Belz-Hegeman Thread re: Rethinking "Reformed"
I just stumbled across your site and your essay Rethinking "Reformed". A very interesting take on the 'problem' of faith and culture. I happen to see the so-called Great Commission and the Cultural Mandate as closely related--that people are being saved and transformed by God in order to fulfill the original cultural calling given to the human race before the fall. Have you seen my book on this topic? You can read the introduction (pdf) and see the outline of my book (table of contents) at http://www.canonpress.org/pages/culture.asp Another book on this topic you might want to look at is Peter Leithart's "Kingdom and the Power". Peace,
Dave Hegeman
Thanks for interacting with my essay! I am sure that we agree with each other, when it comes down to it. I agree that culture, in the pure sense of the word, is the end result of evangelism. The problem I see is that we (the American church) do so little in the way of evangelism and mercy ministry, yet we do so much in the way of developing a "Christian world and life view." We need to be doing both with courage and anticipation! That said, I am not sure that it is legitimate for most Christians to be working in secular trades during the last days. I'm not saying it's not legitimate, I'm just saying that I'm not sure. The reason I'm not sure is that so many (especially abroad) are struggling just to avoid starvation. Our mind, as a Church, is so little on them, and so much on our occupations as businessmen and culture-workers. I wish we had more balance, and more evangelical excitement all around. Your point is well taken, though, and I will look up your book. Thanks, and may God bless you, Aaron Belz
Please indulge me to challenge you on a number of points you made on your response to my response: 1. You raise the question of whether or not it is appropriate for Christians to be involved in culture-making activities because we are in the "last days", during which we should be probably concentrating on evangelism and mercy ministries. What do you base this on? It would seem, based on Acts 2:17, that we have been in the last days since Pentecost. The church is in the same boat it has always been in. While I hold that Christ's return is in principle truly imminent (I am not a post-millenialist), I see no reason why it may not be another 2000 years, or maybe 100,000 years before the parousia. We need to equally open to either possibility and live in the tension between the two. 2. You speak of the activities outside of evangelism and mercy works as "secular trades." I think you need to rethink this. There is no "sacred/secular" distinction for Christians in their vocations. (There are of course some "vocations" which are unlawful.) Adam's calling was to develop (work) the earth. This was a holy calling. It is no less holy/sacred today. Here is a little "closed Book" quiz: What is to be the "light" the church is supposed to illuminate the world with in Matt. 5? The answer is not the gospel but "good works (ergon)." And I do not think this in limited to acts of kindness toward those in need (ministries of mercy), but would equally apply to cultural works as well. A well-built, functional, aesthetic chair made by a Christian to the glory of God speaks as much to a lost world as an act of kindness. Well this is enough for now. Happy chewing. dave
My case is more a matter of degree than of right or wrong. I don't think that we should abandon secular work (and I also don't think that term should carry a negative connotation). But I do think we should work to restore the primacy of so-called sacred work. We Reformed folk are forever battling the distinction between the sacred and secular, and I think it's a misguided battle. We want to say, "It's all kingdom work," and though in a sense it is, scripture itself (old and new testaments) makes a consistent distinction between the world and the church. We, members of the Body of Christ, are holy, living "in the world but not of the world." The world is an evil place in which we must live cautiously: "We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one" (I John 5). But missions and mercy have a special place in scripture -- surely you must admit that the Great Commission does not include the design of chairs. And the expressions of mercy ("I was in prison, and you visited me" etc) that count as our "works" are a bit different than our very good and legitimate work in vocations? In your view, is there no qualitative difference between caring for orphans and composing an advertising jingle? God bless the lawyers and brokers, carpenters and custodians, TV producers and athletes in our churches. They don't have easy lives. But may God [even more so] bless preachers, teachers, ministers, those who feed the hungry and clothe the poor -- they face even greater adversity. They have a higher calling. Why can't we Reformed people recognize that, between two equally legitimate callings, one is higher? Let's go back to other wise men in the Christian tradition, such as Augustine and Bunyan. They had no trouble seeing the distinction between the city of God and the city of man. And when I say "last days," I do mean the days since the time of Pentecost, not just these most recent decades and centuries. As to the length of time we may have to live in these last days, I don't know that it matters -- it's a question of each Christian's heart-response to God's calling here and now. Let Him take care of the future, but there is no question that we are in a historical period of missions-urgency -- even Reformed theologians agree on this. I recommend Anthony Hoekema's The Bible and The Future. He laments that our church has its enthusiasm for missions, which he regards as its primary calling during this historical period. Edmund Clowney does the same thing in The Church (a fantastic book), and so does Berkhof, occasionally, in his systematics. Thanks for taking the time, Aaron Belz
Hoekema's book is one of my favorites too! In fact it was very influential on my book. I consider him to be an "earthy" amillenialist in the tradition of Kuyper, Bavinck and Vos. Allow me to respond to some of your points: 1. The purpose of the Great Commission is "to make disciples", "teaching the nations to observe all I have commanded." The *all* in the last phrase includes all the general moral/ethical imperatives of the OT and NT (i.e. the "moral law"). This includes the first imperatives made to man to take dominion over the earth and work/keep the garden (which I take to be extended to the whole earth when one synthesizes the global horizon of Gen. 1 with Garden perspective of Gen. 2). These "pre-redemptive" imperatives were never rescinded. Thus culture-making and ultimately furniture-making (done self-consciously to the glory of God) is a fulfillment of the Great Commission. (This does not negate the importance of preaching and ministries of mercy which are also implied in the word *all*.) 2. More on the sacred/secular distinction: While I would never want to equate the care of orphans with writing advertising jingles, I would not have a problem equating the care of orphans with composing a symphony. I would even go so far as to say that for one called to be a composer, taking up all of one's resources caring for orphans and widows would be an act of disobedience. Don't get me wrong--people with immediate, dire needs who we come across must *always* be helped, but eventually their care should be turned over to those in the covenant community with the gift and calling of mercy. 3. The world. The irony of the phrase "in the world, not of the world" derived from John 17 (and other places) is that the word "world" must mean two different things in each half of the phrase. While "in the world" must refer to this physical place (1 Cor. 5:10), "world" cannot mean this in the second half of the phrase, since we told the things of the world are "good" (1 Tim 4:4). Rather, the term "world" is better interpreted as the "anti-Christian system (ideas, persons, institutions, etc.)" rather than the physical place. Otherwise we go down the road of metaphysical dualism (spiritual=good/physical=bad) which has plagued the church since the rise of Gnosticism. I discuss this issue in detail in my book including the introduction which you can read for free. (On the horrible effects of metaphysical dualism see Jerram Barrs' book Being Human.) 4. I would certainly concede that preaching/evangelism/discipleship/missions (you can't separate these apart, imho) is priority one for the *institutional* church, BUT, for the church as the organic community of believers, there is (at least) a three-fold calling: evangelism/discipleship, mercy ministry and culture-making. The church community as a whole should not be deficient in any of these areas. Within the church sphere, elders are worthy of honor. But in the other spheres, the leaders are also to be accorded honor within their respective spheres (for example in the political and family spheres). All of these spheres are vital. All of these spheres are (potentially) holy. All of these spheres are high callings before the throne of God. On what basis are we to say the work of the institutional church is higher than that in the other spheres? I ultimately think that the church falls short in all of these areas. Perhaps there is a backlash against the abuses of Revivalism pushing us too much in the culture-making direction, but I think there is a need for huge potential for growth in this area as well. I also think that if the church at large had a healthier cultural life, the evangelistic and mercy-ministry aspects would greatly benefit. The lack of a vibrant, healthy biblical culture is a chronic drain on the life and effectiveness of the church. We deal with the effects of this every day. In him-----------------------------dave
> The lack of a vibrant, healthy biblical I think that what I'm objecting to in my original essay is the reality of the church, not the concept of Christians participating in culture. In fact, Christians should work to transform culture, but most of the time (I have about 25 friends in this category and might be in it myself) we work in culture *as it is*, doing little to transform it. We have lost the vital transformational edge, and as such, we begin to blend. Key principle: IT IS VERY BAD TO BLEND. We are holy. I believe with all my heart that Christians should be known, that we should be lights shining, that we should be different because we have been transformed by Christ. But most of the time, that is not the case. We launch out of Wheaton, Calvin, Covenant College with all the best "reformed" intentions, get jobs, write books, impress people (see October's Atlantic Monthly) and then we accommodate what we find, all the while becoming increasingly frustrated. It is interesting that you regard composing a symphony and writing an ad jingle as respectively "higher" and "lower" endeavors, yet are unwilling to see a similar hierarchy among vocations overall. I do believe there is a scriptural basis for higher and lower callings. I see it even within sacred calling -- see I Cor 12, in which Apostles take the position of supreme ecclesiastical importance, and then prophets, teachers, and so on. I will work to find more scripture in support of callings overall. So yes, I think it's a higher calling to be a composer than a secretary in a law firm, and I also think it's a higher calling to be a pastor than to be a composer. I see a line of authority -- in other words, I think it's more important that the composer respond to the authority of the pastor, when it pertains to the most important things in life. And of course, the pastor trusts the composer's judgment when it comes to musical composition, but that's not as significant a matter as receiving the sacraments and understanding the Gospel of Christ! True, both have limited jurisdictions. But one is jurisdiction on a higher order. As to the threat of gnosticism, I don't find a denial of the flesh to be the necessary conclusion of the city of God/city of man distinction. I don't think piety or separatism are necessary. What I want to see is the Church and its mission being taken more seriously among Christians of all varieties. Life being short, we should each take account of what we're doing. Good email, anyway. This subject tends to make me talk. Aaron Belz
I couldn't agree with you more on the issue of blending culture. I think a kind of separatism is in order--we must separate ourselves from sin and the effects of sin--both in ourselves in the in the community/culture around us. But we must not separate ourselves from culture per se. Thus we must be about making--beginning on a small scale--a Christian culture which truly celebrates the fullness of human life (Doug Wilson and Doug Jones have argued for this most elegantly in Angels in the Architecture.) This was the message of the infamous open letter by Paul Weyrich. I just recently discovered the article in Atlantic Mag. I found it pretty depressing actually. As you said, where is the distinctiveness? We are in our awful cultural predicament precisely because the evangelical church in the 19th century (esp. in America) went nuts over evangelism and missions to the neglect of authentic biblical culture-making. It seems to me, that unless we affirm the equally ultimate value of both the ministry of culture-making and the ministries of the institutional church, the "ministry" we chose to hold as highest will eventually end up crowding out the other(s). One radical idea I explore in my book (and I got from Hoekema and others) is the idea based on Rev. 14:13 and Rev. 21:24,26 that the best of human culture will be included in the culture of the New Earth. Thus it is not only preaching which will have eternal repercussions. I think the key to seeing why the ministries of the institutional church are not ultimate is to see that they are a means to something else: Worship and Work. Cultus and culture. Before the fall this is what typified the human life. On the New Earth this will also typify life. Work and Worship are why human beings were put on this planet in first place. The saints through the ministry of the word are equipped for *every* good work--including cultural works. Hey--this has been a great exchange. dave
|