On the Parchment and Pen blog, C. Michael Patton recently wrote an excellent article entitled, “The Evangelical Epidemic of Theological Accountability and Discipline” in which he makes an excellent case why (albeit tacitly) theological education must primarily exist in an ecclesiological context. Here are some excerpts from his article:
“No one likes to be told they are wrong. Correction and critique are things we go out of our way to avoid. Those who can ask the tough questions about your life, probing deep when they suspect some spiritual sickness, are not often not welcome friends. We don’t pick up the phone when they call. We avoid them at work. We don’t return their emails. Why? Because they can tell us the skinny about our life and we don’t want to hear it. We are prideful people who, like the priest, choose to walk far around the problems in our life, and we ask others to do the same.
As problematic as this mentality is with regards to things having to do with moral integrity, I believe that the problem is just as severe with regards to theological integrity.”
“Sadly we have an epidemic of theological discipline in the church today. People think that they can believe and teach anything based upon a subjective experience or a provision of hope. This epidemic is caused due to lack of theological accountability. We don’t think we need people to tell us we are wrong. We don’t have any system of checks and balances; in fact, we often avoid them. We think that if we have the Bible and the Holy Spirit, we have license. There is no way to be humiliated so that we can be humbled.”
“Integrity of belief is essential for every Christian. We all need trustworthy sources to which we can turn to test our beliefs. We need to have learned how to handle the Scriptures properly. We need to learn not only the right beliefs, but how to come to the right beliefs the right way. We all need to be humbled . . . often. We even need to get the snot kicked out every once in a while. We need battle scars of discipline. We need to have friendships with people who will tell us we are in left field. We need to fear discipline enough that we will think twice about believing or teaching something novel.”
“Once one becomes a Christian, the most they receive is a four week membership class that deals less with theology and more with church polity. But for the most part they don’t even get this. We tell them to ask Christ into their heart then we send them on their way with our blessing. In reality, we don’t know what has been created. At best, we have just placed a new born baby on the streets telling them to be filled and happy.”
Is it any wonder that the church has such an epidemic for theological integrity? Should we really expect any different?
Who are you accountable to for your beliefs? When you get a wild hair about some theological issue, where do you turn? Better, where does this wild hair come from and who gave you the right to have a wild hair. “Wild.” Look it up in the dictionary and you will see that it means “undisciplined, unruly, or lawless.”
People need serious theological training. People need discipline. People need to know that they cannot do whatever they want with Christian belief and expect there to be so many lab rats available. If you have not been trained theologically, you need to be. This does not mean that you have read a book or two on theology, but you need to be in some sort of program that systematically, from beginning to end, takes you through the Christian faith, teaching you not only what to think and believe, but how to think and believe. We all need to be critiqued, disciplined, and humbled. We need more spiritual black eyes. We also need to be prepared to do the same with others.”
___________
A Blue Collar Theology values theological accountability and discipline through a confessional integrity in an ecclesiological context. Accountability and discipline could never adequately occur through mere theological precision in academia (though it is a prerequisite); rather, we are called to watch both our life and our doctrine–and the two cannot, must not be separated. Therefore, theological accountability and discipline rightly correspond to the spiritual disciplines of holiness and progressive sanctification, for as we mentioned earlier, theological education cannot be divorced from sanctification.
Are you accountable for your theological beliefs? Where do you turn to humbly submit your doctrinal understanding and beliefs? Should it not be the local church and your elders? Indeed, it should.
Sorry, Timmy, but I think Mr. Patton’s views expressed in the above quotations come very close to advocating priestcraft and authoritarianism. Maybe I’m reading him wrong—I hope so—but the tone of the last paragraph is really frightening from where I’m sitting, not knowing anything about the man.
Also, where in the Scriptures do we turn to support the idea of submitting our personal doctrinal views to a “local church” or its elders for approval or validation? I fully embrace the concept expressed by Mr. Patton that, “We need to have friendships with people who will tell us we are in left field,” because it fits well with “iron sharpening iron” (Prov. 27:17). That’s the power of loving relationships within the Christian family.
Maybe I’m just having flashbacks to the whole authoritarian abuse plague that circulated among Reformed Baptists a number of years back (perhaps while you were still in elementary school). I probably shouldn’t mention names here, but some elders took things so far as to excommunicate people and then forbid their friends and family to even speak to them (even if they were husband and wife).
Just be careful, brother. We don’t need surrogate priests “teaching [us] not only what to think and believe, but how to think and believe,” when we have a great High Priest and the power of the Holy Spirit indwelling every believer. Jesus said that He (the Holy Spirit) would lead us into all truth, and I take that literally.
Bill, I don’t think either Patton or our host are advocating anything similar to a priesthood or magesterium, but there is a long Christian tradition that has ironed out over centuries what is and is not consistent with the Bible. If someone suddenly “realizes” that the Bible teaches something that was dealt with at Nicea, somebody needs to bring them back to reality.
As for the last paragraph, I think he’s saying that this endeavour requires careful study and hard work. Reading two books does not make you a physicist, and it doesn’t make you a theologian. He wants us to make a lifestyle out of learning theology and to recognize that we can be, and often are, wrong about some point or another.
Bill,
I’ve just a minute, so I cannot fully speak to your concerns. Maybe Mr. Patton could chime in. In general, I think his point is that orthodoxy requires us doing theology together, meaning that doctrines, beliefs, or positions should be held accountable to Scripture and to the Christian community which you belong. Is that a wrong think to expect? Should Christians be free to hold whatever doctrinal positions they want in your church? Where do you draw the line? Expect accountability?
I think I understand where you are coming from. I am not advocating the “surrogate priest” mentality in the church by any means! What I am trying to say is, if theology is important to the church, then we must consider what we confess in light of our covenant communities of faith.
(Note: If I do not answer quickly, I have class from 12-9 today, so I will try to check back when I get a chance.)
Thanks for linking to the post. Chris is right, I am most certainly not advocating anything like the Catholic church. My goal is simply to make it to where people cannot come into Christianity and define it however they wish. We should have a great respect and fear of theology, understanding that we cannot do or say whatever we feel is right. I find that most people get up to their pulpits without any accountability structure. They are fearless. This is dangerous. In some sense we should be very afraid to talk about God while at the same time very bold in our proclamation. A balance that is hard to find.
Thanks again.
Mr. Patton,
Thanks for commenting and clarifying. I think what you are calling for can be described in what Joshua Harris calls a “humble orthodoxy.” This is not uncertainty or doubt, of course, but a confidence and boldness on account of the authority of Scripture alone. Whether it is chronological snobbery or confessional disregard, I find it disconcerting that in our hyper-individualized Western mentality we can avoid such needed accountability in matters of doctrine. Again, thanks for the clarification!
Timmy Brister
We have only one source of authority (Scripture) and one infallible interpreter of that authority (the Holy Spirit). There is no such thing as a completely pure stream of theological tradition handed down, understood, or maintained by anyone. Reading ONE book is all it takes to make someone a theologian, as long as that person has the Holy Spirit dwelling within to guide them into all Truth.
I’m not anti-intellectual, but I do cringe when I read things that seem to take a heavy-handed, authoritarian, condescending attitude toward others. Please, I’m not accusing you guys of willfully embracing that sort of attitude or having insincere motives, but that’s how it sounded when I read this particular post. As an older brother in the faith—not necessarily smarter or more theologically astute—I trust you will receive my critique with the same degree of humility that you would expect of me if the tables were turned the other way.
Timmy, I read your blog every day and I have a reciprocal link on my website that commends people to visit you. So I’m not just jumping in to pick a fight or be obnoxious. I may even visit Mr. Patton’s site from time to time, because I’m sure he’s a great guy who maybe just overstated his case a little too much. My guess is that I’m twice your age with half your zeal, but you two “sons of thunder” need to learn to chill out a bit and trust the Holy Spirit to do His work in the hearts of His people. The Lord IS building His Church (and I’m not talking about the buildings on every corner of Louisville or Nashville).
Blessings,
Bill Lollar
The Thin Edge of the Wedge
Bill,
You wrote,
We have only one source of authority (Scripture) and one infallible interpreter of that authority (the Holy Spirit).
That is precisely the reason why we need theological accountability in the church. Due to our fallen nature and finite understanding, we are prone to bad thinking and theology. Doing theology in a confessional context and in a covenant community offers a necessary critique and check on what we profess. We all have the responsibility of doing theology well–a responsibility that I fear Christians are not taking seriously. The issue is not whether I am trusting the Holy Spirit to do His work in the hearts and minds of Christians. If it were as easy as you make it out to be (just trust the Holy Spirit to guide them in all truth and not demand accountability), then why, pray tell, does Paul and the early church leaders warn of so much false teaching in the 1st century churches? They had the Holy Spirit, the Apostle Paul and the apostles, and yet even Peter (the man God used to preach the first sermon and start the church) had imbibed in bad theology, becoming a hypocrite and leading others astray! If Peter can get it wrong, can’t we?
Can we get it wrong? Of course, but it’s not the end of the world or, more importantly, the end of our relationship with the triune God. He still loves us, just like he loved the Twelve when they got it wrong after three years at the feet of the Living Word; and yet Father used them to turn the world upside down.
I cannot imagine the depth of love that must dwell within the heart of Jesus, restraining Him from calling down fire from heaven when those men continued to voice their political interests (Acts 1:6) at such a late stage in their discipleship. And yet Jesus barely acknowledges their faux pas, but rather He emphasizes a greater purpose in Father’s plan and an amazing sense of confidence that He (and His Spirit) would soon be empowering, guiding, and maturing this little band of brothers (and every one of us).
Now the Pharisees…that’s another story. They insisted on complete precision and uniformity when it came to doctrine: THEY were the arbiters of truth and justice when it came to the teachings of Holy Scripture. It was their life’s ambition to protect the sanctity of biblical doctrine and enforce right thinking and right behavior on everyone else. And if your theology didn’t meet up with THEIR standards, well, you were branded a heretic or worse. They were the first century equivalent of today’s ultra-conservative evangelicals and yet we don’t often recognize the seeds of Phariseeism within our own hearts and minds.
Those whom God raises up (or perhaps I should say “whom God calls to the lowest place as bond-slaves”) within the context of a community of believers are not given the task of managing or controlling or exercising power over fellow believers under threat of punishment (aka “kicking the snot out of people” or “humiliating them” or giving out “spiritual black eyes”). I think Jesus makes this clear in Matthew 20:25-28.
At one time, I competed for “Pharisee of the Month” on a regular basis, until a dear brother in Christ, Ernie Reisinger, warned a group of us (seminarians at Mid-America) of pursuing the modern-day equivalent of Mr. Valiant-for-Truth in Bunyan’s famous allegory. He encouraged us very gently and kindly to put our Jerusalem blades back in their sheaths before someone got hurt. Alexander Whyte sums up Mr. Reisinger’s counsel in his excellent character study of Mr. Valiant, but I will leave you with a brief quotation:
So Bill, what do you do when someone in your church teaches bad theology? Say you have a son in the student ministry where the student minister is teaching your son Brian McLaren’s view the gospel, hell, etc. Not wanting to be the “Mr. Valiant-for-Truth” guy, how are we to address theological error and potential heresy in the local church? Or are we at all?
A follow up question would be the purpose and use of church covenants and confessions. In what way should a church confession be normative in the life of a congregation? How doers believers express their covenant commitment to one another when one is teaching something contrary to Scripture and leading others astray?
I would approach the “student minister” as a brother, treating him as if he were the Apostle Paul himself, deserving of my love and respect and fellowship in Christ. We would talk openly about my concerns, to see if perhaps my own son had misunderstood and always giving the benefit of the doubt. In other words, I would proceed along the lines of Matthew 18 in the most humble posture I could muster, depending upon the Holy Spirit to sort out truth from error in my own heart and in the heart of my brother. It would be my intent to resolve the problem there and then, without getting anyone else involved. Obviously, it might not end there and I may have to pursue things a bit farther than a private conversation. But such a course of action would bring great sadness and regret, rather than a sense of victory or gloating that “the heretic got his come uppence at last.”
I would also say that not everything “I disagree with” necessarily puts someone in the rubbish heap outside the pale of Christianity, or membership in the Body of Christ. Leaders can kick someone out of a particular religious club (Rigidair Reformed Baptist Church of Louisville, for example) because they violate the “rules of membership” (aka “confession”), but it doesn’t always mean that person will burn in hell for being a heretic. You mentioned Brian McLaren, but there’s a host of others within the body of Christ that we would just rather not acknowledge or sit next to or room with or invite to our next barbeque. Do we love them as a brother or sister in Christ? Personally, I have never read McLaren, but I have read plenty of “blog rage” against him and even against guys like Mark Driscoll.
Church covenants and confessions are often used as the starting point—even justification and fuel—for many a fight among true brothers and sisters. I think they can be dangerous, for all the good and harmony they may also bring. Here in Wales, we try to work across various streams of evangelicalism that often are not willing to be nice or even say “Hello!” to one another on a nice sunny day (and that’s rare). My “covenant commitment,” as you put it, is expressed to anyone who is “in Christ,” who follows Him, loves Him, serves Him, and makes Him known alongside me in this troubled world. I don’t get hung up on what church someone attends or what confessional framework they operate under, if any at all. Having an airtight confession will never bring us all together, unless you can boil it down to the essence of “Jesus is Lord” or some other simple (perhaps viewed as arcane) New Testament expression.
Bill,
One of the things we know when relating to one another is that past experiences and previously held beliefs inform our answers or comprise our statements. It sounds like you have been around some jerks who have been ungracious and unbecoming of the gospel. I may be wrong in making this observation, but I fear that it is possible to throw the baby out with the bathwater when believers exercise theological accountability in the wrong way. Just because it has been wrong does not mean that we give up doing it.
I have personally been burned and bruised in the local church, and I have seen ten times more how NOT to do things than how to do them rightly. I have been around hard authoritarians and pastors who acted as autocrats, even personally threatened when I disagreed. My calling for theological accountability does come as a theoretical idealistic notion but something I believe essential to the unity and integrity of the local church. If we can agree on the fact that theological accountability is needed in the local church, then the next step would be to discover the *right way* of going about doing it. Unfortunately, in most cases it is as you have expressed, and that should break our hearts.