Spring 2001 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources for Ministry

8/9/2019 Spring 2001 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources for Ministry

1/113

2001

Quarterly ReviewA J O U R N A L O F T H E O L O G I C A L R E S O U R C E S F O R N Q N I S T R Y

RevitalizingTheologicalReflectionin theCongregation


2/113

QUARTERLY REVIEW E D I T O R I A L B O A R DT E D A. C A M P B E L LWesley Theological Seminary. Washington, DCM I N E R V A G. C A R C A N OPerkins School of Theolog)'. Dallas. TXR E B E C C A C H O P PCandler School of Theology, Atlanta. OAD U A N E A. E W E R SGeneral Board of Higher Education and Ministry,The United Methodist Church, Nashville, TNP A T R I C I A F A R R I SFirst United Methodist Church of Santa Monica,Santa Monica. CAG R A N T I I A G I Y ALos Angeles District Office, Los Angeles, CAT O R D I R E B L A DMctodistkyrkans Nordiska Teologiska Scminarium,SwedenR O G E R W. I R E S O N . C H A I RGeneral Board of Higher Education and Ministry,The United Methodist Church, Nashville, TNJ A C K A. K E L L E R . JR.The United Methodist Publishing House,NashviUe. TN

M A R Y AN N M O M A NGeneral Board of Higher Education and Ministry,The United Methodist Church, Nashville, TNT H O M A S W. O G L E T R E EThe Divinity School, Yale University,New Haven, CTH A R R I E T T J A N E O L S O NThe United Methodist Publishing House,Nashville, TNR U S S E L L E. R I C H E YCandler School of Theology, Atlanta, GAM A R J O R I E H E W I T T S U C H O C K IClaremont School of Theology, Claremont, CAL I N D A E. T H O M A SLutheran School of Theology at Chicago,Chicago, ILT R A G I W E S TThe Theological School, Drew University,Madison, NJD A V I D Y E M B AAfrica University, Zimbabwe


3/113

Quarterly ReviewA J O U R N A L O F T H E O L O G I C A L R E S O U R C E S F O R M I N I S T R Y

Volume 21, Number 1Spring 2001

A Publication ofthe General Board of Higher Education and Ministryand The United Methodist Publishing House


4/113

Qu arter ly Rev iew (ISSN 0270-92 87} provides continuing education resources for scholars ,Christian educators, and lay and professional ministers in The United Methodist Church and otherchurch es. QR intends to be a forum in which theolog ical issues of significance to Christian ministrycan be raised and debated.

Editorial Offices: 1001 19th Avenue. South, P.O. Box 340007. Nashville, TN 37203-0007.Manuscripts should be in English and typed double-spaced, including notes.

QR is published four times a year, in March, June, September, and December, by the GeneralBoard of Higher Education and Ministry and The United Methodist Publishing House. Periodicalspostag e paid at Nashville, Tennessee.

Subscription rate: $24 for one year; $44 for two years; and $60 for three years. Students: $16 forone year; $30 for two years. For all subscription orders, single-copy orders, and change-of-addressinformation contact C okesbury toll-free. (800) 672-1789, M -F 7 :00 a .m. -6 :30 p.m. CST and Saturday8:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m. CST. Inquiries may also be sent in writing to the Cokesbury SubscriptionServices , PO . Box 801, Nashville, TN 372 02.

Postmaster: Address changes should be sent to The United Methodist Publishing House, PO. Box801 , NashviUe. TN 3720 2.

QR is printed on acid-free paperLections are taken from Revised Common Lectionary (Nashville: Abin gdon Press, 1992),Scripture quotations unless otherwise noted are from the New Revised Standard Version Common

Bible, copyright 1989 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches ofChrist in the USA and are used by permission.

Quarterly ReviewSpring 2001

Editor: Hendrik R. PieterseEmail : hpieterse^gbhem.org

Web site; http: //www.quarterlvreview.orfiCopyright 2001 by the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry

and The United Methodist Publishing House
http://www.quarterlvreview.orfi/http://www.quarterlvreview.orfi/


5/113

Volume 21, Num ber 1 ^ ^ j E ^ Spring 2001C o n t e n t s

E d i t o r i a lKeeping Faith in a Pos tmo dern World 5I S S U E T H E M E :R e v i t a l iz i n g T h e o l o g i c a l R e f l e c t i o n i n t h e C o n g r e g a t i o nTheological Reflection and Vital Piety

i n N o r t h A m e r i ca n M e t h o d i s m 7Ann Taves

Formation and Reflect ion : The Dynamics ofTheo logy in Christian Life 20Randy L Maddox

The Word of God and the People of God:Revital iz ing Theological D iscourse from the B ottom Up 33Joerg Rieger

The Imperative to Teach: Towards Vital Renewalof the Teaching Office 45Patricia Farris

Hispanic Lay Theology: Reflect ions on an Emerging Mo del 38Saul TrinidadO u t s i d e t h e T h e m eThe Reforming Bishop:

John W esley and the Sunday Service of 1784 67Robert Webster

T h e C h u r c h i n R e v i e wD o c t r i n e a n d Id e n t it y

J, Michael Ripski 81Jerry L Walls 81


6/113

A W o r d o n t h e W o r dL e c t i o n a r y S t u d y

Osvaldo D. Vena 8 8Issues In: Homiletics

Paul Scott Wilson 102

B o o k R e v i e wTrinity, Community, and Power: Mapping Trajectories in Wesleyan Theology

ed. by M. D ouglas Meeks (Nashvil le : Kingswood B ooks . 20 00 ) 108Reviewer: Hendrik R. Pieterse


7/113

E d i t o r i a l

Keeping Faith in a Postm odern W orldH E N D R I K R . P I E T E R S EC hristians believe that reading the "signs of the times" is crucial to faithfulwitness in the world. That makes Christian theology and practice funda

mentally hermeneutical activities, characterized by a dynamic of "mutuallycritical correlations" (David Tracy) between Christian tradition and culturalcontext. This Christian dynamic of making meaning has always been a delicate art, but it has become a daunting undertaking in the twentieth andtwenty-first centuries. In the highly fragm ented cultures of the West, m any !theologians, influenced by postmodern intellectuals like Derrida andLyotard, argue that constructs like "Christian tradition" and "cultural context"are to o mo nolithic to do justice to the comp lexities of interpre tation in \today's pluralistic world. It is time, they say, to recognize that all interpretation is highly contextual, diverse, and local. No one can speak for everyone.

The United Methodist Church has not been imm une from this debate. 'Indeed, many United Methodists welcom e the pos tmod ern critique of "meta- jnarratives" (Lyotard) and the celebration of particularity, diversity, and contingency. Fearing a slippery slide toward nihilism, other United Methodists callfor a herme neuti c that will carve out a securely definedperhaps even incontestabletheological and doctrinal identity for the church.

Clergy find themselves in the middle of this struggle; after all, they arethe ones called to the task of ''equipping [laity] to fulfill the ministry to whichthey are s e n t " i Thus, we ask. Wh at resources do clergy need to ensuretheir ongoing theological competence in this complex and often confusingworid? W her e do they turn to ho ne the theological and intellectual skills the y 'need to prepare the church to think and practice the faith in a fragmentedage? For the past twenty years. Quarterly Review has aimed to provide a forumwhe re United Methodist and other cler gy- as well as interested lay pe op le- |can raise and debate issues of significance to the church's theology and i


8/113

Hendrik R. P ieterse is the editor of Quarterly Review.Endnotes1. The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church-2000 (Nashville: The UnitedMethodist Publishing H ouse, 20 00 ), If 331 (my emphasis).

ministry. Through articles exhibiting impeccable scholarship and provocativetheological content, as well as resonating to the multiple ministry contexts ofan increasingly pluralistic world, Quarterly Review has sought to stimulate andnurture the ongoing intellectual growth of ministers of the gospel.

In our own attem pt to read the signs of the times, we at Quarterly Reviewhave concluded that sensitivity to the growing co mp lexity of ministry in thenew millennium calls for a fresh approachone that is carefully focused yetmultidimensional. The result is the newly designed version of the journalyou are holding. Let me say a word about the new format.

Each issue features a major theme, with five articles devoted to an in-depth exploration of several of its aspects . The section titled Outside theTheme carries an article not related to the issue theme yet pertinent to theintellectual life of Christian leaders. The Church in Review allows twothoughtful persons to share their musings about an issue or event thatimpacts the theology and ministry of The United Methodist Church. Thetwo-part sect ion dded A Word on the Word furnishes busy c lergypersonswith practical resources for preaching and teaching. The first part is theLectio nary study, providing the p reache r with useful exegetical insightsinto Scripture. In the se con d part , called "Issues In," a scholar exam ines thelatest trends, issues, and publications in a particular field of study as a wayof helping readers stay abreast of the latest knowledge and developmentsin a variety of scholarly domain s. Carefully selected boo ks for revi ew assistthos e in ministry to build a theological library fit for our dem anding times.We sincerely hope that this multifaceted format responds adequately to thechanging demands of ministry today, while maintaining the scholarlyintegrity and insight you have come to expect from Quarterly Review.

The theme of the current issue, "Revitalizing Theological Reflection inthe Congregation," is an apt one for ministry in our postmodern times: Howcan we nu rture a theologically com pete nt laity, equipped to give an a ccou ntof the hope that is within them (1 Pet. 3:15)? Happy reading!


9/113

I s s u e T h e m eRevitalizing Theological Reflection in the CongregationTheological Reflection and Vital Piety inN orth Am erican M ethodism

A N N T A V E S

I n this essay I take up the question of the relationship betw een theological reflection and vital piety, as this relationship has been constituted inNorth American Methodism, particularly in the United Methodist tradition. Recent scholarship on John Wesley has emphasized Wesley's concernfor what we might call "a theologically informed piety" or, as he called it inhis preface to A Collection of Hymns for the Use of the People Called Methodists,"experimental and practical divinity." This phrase points to Wesley'sconcern with "the way of salvation"; that is, with justification, the newbirth, and going on to perfection (sanctification or holiness)the ultimateend of which was the renewal of God's image in humankind and in theworld. 1

As Wesley would have been the first to maintain, however, understanding the way of salvation is not the same thing as experiencing salvationor being saved. This distinction suggests what I take to be the differencebetween "theology" and "piety." Theology is an intellectual activity. It istheoretical, insofar as it is abstracted from practice, although it may, and inthe Wesleyan tradition typically does, focus its attention on practice. Pietyis a form of practice. Whe re the task of theology is to reflect upon thethings of God, piety engages God directly through practices such asworship, prayer, service, or social action. Piety, in other words, refers towh at we might call the "lived experien ce of God"; that is , an engag em entwith God that includes more than simply thought or discourse.

I would argue that vital piety as the lived experience of God typically


10/113

exists in a dynamic and interdependent relationship with an implicittheology, if not always with explicit theological reflection. The process offormation whereby a lived experience is constituted is complex. Neither isit simply rationally learned, nor does it simply arise spontaneously. Rather,individuals within a group internalize a theological worldview quasi-consciously as they gain practical knowledge of the practices of a group(for example, through worship, class meetings, social action, annual con ferences) in which an implicit theology is embedded. Communities, in turn,cultivate and maintain a set of practices through which they understand,locate, and experience their theological vision and socialize their membersto recognize what counts as sacred in that community.^

The n eed for explicit theological reflection is m ost apparent, I suggest,when the process of formation breaks down, as a result either of dilemmasemerging from within the tradition or of challenges posed from without.Explicit theological reflection provides a way to defend, reinterpret, modify,or develop communal practices so as to resolve the dilemmas or meet thechallenges. When this is done elegantly, a community experiences a senseof continuity with what they take to be the heart of the tradition and thefreedom to set aside what they take to be extraneous. Less elegant solutions typically produce either a sense of theological discontinuity or theological rigidity.Methodist Theology and Piety in Four Movem entsIn thinking as a historian about the relationship betw een theological reflection and vital piety in the history of Am erica n Me thodism , I reflect in whatfollows on how Methodists have responded over time to the dilemmas andchallenges posed to their Wesleyan inheritance. This response can beexamined in terms of four distinct periods.

176 0-1 830 : Theology and piety were jo ined mu ch as they had b eenunder Wesley's leadership but were weakly defended intellectually

18 30 -18 90 : Theology becam e m ore scholast ic, and pract ice was increasingly attenuated in relation to Wesley

1890-1920: "Liberals" and "conservatives" were divided in response tothe challenges of the Enlightenment, with liberals reformulatingtheolog y and piety in ways that largely broke with Wesley and c onse rvatives restating it in narrowly conventional ways.

1930 to the present: Methodists exhibit renewed theological interest in


11/113

Wesley, a practical con cer n for li turgical renewal, and continu ingtension between liberals , conservatives , and neo-Wesleyans.I view the challenges posed during the third period as the most diffi

cult . Although many Methodists rose to the theological challenge posed bythe Enlightenment, the solutions they offered were, in my view, less thanelegant. Turn-of-the-century liberals ruptured the community's sense ofcontinuity, while conservatives retreated into theological and practicalrigidity. This legacy informed the fou rth period up to th e present, A desirefor a more elegant solution may be welling up within the denomination. Asa historian and a denominational outsider . I suggest that continuityrequires engagement with the tradition on the level of practice, while openness to change requires careful theological reflection on what is and is notessential to its practice.

Fro m my ow n reading of Wesley, I would argu e that the distinctionsbetween formalism, enthusiasm, and "genuine" or "real" Christianity wascrucial to his own und erstandin g of salvation as l ived out in practice.Working out the distinctions between them forced Wesley to reflect theologically both on dilemmas internal to the movement and challenges posedfrom w ithout. To put i t simply, Wesley believed that real Ch ristianity w asnot just a matter of assent to doctrine or participation in the rituals of thechurch or obedience to behavioral norms (formal or nominal Christianity) .Rather, for him real Christianity consisted in an assurance of God'spardoning grace that could be known not directly through the ordinarysenses but only through a new "spiritual sense," awakened at the t ime ofthe "new birth." Through this new sense, real Christians were able toperceive the reality of God's loving presence in their inmost selves orhearts (the Holy Spirit witnessing with our spirit that we are children ofG o d ) . A genuine transformation of perception initiated the process of sanctification (going on to perfection o r perfect love) . An auth entic e xpe rience ,thus, of necessity gave rise to a transformed life (fruits of the Spirit) and, asa result , could be tested in practice. Wesley condemned as "enthusiasm"experiences that did not lead to a transformed life. In sum, genuineChristianity, for Wesley, entailed an a uthe ntic e xp erien ce of the Spirit andresulted in genuine fruits . It wa s a third way betw een formalism (apparentfruits or form without the experience or power of the Spirit) , on the onehand, and enthusiasm (an alleged experience without the fruits) , on theother.3


12/113

Wesley believed that Methodists in particular were called upon to"understand, explain, and defend" the doctrine of the "witness of theSpirit" to the world. When critics charged him with enthusiasm forupholding this doctrine, Wesley responded in a twofold manner. First , heemployed circular reasoning: The power to distinguish between trueChris tian expe r ience and enthusiasm w as groun ded in a new spir itualsense access ible only to those who had had an authent ic exper ience of thenew bir th . Second, he em ployed pragmatic criteria, that is, the fruits of theSpirit . Relying ultimately on the pragmatic criteria, Wesley sought to avoidenthusiasm in practice through the use of small groups (bands, c lasses , andsocieties) with lay leaders designed to promote genuine Christianity. Strictstandards and practical guidelines were used to correct or , if necessary,weed out those who were not evidencing the fruits of the Spirit . Themeaning of genuine Chris t iani ty was conveyed through sermons , hymns ,and testimony. In the context of conferences and class meetings, bothpreachers and people testified to their own experience and were, in turn,formed by the ex per ien ce of others . In England, these prac t ices wererooted in a liturgically and sacramentally oriented church."*1 7 6 0 - 1 8 3 0Recent work on the per iod f rom 1760-1830 indicates a high degree ofcont inui ty between Wesley 's vis ion and ear ly Am erican Me thodism interms of theology and practice. To be sure, there were some tensions andchallenges from within the movement along the lines of race, c lass , and religious practice. However, the movement reveled for much of this period inits s tatus as a rapidly growing, u pstart m ov em en t led by relatively un educated preachers bound to Wesleyan theology and practice, albeit resistantto Wesley's direct leadership. The movement appealed to the less educatedand was looked dow n up on by those in denom inat ions with highlyeducated clergy, such as the Congregationalists and Presbj^erians. Storiesof evangelistic tr iumphs wrought by the power of the Holy Spirit , such asthose told by it inerant Peter Cartwright, were used to shore up the esteemof the Methodists and disabuse the respectable of their pretensions.

D uring this per iod, Method is ts of Europ ean and Afr ican descent in themovement*s multiracial heartland in the Chesapeake Bay region elaboratedthe "shout" tradition as an expressive variant on Wesleyan themes of newbirth and sanctification. Toward the end of this period, the shout tradition


13/113

found a home in the popular camp meetings and racial tensions v^ithin themovement led to the formation of separate African Methodist congregations and eventually to separate denominations.^1 8 3 0 - 1 8 9 0D uring the second of the four periods , 183 0-1 89 0 , M ethodists gainedrespectability and b ecam e m ore like their evangelical neighbors. Thedistinctive structures of Methodism were gradually attenuated: preacherstraveled less, class meetings declined in importance, and standards formembership were relaxed. Phoebe Palmer led a successful movement thatexplicitly reflected on the nature of holiness, reinterpreted the traditionand its practices, and revitalized the Methodist understanding of sanctification for an increasingly bourgeois church.*^

Palmer's theological reflections on holiness were prompted by her ownlack of experience. As she put it, the Spirit did not operate upon her heartin the same manner in which she conceived it to be operating on thehearts of others. Her "altar theology" represented a breakthrough for thosewho did not experience the feelings traditionally associated with the"witness of the Spirit." Her fam ous "shorter way" to holiness was com prisedof a series of steps, beginning with consecration, and followed by therecognition of God's promises in Scripture, the acceptance of Godpromises for oneself , and public testimony to one's acceptance of thepromises. The crucial twist was her determination to "take God at his word[in Scripture], whatev er her em otions might be."' ' B ased on h er renewedtheological understanding. Palmer established her famous Tuesday meetings for the prom otion of holiness and a holiness periodical that she editedwith her husband. Both Palmer's understanding of holiness and that of theearlier shout tradition were taken up into the National Camp MeetingAssociation for the Promotion of Holiness by John Inskip in the 1860s andcontinued to inform the more conservative side of the tradition.1 8 9 0 - 1 9 2 0Certain weaknesses were buil t in to the Am erican M ethodist m ovem entfrom the outset as a result of the movement's divorce from the largerchurchly context in v^hich it had been embedded in England. For much ofits history, American Methodists viewed both liturgy and theologicaleducation as liable to "quench the Spirit" and thus a threat to vital piety.During its first hundred years, the American church largely ignored the


14/113

Sunday Service, based on the Book of Common Prayer, provided by Wesley infavor of a simplified service based on Scripture reading, preaching, andhymns. Until well into the nineteenth century, most Methodist preacherswere trained through an apprenticeship system and later a "course ofstudy," rather than in theological schools. This meant that Methodistpreachers for the most part engaged with Scripture, tradition, and reasonthrough Wesley's own writings and those of other Methodists rather thanin the more direct and expansive fashion that Wesley himself, as a university-trained Anglican priest, had employed.^

These limitations, coupled with Wesley's own relatively superficialengagement with the challenges posed by the Enlightenment thinkers ofhis era, left the Methodist church ill prepared to respond in a distinctivelyWesleyan fashion to the external challenges posed by German biblicalscholarship, historical critical methods, and the rise of the social sciences.Thus, rather than engaging that which Wesley saw as the Methodist movement's distinctive contributionits emphasis on true Christian experiencerooted in the witness of the Spiritprominent intellectually orientedMethodists at the turn of the century either sidestepped or attacked thisfundamental Methodist claim in order to promote an understanding ofChristianity which they considered more viable-philosophically, socially,and scientifically. The contributions of the Boston Personalists, such asBorden Parker Bovme. to a philosophically informed Protestant modernismare well known, as are the contributions of ethicists, such as Harry Ward, tothe Methodist social creed and the Methodist Federation for Social Service.The contributions of George Coe, a pioneering psychologist of religion andreligious educator, although less well known, are at least as crucial in termsof understanding the transformation of Methodist practice.

A Methodist layman, a student of Bowne's at Boston University, andWard's close friend and colleague at Union Theological Seminary, Coe usedthe new empirically based psychology of religion to undermine the legitimacy of the traditional conversion experience and lay the foundation for anew education-centered paradigm for theological education. Coe, like hiscontemporary Edwin Starbuck, published an important empirical study ofconversion in the late nineties. Coe*s article, which examined the experiences of 74 predominantly Methodist college students (50 male and 24female), appeared in 1899, two years after Starbuck's. The first books theyWTOtc-Psychology of Religion (Starbuck) and The Spiritual Life (Coe)-both


15/113

appeared in 1900. They were frequently reviewed together as the leadingexamples of the new psychology of religion and widely read by moreliberal Protestant clergy. Coe found that over half the students in hissample had had a dramatic conversion experience and more than a quarterexperienced "mental and motor automatisms," that is, the striking dreams,visions, or involuntary bodily movements associated with old-timeMethodism. When the original study appeared as a chapter in The SpiritualLife, Coe added that he had found "the same general results in an examination of scores of cases of seeking for the experience commonly called'entire sanctification.'"^

Coe's central concern was less with people who had had traditionalconversion experiences than with persons who had expected to have suchexperiences and did not. This was not an abstract issue for Coe and manyof his liberal Protestant contemporaries. Coe, like Phoebe Palmer and adisproportionate number of other liberal leaders of his era, did not have aconversion experience of the expected sort. Although he was the son of aMethodist minister and was raised at a time when, as he put it, Methodists"laid great store by 'testimony' to a 'personal experience' of 'conversion'and 'witness of the Spirit' or 'assurance' that one had been pardoned and'accepted' of God," Coe was never granted the experience he had been ledto expect. The absence of such an experience caused him considerabledistress as an adolescent, and it was only as an undergraduate that hefinally "cut the knot by a rational and ethical act." Where Phoebe Palmerworked through the perceived deficiencies in her experience theologically,based on her own exegesis of Scripture, Coe worked his through scientifically, based on empirical research and the secular concept of "temperamental differences." 1 0

Temperamental difference, Coe claimed, is what "distinguishes holinessmovements from the ordinary life of the churches. A holiness band or sectthat separates itself from the general life of the church is organized andheld together chiefly by temperamental affinities."ii By recasting what hadbeen signs of "the power of God" or "the witness of the Holy Spirit" asmanifestations of a particular temperament, Coe reinterpreted the traditional Methodist understanding of religious experience in nontheological,scientific terms. In so doing, Coe created space within Methodism for avariety of temperaments and, at the same time, relativized the traditionalunderstanding of conversion such that it could be compared (unfavorably)


16/113

with what Coe took to be a deeper understanding of personal and socialtransformation based on moral development .

The critique of conversion mounted by the early psychologists of religion laid the foundation for the rise of religious educatio n as a theologicaldiscipline. Edward Ames, a psychologist of religion at the University ofChicago, spelled out the underlying connection between the psychology ofreligion and religious education . R eferring to th e work of Co e, Starbuck,William James, and others, Ames pointed out that "the earliest work in thefield dealt almost exclusively with conversion" because that was where "thewhole task of Protestant Christianity has been felt to focus," The stakes forevangelical Protestantism were enormous, since, as Ames went on to say,"[t]he question of methods in religious work turns upon the psychology ofreligious experie nce." Setting up revivalism an d religious educatio n asopposing methods, he added, "[tjhe relative value of revivalism, and of relig ious education , depends upon the comparative significance of the different typesof conversion and upon the means by which they are occasioned The psychology of religious experience, as understood by Coe, was not simply anadjunct to religious educatio n. R ather, by delegitimating th e traditionalunderstanding of conversion, the psychology of religion laid the foundation and created the need for the new modernist emphasis on religiouseducation .

Neither Coe nor Ames understood religious education as simply oneaspect of the theological curriculum but rather as its new center. i 3Education, as opposed to evangelism, was the new paradigm for ministry.In this new paradigm for ministry, the minister beca m e a teac her and w asencouraged to integrate the latest in historical critical and social scientificresearch into the life of the parish through sermons, Bible studies, Sundayschool curricula, and social outreach. C ours es in the psych ology of religionwere se en as foundational to religious educatio n and w ere normally offeredby religious education faculty and listed un der that dep artme nt. The majo rvehicle for this new theological vision was the Religious Education Ass ociation, co-founded by Co e and W illiam R ainey H arpe r of the University ofChicag o and led by C oe for mu ch of the ne xt fifty years. In 1908 , Coe leftNo rthw estern University to fill Un ion Theological Sem inary's newly established position in the psychology of religion and religious education. Overthe course of the next decade, Coe wrote the first widely used textbooks inboth the psychology of religion and religious education,


17/113

A study of more than one-hundred Protestant theological schools inthe U .S. and Can ada c om mis sione d in the early tv i enties by the Cou ncil ofChurch Boards of Education suggests that Coe's influence was widely felt ,especially at liberal Methodist and Baptist theological schools and theschools most identified with theological modernism, such as the Universityof Chicago and Union Theological Seminary in N ew York , The reportdescribed liberal Methodist theological schools, such as Garrett , Candler,and Boston University, as placing an "[u]nusual emphasis . . . upon religiousedu cation and psych ology of religion." While the liberal schools in thedenominations with the most pronounced his torical commitment torevivalism (such as the Baptists and the Methodists) replaced their traditional emphasis on conversion with an emphasis on religious education bythe 1920s, conservative theological schools and schools associated withliturgically or confessionally oriented traditions (such as the Episcopalians,the Lutherans, and the Presbyterians) resisted this development.

Sketchy data suggests that there was corresponding decline in conversion and sanctification experiences among Methodists during the earlydecades of the twentieth century. As noted above, about half the studentsstudied by Coe in the 1890s reported dramatic conversion and sanctification experiences. In a study of rural, Midwestern congregations in the earlyteens, Coe's student Anton Boisen found that the goal of the congregationswas still the traditional one of saving souls. Reflecting back on his researchin 1935, Boisen commented that then "[e]ven large and influential bodies,like the Methodists [as opposed to 'holy rollers ' ] , taught their people toexpect a period of 'conviction of sin' followed by a more or less clear-cut'baptism of the Holy Spirit. '" Now, in the thirties, he said, "the conversionexperience has pretty much dropped out of the picture, so far as the liberalProtestant churches are concerned. The evangelists who forty years agowere so very plentiful are no longer much in evidence, and an inquiryamong a group of prominent liberal ministers revealed among [newm e m b e r s ] . . . not a s ingle case of a sudden transformation of character ofthe type that Starbuck has described."!^

Intellectually, early-twentieth-century Methodist theological liberalismis usually understood as breaking with Wesleyan theological understandings and replacing them with either philosophical (Boston Personalism) orsociological (Social Gospel) categ ories. It was the psycho logy of religionand religious education, however, that most directly challenged the tradi-


18/113

t ional Methodist understanding of "true Christian experience" ( that is, "thescriptural way of salvation") and the concomitant emphasis on conversionand sa nctification in terms of the life of the chu rch and the pra ctice ofministry. The rise of the psychology of religion and religious educationcoincided with the virtual disappearance of conversion and sanctificationin the more l iberal Methodist congregations and replaced that traditionalunderstanding with a very different formation process. In other words, theliberal wing of the tradition, which is dom inan t in The United Me thodistChurch, experienced a virtually complete break with the tradition on thelevel of experience or formation during the early decades of the twentiethcentury.1 9 3 0 t o t h e P r e s e n tThe fourth period1930 to the presenthas been characterized byincreasing d iversity with resp ect to the ology and practice. Relative to th edenomination's Wesleyan heritage, the rise of "neo-Wesleyanism" in thethirties resulted in renewed attention to Wesleyan studies and to liturgicalworship. The f orme r led to the publication of a new ed ition of W esley'sworks, the latter to the publication of the first Methodist Book of Worship(1945 , subsequently revised in 1965 and 1980) .

The ecum enically oriented mo vem ent for l iturgical renewal of the lasthalf-century has done much to reconsti tute the churchly side of Wesley'svision at the congregational level: however, it has done little to revitalizethe evangelical side of the Wesleyan heritage, that is, the distinctiveWesleyan emp hasis on conv ersion and sanctification, on the level of prac-tice.i^ Liberal Methodists tended to resist revitalizing the evangelical sideof their heritage, fearing that it would have, in John Cobb's words, "veryconservative, if not reactionary, results." But confronted with the debilitating effects of the denomination's loss of a unifying vision, liberalMethodists, such as Cobb, have evinced a new will ingness to consider whatit might m ean to recons ti tute M ethodist p ractice in dialogue with explicit lyWesleyan theology,Theology in Hymns?Although I take salvation "wrought in the soul" through justification, thenew birth, and sanctification to l ie at the h ear t of what i t me ans to be aMethodist . I do not presume to know what form that can or should take in


19/113

Ann Taves is Professor of History of Christianity and American Religion atClaremont School of Theology in Claremont, California,Endnotes1. John Wesley, "The Scripture Way of Salvation." in John Wesley's Sermons: AnAnthology, ed. by Albert C. Outler and Richard P. Heitzenrater (NashvilleiAbingdon, 1991), 371-80; A lbert C. Outler, John Wesley's Sermons: An Introduction(Nashville: Abingdon, 1993), 22,65; Robert E. Cushman,/ofon Wesley's ExperimentalDivinity (Nashville: Kingswood Books, 1989), 34-63.2. This is adapted from my reading of Pierre Bourdieu. See his Outline of a Theory ofPractice, trans, by Richard Nice (Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press,1977), 87-89; Pierre Bourdieu and Loic J. D. Wacquant, An Invitation to ReflexiveSociology (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), 126-2 73. Cf. John Wesley, 'A Plain Account of Genuine Christianity" and "The Witness ofthe Spirit, Discourse 11" in Outler, ed.John Wesley (New York; Oxford UniversityPress, 1964), 181-96, 209-20.4. Ann Taves, Fits, Trances and Visions: Experiettcing Religion an d Explaining Experience

the present day. That, I think, is the central theological question that weall-clergy, laity, and theological educators-must grapple with in thecontext of practice. While there has been considerable discontinuity inMethodist practice, the aspect of Methodist practice that both is in touchwith the past and still retains at least some of its formative power forcontemporary Methodists is singing. The current United Methodist Hymnal(1989) , as well as older hymnals and worship books to which congregantshave an attachment, may be a place to begin a process of theological reflection on what has or has not been "wrought in the souls" of present-dayMethodists . Congregants* engagement with the theology of the morerecen t hymnals could also be broug ht into dialogue with Wesley's Collectionof Hymns for the Use of People Called Methodists (1780), which was arrangedto communicate his understanding of "true Christian experience," and theSunday Service (1784), which he intended to communicate the best of theAnglican liturgical tradition. As traditional mea ns by which M ethodistshave proclaimed and appropriated the way of salvation, hymnody offers abasis for reflection that holds Wesley's original vision of Christian practicein tension with the practice of the church today.^o


20/113

from Wesley to James (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999). 50-56, 63-65.5. On this period, see Cushman, 26-33, 72-85; Russell E. Richey. Early AmericanMethodism (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1991); John H. Wigger, TakingHeaven by Storm: Methodism an d the Rise of Popular Christianity in America (New Y ork:Oxford University Press, 1998); Dee E. Andrews, The Methodists and RevolutionaryAmerica, 1760-1800: The Shaping of an Evangelical Culture (Princeton, N J: PrincetonUniversity Press, 20 00) ; Le ster Ruth, A Little Heaven Below: Worship at Early AmericanMethodist Quarterly Meetings (Nashville: Kingswood Books, 2 00 0); Taves, 47-1176. Kenneth E. Rowe, "Redesigning Methodist Churches," in Russell E. Richey,Dennis M. Campbell, and William B. Lawrence (eds.), Connectionalism: Ecclesiology,Mission, and Identity (NashviUe: Abingdon. 1997), 117-31; A. Gregory Schneider, TheWay of the Cross Leads Home: The Domestication of American Methodism (Bloomington:Indiana University Press, 1993).7 Phoebe Palmer, The Way of Holiness, 52nd ed. (New York: Palmer & H ughes, 1867),33-39 , 74-75; Stephen Cooley, "The Possibilities of Grace; Poetic D iscourse andReflection in Me thodis t/Holin ess Revivalism" (Ph.D . diss.. University of Chica go,1991), 78-81; Thomas G. Oden, ed., Phoebe Palmer: Selected Writings (New York:Paulist Press. 1988), 107-30; Harold E. Raser, Phoebe Palmer: Her Life an d Thought(Lewiston. NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 19 87), 267-7 2.8. James B. White, "M ethodist W orship," in Perspectives on American Methodism:Interpretive Essays, ed. by Russell E. Richey. Kenneth E. Rowe, and Jean MillerSchmidt (Nashville: Kingswood B ooks, 19 93), 460- 79.9. George A. C oe, "A Study in the D ynamics of Personality," Psychological Review 6(1899): 487-88; George A. Coe. The Spiritual Life: Studies in the Science of Religion(New York: Eaton & Mains, 190 0), 105 . The discussion of C oe is adapted fromTaves, Fits, Trances and Visions, 266-69,299-305, 341-47, courtesy of PrincetonUniversity Press.10. William R. Hutchison. "Cultural Strain and Protestant Liberalism." AmericanHistorical Review 76/2 (1971): 386-411; G eorge A. C oe, "My Own Little Theatre." inReligion in Transition, ed. by Vergilius Perm (New York: Macmillan Co., 1937). 92-9 3.11. Edwin Starbuck. Psychological Review (November 1900); George A. Coe. Papers,Scrapbook 1: 52-5 3, M anuscript G roup N o. 36 . Special Collections, Yale D ivinitySchool Library; Coe. Spiritual Life, 21712. Edward Scribner Am es. The Psychology of Religious Experience (Boston: HoughtonMifflin Co., 1910). 5. (Emphasis added.)13. H. Shelton Smith, Faith and Nurture (New York: C Scribner's Sons, 1941), 1-2.14. Am es. 26 -27 On the functional approach to theological education, see W. Clark


21/113

AN N T AVE S IfGilpin, A Preface to Theology (Chicago: University of C hicago Press, 1996), 99-105. I

15. Coe's major textbooks were Education in Religion and Morals (1904), The IPsychology of Religion (1916), and A Social Theory of Religious Education (1917). On [Coe's centrality in this process, see Smith, Faith and Nurture, 26-32 ; Jack L. ;Seymour, From Sunday School to Church School: Continuities in Protestant Church jEducation in the United States, 1860-1929 (Washington, D .C : U niversity Press of IAmerica. 1982), 79-1 01,1 27- 54; James E. Kirby, Russell E. Richey, and Kenneth E. -Rowe, The Methodists (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1996), 231-41.16. Robert L. Kelly, Theological Education in America: A Study of One Hundred Sixty-on e Theological Schools in the United States and Canada (New York: George H. DoranCo., 1924), 98,142-43. :17 A nton T. Boisen, "The New Evangelism," Chicago Theological Seminary Register I25/2 (1935): 9; idem., "The Holy Rollers Come to Town," Chicago TheologicalSeminary Register 29/\ (January 1939). 5-6.18. White, 474-79; Albert C. Outler, "A New Future for Wesley Studies." in TheWesleyan Theological Heritage: Essays of Albert C. Outler, ed. by Thomas C. O den andLeicester R. Longden (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991), 132-42.19. John B. Cobb, Jr., Grace and R esponsibility: A Wesleyan Theology for Today(Nashville: Abingd on, 1995). See also Randy Maddox, ed.. Rethinking Wesley'sTheology for Contemporary Methodism (Nashville: Kingswood B ooks, 1 998) and jTheodore Runyon, The New Creation: John Wesley's Theology Today (Nashville: iAbingdon. 1998). ^20. Cf. Teresa Berger, Theology in Hymns?, trans, by Timothy E. Kimbrough (NashviUe: Kingswood Books, 1995).


22/113

Form ation and Reflection:The D ynamics of Theologyin Ch ristian LifeR A N D Y L . M A D D O XT here is a broad sense of malaise currently in The United MethodistChurch, at least in its North American setting. And there is a range of

diagnoses of the underlying problem. W hen one looks for points ofconsen sus in the se assessm ents, it is striking how oftenacross the spectru mof the denomination-the focus turns to bemoaning a paucity of theologicalconcern and theological reflection in our corporate life. More specifically, ourlack of theological clarity and consen sus at annual and G eneral Con ferencelevels is attributed to a d earth of theological engagem ent a mo ng m em bers inour con gregations.! The implied man date is for United Method ists to devoteresources (like the present issue of Quarterly Review) to th e task of revitalizingtheological concern and reflection in the local church.

Those like me who teach theology professionally will likely resonatewith this agenda. But they will also know that this agenda must confront atthe outset this question: "Why should United Methodist congregationsinvest in the theological competence of their laity?" We encounter thisbasic question continually in the various contexts in which we teach. Whenoffering required general education courses in theology at Christian liberalarts colleges, it comes in this form: "Why do we have to study theology?We're not going to be pastors." An d wh en teaching curren t or prospect ivepastors we all too often hear the question, "Why do we have to studytheology? We're not going to be professors."

Behind the differing forms of this question are som e co m m on assumptions about the nature of theology as a human enterprise. At the least ,theology is cast as abstract reflection that has little contact with or relevan ce for daily Christian life. Of ten the re is the further sugg estion thattheology necessarily involves a style of reflection and discourse that isaccessible only to those with professional training. Sometimes even morepejorative insinuations are evident, as in C. S. Lewis's caricature of a


23/113

theologian in The Great Divorce. The premise of this delightful little story isthat a group of pers ons in hell are allowed to visit the portals of heaven todetermine whether they wish to transfer residence to the heavenly realm.The "catch" is that they must finally surrender the vices that currentlyconsign them to the lower realm. Most of the visitors prove unwilling tochange (illustrating Lewis's point that "hell is self-imposed"), including acerta in theologian . He ch ooses instead to re turn to the netherworld todeliver a promised paper to a Theology Society there. The subject of thepaper is how Jesus might have developed m ore m oderate v iews had helived longer instead of being crucified while still at an idealistic agel Herewe see the not-so-subtle insinuation that theological reflection is in dangernot only of losing contact with ordinary life but also of becoming a sophisticated way of obscuring or discounting the clear demands of the gospel.

There are undeniably examples of "theology," both at present and inearlier times, which can be marshaled to illustrate these common assumptions. But there is also a more authentic sense and practice of theologyrunning through the history of the church that stands in judgment of theseexamples. It is this classic expression of theology that we need to revitalizein our churches. An important step toward this goal would be to gain aclearer sense of its nature and dimensions.Classic Dimensions of the Tlieolog ical EnterpriseThe com m on assumptions about theology just sketched are connected inthat they take th e activity of professional aca dem ic theologians as the standard for defining the nature of theology. But this standard is unduly narrowand anachronistic . Only with the emergence of universities in the MiddleAges did we begin to get persons wh ose primary vocation was academ icinstruction in theology. The vocatio n of noted theologians in prior c enturieswas more commonly that of pastor, bishop, abbot, or spiritual director-rolesdevoted to shepherding Christian communities in their engagement withdaily life . Broadening the consideration to include these examples fromearlier centuries helps us gain a m ore rob ust view of theology, a conc eptio nthat identifies at least five dimensions within the overall enterprise.The foundational dimension of this robust expression of theology isth e basic worldvievi> that Christians assume should orient believers ' l ives inthe worid. As Paul put it, Christians will perceive things rightly and actappropriately only when they have the "mind of Christ ." That this involves


24/113

holistic dispositions and not merely intellectual convictions is evident fromPaul's parallel emphasis on Christians nurturing the "fruit of the Spirit ."The mind of Christ fosters -and is reciprocally strengthened by- lov ingservice of others (Philippians 2). The "orienting" nature of this foundationaldimension deserves special emphasis. A person's worldview is not simplyone set of beliefs and disposit ions alongside others that he or sheembraces. These specific beliefs and disposit ions frame the perspectivewithin which the person makes sense of, evaluates, and incorporates alloth er beliefs and disposit ions. Tha t is wh y the te rm theology should not berestricted to designating only knowledge of God (as the Greek roots of theword might imply). It is inadequate even to confine it to knowledge ofgeneral religious truths. The w ord theology names instead the Christianpractice of approaching all of life from, and placing all knowledge within,the persp ective of Go d's revelation in Christ Jesus.

Paul's passionate appeal for Christians to emulate the "mind of Christ"reflects the reality that this orie nting w orldview is not unilaterally infusedby God at one's conversion. It neither em erges effortlessly over t ime normanifests itself spontaneously whenever it is needed. It must be cultivatedas part of the intentional process of growing in Christlikeness. This needdefines the second dimension of the theological enterprise evident throughthe history of the church, namely the pastoraP task of forming/reforming aChristian worldview in believers. Since the worldview in question is holistic,this task has prove n to involve a variety of activities aimed at invoking andshaping beliefs, affections, and character dispositions. The case of the earlychu rch is particularly revealing in this regard. The ir theological energ ieswere n ecessarily dom inated by the task of forming a Christian worldview innew believers, and th ey pursued this task with the clear sense that thecultures w ithin which th ey lived were ben t on instilling quite differentworldviews. In this con text they prized m ost highly as "theologians" tho sewho crafted such formative practical-theological materials as hymns, liturgies, catechetical orations, and spiritual discipline manuals.

The case of the early church also makes clear that the production ofsuch "first-order" theological materials will inevitably spawn "second-order"normative theological reflection (a third dimension of the overall theologicalenterp rise) . That is, i t will spark deb ates n ot on ly over the adeq uacy ofparticular practices for forming a C hristian worldview but also over alternative con ceptio ns of this basic worldview and alternative propo sed implica-


25/113

t ions of the worldview for concr ete action in the world. Thus, for examp le,a prop osed l iturgy addressing prayers directly to the Holy Spirit provoked adebate in the early church that led naturally into the range of issuesconcerning God's triune nature.^ Challenges to the longstanding use ofpredominantly male imagery for God in Christian discourse and sjmibolsprovide a current example of the same dynamic interaction between thesedimensions of the theological enterprise.

The concern of the three dimensions of theology considered so farfocuses primarily on those who have embraced ( to some degree) theChristian worldview. A fourth dimension that can be discerned throughoutthe span of the church is more apologetic and evangelist ic in aim, engagingself-consciously those who question or reject Christian beliefs and practices. Whilethis aim has i ts own integrity, onc e again we should n ot overlook theconnections between this dimension and those already identified.D ialogue with cri t ics has often helped to clarify aspects and im plications ofthe C hristian worldview. Likewise, the q uestions th at outsiders art iculateare typically gnawing at insiders as well, and their resolution serves toenable a deeper appropriation and integration of the Christian worldviewby believers. Coming full circle. Christians living more authentically in theworld are the m ost effective apologetic or evangel that could be desired.

One further perennial dimension of the overall theological enterpriseis the con cern to train new generations within the comm unity of believers tocarry out the formative, normative, and apologetic dimensions of this enterp rise.Through the first millennium this training took place largely by mentoring.As such , it generated few distinctive forms of theological expre ssion. On elearned how to engage in first -order, second-order, an d ap ologetic activit iesunder the guidance of a practicing pastor, abbot , catechist , and so on. Bycontrast , as specialized academic insti tutions increasingly subsumed thistraining task in the second millennium, i t became common to privilege thecurricular forms developed within this new sett ing (compendiums, summae,system atic theologies, and the l ike) as "serious" theology and to consid erthe in structors in these insti tutions the "real" theologians.The Shift to Privileging "Theoretical" TheologyThe em ergenc e of these academ ic insti tut ions and the developme nt ofcorresponding forms of theological activity are, in themselves, surely not tobe lamented. They were natural processes that had actually been unduly


26/113

delayed by historical circumstances. And they provided greater t ime, focus,and scholarly resources for some in the church to pursue specializedaspec ts of the bro ad theolog ical enterprisesuch as careful l inguistic andcultural exegesis of biblical and historical texts. But the specific model thatcam e to dominate a cade mic theology is problemat ic. The longstandingassum ption h ad be en th at theolog y was overall a "practical" discipline(scientia practica); that is, theology focuses primarily on addressing humansand the things that humans do-in l ight of God. For a variety of reasons, i tbecame increasingly standard within the university to defend theology asinstead a "theoretical" discipline-focused first and foremost on understanding God pe r seA

The cru cial prob lem w ith this shift in focus is not th at i t cham pionstheoretical reflection but that i t easily severs the dyn am ic in teractionbetween the normative dimension of theology and i ts foundational andformative dimensions. Theoretical considerations about the nature of God,drawing on biblical exegesis and philosophy, have been integral to normative judgm ent in the ch urch from its earliest days. But the "practical" consequences of alternative conceptions of God and God's relationship tohumanity have been equally central in classic Christian normative reflec-tion.5 Mo reover, just as it was instructed by spiri tuali ty/practice in reachingits decisions, second-order normative reflection was ult imately geared to readdressing spiri tuali ty/practice by me an s of first -order theological activities. It could take very formal expression in concil iar creeds, for example;but i ts fruitful outcomes were never intended to be restricted to suchexpression. They were meant to guide how Christians prayed, worked,played, procre ated, and the rest.

As the heightened theoretical emphasis supplanted practical considerations in normative reflection, it became natural to identify full-time academic theologians as the ideal -b eca use they were "freed" from the bu rdenof shepherding (even participating in?) the daily life of a Christian community in order to devote full time to theoretical reflection. And it waspredictable that their sense of this reflection's being secon d-ord er activitywould fade. On the one side, there was less exposure to the ways in whichthe daily experience and practice of ordinary believers could inform theological judgm ent. O n the o the r side, a professional disdain tended toemerge toward concerns that theological insights be expressed in formsthat communicate to and effectively shape the worldview of ordinary


27/113

believers: "real" theolog ians wr ote system atic theologies o r p hilosophicalapologetic treatises, not liturgies and hymns.

The inverse impact of these developments remains readily apparentoutside the academy. Few pastors view their main role as shepherding thetheological formation of those in their care or see decisions about worshipmaterials, building programs, and the like as first-order theological activity.They ma y be m ore willing to talk ab out their role in spiri tual forma tion butusually assum e that this is quite different from theological form ation. A ndthe typical layperson finds any suggestion that he or she has a crucial rolein theological formation and reflection within the church quite foreign.The Amplifying Effect of Enlightenment AssumptionsThe privileging of theoretical theo logy w as well und erwa y wh enMethodism came on the scene. Despite glimpses of an alternative inWesley's "practical" theological activity, influential American Methodistssoon appropriated th e reigning acad em ic model.


28/113

l ived. The concern for formative catechetical instruction, particularly thecontinuing instruction of adults, faded. And the percentage of laity whofelt competent to participate in normative theological debate decreasedsteadily.^ In other words, Methodists increasingly became a less ' 'theological" ch ur ch - in the classic sense of that term-pa rt icularly at the lay level.Wh at prom oted this move? The deepening im pact of reigning academic assumptions about theology l ikely played a role but does not seem asufficient explanation. Echoing a point in the previous essay by Ann Taves,1 believe that a major amplifying factor h as bee n the wa y in which N ort hAmerican Methodists have embraced in an insufficiently discerningmanner certain Enlightenment assumptions flourishing in our culture overthe past two centuries. I am not suggesting that Methodists are unique inthis regard; rather, this is one of the places where we have served as the"most representat ive" North American denominat ion. Nor am I suggest ingthat Methodists should have summarily rejected all Enlightenmentassumptions; quite the contrary, the rejection of such assumptions ashuman equality and individual rights by reactionary elements must bejudged as at least as problematic as the uncrit ical appropriation of certainothers by "mainline" Methodists. But i t is this appropriation that is mostrelevant to our present topic.

The Enlightenment period in Western culture is characterized byvigorous advocacy of modern empirical inquiry as a guide to truth. Thisadvoc acy em erged as a just if iable react ion to the dom inant focus on exposit ion of traditional texts as the m ode l for learning in the preced ingcenturies. But the specific ways in which i t has been framed have served toobscure-both in the general publ ic and in the church- the classic conception of theolog y as the discipline dev oted to bringing all knowledge intodynamic interrelationship with the truth of God revealed in Jesus Christ .

To begin with, a broadly influential mod el for inserting new emp iricalinquiry into the medieval curriculum appealed to the notion that God hasprovided two "books" of revelation: the Book of Scripture and the Book ofNature. The implication drawn was that while Scripture can be studied bytraditional methods, the Book of Nature is more appropriately studied bypresent empirical investigation. In clearing space for the emerging independent sciences, this model left the suggestion that theology is concernedsimply with studying traditional texts. This more restricted conception oftheology was reinforced by the growing specialization of the modern


29/113

academ y. At the outse t of the E nlighten men t i t was sti ll possible to pu rsuethe ideal of individually comprehending all fields of knowledge. But wehave long since conceded that individuals can master only specializedareas. The clear, popular ass um ption (evident widely in Me thodist circles)b ecam e t h at th e theologian's characteristic area is study of past religious texts,while the natural and huma n sciences are "lay" specializations. This leaves thefollowing unfortuna te dual conno tation: (1) one ca n be a "theologian" insom e ad equ ate sense w ithout eng aging the lay disciplines; (2) study oftheology is a peripheral, and optional, matter for lay intellectual inquiry.

These co nnotat ions would be mit igated somew hat if theology and theother specialized fields were considered of equal value and if specialists ineach field were encouraged to engage the others frequently in mutuallyinforming dialogue. But the dominant stream of the Enlightenment pushedin precisely the opposite direction. The recommendation of key figures wasnot just to introdu ce pres ent inquiry as a parallel conside ration alongsidetraditional methods and materials; it was also to discount all reliance ontradition. For many this ult imately meant displacing theology from themodern scientific university. And in culture more broadly, it has fostered a"privatization" of theological convictions. These convictions are reduced tomatters of "opinion" that individuals are free to hold but that, they areexhorted, should make no difference in their intellectual inquiry, professional activities, or political judgments.

While the Enlightenment assumptions considered so far were undercutting the sense of theology as normative reflection on all knowledge andall of l ife, oth er assum ptions were eroding ap preciation for the dime nsionof theology as worldview formation. The general Enlightenment optimismabout humanity was central in this regard. One form this optimism couldtake was Wesley's insistence that God's grace is universally available andholistically transformative in human lives. More often, though, it wasexpressed in terms of the inherent goodness of human nature. The differencebetween Wesley's conviction and this more common expression is subtle,and his American descendants increasingly blurred the distinction. Thecrucial point is that when moral goodness is assumed to be inherent , thereis little emphasis on cultivating dispositions toward desirable actions. Manywill assume that the ideal dispositions emerge naturally, if we do not foolishly thwart them by attempting instead to impose our distorted culturalexp ectation s. O thers will sup pos e that cultivating predisposit ions is irrele-


30/113

vant ( if not antithetical) to moral concern, because the essence of truemorality is rising above all biological and cultural inclinations in exercisingour innate power of rational choice. As a growing number of Methodistsembraced such assumptions, they inevitably lost touch with Wesley's stresson the imp orta nce of cultivating within believers an end uring holisticdisposition toward Christlike life in the world and his appreciation for therole of first-order forms of theological activity in this venture.The Need for Investing in the Theological C om petence of LaityThe dynamics just traced help explain why many in our churches honestlyquestion the value of devoting major resources to cultivating the competency of laity in theology. When theology is understood as a narrowlyspecialized discipline of highly abstract reflection on a purely private areaof life, what vital contribution could its mastery make to laity? And whatpossible benefit might they bring to theology? But these dynamics alsoprovide the backdrop for appreciating the growing sense of need to reclaimthe classic conception of theology, with i ts emphasis on both the importan ce of lay theological form ation an d th e value of lay participation intheological reflection.

Con sider first the foundational d imen sion of holist ic, orienting dispositions. There is broad lament in North American culture over a perceiveddecline of "character" in our citizens. This is helping to call into questionthe diffuse Enlightenment assumption that disposit ions toward honest ,humane, and charitable behavior are native to humans and emerge naturally in normal maturation. We are beginning to appreciate again thedeg ree to which chara cter is a prod uct of the form ative (or de-formative)impact of our various communities-of-influence. And we are learning thatthe communities that are most pervasive and intentional in their influencehave the most impact . Hence the sad reali ty that so many of us raised in acommunity named for the one who "emptied himself for the sake ofothers'* are pursuing life in a way that reflects instead the consumeristmotto that "the one who dies with the most toys wins"! Lack of appreciation for the malleable nature of character has left us susceptible to culturalcaptivity. If we want our members to have greater clari ty about and greatercons istency in embod ying truly Christiike life in our culture, we must ow nthe need to cultivate competent Christl ike disposit ions.

In moving to the next dimension, it is vital to recognize that laity are


31/113

not just beneficiaries of formative attention; the y are also major players inthe practical-theological activities that shape the worldview/character ofthose in our churches. At the heart of character is a "life narrative" thatframes our sense of self in relation to others, lending coherence to ourdispositions and actions. While this narrative has unique elements, its plotself-consciously emulates a prototypeimbibed from those who surroundus and/or chosen out of adoration. For Christians, this prototype is the"Christ story" Sermons and scattered Scripture reading are insufficient fortranscribing this story deeply into our souls. It is impressed more fullythrough regular patterns of worship, times of intentional study of Scripture,the example of mentors who emulate Christ , and a variety of other activities in which laity are forefront. The effectiveness of these activities isdependent upon a sufficient core of laity recognizing their theologicaldimension and engaging them competently .

The authenticity of the Christ story being impressed through theseactivities is also of conc ern , reflecting the interplay of the form ative a ndnormative dimensions of the theological enterprise. The ability to discernthis authenticity is grou nde d in knowledge of the w hole of Scripture. It isstrengthened by exposure to the long and broad tradition of Christianinterpretation and application of Scripture. This exposure makes one sensitive to the reality that God's revelation in Christ-while universal in scope-took specific historical-cultural expression; and it provides the chance tobenefit from the wisdom gained through the attempts in other ages andcultures to give appropriately translated expression to that revelation. Bycontrast , a lack of grounding in Scripture or of exposure to the tradition ofChristian life and witness makes it more likely that we will fail to recognizecultural captivity in our life and witness. Any in vestme nt th at increase s t hecompetence of our laity in Scripture and tradition increases the likelihoodof authentic Christian formation in our churches.

Such investm ent is also vital for formalized no rma tive reflection.United Methodist polity provides laity a prominent voice in our decisionmaking bodies. As John Cobb has reminded us, when we fail to alsoprovide laity with support in (and expectation of) developing appropriatetheological competence, it increases the likelihood that theological issueswill be decided by cultural and political dynamics. The solution to thisdanger is surely not to exclude laity from normative reflection! In the firstplace, clergy and academic theologians are also susceptible to cultural and


32/113

polit ical influences. More important , such exclusion would represent asurrender to the unfortunate fracturing of normative reflection fostered bythe Enl ightenment . Normat ive debates in theology are now commonlyframed as forced choices between past authorit ies (Scripture and tradition)and present authorit ies (reason and experience) . Given the specializationof knowledge described above, this scenario approaches a choice betweenrelying on clergy/theology for guidance and relying on laity/science. JohnWesley rightly resisted this framing of theological debates, evidencingsome awareness that interpretation of experience and reason is as humanand thus fall ible-as is that of Scripture and tradition. He modeled a desirefor normative reflection to sustain dialogue between competing interpretat ions of the various so urces of theological insight until a way was found to"do justice" to all the sources (and thus to the contributions of all th echurch).^ W e nee d laity from all areas of specialization wh o are grou nde denough in the classic dimensions of theology to be confident anddiscerning in offering their unique contributions to normative reflection inthe church.

We also need laity to own their crucial role in the ap ologetic dime nsionof the theological enterp rise. In this age of specialization a nd rapid chan ge,new challenges to Christian claims and values emerge most often inresearch labs, boardrooms, clinics, and the like. It is laity who first confrontthe se challenges and o ften laity w ho a re best placed to offer an influentialChristian respo nse. This makes i t vital that they resist the privatized mo delof the relation of their Christian convictions to their vocation and that theyare theologically com pete nt to pa rticipate in forming this response. It isequally vital that the church support them in developing this competence.Prospects for Enhancing the Theological C om petence of LaityWhat are the prospects for strengthening this support? The good news isthat some excellent resources are being made available to UnitedMethodist congregations and are being used to a significant degree.Program s l ike DISCIPLE Bible study. Christian Believer, an d C oven an tDiscipleship are proving their value both for promoting formation ofauthentic Christian conviction and disposit ions and for grounding andstrengthening participants* capacity to participate in normative reflection.

The prospects are bleaker in the academy. I have formal theologicaledu cation o nly partly in mind in this assessm ent. A variety of voices here


33/113

Randy L Maddox holds the Paul T Walls Chair in W esleyan Theology at SeattlePacific University, He is the author o f Responsible Grace: John Wesley'sPractical Theology and is an elder in the Dakotas Annual Conference of TheUnited Methodist Church.Endnotes1. To cite just two exam ples, see W illiam J. Abraham, "The Revitalization of UnitedMethodist D octrine and the Renewal of Evangelism," in Theology an d Evangelism inthe Wesleyan Heritage, ed. by James C. Logan (Nashville: Kingswood Books, 1994),35-50 ; and John B. Cobb, Jr., Becoming a Thinking Christian (Nashville: Abingdon,1993).2.1 am using this term to describe the nature of the task, not to delimit who mightengage in it. The tendency (particularly in the Western church) to restrict suchformative work to clergy is regrettable and unjustified.3. Cf. Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit, trans., with an introduction by D avidAnd erson (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's S eminary Press, 1980 ).4. For details on this development, see Randy L. Maddox, "The Recovery ofTheology as a Practical Discipline: A Co ntem porary Agenda," Theological Studies 51(1990): 650-72.5. This point has been emphasized by Ellen Cha rry in "The Moral Function ofDoctrine," Theology Today 49 (1992):31-45; see also idem., By the Renewing of YourMinds: The Pastoral Function of Christian Doctrines (New York: Oxford UniversityPress. 1997).6. Cf. Randy L. Maddox, 'An Untapped Inheritance: American Methodism andWesley's Practical Theology," in Doctrines and Disciplines: Methodist Theology and

are call ing for the recovery of something more l ike the classic conceptionof theology. 1 0 The broader problem is the general isolation of formal theological education from the rest of the university. While some divinityschools stand on university campuses, they rarely require students toengage an y field outside the divinity curriculum . Mor e impo rtant , UnitedMethod ist-related colleges and universit ies have largely drop ped any exp ectation that nondivinity majors will develop basic competency for bringingtheological perspective to their area of specialization. We will have to lookelsewhere at present for academic models that prepare laity for seriousparticipation in the theological enterprise.


34/113

Practice, ed. by Russell E. Richey, William B. Lawrence, and Dennis Campbell(Nashville: Abingdon. 1999 ), 19 -52.7. On the points in this and the preceding paragraph, see James E. Kirby, Russell E.Richey and Kenneth E. Rowe. The Methodists (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 199 8);Cynthia Lynn Lyerly, Methodism and the Southern Mind, 1770-1810 (New York:Oxford U niversity Press, 1 998); and A. Gregory Schneider, The Way of the CrossLeads Home: The Domestication of American Methodism (Bloomington: IndianaUniversity Press. 199 3).8. See this w orry in John B. Cobb, Jr., Lay Theology (St. Louis: Chalice, 1994), 3-4.9. For more on this, see W. Stephen Gunter, et al, Wesley and the Quadrilateral:Renewing the Conversation (Nashville: Abingdon, 1997); and Randy L. Maddox,''Honoring the Dialogue," Circuit Rider 22/6 (Nov.-D ec. 1999): 24-2710. See Maddox. "The Recov ery of Theology." 65 9-65 .


35/113


36/113

the elites or with yet another standardized set of ideas) but from thebottom up? Let 's take a closer look at the concerns and questions that popup at the grass roots.A New Respect for GodThe biggest hurdle to thinking theologically is neither the complexity ofthe issues nor the irrelevance of theological thought; rather, it is thatpeople assume they already know all they need to know about God.including Jesus Christ , the Holy Spirit , and the church. This is the problemnot just of religious professionals who proudly present their degrees. Evenin conversat ions am ong chu rch people notions of God or ideas about th einterpre tation of biblical texts , for instanc e, are often referred t o in ord er toend a debate rather than in order to become part of a dialogue. We allknow phrases (some turned into bumper stickers) like "God (or the Bible)said it, that settles it."

N ot surprisingly, wh en there is talk about revitalization in the church ,theological discourse does not usually appear on the list of things to berevitalized-even though it may show up on lists of things to be "recovered." A widespread feeling holds that all that the churches need to do is tomarket the ir stock of inherited ecclesial goodsincluding their know ledgeof God and other theological insightsthrough more appealing worshipservices , more comfortable accommodations , or bet ter services . And al lthat this effort would take is to repackage these goods in new and moreattractive ways and dust them off, where necessary.In this situation theological discourse can be revitalized only from thebottom up. The first thing that needs to happen is for us not to fire up themarket of theological ideas but to understand the limited nature of ourknowledge of God. Well-meaning experts , trying to counter our theologicalcomplacency by pointing out new and interesting "facts" about God, willonly make things worse at this stage. We first need to become aware of ourlimits . And isn't it true that we are most aware of these limits when we arein touch with the p ressures of life at the grass roots, wh en w e question ourpreconceived ideas about God and the world?The first step in revitalizing theological discourse is ultimately a matterof gaining new respect for God.2 We would never presume that we have fulland absolute knowledge of people whom we respect. We are limited in ourknowledge of our pa rtner s and friends, for instance; and this is wh at ulti-


37/113

mately keeps our relationships alive and dynamic. It is no different in ourtheological knowledge of God. Revitalization presupposes an attitude ofrespect.

The biblical book of Job tells a similar story. Here theology is also revitalized through gaining new respect for God. In a situation of extrem e pressure, including the loss of Job's wife and children and all that he worked for,the textbook answers of Job's friends, complete with beautiful ideas ofGod's power and glory, reach their limits and crumble. In Job's situation, thetheologians who merely repeat standardized ideas about God are the oneswho are least helpful and are unable to understand what's really going on.

A pastoral care approach is equally hopeless in a situation where everything is turned upside down. Job's ordeal leads him into uncharted territory beyond the theological textbooks and the well-meaning efforts atpastoral counseling and ends with a personal encounter with God thatrestores respect and makes all the difference. Theological discourse ismoved to a new level in Job's experience: "I had heard of you by thehearing of the ear, but now my eye sees you" 0 o b 42:5) .

Revitalizing theological discourse has nothing to do with merelydusting off a few doctrines or simply recovering a set of inherited beliefsand memorizing them. Theological discourse is revitalized wherever ourdoctrines are tested and shaped in the context of new encounters withGod in our everyday lives, where the pressure is greatest . Was that not alsopart of the early Methodist experience? At the heart of it all was the experience of God in situations of pressure. John Wesley saw himself as a "brandplucked from the burning," first as a child when he was rescued from hisfather's burning parsonage and later as one who was rescued from damnation in order to challenge the powers of evil . The best Methodist theologyhas always been theology done under pressure, constantly revitalized byseeking out and confronting the most severe pressures of life . These pressures included the life-and-death issues of the day, such as poverty andslavery, and the forces that kept people poor and enslaved, such as thegreed and self-centeredness of the powerful.^

Theological discourse is revitalized wherever we develop new respectfor God. something learned best when people are pushed out of theirsecure worlds and the security of their doctrinal assumptions and into situations of pressure at the grass roots of everyday life.'*


38/113


39/113

regular basis with the people at the local homeless shelter. Creative engage- Iment with Bible and theology picked up precisely at the point where weenc oun tere d people wh o pushe d us beyon d the limits of our theological 'com fort zon es . L ike Wesley and the early Methodists , we exp erienced howtheological discourse is revitalized under pressure.Theological discourse can experience revitalization from the bottom upeven in the theology centers. When students and faculty at Perkins Schoolof Theolog y in D allas began going to W est D allas (a desolate are a of townmarked by poverty and racial marginalization) and developed relationshipswith the people there, we also experienced revitalization. It all began with asense that meeting God in West Dallasunder pressure and in the contextof the encounter with other peoplecan change one's life. In this settingpeople developed new relationships to the traditions of the church, eyeswere opened to important themes in the Bible that had gone unnoticed forgenerations, and new theological questions were raised. No wonder that wemet resistance from certain faculty and students precisely at the pointwhere theological discourse was being revitalized in these ways: nobodyever worried about a few acts of charily performed off campus. I

Even official church documents are now beginning to tie the revitalizat ion of theology and the church to enco unters w ith the underside . H erelies the real challenge of the United Methodist Bishops' Initiative onChildren and Poverty. Unlike many annual conferences that have picked upthe document, the bishops are not primarily interested in the questionabout what else those of us who are well off can do for others. Neither isthe point of the bishops' co nc ern for the worse ning situation of the chil- ]dren and the poo r that we develop m ore prog ram s. "The crisis am ong children and the impoverished and our theological and historical m and ates [dem and mo re than additional program s or emph ases ," the bishops s ta te .They conc lude on the surprising note that "nothing less than the reshaping ^of The United Method ist Ch urch in respon se to the Go d wh o is am ong i*the least of these ' is required."^ W herev er we en cou nte r the pressures of ilife, the vitality of both theology and the church is at stake.

In all these examples theological discourse is revitalized from thebottom up and draws i ts energy where people encounter God in thetension s of life. The m oun taintop s, including our aca dem ic or ecclesialivory towers, may not necessarily be the best places to start the revitalization of theology. The German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer, partici-

i


40/113

pating in the revitalization of theology under the pressures of Germany'sThird Reich (an effort that cost him his life), realized that we need to followGod where God has already preceded us, to the underside of life . ' ' Freshencou nters with G od w here the pressure is greatestwhere we are shakenout of our theological safety zonesprovide new sources of energy for revitalizing theological discourse. Theological discourse cannot be truly revitalized through well-meaning programs that merely repeat the lessons of thepast, no matter how valuable and true they may be.Listening in C om mu nityThe revitalization of theological discourse goes hand in hand with a newattitude of listening. While the theological experts may have a hard timelearning this lesson (many of us are more used to teaching than toreceiving), nobody is off the hook. When we forget to listen to other voices,we often hear only ourselves. Without listening, theological discoursebe com es narcissistic by default . At all levels of theological discourse, fromthe academy to the Sunday school class, there is a constant temptation toget stuck circling around our own interests . At other times, we may also belistening too indiscriminately. Here our efforts to think about God becomemarket driven and are determ ined by the powers-that-be , by those wh ospeak in the loudest voice. We need to learn when to listen and to what tolisten.

In the Methodist tradition following John Wesley, the means of gracemark the m ost im portant places wh ere we need to l is ten . Means of grace arechannels through which we receive God's grace; they are links throughwh ich we are co nn ecte d to G od. Initially, Wesleyrooted firmly in theAnglican traditionidentified prayer, reading the Bible, and Holy Co m mu nion as mean s of grace . Later , he added Chris t ian conferen ce andfasting. In addition, the older Wesley also put strong emphasis on works ofmerc y as me ans of grace . Each of these e lements provides an opp ortunityfor listening to God and to other people.

Praying to G od, in this lineup, is not prese nting Go d w ith a wish list o rperforming a religious ritual. Rather, prayer has to do with being indialogue with G od, with speaking as well as listening. Praying me ansopening up to God, aligning our will with God's will when the going getstough. Jesus himself set the example in Gethsemane: "Not what I want, butwhat you want" (Mark 14:36). Praying not only is a personal matter, as


41/113

Wesley was well aware, but also takes place in community. Here thedialogue between the self and God is extended to include others who aredifferent, thus intensifying the experience of listening.

Reading the Bible also implies listening and dialogue: not only do weread the Bible, the Bible also reads us M We are shaped in this interaction inways that we cannot anticipate and that lead us beyond the stereotypical"religious" or "ecclesial" realms into interaction with all of God's creation.Like prayer, the Bible has its place not only in personal life but also in thecommunity. Written by a large number of people and groups who haveencountered God in their lives, the Bible needs to be listened to in communities diverse enough to have captured the most severe pressures of lifeand to have had diverse encounters with God in those situations. The unityof the biblical canon has always been a unity in diversity.

Everything comes together in Holy Communion. Here the Bible isread, prayer and the liturgy (representing th e traditions of the church ) findtheir deepest roots, a community is formed out of diverse members, andChrist 's presence is encountered in ways that have the potential to revitalize and, at times, revolutionize o ur theological and do ctrinal images.i^The "open table" tradition of the M ethodists , inviting all w ho repent oftheir sin and want to live in peace with one another, breaks open ournarrow images of comm unity and extends our horizons . Vita l theologicaldiscourse is not restricted to church members. It also includes all peoplewho are aware of their shortcomings and who seek to find new sources oflife, particularly those people at the margins of society whom we often failto take seriously as brothers and sisters because they do not fit our ecclesial profile.

In this context Wesley 's concern for Chris t ian conference reminds usthat we need to develop new form s of lis tening in com m unity set t ings .The com m uni ty is not a s tra ightjacket in which e verybo dy is expe cted tothink alike; rather, it is a place that cre ates sp ace for disco urses "seaso nedw ith salt," as Wesley p uts it- ** Fastin g mig ht he lp resist th e incre asin gcommodification of life i

Documents

Spring 2001 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources for Ministry