SAET Blog

Pastor-theologian Posts

  • January 13, 2012 by Matthew Mason

    The Great Value of Christian Scholarship

    The matter is quite simple. The Bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand, we are obliged to act accordingly. Take any words in the New Testament and forget everything except pledging yourself to act accordingly. My God, you will say, if I do that my whole life will be ruined. How would I ever get on in the world? Herein lies the real place of Christian scholarship. Christian scholarship is the Church’s prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming too close. Oh, priceless scholarship, what would we do without you? Dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living God. Yes, it is even dreadful to be alone with the New Testament. (Søren Kierkegaard, Provocations)

    Categories: General | Matthew Mason | Pastor-theologian | biblical studies

    0 Comments

  • August 4, 2011 by Matthew Mason

    Three proverbs for the pastor-theologian

    On the value of making the most of time for reading, taking notes, and storing things up even if it doesn’t seem immediately relevant:

    The ants are a people not strong,
    yet they provide their food in summer (Prov. 30:25).

    On the value of reading widely, suspending judgment, and reading people you disagree with:

    The one who states his case first seems right,
    until the other comes and examines him. (Prov. 18:17)

    To give us hope and a sense of the dignity of the task, and to provoke us to search the Scriptures for fresh insights:

    It is the glory of God to conceal things,
    but the glory of kings is to search things out. (Prov. 25:2)

    Categories: General | Matthew Mason | Pastor-theologian

    0 Comments

  • July 29, 2011 by Matthew Mason

    Focusing on the Primaries

    It bothers me that, when I come across a list of “Books every pastor should read in 2011″, it generally consists only of (usually fairly popular level) titles written in the previous couple of years. I understand why that’s the case, and I suppose it’s valuable to be informed of the latest books being published. But I must confess I long to see a list made up of reminders that we’d benefit more in 2011 from reading Augustine’s Confessions, or Luther’s Freedom of a Christian than in reading almost any text written in the past 50 years, let alone the previous twelve months.*

    In large part this reaction is probably a legacy of my seminary education (and, no doubt, my own, peculiar, contrarian nature). I’m grateful for many things from my time at Oak Hill, but perhaps the most important ongoing influence was the importance placed on reading primary texts. I think in particular of the daunting OT exam (covering 1 Kings-Malachi), which contained questions like (at this distance, I paraphrase!), “Compare and contrast the eschatological vision of Ezekiel with that of Isaiah,” and in which we weren’t allowed a Bible; the reasoning being that it would compel us to read that part of the OT thoroughly before entering the exam room (OT professors take note – it was a great educational strategy). Or the church history essays I wrote, in which it was made clear to us that engaging seriously with the writings of C19 liberal theologians, e.g., would gain us far better marks than footnoting summaries of their teachings drawn from elsewhere, or where I wrote on Calvin’s doctrine of the Lord’s Supper without citing a single secondary source in my bibliography or footnotes (I don’t recommend this!), and got the feedback: “Strengths: Lots of lovely primary texts”. As a result, it’s instinctive to me that, if I want to know what Augustine taught about the Trinity, I should jolly well read Augustine. It also gave me the confidence that on the whole (with judicious help from good secondary sources where necessary) this is doable, and is far more fruitful and enjoyable.

    None of this is to deny the value of secondary literature. I’d be poorer for not having read Cranfield, Moo and Wright on Romans; or Lewis Ayres’s Nicaea and Its Legacy; or Richard Muller’s stellar work on Reformation and Post-Reformation dogmatics; or Gilles Emery on Aquinas’s trinitarian theology. These scholars, who have devoted decades to studying their subjects and are fine readers of texts, are not only able to summarise a text’s meaning, or untangle a particularly knotty argument, or point one in the direction of further sources; they are also able to situate the text in its historical, social, and linguistic context in a way I never could because I lack the skills and expertise. Nevertheless, I’m convinced that nothing beats repeated, careful reading of Romans itself, or Augustine and the Cappodocians, or the Reformed confessions, or Aquinas. And if I were forced to choose one or the other, I’d go primary every time.

    Going primary is certainly slower. It takes time to get used to a new thinker and to begin to inhabit their world. Potted summaries would be easier to absorb. But they’re also thinner, less demanding, less rewarding. There’s a reason that Plato’s writings, and those of Athanasius, and Edwards, and Barth are classics. And nothing stretches and expands a small mind so much as thoughtful, albeit sometimes bemused and foggy, contact with a great one.

    So, I for one am mostly likely to be found studiously ignoring lists of books written in the past few years, and brewing myself a strong coffee or pouring a glass of wine, and settling back with an old book in the hope of making a new friendship or renewing an old one.

    *All of this in addition to my almost comically violent dislike of lists laying guilt trips on pastors by telling them that here is yet another list of books they positively have to read. Why not call these lists, “Ten books that might possibly benefit some pastors if they don’t already have more than enough to read to last them a couple of lifetimes, not to mention their innumerable other pastoral responsibilities”?

    Categories: Church History | Ecclesial Theology | General | Matthew Mason | Pastor-theologian

    3 Comments

  • January 3, 2011 by Gerald Hiestand

    Essay at On the Square

    The good people over at First Things were kind enough to publish a short piece I wrote about the need for pastor-theologians on the On the Square blog. The essay can be found here.

    UPDATE: Scot McKnight picked up the piece and raises a number of fair questions here.

    Categories: Ecclesial Theology | General | Gerald Hiestand | Pastor-theologian

    1 Comment

  • October 28, 2010 by Gerald Hiestand

    Seeking Wisdom

    The annual symposium for the First Fellowship has come and gone, and, as hoped for, was a great success.  The blend of pastoral sensitivity, sharp theological engagement, and pietistic earnestness, all combined for a truly wonderful few days.

    This year’s symposium in particular was important for me. During Dr. Vanhoozer’s closing comments, he stressed that doctrinal knowledge should serve the higher end of wisdom. In other words, doctrine is not an end in and of itself, but rather is meant to lead us to wisdom — right living in relation to God and others. Like faith without works, doctrine that fails to terminate in wisdom is dead. This wasn’t a new thought for me, but somehow it landed with fresh force.

    The proper role of the pastor, Vanhoozer reminded us, is to serve the church through accumulating and dispensing wisdom to her children.  And it struck me in a wincing way how much of my study and scholarship of late has been about seeking knowledge rather than wisdom. Over the last year in particular, the books I’ve chosen to read, the way I’ve read them, and the notes I’ve taken, have been almost entirely driven by a desire to be learned, rather than a desire to be wise. And likewise my writing has been primarily an attempt to reveal my learnedness, and less to convey wisdom. My study had become professionalized. (Which is all the more remarkable given my explicit commitment to ecclesial theology.)

    So I’ve returned again to Augustine, and placed an order at Amazon for Thomas’ Summa and Barth’s Church Dogmatics–both wells of wisdom from which I’ve yet to drink. And I’ve already found it immeasurably refreshing to be reading City of God with no other agenda than to figure out how to more deeply love God and be a better pastor.  And if perchance I stumble upon an insight or two I think worth sharing to the larger ecclesial community, I’ll prayerfully write those thoughts down. But God forgive me for making an end of the means.

    The world is full of theologians and scholars who can dispense knowledge. And I know beyond a doubt there are many who can do it better than I ever will. The mere distribution of knowledge should not be (nor likely can be) the sweet-spot of the pastor-theologian. God spare us (me!) from mere learning, and from the bony fingers of pride that, with suspect motives, grasp book and pen.

    Categories: General | Gerald Hiestand | Pastor-theologian

    2 Comments

  • October 13, 2010 by Jason Hood

    Bishops and book-banning (or book-testing) viewed Darkly

    An interview with David Dark (2005) supports the point I made in a previous post about the important discernment role of pastor-theologians, and the need to place would-be “Christian” books and their ecclesial impact on the scales.  This is as big a problem in the modern church as it was in the ancient church, and throughout church history.

    Christianbook.com:

    You note that most Christians are unable to determine whether something is morally edifying unless the movie, album or book immediately defines itself as such. As a result, the Christian culture has allowed marketing teams to define that which is Christian and to distinguish those things which are not Christian or ‘secular.’ . . . You also state, “I’m personally convinced that such market-driven theology will be viewed historically, with at least as much embarrassment as, say, the medieval sale of indulgences.” What might you say to those who would disagree with this conclusion? To those who have grown up in the context of “Christian Culture,” how can they develop a more discerning view of contemporary culture?

    David Dark:

    I’d say that the Catholic Church eventually repented over the indulgences, but there’s no sign of a similar moment of clarity in corporations who want their profits (at any cost) from their so-called “Christian” companies. The market will call “Christian” whatever sells as “Christian” and well-meaning church people inherit the heresy. The market we will always have with us (this side of the coming kingdom), but discerning the spirits and sorting out our allegiances from consumerism and America and whatever we’ve gotten fooled over is a fulltime, communal occupation. Studying history, praying, and talking these things through is really all we can do. But it’s what the church has always had to do.

    I’d only add that it is not only a communal occupation; someone has to take the lead in discernment, historical perspective, and prayer.  I vote for pastor-theologians.

    Categories: Ecclesial Theologian | Ecclesial Theology | Jason Hood | Pastor-theologian

    0 Comments

  • October 12, 2010 by Jason Hood

    Revelation, served three ways

    I’ve really enjoyed teaching through Revelation with my buddy Robbyn Abedi.  I’ve really enjoyed reading three books (in addition to commentary dabbling), by very different writers whose perspectives result in very different insights:  a scholar-exegete-theologian (Richard Bauckham, Theology of the Book of Revelation), a worship leader, musician and pastor (Michael Card and Scotty Smith, Unveiled Hope), and a contemplative-pastor type (Eugene Peterson, Reversed Thunder).  It’s been a great exercise, and a fantastic reminder that those with different gifts have much to give one another–surely one lesson we’re trying to learn at SAET, by focusing on what it means to be in the church doing theology.

    For one sample of Peterson’s pastoral angle:  the first century churches in Asia were not a bunch of weaklings. On the outside, especially by the standards of their culture, they may have looked like it. But should we see these Christians as harried, harassed?  Eugene says no:

    “These men and women from the moment of their baptism in the name of the Trinity, knew their lives as miracles of resurrection. The people who gathered each Lord’s Day to sing their Lord’s praises and receive his life were the most robust in the Roman empire.

    They were immersed in splendors. They brimmed with life. Even when their zeal cooled, as it sometimes did, and their taut loyalties went a little slack, as sometimes happened, there was far more going on in their lives than in the Babylon-seduced lives of their contemporaries. And they knew it. When they forgot, St. John reminded them.

    We must never forget that the pictures of wildly celebrative praise in heaven and catastrophic woes wreaked on earth…that all this stuff was made out of their daily traffic in scripture, baptism, and eucharist. In this heaven-penetrated, hell-threatened environment they lived their daily lives. Nothing . . . could equal it for depth of meaning and drama of inciden

    There could not have been many dull moments in those lives, nor need there be in ours. When dull moment did come, they were recognized as the work of the devil and were chased by the apocalypse-informed imagination at worship.” (Reversed Thunder, 70-71)

    Categories: Ecclesial Theologian | Ecclesial Theology | Jason Hood | Pastor-theologian | Revelation

    0 Comments

  • September 28, 2010 by Gerald Hiestand

    Jamenson Ross on Metaxas’ Bonhoeffer

    Jameson Ross has a nice little guest review over at Euangelion on Eric Metaxas’ Bonhoeffer. His comments about Bonhoeffor as a pastor and theologian are worth noting (as opposed to “nothing” as I incorrectly wrote earlier!).

    “Bonhoeffer was a theologian. His life as a theologian and pastor, calls into question the dichotomy between the pastor’s role to preach and live theology, on the one hand, and the scholar’s role to produce theology on the other. Bonhoeffer was both. Perhaps Bonhoeffer offers a refreshing example of pastor-theologian to a new generation of pastors who wish to construct theology within the context of the church. Bonhoeffer’s work called the church to obedience rather than compromise, and that summons could only be invoked from a deep theological well.”

    Read the whole piece here.

    Categories: Bonhoeffer | General | Pastor-theologian

    0 Comments

  • June 10, 2010 by Gerald Hiestand

    Piper on PhD’s

    This video made the rounds awhile back, but if you haven’t watched it yet, it’s worth watching. I think Piper is mostly correct here. Pastors don’t need to be doing academic theology; someone needs to, but not pastors. But more pastors do need to do PhD’s, with a view to ecclesial theology. I’m not sure Piper fully appreciates the distinction between academic theology and ecclesial theology.

    Frankly, I’m not convinced most pastors need to bother with a PhD unless they plan to engage in some sort of theological writing ministry. An MDiv or a ThM is generally sufficient for what most pastors will face in the context of parish ministry.

    HT: Dane Ortlund

    Categories: John Piper | Pastor-theologian

    0 Comments

  • April 2, 2010 by Gerald Hiestand

    Pastor-Theologians and Academic Theologians: Toward a Healthy Division of Labor, Part 2

    In a previous post I raised a question about the necessity of pastor-theologians in light of gifted, ecclesially sensitive academic theologians such as Jenson, Guton, Hart, Webster, Vanhoozer, etc.  Is there anything that a pastor-theologian brings to the table that isn’t already being brought by academic theologians? And if so, what?

    Nearly all of my study up to this point has been in historical soteriology (Augustine, the Cappadocians, Athanasius, Anselm, Calvin, Luther, Edwards, etc.)  and New Testament studies devoted to Paul and justification (Wright, Westerholm, Seifrid, Bird, Moo, Dunn, etc.).  I’m a new-comer to contemporary systematic theology, so the analysis provided below must be seen as preliminary. What follows is my “initial sense of things” after reading portions of Jenson, Webster, and Pannenberg, contrasted with the sort of theological reflection written by Calvin, Luther, Augustine, etc. My comments here are not intended so much as a critique, but mere observations. As I will note in a coming post, academic theologians are able to do things that pastor-theologians cannot.

    1. Academic Theology lacks a sense of the preacher’s burden. Academic theologians do not typically have to preach to the laity. This reality is evident in the way their work is constructed. The reader senses that academic theology, even explicitly Christian academic theology, is a couple of steps removed from the situation on the ground. Theology, at it’s core, must be pressing toward the pulpit. This does not mean that a theologian’s work should be hung low enough for the shortest goat. But it does mean that whatever I come up with must be — in its most distilled form — preachable. Academic theology lacks this at many points. Don’t misunderstand my point. I’m not saying that a theologian’s project must be preachable without translation — that every interested lay person should be able to pick it up and understand it. Augustin’e De Trinita, or Edwards’ Freedom of the Will, for example, are not easily accessible. But there is a sense in both Augustine and Edwards that they are writing as pastors who have to weekly (if not daily) draw a connection between their most profound thoughts and the lives of  average people. Academic theologians do not — as a matter of vocation — have to do this, and it gives them a certain luxury to split atoms that perhaps need not be split.

    2. There is tendency in academic theology to speak of the believing community in the third person. John Webster, in his little book on holiness, is clearly driving toward an explicitly Christian application. Yet the readers notes a certain distance between Webster and the ecclesial community. His customary way of referring to the believing community is in the third person. He speaks of “the christian,” “the believer,” and “the church.” Yet throughout the book he often quotes Calvin, who in contrast speaks of the believing community in the first person — “I” and “we” and “us.” It’s not that Webster never self-identifies with the believing community. But the freedom to do so in academic prose is certainly less than what one finds in Calvin or Luther or Edwards or Augustine. I can’t help but feel that this rubs the ecclesial edge off of Webster’s work.

    3. Academic theology is less self-consciously an expression of personal piety. Worship is a personal thing, and each person expresses it uniquely. Far be it from me to make a statement about the personal piety of academic theologians. Yet I think it a safe observation to note that contemporary scholarship (whether theology or biblical studies), is less self-consciously pietistic than what is found in theological treatises of old. One thinks here of Anselm’s Proslogion. In the opening paragraphs Anselm writes,

    Lord, you are my God and my Lord, and never have I seen you. You have created me and re-created me and You have given me all the good things I possess, and still I do not know You. In fine, I was made in order to see You, and I have not yet accomplished what I was made for….I set out hungry to look for You; I beseech You, Lord, do not let me depart from you fasting.

    The entire treatise is, in fact, a prayer. My point here is not that all theological treatise should be written as extended prayers. But there is certainly something to be said for a genre of writing that makes explicit the author’s personal hunger and love for God.

    I like Webster and Jenson, and am finding their work helpful in many respects. And, as mentioned above, I think they are doing some important things that most pastor-theologians –given our eccleisal vocation –  find difficult to pull off. More on that in the next post.

    Categories: Academic Theology | John Webster | Pastor-theologian | Robert Jenson

    1 Comment
« Previous Entries