Reclaiming the Church

So let's dig into the first batch of Transforming Theology material.

First up is John Cobb's Reclaiming the Church. Today, we'll blog up through chapter two (about half way through the book). This will include a detailed summary of Cobb's thoughts. Tomorrow I'll try to log back on and lob a few of my own questions at Cobb's work. Feel free to jump in and ask your own questions or attempt to answer mine in the weeks to come. I'm hoping to pass a few of these along to Mr. Cobb when we're done with the book, so don't be shy!

(And I apologize for all the formatting errors found below. I am having the hardest time making the font a uniform size)
_______________________
Preface

Cobb states that the biggest reason for decline of “oldline” churches (we'll define this term later) is that its faith has become “vague and unconvincing” (p. vii). This is mainly because the task of doing theology has been left up to the “professionals” whose work is determined by the norms of the university rather than by the needs of the church.

Introduction

-Whatever the exact reason for the decline of oldline churches (too liberal, too disengaged from culture, etc...), Cobb see the root cause as lacking strong, shared Christian convictions.

- Most of these churches are lukewarm. “We do good things. We serve real needs of real people. But we inspire no passion...We are quite content if, among the priorities of our members, Christian faith comes in third or fourth, after family and employer and nation perhaps” (p. 4).

-Cobb then identifies who this book is addressing:

• “Oldliners” = Protestant churches in existence by the beginning of the 20^th century (so no Fundamentalists, Pentecostals, Orthodox, or Catholic), who have been in ecumenical dialogue with one another and the Orthodox and Catholic (so no SBC or Lutheran-Missouri Synod) and are predominantly white in makeup (so no Korean Presbyterian churches).
  

Chapter 1: Diagnosing the Loss of Shared Convictions

-Cobb traces the history of lukewarmness and loss of passionate conviction in the oldline denominations:

• Through the first half of the 17^th c., the charge of fanaticism was more likely than lukewarmness (Puritans and Pilgrims). But the second half of the 17^th c. and into the 18^th is where the lukewarmness settled in.
• Partly due to the “bloodshed” of the competing factions of the faith. Christians stopped all the fanaticism and looked for common ground, which they found in nationalism and rationalism. Governments controlled religious activity and reason trumped ancient wisdom (the Bible).
• Christianity was fine “as long as it performed its proper functions and avoided claiming too much for itself.” (p. 10) Lukewarm Christianity avoided criticizing nationalism and did not infringe on rationalism’s turf.
• In the 19^th c., the social gospel was an effective response to merge new understandings (evolution, historical criticism, industrialization) with the Christian faith.
  
• “The social gospel shaped much of healthiest part of church life in this country until World War II.” (p. 12) We need to look back here for a paradigm on how to face our current challenges and integrate them with Christianity.

Current challenge—the earlier assault was on the credibility of Christianity, but the new challenge is to its value. Oldline churches went into a period of apology and repentance for past wrongs, but why the lukewarmness?

• Anti-Judaism wass replaced with not wanting to make any claims that could be construed as such; theefore Jesus could not be the only Lord and Savior.
• Sexism was replaced with gender inclusive language, liturgy, and structure, which leads to questions on God’s nature that have still left many in uncertainty.
• Ecological crisis is acknowledged at the denominational and ecumenical levels but “creation spirituality” never makes its way into the pulpit or life of the local member.

-So the challenges are there for the oldline churches to answer and make a similar impact as the social gospel movement, but “the church has lost its capacity...because the church has no organs of thought. It has turned those over to the university...” (p. 22). Cobb claims this gap didn’t exist to such an extent a century ago...Social gospel pastors saw themselves as theologians, as did many lay persons. Today, theology is for the professional only.

• Cobb traces this shift mainly back to the import of German theology and Neo-Orthodoxy into the U.S. scene. This “faith against culture” theology became the norm in east coast seminaries. Neo-Orthodoxy was so academically rigorous that it scared off lay persons and pastors.

-If churches are to be renewed, it’s going to have to come from pastors and lay persons reflecting on “who we are and what we are called to be” while responding to the challenges of the day (p. 31).

Chapter 2: Responding to the Loss of Cultural Props

Those who want to do so aren’t starting from scratch.

• Two models have already been proposed to address the ending of “the modern world” (which includes EurocentrismNationalism [which has given way to transnational economics] and Enlightenment Rationalism [which has given way to skepticism or dogmatism]. Sexual repression and patriarchy are on their way out the door as well. [which has given way to pluralism],
  
• Model #1 – Renewal
• Renewalists “concentrate on the inner life of the church, especially on the local congregation” (p. 41)
• This comes with a realization that the church has borrowed its beliefs and agenda from the surrounding cultural trends. What we need to do now is to trust the language and symbols of our heritage and be more faithful to it.
• The end of modernity means that we can have our own distinctive vision without having to justify it to other traditions. Cobb also includes a strong "back to the Bible" attitude in this model.

• Model #2 – Transformation
• Views Christianity as a movement that is always seeking to hear from the past but is open to being changed by its cultural environment, while simultaneously trying to “Christianize” that environment. (p. 43)
• The goal “is not to recover and original form of life in the church,” that vision had its day. The goal is to reach out “to those who have been alienated from the church by its incredibility and oppressiveness of many of its teachings.” (p. 43)
• Transformationalists assume we know have knowledge (particularly in the areas of gender and sexuality) that the biblical authors did not have access to. We learn from this new knowledge what we cannot learn from the Bible and add that to the mix of doing theology.

-Cobb then traces how those favoring "renewal" and those favoring "transformation" view the 5 items that are ending (mentioned above):

• The end of Eurocentrism – both affirm ethnic pluralism and are open to new developments, but renewal focuses on the church’s ability to embody a new inclusive community, whereas transformation calls for the empowerment of new leadership and a new vision for a more inclusive society. Renewal says to “each his own” while transformation values humble dialogue.
• The end of nationalism – both are happy about its death and also reject the economism taking its places. Transformationalists, however, value “earthism” much more than the renewalists.
• The end of Enlightenment rationalism – Renewalists see a way out of apologetics and a road to pursue our own faith commitments without having to justify them to others. Transformationalists become allies with many aspects of postmodern thought and see an opportunity to shape and weigh new ideas and values in the surrounding culture.
• The end of sexual repression – both accept the fundamental goodness of sexuality. Neither fully accepts to so-called “sexual revolution.” Renewalists look to Scripture for a “biblical” sexuality but transformationalists view the bible’s teachings on sexuality as socially conditioned and lacking.
• The end of patriarchy – similar to above. Renewalists look to Scripture and condemn abuses of power by men in Christian history, but reject wholesale investigation into the symbols and doctrines of the faith. Traditionalists, on the other hand, see in feminism an ally to change the Church and the world. They are Christians first, and feminists second, (a very strong statement!) but are ready for wisdom wherever it's found.

• Cobb insists that these two visions are not to be taken as opposites. Indeed they agree on much and both try to address the lukewarmness of the oldline churches.
• “Both individually and institutionally, there is no transformation without renewal, and renewal inevitably transforms...the excesses of each call for the other.” (p. 51) Cobb traces the history of Christianity from the inclusion/exclusion of Greek philosophy in the early church up to Vatican II to demonstrate how this process typically happens.
• But the two sides tend to vilify each other, even though they are both needed.
• “When the problem is that the distinctive biblical themes are clouded by the dominance of cultural patterns, renewal is needed. Transformation is needed when our historic teaching limits us to the themes dominant in our own tradition, preventing us from hearing the voices of those who have suffered, because of our historic teaching, and when this limitation blocks our appropriation of liberating and enlarging insights from other sources” (p. 55).
• The direction we take today large will depend on how we view the present situation.