Lewis on modern academic theology pt.1

"Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism" was the name of a paper written and presented by C.S. Lewis for a gathering of Anglican seminarians at Wescott House, Cambridge in May 1959. I read this paper recently and believe that many of his points are still quite relevant to the renewal of (mainline) theological education. Lewis confesses that he no doubt has many mis-understandings because he is an outsider to the theological academy (the academic study of the New Testament in particular), but even this may make his comments all the more helpful for these students of theology:

"Though I may have nothing but misunderstandings to lay before you, you ought to know that such misunderstandings exist. That sort of thing is easy to overlook inside one's own circle. The minds you daily meet have been conditioned by the same studies and prevalent opinions as your own. That may mislead you. For of course as priests it is the outsiders you will have to cope with. You exist in the long run for no other purpose. The proper study of shepherds is sheep, not (save accidentally) other shepherds. I am a sheep...And now I start my bleating."

We see here one good argument in favor of having a genuinely diverse theological faculty or curriculum, at least when it comes to "radical new understandings/methods": so that we do not have a complete assimilation of the student into some "academic worldview" that turns out to be a passing fad (remember Process Theology?) or totally useless to the actual work of pastoring (remember Process Theology?). There has at times been a very real divide between the intellectual (and spiritual) priorities of the seminary on the one hand and the actual needs of the local parish (and indeed, the soul of the Christian) on the other. It is critically important that the seminary remember, through and through, that it exists for the church, to provide intellectually, morally, and spiritually qualified spiritual shepherds. For that work we should always look to the time tested methods and theologies that have endured the centuries, while fads came and went.

This same issue of "theological parochialism" also plays out in a broader way in the church: we may at times forget how vast the Church of Jesus Christ actually is. This is why I tell my Methodist friends they really ought to go spend enough time with Charismatics or traditionalist Roman Catholics to begin to understand how they think and believe. By the very nature of denominationalism, we often end up working primarily with people who have had a very similar faith experience to our own, and this can cause us to neglect or even despise the insights we might gain from listening to other brothers and sisters in Christ.

On the holiness of Christian leaders

As mentioned a while back, I am currently reading (at a ridiculously slow pace, I confess) The Book of Pastoral Rule by St. Gregory the Great. I am hoping to learn a bit more about spiritual leadership and the care of souls from the wisdom of the ancient church than what was included in my seminary training. In keeping with a suggestion I received, I will from time to time be reflecting and commenting on this ancient text.

Here is a memorable line from Part I, section 4:

For no one who is imperfect should dare to seize a position of spiritual leadership, just as no one who staggers on level ground should set foot on a cliff.

Those who become pastors or shepherds should not be "imperfect" or else they endanger themselves as well as those under their charge. What we mean by "perfect" is something that is discussed frequently among Wesleyan Christians, since John Wesley insisted that we should all be "going on to perfection." He also required, and this requirement remains a part of our ordination process in the United Methodist Church, that those seeking to become Methodist clergy should affirm that they are "going on to perfection" and also that they "expect to be made perfect in love in this life" (see The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church, 2008 para. 336; p. 246).

All of us who are ordained have answered "yes" to those questions, implicitly agreeing with St. Gregory's statement above. Some may have done so with fingers crossed, but many of us after meditating upon the nuances of meaning of the word "perfect" have done so with a clear conscience.

In Wesley's day, the 18th Century, it seems the word "perfect" had a bit more nuance than it now does in contemporary English usage. In once sense, it simply means "mature" or "grown up." In fact, today's Bible translations often render the Greek (telos) as "mature" where the old translations rendered it as "perfect" (for example, compare 1 Corinthians 2:6 in the NRSV and ESV on the one hand with the KJV). I do expect to be spiritually grown up or mature in this life, by God's grace, I hope to have already had a moment or two of maturity here and there.

On the other hand it seems that in 18th Century usage, as still today, "perfect" also had the sense of "utterly complete," "sublime," and "faultless." In Ephesians 4:13 we find this word used to describe being "grown up" (thus, "mature") but grown up into the image and full stature of Jesus Christ, who is the pure and sinless One, so that "mature" here also takes on the loftier sense of "perfection." I believe this is the destiny of every Christian in the coming age, though clearly it seems that not all reach it before death.

In seminary we were told that Wesley believed he knew other people who had reached this level of growth, but did not claim it for himself.

Of course, there is a line of connection between being spiritually mature and going on to the "full stature of Christ." The one who is spiritually mature is precisely the one who is most aware of his own faults and sins, yet who also is most determined to pursue holiness and Christ-likeness in his lifestyle. It is the one who is mature who wants to become glorious and luminous. Thus one can be perfect (spiritually mature and grown up) while still pursuing perfection (theosis by utter union with Christ) and freely admitting not yet to have attained it (see Phil. 3:12, and those being the words of Saint Paul, who was not only a saint, but also an apostolic leader).

This is basically the view of St. Augustine who wrote: "The Apostle (Paul) speaks of himself as both perfect and imperfect: imperfect when he considers how much righteousness is still wanting in him but perfect in that he does not blush to confess his own imperfection and makes good progress in order to attain it (perfection)." (On Two Letters of Pelagius, 3.19)

Perfection can mean maturity or it can mean attaining to the "fullness of the stature of Christ," and it would seem that "perfection" can also be used to describe the person "in process" - already mature, still pursuing Christ-likeness. Indeed we use "Christ-likeness" or "holiness" in just the same ways.

And, I believe, this is coherent with John Wesley's own teaching: "Christian perfection, therefore, does not imply (as some men seem to have imagined) an exemption either from ignorance, or mistake, or temptations. Indeed, it is only another term for holiness. They are two names for the same thing. Thus, everyone that is holy is, in the Scriptural sense, perfect. Yet we may, lastly, observe, that neither in this respect is there any absolute perfection on earth. There is no perfection of degrees as it is termed; none which does not admit of a continual increase. So that how much soever any man has attained, or in how high a degree soever he is perfect, he hath still need to 'grow in grace' and daily to advance in the knowledge and love of God his savior (see 2 Pet. 3:18)...He, therefore, who liveth in true believers hath 'purified their hearts by faith'; insomuch that everyone that hath Christ in him, the hope of glory, 'purify himself, even as he is pure' (1 Jn. 3:3)." - Sermon XXXV, "Christian Perfection," 1.9 & 2.6

So, to return to St. Gregory's point, let no one become a spiritual leader who is not holy and pursuing deeper holiness. For it will surely be difficult to train others in a way of living that we have not yet learned ourselves.

How well are we the clergy (and other Christian leaders) doing here? Have we a deep knowledge of Christ and of things Spiritual? Are we deeply formed in God's Holy Word and shaped by prayer and the sacraments and the other spiritual disciplines? Are we people of genuinely pure, charitable, and holy character? I suspect we are in fact a very mixed bag.

Not too many days ago I attended a "Sacred Trust" training event about "boundaries" for clergy. In particular it reminded us not to cross unethical sexual boundaries. The presenter shared a number of horrifying anecdotes of clergy from her conference who had said and done a number of extremely inappropriate (not to mention sinful) things, some of it online. The fact that such a training event even exists to tell us things that are already taught in the Bible is a reminder of how far short any of us may fall of the heavenly calling we have received, and how very present temptation remains for each of us.

Yet the promise and the vocation remains before us, "I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me." (Phil. 4:13)

Rumor has it: Archbishop to step down in 2012

It is now being reported that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, is planning to step down next year. It is believed that Cambridge University will create a position for Williams so that he can pursue an academic life; he studied, taught, and served as a chaplain at Cambridge.

Archbishop Rowan, aged 61, could serve almost ten more years, since he is not required to stand down until he is 70 years old, however reports indicate he would like to give his successor plenty of time to settle into the role of archbishop before the next Lambeth Conference (probably in 2018), which will no doubt have plenty of difficult issues to deal with.

It is also being suggested that the Archbishop of York would act as a caretaker until the new Archbishop of Canterbury could be selected. Bishop of London Richard Chartres has been suggested as a likely successor as Archbishop of Canterbury. Chartres recently preached the homily at the Royal Wedding, has a close connection to the Royal family, and has had an increasingly prominent place in the media (at least I've noticed and linked this blog to more articles about him in recent months). Interestingly, while Rowan Williams made paving the way for women bishops one of the goals of his reign, Bishop Chartres, a traditionalist, is reported to oppose womens' ordination (which, perhaps more importantly, presumably makes him a traditionalist on sexual issues as well).

The full article from "The Telegraph" can be found here. And some other links are at the Duke Divinity Blog.

Personally, I think this is likely a good change for Anglicanism. Rowan Williams is a gifted academic theologian, but I do not believe his reign as archbishop has been effectual for strengthening the Anglican Communion. I wonder what the election of Chartres could mean for the row within the Church of England over women bishops (since many Anglo-Catholics are threatening to leave for Rome if they do not receive some special protections for their position that, as yet, they do not have), and also for the wider divisions within the Communion.

Perhaps the next archbishop, whomever he may be, will provide a more decisive leadership that will bring the current crisis to some sort of resolution, rather then attempting the impossible task of appeasing all sides of controversial issues, even where they are diametrically opposed to one another.

Catholics help repair Anglican cathedral

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese has pitched in $25,000 to help with millions in repairs needed to the Washington National Cathedral (Episcopal).

“The National Cathedral holds a special place in the hearts of all of us in Washington,” said Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington.
“So many recognize it as a national house of prayer, and indeed its magnificent Gothic spires are a reminder of our constant need to raise our hearts in prayer to God in the midst of all our daily preoccupations.”

It is nice to hear of Christians from different demonimational streams looking to help one another (since all too often we hear Episcopalians and Catholics bashing one another for being either too rigidly narrow-minded or too liberal and heretical). The full story is here.

If you'd like to make a contribution to restoring the Cathedral you can find more info here.