Book Review: Exploring Protestant Traditions

Publisher: IVP Academic
Date: 2006, 373 pages

W. David Buschart (PhD Drew University) professor of theology and historical studies was troubled by a trend he saw in theology students. Some of them held ‘sincere yet uninformed stereotypes and postures of criticism-and fear’ before modest investigation into some of the primary documents of various Protestant traditions. His previous experience had demonstrated that a number of churches often claim the theological high ground. Upon investigation he discovered that often such groups have similar claims, patterns and practices. Ignorance of other traditions is fairly common. He states that ‘Protestants simply do not know, understand, or learn potentially valuable lessons from one another.’ The goal of this book is to address this ignorance and invite Protestants to extend theological hospitality to one another. He also claims its goal is to help non-Christians better understand the protestant branch of Christianity.

Drew starts out with the claim of Protestantism initially consisting of four streams, Lutheran, Reformed, Anabaptist and Anglican. Out of these streams he draws a Protestant taxonomy. This classification seems to be primarily based on when the traditions arose historically. Other traditions arose out of these four streams over time. The book examines eight separate traditions: Reformed, Lutheran, Wesleyan, Baptist, Anglican, Anabaptist, Pentecostal and Dispensational. Throughout the book he has useful diagrams that chart a rough ‘theological’ family tree.

The book is clearly laid out and easy to use, even as a reference. He dedicates a chapter to each tradition, and within each tradition has a chart showing the relationship of various related denominational strands. The chapters are divided into five sections that take the reader through the tradition. He covers the context in which the tradition arose, their approach to theology, a sampling of characteristic beliefs and then concludes with some remarks. He then has a section of resources for further study.

The first section of each chapter lays out the historical context and ecclesiastical background of the tradition with attention to its origins, development and diversity. It is in this section where his background in historical studies shows the most. He includes numerous historians in the discussion, most of them being from within the particular tradition. However, he is not given to mere recitations of dates, but some analysis of the intellectual thought forms of the time as rooted in history and theology. What this tends to generate in the reader is some context for why a particular belief system arose. He does not shy away from the inevitable messiness of reality, so attempts to address the diversity that arises in a tradition when you have differences of opinion that lead to factions.

He continues on to address the role of theology and hermeneutics in the tradition. In some cases it is quite clear, particularly where scholasticism is part of the ecclesiastical culture and scholars have taken the time to discuss an approach. But some traditions eschew theology and view it with mild suspicion at best. Such groups may typically state that they believe the Bible, full stop. Buschart would counter that whether we admit it or not, in practice we do theology and act on our belief systems. In doing so he is able to demonstrate that Pentecostals, Anabaptists and Dispensationalists do their theology in a particular way as seen through the lenses of their belief systems. Although they may not codify it as such, they approach their beliefs in a certain way. Part of my own ecclesiastical heritage is the Pentecostal movement, and it rings true when he states that we tend to have experience as the lens through which we view all else. This analysis is useful, because it demonstrates that how we approach theology and hermeneutics will actually create a certain tone or texture to our practices.

In the third section he delves into characteristic beliefs of the tradition. He carefully chooses two examples to work with, interestingly enough, key beliefs that tend to colour the tradition and often times stand out to the outsider. So for Lutheranism it is justification and the sacraments, peace and community for Anabaptists, the sovereignty and grace of God for Reform, ecclesiology and the sacraments for Anglicanism, ecclesiology and baptism for Baptists, grace and sanctification for the Wesleyans, Israel and the church and the covenants for Dispensationalists and finishes off with Spirit baptism and the gift of healing in the Pentecostal movement. He treats each belief fairly, and allows the voices of insiders to explain each one of them.

He concludes his discussion of the chapter with a synopsis that attempts to distil and capture the flavour of the tradition being discussed. In some ways, it should have come at the beginning, but it would probably have made little sense to the reader.

He finishes the chapter with a list of resources for further study. He lists key bibliographies, reference works and survey resources. A key section is primary historical and theological resources, and then a section for current theological explorations. Each chapter is heavily footnoted with citations, most of them from voices from within the tradition.

He wraps up the book with a call to theological hospitality. He does not deny the divisions that exist and accepts that many consider this sinful and less than ideal. So he develops a position that accounts for the diversity that tradition brings while still claiming a unity. His argument comes across as making an excuse for division (Christianity is an incarnational religion that yields particularity), but at the same time he is realistic with what really exists.

He proposes that we model the Old Testament and show hospitality to the stranger in our midst, much the same as God has shown hospitality to us as individuals. And the stranger in our midst is the Christian from a different tradition. He then discusses the risks and benefits of theological hospitality. He ends the book with his own testimony of how he has been impacted by his survey of other traditions.

Analysis

Buschart’s approach of weaving historical context into the tradition gives the reader an understanding and sympathy for each movement. For example, his discussion of Anglicanism reveals that political and social events within Britain had a great effect on religion, especially after the king became head of the church. The crown, observing the strong reaction of the reformers in Europe who wanted to throw a lot out and rebuild, could also see the value many English people held in some of the Catholic practices. So they opted for the via media, or middle road and arbitrarily chose to be informed by antiquity and retain the first five centuries of the church. Whatever the crown was to choose, they had to achieve compromise between Catholics and reformers. So rather than throwing it all out, they chose the flavour of the early church.

His choice of characteristic beliefs includes at least some of those features most often misunderstood by other believers. Since he has given the historical milieu in which the belief arose, the belief actually makes some sense. For example Anabaptists have a stubborn peace at all costs streak that has troubled other Christians and society at large during times of war. One can now see this arose not as a mere ideology but in response to the intense persecution which greeted the early members in the movement.

It is in the juxtaposition of these beliefs across tradition boundaries that we can actually have some intellectual basis for theological hospitality. Picture the Lutheran who believes that Christian experience can never be the standard for doctrine having a discussion on Luke and Acts with a Pentecostal who tends to view the baptism of the Holy Spirit as the lens through which he views all else.

His chapter discussing division is less than satisfying. It seems like he is making an elaborate argument to preserve the status quo all the while ignoring the first eleven hundred years of church history which were ended when the Roman Catholic and Orthodox went their separate ways. One might say that he is simply being realistic, and you can’t put Humpty together again. Perhaps his book is at least a beginning call to Protestant leaders to lay aside agendas and triumphalism and recognize the good and pleasing that exists in the body of Christ.

It would have been interesting if at some point he would have tried to tie the belief systems that arose to the general intellectual atmosphere generated by the enlightenment. The overemphasis on reason as a tool and the concomitant pride that it engenders has certainly played a role in the fractionalization of the Christian movement, but other voices from the emergent church are already singing that tune.

The book is a valuable addition to any Christian thinker or leader’s library.

Does the book fulfill its intended goal? It certainly does for the Christian. An unbeliever coming to it would need some understanding of Christian belief, but would probably need to be quite dedicated to make it through.

Book Review: DEEP CHURCH

Author: Jim Belcher

Publisher: InterVarsity Press
Date: 2009, 233 pages

Jim Belcher (Ph.D., Georgetown) pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Newport California wrote this work to target four audiences. Those who are unhappy with the state of evangelicalism and like some of what both the emerging and traditional camps offer, but are not completely at ease with either, those who are new to the whole conversation and need to understand it, seminarians who are working out their ecclesiology, and lastly pastors who have been ministering for awhile and are beginning to have questions.

Belcher is part of a group of Gen-X pastors who began to question traditional evangelicalism in the 1990s. Eventually many of them began to identify themselves as the Emerging church. Belcher says the Emerging tent is actually large, but comprises three main groups which he identifies as Relevants who are trying to contextualize Christianity to their culture, Reconstructionists who are typically more orthodox but question current ecclesiology and Revisionists who are questioning key evangelical doctrines on theology and culture and wondering if these dogmas are appropriate in a postmodern world. What they share in common is the postmodern critique of modern culture as one of their primary lenses through which they interpret culture and evangelicalism in particular. Their complaints have become particularly shrill and as traditionalists have heard them the pushback has been strong. On the other hand, many traditionalists believe that the Emerging churches are simply 21st century liberals.

Belcher, who has some formal training in philosophic postmodernism, became puzzled so took the time to listen deeply to what they had to say. He has boiled their critiques down to seven major areas which he has identified as truth, evangelism, the gospel, worship, preaching, ecclesiology and culture. In his work he identifies each critique, how traditionalists respond, and then suggests a via media or middle road that avoids either extreme. Although he can identify with the complaint that evangelicals are captive to modernism he also recognizes that without a reference point emergents run the risk of simply becoming another expression of postmodern frustration, no less tied to the culture around them.

Belcher starts out by identifying the chronic evangelical tendency to fragment and posits that in this case we cannot afford another major split that mirrors the modernist/fundamentalist split of the early 20th century. He also asks “what if the emerging church is not liberal?” Isn’t some discussion needed? But before discussion can begin we need to have trust. Because evangelicals tend to view themselves as theologically diverse Belcher suggests a return to the classical consensus which suggests that orthodoxy is defined by adherence to the major creeds of the early church. He argues that this is the essence of C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity. If this becomes the litmus test of orthodoxy then other doctrines can become simply denominational distinctives not necessary for salvation. If we adopt this view, then discussion between the emerging and traditional church becomes possible.

In the area of truth or epistemology the complaint against traditionalists is that they are foundationalists at heart. Their quest for epistemological certainty has bred arrogance, lack of humility and they have all the right answers. Everyone else is wrong. But the postmodernist also believes that anti-foundationalism means that we cannot know reality aside from the individual or community, so they have flawed metaphysics. But the truth is, reality is there and individuals realise it. The emerging camp has not always made it clear what they stand for, but is clear in what they are against. Belcher argues that what is real is found in the Word and provides the authority for Christian community. We build our metaphysics on divine revelation. God becomes our guarantor.

Traditionalists are flawed in their evangelism because they use doctrine as a fence to keep others out and have reduced conversion to doctrine or transfer of theological knowledge. On the other hand emerging culture places belonging before believing. However, the emergents can be asked ‘when does the seeker ever get to a point where they are challenged to repent?’ The bible affirms that Christians are a new and distinctive community. The question becomes can we stress belonging so much that we stunt spiritual growth in our communities? Belcher maintains that Jesus modelled a better approach. He had many followers, but admission to the inner circle (God’s covenant family) required a commitment. He demonstrates this in his challenge to the rich young ruler who thought he was in the inner circle. Jesus told him that what he lacked is that he needed to sell all. Jesus never sent his other followers away, but continued being invitational.

Traditionalists assert that the Emerging church is really the social gospel in the 21st century. It’s emphasis on the Kingdom of God diminishes the importance of the cross. Instead of calling all to make Jesus Lord and Saviour, the gospel is reduced to social justice and good works. Emergents push back by saying that traditionalists overemphasize personal salvation and it produces an individualism that ignores the world, a type of fire insurance against hell. These churches tend to promote self-interest and church shopping for places that meet ones personal needs better. Belcher argues that the gospel touches all areas of life, we are personally transformed which leads to beautiful community, social justice and cultural transformation.

In the area of worship traditionalists create mall like church environments sporting high energy entertainment style worship and model church structures after the world’s business models. In its place some emergents are making their worship spaces sacred again by creating a multi-sensory experience that combines art and worship, old and new. Christianity is not just new, but ancient as well. The critics argue that just as other churches pander to the culture at large, the emerging church just offers a specialized worship experience that can easily become entertainment and will require new ways to keep people. Belcher sees clearly the problems in the traditional church but also argues that the theological amnesia that the emergent stream has of the Great Tradition means that they will likely be absorbed by the culture at large, since they don’t have sufficient roots. Belcher echoes that to avoid this fate, evangelicals need to return to keeping the Bible, culture and tradition. In this case tradition can act as a counterbalance against culture. At Belchers church they base the worship on the following principles: Ancient and new, feature biblical drama, an atmosphere of joy and reverence, the priesthood of all Believers, profound but accessible sermons, weekly Eucharist and guest friendly evangelism.

In the area of preaching, emergents are tired of rationalistic preaching that is both moralistic and legalistic. They charge that it comes across as arrogant and preachy. Some say what is more important than the authority of the bible is God speaking to the community, sometimes using the bible and sometimes not. The traditional church pushes back by saying the issue is really the emergents distrust of authority and a loss of confidence in God’s Word. Belcher argues that we need to use the great tradition as a plumb line, a rule of faith the church has used for two millennia to understand the faith, live it out faithfully and pass along to the next generation. Surely we need to contextualize the message, but without an outside marker we don’t know how far we have moved from biblical fidelity (p 153).

In the area of ecclesiology the emerging church is disappointed with the institutionalism. Their thinking is fuelled by a passion for missions and church structure gets in their way. The emphasis placed on church attendance, one size fits all worship, and church planting, which are the earmarks that the church is modernistic. In its place they suggest flat management structure, and some prefer home churches. The traditionalists push back by saying that those things coupled with fluid structures and limited accountability are simply trends of the new business model, so the emergents are just as enthralled by the culture as they claim everyone else is. Once again Belcher sees that although both sides have a point, they are still missing something. The problem is that many evangelicals have been influenced by the models of modernity for 150 years. He states ‘without the great Tradition teaching us about inherited forms of church structure and government, we will continue to talk past one another.’ In the end he arrives at the conclusion that the Bible plus Tradition plus Mission will enable us to form a deep ecclesiology.

Emergents contend that in the area of culture, the church has become dualist in outlook, with a wall between the sacred and the secular. This has led to becoming isolationist, inhospitable to postmodern seekers, arrogant and judgemental. People are often of the world but not in it. The traditionalist pushes back with the assertion that immersing in the culture translates to whatever the world loves at the moment, and pandering to every worldly theme, trend and fashion. Belcher feels that the emergents still have too narrow of a view of creation, mostly focused on the private sphere touched by music, art and film. They don’t recover enough of creation. On this issue he draws inspiration from Abraham Kuyper who felt that although the church has a special spiritual purpose, spiritual transformation will manifest itself in people making new culture and seeing their communities transformed.

Belcher has clearly done a thorough job of research and has spent a lot of time listening to and trying to understand the emergent church. His background in the traditional church and his own personal voyage have prepared him to undertake the task. He has not only consulted primary sources, but in some cases gone to authors to discuss their work (Wolterstorff, Frost and Hirsch, Kimball and Pagitt). He is sympathetic to both sides of the dispute, and does not hesitate to agree with valid criticisms. He has achieved his stated purpose with something for each of the four groups he addresses.

One of his more important points that he raises really is a corollary to from D.H. Williams contention that evangelicals suffer from historical amnesia. He states “…it is too easy to think we are being biblical when we let either the traditions and preferences of the recent past dictate our ecclesiology or let the surrounding culture mold our views of church structure” (p 173). Because all humans are essentially bound to the era in which they live it is difficult at times to see how conditioned we are by our culture. At times we are so tightly bound it is miraculous that God can still speak into our time. So Belcher recommends that we allow the great tradition to act as a counter balance or plumb line in both our preaching and ecclesiology.

I would highly recommend Belchers work to anyone who is troubled with the current state of evangelicalism. As a member of a church that is strongly a product of some of the same forces that have produced the emergents I am almost weekly reminded of the amnesia and chaos that results when you have many voices in the community who want anything but the evangelical culture they grew up with. And as I watch us slip into the same patterns as our surrounding culture I get alarmed. Belcher’s cool, calm voice reminds me that the great cloud of witnesses mentioned in the book of Hebrews extends beyond the death of the last apostle and that perhaps they may have something to contribute to this dialogue.