![\"\"](\"http:\/\/bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com\/southernminn.com\/content\/tncms\/assets\/v3\/editorial\/b\/d0\/bd033bc3-4bd4-581c-b44a-a3a837f954ea\/51782bb6cb9da.image.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
I have read many \u201ccritique\u201d books of evangelicalism.\u00a0 Authors such as David Wells, Mark Noll, James Davison Hunter, George Marsden, and Os Guinness, along with many others, have provided me with extremely helpful insight.<\/strong><\/p>\n Svigel\u2019s book is also a critique of evangelicalism, but it differs from the authors above.\u00a0 Svigel\u2019s book is challenging without being a jeremiad.\u00a0 To be sure, Svigel has some pointed things to say, but there is a grace and generosity of spirit which shines through.\u00a0 To chase to the end of the book first, Svigel offers some wise and gentle applications for those who want to see the evangelical church reformed.<\/strong><\/p>\n Instead of doing your typical review, here are several things which I greatly appreciated about the book:<\/strong><\/p>\n *Chapter one is a terrific sketch of modern evangelicalism.\u00a0 Svigel uses a helpful \u201cinfancy to midlife crisis\u201d scheme to describe how evangelicalism has developed in the twentieth century.\u00a0 Crossway ought to consider making this and chapter eight stand-alone booklets.<\/strong><\/p>\n *Retro-Christianity<\/em>\u00a0is a well-written book which contains several clever illustrations and analogies.\u00a0 Though\u00a0Retro-Christianity<\/em>\u00a0is full of church history, especially from the Patristic era, the illustrations and analogies nicely anchor the ancient stuff to what the church faces today.<\/strong><\/p>\n *The emphasis on remembering to keep primary doctrines, primary, is spelled out extremely well.\u00a0 I have read Tom Oden and others on this very issue, but Svigel provides a fresh perspective.<\/strong><\/p>\n *As mentioned above, chapter eight could also be a terrific booklet.\u00a0 There is much in it which spells out a way forward in truly having qualified pastors and elders.\u00a0 Furthermore, the lunacy that you find in too many evangelical churches where not all pastors are elders out of fear that the pastors become too powerful is wisely and courageously addressed.<\/strong><\/p>\n On this very issue, I offer a few more personal observations made over the years.\u00a0 First, check out evangelical church web sites.\u00a0 You will notice two dominant and disturbing matters.\u00a0 Too many of the web sites only list the \u201cstaff,\u201d but not the elders.\u00a0 If the elders are listed, check how many of the pastors are part of the elder board.\u00a0 I have had many conversations with pastors and NT scholars on how Paul\u00a0assumed<\/em>\u00a0all pastors would also be serving as elders.\u00a0 So what is the problem?\u00a0 In a word, fear\u2026fear that having all the pastors on the elder board will result in the pastors being a powerful voting bloc.\u00a0 What does this tell us about the lack of trust among church leaders?<\/strong><\/p>\n I do have a few quibbles and what would even a non-traditional book review be without them?:<\/strong><\/p>\n *Svigel seems to believe that only Protestants can be evangelicals.\u00a0 I don\u2019t necessarily disagree, but would have liked to see some discussion as to whether you can be an evangelical Catholic (see Keith Fournier\u2019s book,\u00a0Evangelical Catholics<\/em>).<\/strong><\/p>\n *Svigel seeks to make a historic and biblical case for having a \u201chead pastor.\u201d\u00a0 I may not so much be in disagreement with his reasoning, but would have liked to see some discussion of the problem with the modern CEO model of pastor.\u00a0 This is an important issue and it deserves some ink.\u00a0 Several years back, Dallas Seminary sent out their alumni newsletter with a lead article on the \u201cpastor as CEO.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n *Tertullian\u2019s classic question of \u201cWhat has Athens to do with Jerusalem?\u201d is mentioned to set up a brief discussion of the relationship between philosophy and theology.\u00a0 It would have been good for Svigel to mention that even Tertullian used philosophy! \u00a0\u00a0Among others, Nicholas Wolterstorff has addressed the popular myth that Tertullian was completely opposed to using insights garnered from philosophy.<\/strong><\/p>\n