how well do you think the American church does today in guarding against heresy?

John: I studied medieval Christianity initially because I wanted insight into the Reformation. In college, one of my professors implied that Catholics were on the right side of the Reformation because tradition and history were on their side, whereas Luther was suggesting something new. That really bothered me. I realized that if Luther was suggesting something new then there was a big problem with his ideas. As Christians, we believe that our faith has historical continuity, that we believe something that is millenia-old, so I wanted to find out if Luther had historical predecessors (aside from the Gospel writers). The answer, of course, is that he did. But my research ended up turning in another direction. Based on the advice of one of my professors, who urged me to choose a more medieval topic, and help from Foxe’sBook of Martyrs, I chose to study the Waldensians, my first heretical group. In the twelfth century, the Waldensians called on Christians to adopt the life of the apostles, complete with poverty and public preaching, but they were labelled heretics, because, not being priests, they were preaching without the authorization of local bishops.

Moore: Too many Christians find the study of history boring and irrelevant.  Why is that, and what can be done about it?

Lindsey: As long as Christians continue to value the Bible, they should value history, for at least two reasons. First, the Bible references history multiple times. How many times does God tell the Israelites to remember His works? When Stephen gives the sermon that would get him stoned, he gives the Jews a history lesson. Second, if Christians do not know their history, they have no defense against critics who say that the Bible has been translated too many times, that it was written by later authors than tradition states, or that it’s been disproved. That is why history is relevant. But if Christians find it boring, they should remember that church history, at least, is about our brothers and sisters in Christ. These are the people who are going to be slapping our backs when we get to heaven. It would be awkward to tell them that we thought they were boring.

John: I think part of the burden lies with teachers of history. At its foundation, history is a mosaic, composed of many little stories. Yet all too often, historians, and I include myself in this statement, are more interested in talking about theories than in telling stories that capture the imagination of their audience. As a teacher of history, whether the topic is church history or something else, I want my students to see how fascinating the topic is. At the same time, when studying the history of Christianity, we have to recognize how complex and, at times, troubling our history can be. Christians of the past are not always heroes; in fact sometimes they seem to do things that are genuinely wrong. This poses a challenge to Christians who study our past: how do we deal with these troublesome historical details?

Moore: You guys are currently teaching at different educational levels.  What are some of the things you use to instill a love for history in your students, regardless of their age?

Lindsey: I wave my arms a lot. That helps.

John: First, I start by showing them how much I love history by coming into class everyday with an obvious passion for the subject. Second, I try to make it easy to love. People enjoy stories, so I make sure to tell plenty of stories in my lectures.

Moore: Lindsey, you are finishing the third volume of The Advocate Trilogy (http://www.theadvocatetrilogy.com).  Why is a serious scholar writing a series for kids?

Lindsey: Much as I love history, writing is closer to my heart. I’ve been writing since the seventh grade and to give it up would be like giving up a part of myself.  Plus, I believe that Christian scholars are well placed to write fantastic fantasy, if the work of Tolkien and Lewis is any indication. The goal of The Advocate Trilogy is to give youth a high-quality, entertaining read both in the literary and moral sense. The trilogy has the marks of classic fantasy: adventure, strange creatures, and names that are difficult to pronounce. Yet it also takes its readers on a cycle of faith and doubt, all the while introducing them to the most important character of all: Kynell.

Moore: John, any chance we could we get you to write an accessible work on the importance of understanding and addressing heresy?

John: I am much more interested in writing an introduction to medieval Christianity. Take a look at the typical textbook on church history. The one-thousand-year Middle Ages (500-1500) is dispensed in less pages than the previous five hundred years. The Medieval Church often garners a bad reputation, as if the Church told everyone what to think and parishioners just said the correct lines in the church service – then Luther comes along and makes everything better. However, this popular version of the medieval church is terribly wrong. By studying heretics, I have learned how many people were willing to risk their lives on matters of faith. One person I studied joined six different religious groups in a thirty-year period, and was burned at the stake because of it. Meanwhile, the Waldensians were determined to preach to common people and as their reward, they received heavy persecution. Medieval Christianity was diverse, exciting, and creative, and the evidence reveals that many Christians across social strata were seriously concerned about their spiritual fate.

In other words, I study medieval heretics not because I’m interested in heresy, but because I’m interested in faith, and medieval heretics left behind a great amount of evidence concerning their faith. At the same time, studying heresy has convinced me of the importance of unity in the Church. In retrospect, many theological controversies labeled individuals as ‘heretics’ for theological beliefs that are not vital to our faith. If I were writing a book about heresy, I would encourage readers to keep central things central and not to make ancillary issues the standard by which we judge other believers.

Moore: Did going through graduate school at a secular school pose any significant challenges to your faith?  If so, what were they and how did you work through them.

Lindsey: Yes, there were many times the Christian faith–my faith–was challenged. I actually lost my faith in God for a short time during my Master’s program. It started with the dating of the book of Daniel. Modern scholars almost unanimously champion a late dating for that book, i.e. that it was not written by Daniel himself but several centuries afterward. At the time, I had no counter to that argument and it greatly rattled my confidence in the Bible. I felt my relationship with God slipping into oblivion, and I had no energy nor strength to stop it. I didn’t even research the authorship of Daniel further! I just watched it all go, and for a number of weeks I felt spiritually and physically ill. I had lost my closest, most constant friend and I didn’t know how to get Him back. I talked with my parents a great deal during that time: they fielded several random questions and doubts, but mostly listened to me be miserable. Then one night, my mom said, “Lindsey, I think you should focus on the resurrection.” I dismissed her suggestion at first. After all, what did the resurrection have to do with bigger questions of canonization and inerrancy? Eventually, I decided to take her advice and re-consider Christ’s final moments here on earth. In doing so, I realized again how rock-solid the resurrection is as an historical event. There is no theory that can come close to explaining it or the disciples’ subsequent behavior, other than the one Christianity maintains: that Christ died and rose again materially. So the resurrection became a foundation upon which God helped me rebuild my relationship with Him.

Moore: Give a word of encouragement to Christians who sense a call to the academy.

Lindsey: Three things. One, know your Bible. Chances are, you will know it better than many others there. Two, don’t give anyone a foothold when it comes to your work ethic and excellence in research. Do the best work you can and respect your professors’ academic expertise. Third, you can do no better than to strengthen your relationship with God. Everything else will follow from Him.

John: First, a warning: graduate school is very hard, and many professors either openly or implicitly dismiss Christianity, so your faith will be under attack. Second, a recommendation: pray early and often, and rely on God.

 

 

 

DOES GOD STILL SPEAK?

Noted Stanford anthropologist (technically a psychological anthropologist), Tanya Luhrmann, has written a fascinating book. In it, she describes hanging out with various Charismatic Christians to determine whether they are actually hearing God speak or perhaps crazy.

Luhrmann’s account shows the limitations of saying one is a “detached observer.” Yes, she does serious academic work, and yes she seeks to be objective, but let’s face it, this is a decidedly subjective issue.

Luhrmann’s graciousness and even sympathy for those involved in her study moves her own beliefs some. Read and see what I am talking about, but more importantly, whether God is still talking today.

THE GOSPEL OF FLATLAND

Lindsey Scholl

Lindsey Scholl is a dear friend and an insightful thinker.  She can communicate to many audiences. Her PhD is in ancient history, but she is completing a trilogy for children which you can find out about below.

Lindsey recently penned a piece called “The Gospel of Flatland” which you can access here:

http://tcshouston.wordpress.com/2013/12/03/the-gospel-of-flatland/

Lindsey also has a trilogy of web sites:

http://www.lindseyscholl.com/

http://www.theadvocatetrilogy.com/

http://www.gooddiscourse.com/

WORDS MATTER

Looking for a great Christmas present?  Get a copy of Booked by Karen Swallow Prior.  And while you are at it, buy a copy for yourself.  You will thank me later.  

Karen will soon come out with a book on Hannah More, writer, philanthropist, and so much more (no pun intended).

On Karen’s Twitter account, I found this wonderful quote from Hannah More:

“It is therefore no worthless part of education, even in a religious view, to study the precise meaning of words.”

MIXING IT UP WITH BILL BRIGHT AND MARK DRISCOLL

If you need some context, radio host, Janet Mefferd, charged popular preacher, Mark Driscoll, with plagiarism.  You can read more about it in the link below, the three pieces so far from Carl Trueman (see my Dec. 1 post), and several things at www.janetmefferd.com.

http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2013/11/27/mark-driscoll-silent-amid-mounting-allegations-of-plagiarism/

One troubling aspect is the widespread silence among the Reformed community. 

Before you read my own reflections, one editor wrote me a gracious note explaining the reason he would pass on my piece:

Thanks for sending this along to X.  I love the point you’re making.  Let me say, as editor of X, I want more of our celebrities to absorb this message. It would save me a lot of grief.

Unfortunately, this piece won’t work to that end.  It inadvertently makes you the hero of the story, and it will get readers to wondering why you used yourself as a chief example.  This is certainly not your intent, but it will be what is heard. 

Sorry this didn’t work out.  I’m glad we’ve been introduced, and I trust our paths will cross some day.

Here is my response:

Thanks.  I certainly understand your point.  

However, I do think evangelicalism desperately needs more people who can say, albeit with an understanding of their own sin, “to follow me as I follow Christ Jesus.”  I have loads daily to repent of, but do wish in this area more Christians would in fact follow my own example.  

Now on to my own reflections…

Bill Bright started Campus Crusade for Christ (now Cru) in 1951.  A former businessman, Bright caught a vision for reaching college students with the gospel of Jesus Christ.

As a college student, I often heard Bill Bright speak at conferences.  His messages were simple and became predictable over time.  He seemed a bit naïve and out of touch with the complexities of college ministry at a secular school, but I never doubted his sincerity.

After seminary, I joined the full-time staff of Cru.  I was placed as the campus director at Stanford University.  It was a trial by fire as my training for this role came after being in this position for an entire year.  I was greatly helped by many wise and patient people.

For various reasons, Bill Bright took a personal interest in the ministry at Stanford.  And trust me, it was not because we were the biggest!  He even visited us for an intimate luncheon.  After the meal, our small group of about twenty peppered Bright with all kinds of questions.  Stanford students are not known for pulling their punches.  One student waxed on about the name Campus Crusade for Christ.  The name needed to change.  There was way too much baggage from the annals of history.  Bill Bright listened attentively and then shocked all of us with his disarming response: “That makes sense. What should we rename it?”  This was the 1980s, long before the change to the abbreviated Cru.  A stunned silence filled the room.  No one had anything to offer by way of a change.  Bright then invited the students and staff to write him with any ideas they might have for making Cru better.  Suffice it to say, those who were skeptical about Bill Bright’s approach going into the meeting were decidedly changed upon leaving.

A few years after our luncheon, I found myself in a hotel ballroom with the full-time Cru staff who ministered throughout the state of California.  There were about one hundred of us.  Bill Bright was addressing us on various issues.  Towards the end of the talk, Bright rather abruptly shifted to speaking about the “drinking policy” of Cru.  Bright’s personal convictions about drinking alcohol were well known by those in the room.  He did not want any full-time staff drinking under any circumstances whatsoever. He went on to say that if we knew of any staff who drink, we were to tell them to stop.  If they were unwilling to do so, they would be required to leave.  It was the most animated I’d ever seen Bill Bright.   

Bill Bright closed by asking if there were any questions.  A few softball questions were initially thrown his way, but I was troubled.  I was sitting in the back of the long, rectangular room.  I raised my hand high so as to be easily spotted.

I knew, as most in the room knew, that there was in fact freedom to drink. The official policy of Cru did not prohibit drinking.  

My give and take with Bill Bright started out with voicing my respect for his reasons regarding abstinence from alcohol.  That said, I wanted him to clarify whether he was articulating the official policy of Cru or simply conveying his own personal desire.

Dr. Bright did not address the nub of my question. He simply gave reasons why he personally did not want Cru staff to drink.  I pressed him on the issue.  At this point I had little doubt many in the room were not happy with me for challenging Bill Bright.  After the meeting, my hunch was confirmed.

After going back and forth several times with Bright underscoring the dangers of drinking, he conceded that this was in fact not Cru’s policy, but his own deeply held conviction.  As we finished, Bright graciously paid me a public compliment.  He said I was a person he could trust to tell the truth.  

Over the years, other opportunities have presented themselves to speak up about “sacred cow” issues.  Sadly, I have seen many men in positions of leadership freeze when the opportunity came their way.  My own dad modeled in more ways than I can mention here how it is always right to stand up for what is right.  By God’s grace, I have not been too tempted to be silent by the consequences which many times come from saying unpopular things.  And the cost at times has been significant.  And yes, I remind myself regularly to “take heed lest I fall” for the temptation to be quiet when one should speak needs to be vigilantly monitored.

Speaking “truth to power” is never easy.  The possibility of being tagged with jealously over someone’s superior status, making a name for yourself by questionable means, or being labelled as having a martyr complex are all too real.  The difficulty becomes more acute when the one needing the challenge is surrounded by those who benefit in various ways from that particular association. 

The recent controversy over whether Mark Driscoll plagiarized is not really of much interest to me.  Plagiarism is certainly a serious matter, but I can imagine how Driscoll may have been sloppy with his citations.  I leave it for others to decide.

What I do find troubling is how silent the so-called Neo-Reformed community has been up to this point. The quick and incisive commentary of Carl Trueman is a breath of fresh air, but his is pretty much a lone voice.  Yes, there are others like the jolly gadflies at Pyromaniacs, but they are not really insiders like Trueman.  Like Driscoll, Trueman has written for Crossway.   Trueman is also friends with several of the Neo-Reformed and even speaks at some of the same conferences.  Those relationships however, did not hinder Trueman from saying what he labels “the celebritydrome of the evangelical subculture.”  Trueman cited Driscoll as a “classic case in point.”

It is a sign of health not disloyalty when friends within the same institutions are willing to challenge one another.  All of us need accountability and history demonstrates that leaders typically get the least amount.  We are wise to remember the words of Isaiah: “Stop regarding man whose breath is in his nostrils, for why should he be esteemed?”

I have no doubt Carl Trueman would have appreciated my willingness to challenge Bill Bright, as I am deeply grateful for his willingness to challenge Mark Driscoll.

CHRISTIAN CELEBRITY CULTURE

Sadly, celebrity is big business in American Christianity.  For example, Christian publishers don’t typically publish the very best books, but the ones by authors who have a large platform.  Indeed, platform is one of the buzz words in the industry.  And don’t miss that most Christian publishers are an industry not a ministry.  

Recently, Mark Driscoll, one of the more popular “young, restless, and Reformed” pastors was on the Janet Mefferd show.  Mefferd pressed Driscoll on the issue of plagiarism.  Driscoll was not pleased.  For the record, I am not sure Driscoll knowingly plagiarized.  Motives may not matter for non-Christians, but they matter a lot for Christians.

What did strike me and I found depressing, is how the celebrity culture of American Christianity seems to trump issues of accountability and scrutiny.  The well-respected historian and author, Carl Trueman, weighs in with sage insight:

http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2013/11/if-the-top-men-take-over-who-w.php