Pastors, not professors, should be setting the theological agenda of the church. This is, of course, a loaded statement, and one that requires more nuance than I’ll be able to give it here. But I stand by it nonetheless. As a pastor who cares deeply about theology, I’ve become convinced that the present bifurcation between theological scholarship and pastoral ministry accounts for much of the theological anemia facing the church today.
Robert Jenson, in his Systematic Theology, defines theology as the church’s “continuing discourse about her individuating and carrying communal purpose.” A typically dense Jensonian statement, but one that rightly captures the essence of theology. Theology is “church speak” about the God who calls and constitutes the church and about the message she proclaims. Reflection on this message—its meaning and specific cultural application—constitutes the church’s theology.
What’s more, guardianship of this message is vital to the health of the church. Yet while all Christians are called to guard the apostolic trust, there is an ascending level of theological responsibility within God’s economy. At the most basic level, all Christians are called to draw a circle of theological protection around their own lives. Beyond this, some have been entrusted with a family and are called to draw a larger circle of protection around a spouse and children. Elders and pastors among us are called to draw a still larger circle, encompassing an entire local Christian assembly. And finally, there are those who are tasked with the theological care of large swaths of the Christian tradition, or even the whole of the tradition itself (think Athanasius, Augustine, Thomas, Luther, and Calvin). These we may call, after a fashion, “wider theologians”—theologians who have been tasked with caring for the theological needs of the wider church.
And so we arrive at a pressing question, one that I believe speaks to a significant shortfall in Christian theology: Who should the church call upon to serve as its wider theologians?
Postmodern theology—on the whole—makes too much noise about the effect of social location on theological formation. But one need not drink the entire cup of Derridian Kool-Aid to see that postmodernity has a valid point here. Social location plays a key role in shaping the agenda of one’s theology. And, while perhaps obvious, it must be stated that the social location of pastoral ministry is different than the social location of the academy. Simply put, the questions facing clergy are not always congruent with the questions facing professors. This is not in itself troubling. We need not discount the validity of either set of questions. What is troubling is the fact that nearly all of our theologians have entered the academy, expending the greatest part of their energy answering academic questions. And when academic theologians do get around to addressing ecclesial questions, they tend to do so in academic ways. The chronic “disconnect” between the academy and the church is the inevitable result.
Historically, the church’s most influential theologians were churchmen—pastors, priests, and bishops. Clerics such as Athanasius, Augustine (indeed, nearly all the church Fathers), Anselm, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Edwards, and Wesley functioned as the wider theologians of their day—shaping not only the theological vision of their own parishes, but that of the wider church. In their day, the pastoral community represented the most influential, most insightful, and most articulate body of theologians.
But since the nineteenth-century (in North America, at least) the center of theological reflection has shifted from the parish to the university. The pastoral community is no longer called upon—as a matter of vocation—to construct theology for those beyond their congregations. Instead, our present context views the academy as the proper home for those with theological gifts. Those with shepherding gifts are directed toward the pastorate. And those who are gifted in both areas? Well, they’ll have to choose. But can this be right? Do we really mean to suggest that the proper home of a theologian is in the academy, disconnected from the pastoral vocation?
The drain of our wider theologians from the pastorate to the academy has resulted in a two-fold problem. First, the theological water-level of our local parishes has dropped considerably. Inasmuch as the pastoral vocation is no longer seen as a theological vocation, pastors no longer bring a strong theological presence to their local parishes. The net effect (particularly in the evangelical tradition in which I reside) is a truncated understanding of theology and its import among the laity. Theology has largely left the local church.
The second part of this problem is perhaps more even troubling. Not only has theology left the church, but the church has left theology. To be sure, many academic theologians view themselves as self-consciously serving the theological needs of the church. But on the whole, academic discourse has lost its way, becoming preoccupied with questions—especially questions regarding its right to exist—that minimize its ecclesial relevance. As Karl Barth noted in his Evangelical Theology,
Theology [given its place in the academy] has taken too many pains to justify its own existence. It has tried too hard, especially in the nineteenth century, to secure for itself at least a small but honorable place in the throne room of general science. This attempt at self-justification has been no help to its own work. The fact is that it has made theology, to a great extent, hesitant and halfhearted.
Of course, Barth’s critique does not hold true for every academic theologian. Barth, himself an academic theologian, writes self-consciously in service to the church. And similar contemporary examples can be found in John Webster, Robert Jenson, Kevin Vanhoozer, R.R. Reno, and David B. Hart, among others. But who will gainsay that theology—on the whole—has taken an unhelpfully academic turn?
Not only has academic theology neglected to focus on the right questions, but it has also lost its ecclesial dialect. The ultimate telos of Christian theology is the edification of the church. And not simply the church in its broad intellectual sense, but the church as comprised of regular people—the widower, the business executive, the married mother. Theological reflection is—if nothing else—our best efforts to preach the content of the divinely spoken Word to such as these in a way that births faith. And though much of a theologian’s project will inevitably remain inaccessible to the laity, all of a theologian’s labors should be pressing toward the pulpit.
But academic theologians do not—as a matter of vocation—have to do draw connections between theology and pulpit. Thus academic theology has become unhelpfully nuanced—a more sophisticated, gentlemanly discourse that can get away with flying at 50,000 feet. It often lacks a bare-fisted, take-no-prisoner, prophetic, pulpit voice. And yet, in reading the work of past wider theologians such as Athanasius and Calvin, one encounters theologians who draw weekly, if not daily, connections between their most profound thoughts and the lives of average people. Pastor-theologians, by means of their vocation, are best positioned to remember the inherent preachy-ness of theology.
Of course, my critique of academic theology is inevitably subjective. Some will not find the situation so dire. But all Christians of good will must agree that the church could use more ecclesially focused theology—theology that is born within an ecclesial context, driven by ecclesial concerns, and prosecuted by ecclesial theologians. We need a theology that moves boldly beyond self-justification, and that answers ecclesial questions in pastorally rich ways.
The ecclesial renewal of Christian theology will not take place apart from a concerted effort to reestablish the pastoral community as the church’s most significant body of theologians. The pastoral community must once again become serious about the duties of the theological task—study, prayer, writing, and theological dialog. The pastoral community as a whole must once again don the mantle of theological responsibility for the wider church.
I am not simply stating that pastors must become more theologically informed, or that pastors much preach with more theological precision. True enough, but this will not solve the problem. Rather, an entire paradigm shift is needed. Pastor-theologians, not academic-theologians, must once again become the leading theological voices of the church. We ask too much of our academic theologians when we ask them to answer—from the outside, as it were—the pastoral questions facing the church.
Ecclesially sensitive academic theologians have much to offer the church; I count them among my most valuable dialog partners. But we pastors must stop outsourcing the entire theological enterprise to the academy. Maintaining the theological integrity of the people of God is a task that has been assigned to the pastors of the church.
Of course, not every pastor must be—or can be—a wider theologian. Indeed, we pastors have neglected the theological calling for so long that the present pastoral community no longer possesses the theological resources necessary for the task. But a reversal is possible. Our hope for the future lies with the emerging generation of theology students.
While some of these students would make poor pastors, many have both intellectual and pastoral gifts. We must stop insisting that pastorally sensitive theologians and theologically sensitive pastors choose between theological scholarship and the church. Theologians not only belong to the church, they also—in the main—belong in the church.
Gerald Hiestand is Senior Associate Pastor of Calvary Memorial Church in Oak Park, Illinois, and executive director of The Society for the Advancement of Ecclesial Theology (SAET)—an organization dedicated to assisting pastors in the production of biblical and theological scholarship for the ecclesial renewal of Christian theology and the theological renewal of the Church.
Comments:
Without reducing this to an economic question, I do think the playing field is tilted against pastor-theologians by the incentive systems that are in place. Academic theologians have constant incentives to keep producing theological writing: publication, conferences, promotion, prestige, etc. Any ideas for how to get encouragement and incentives in place for pastors to think and write?
Fred
You're touching on a key point of this issue. I think it's a tough road ahead. The local church in its present form is rarely an incubator for birthing ecclesial theologians. The institutional change required to reverse this will take large amounts of time, effort and patience. Especially patience. Pastors committed to the vision of the ecclesial theologian must not assume their right to function as such within their local churches. We must earn this right, as it is no longer self-evident to our congregants that robust theological engagement is a good use of their pastor’s time. But before we will make any headway on institutional changes, we as pastors (and pastors-to-be) must have a fresh vision for why such changes are necessary. This essay, I hope, is a step in that direction.
Years ago I heard a Sunday homily about two priests who lectured at a conference on the Bible. The first priest, a renowned professor of theology, spoke for two hours. When he finished, the moderator said "He knows the words of God." The second priest, a humble pastor of little renown, spoke for about ten minutes. When he finished, the moderator said "He knows the Author."
Father Dubay, who has written and lectured about the Transforming Union, notes that those who are very holy and in union with the Trinity are the ones who enlighten us most with profound discernment of the meaning of scriptural passages. For example, were the Cure of Ars, Catherine of Siena, Theresa of Avila, and the Little Flower Doctors of Theology?
"Your first duty as pastors is not projects and organizations, but to lead your people to a deep intimacy with the Trinity."
John Paul II to the Austrian bishops.
From the page after the copyright page in Deep Conversion Deep Prayer by Thomas Dubay, S.M.
i loved the parish, and find myself now struggling through a PhD program to attain that proper credentialing. I am acutely aware that the divide of which Pastor Heistand speaks. It is not easy to cross.
I concur that altogether too many who walk under the title of "theologian" have not wept through the night with a family whose child has died, nor have they turned to face a congregation of people grieving the death of someone you loved too. They have not known the joy of baptizing a child and then teaching that child, and watching that child mature into a Christian adult. These are slow things that take time and they profoundly change the theologian who finds that he speaks "God's Word" theo-logos in those times and people.
One can be credentialed and enter the academic discipline, as indeed too many of my seminary professors did, without the benefit of real parish experience. That is part of this problem. We are too quick to accord someone the title of theologian who has never actual spoken the word of God to his parish, the assembled people of God whom he has come to know and love. Academics are on a calendar which most often involves a semester of perhaps 3 or 4 months. Those weeks are intense, but when the semester is done, most of my students are working hard to forget all that i said for another professor is quite appropriately trying to fill their heads with another subject. There is little time for the reflection and pastoral care which gave Ambrose, Basil, Athanasius, Augustine, Luther, Aquinas, and Calvin the depth and theological perception which makes them geniuses in our estimation. I am only my student's professor, i really will never be their pastor. Our time together is too short for that.
Yet, i find that when serious questions of theology arise, my brother pastors will turn to me as a professor, as if my answers are somehow more profound for my office than theirs would be. I know that the demands of my own parish experience did not foster or really even permit the sort of critical thought processes which are the mark of today's serious theologian. My brothers seem to know that, and they sense a need for what we do too.
My dean, a research geneticist by training, insists that no one can be a generalist any more. I don't know. I would like to think, however, that my own years of pastorally caring for a flock of people whom Jesus entrusted to me has made me a much more perceptive reader of Scripture, and hence a better thinker, speaker, and doer of theology. Does my institution see that? Does the rest of the theological community? If not, how would that change and what would that even look like?
As for academic theologians actually engaging parishioners as part of their engaging in theology.....I think of Peter Taylor Forsyth whose German theological education made him a "liberal" until his experience (resulting in conversion) with a congregation and real sin made the Gospel of grace a reality for him. He didn't throw away the "critical" tools of biblical study.....its just that he had a transformed view of their use. And Dietrich Bonhoeffer was impacted by an African American congregation in New York City....and on it goes. It seems that history's best theologians were also pastors in some capacity.
So many of today's theology professors remind one of the Pharisees and Saducees...self-exalting and full of contempt for the ordinary, un-educated laity who love the "Word of God" while the professors believe and praise their own words more than they believe the testimony of Christ in Scripture. And these sorts prepare our pastors for frontline battle.
There were theologians in C.S. Lewis' day who sneered at his efforts to write theological books for ordinary people. He made no claim to be a theologian, but merely said that since theologians were not writing for the ordinary person, someone needed to do it.
Complaints above, made....let me conclude on a more positive note that I much appreciate and benefit from reading books and First Things postings, articles etc. from theologians such as D.B. Hart, RR Reno etc. It's nice to know that D.B. Hart can, along with dense books for a limited audience like "Beauty of the Infinite," put out something for a wider readership, like "Atheist Delusions." Men like him are a true gift to the Church.
here. The bifurcation Gerald wrote about I experienced first hand in two catholic
"renewal" communities where lay persons assigned as "stewards" had scant or no
theological foundation. In fact, during my stint in the "ministries" many theological questions were unanswered or glossed over because of ignorance and for the trend of charismatics toward emotionalism. Basic questions like Adam and Eve and the
garden of eden being mere symbolism could not be clarified. It is a pity that to date
church teaching is subsitituted by community norms that in many ways subvert the teachings in the magisterium. The priest/theologians for their part are too busy
deliberating amongst themselves to be concerned about the flock that to quote today's gospel are like "sheep without a shepherd". This is mainly because theology per se
is difficult to digest for laity in communities that think their autonomy gives them the
right to make rules that couldn't care less about basic theological truths. The empowering encyclical behind catholic communities, "Christifidelis Laici" calls workers
to the vineyard, from all walks of life but you cannot give what you do not have! The church must find ways to bring theology to a more understandable level for the lay
person for those that are not schooled or have no wish to be schooled. The end
game should be where theology, faith and practice become one.
No more bifurcation! No more discorporation.
I will never forget his continuing advice to me, "The church needs her best people in her pulpits." On a more expansive note than the above article, that suggested to me theologian-pastors as well as effective leadership-pastors need to be leading actual congregations. In the end it will be the local congregation that will decide what future generations will believe. Or whether there will be any of them.
Brian
And while there needs to be a general effort, pastors themselves are the best positioned to change a congregation's expectations about the benefit of their study. I hope things like SAET promote theological reflection among present pastors, but more needs to be done to draw the future Calvins and Edwards and Wesleys into the pastorate.
Working for Teach For America, which has successfully attracted thousands of top college graduates to apply to work in an uncompetitive field, I know it is possible for the church to do more. But how does it? Correcting false notions of what "calling" means? Changing the climate of Christian colleges? Bullying? The stakes are very high. Any ideas?
-Jeremy
Jeremy, this is exactly right. The SAET is currently thinking about how to best target the future generation of theologians. Nothing solid yet, but it's coming.
And while pastors are best positioned to change the expectations of the congregation, professors are best positioned to change the expectations of the next generation of theologians. Ecclesially sensitive professors need to point intellectually gifted young people toward church ministry, not simply with a vision for doing theological ministry, but for constructing ministry-infused theology. Professors, given that they are the theological power-brokers of the day, are hugely instrumental in helping reverse the current paradigm.
On the other hand, in the 80's and 90's, I endured a string of indepedent and rebellious pastor/priests. They fancied themselves theologians who knew better than the Church. I therefore have a healthy respect for pastors who defer to settled theology rather than torturing their congregations with what end up being failed theology experiments. That being said, the Catholic model, though obviously not immune to abuse, has an institutional and hierarchical structure that seems to offer more opportunity for the pastor/theologian ideal.
made canon law the sole purview of priests and canon lawyers, when a hefty section of canon law is dedicated to the laity (Faithful). I was so surprised when our former "steward" didn't know that canon law was applicable to lay associations! Is
canon law the "need to know" basis of catholic theology? Just asking...
Goodness. Saints, whether they are pastors or academics, should be setting the Church's theological agenda.
wealth from the crusades to bank accounts from sunday collections. Go ahead ask!
This just should not be.
This quote unsettles me a bit. The enitre article really said nothing of the Word of God dictating our theology. Western Christianity has deviated from biblical Christianity so much that our 'theology' has become culturally dictated. First century examples of Christianity and its theology are ignored while we insist on hanging on to traditions that entered the Church to the detriment of the functioning Body.
As a former pastor, I've had the opportunity to visit some of the previous pastorates where I used to serve. Out of three former colleagues I used to serve with, not once during a sermon was the name and work of Jesus Christ mentioned among any of them. Paul said, "I preach Christ and him crucified..." So much for that I guess. I say this to say that our theology (at least in the West) has indeed changed from a 'word-centric/Christ-centric' emphasis to a theology of personal choice, even to the point of self-gratification.
Steve was on the right track when he said we all are to be theologians. The vocational status of religious workers is absent in the Christianity of Jesus and the apostles. Somehow we ignore that. If we build on a different foundation other than that, what theology do we expect to have anyway?
Let us reflect on whom, primarily, needs to hear this message and act on it in order that its goal may be brought about. When a publisher or an editor receives a manuscript, will they respect “20 years in the parish ministry” as they do, “Th. D., Ph. D. from so and so.”?
There are quite a few pastor-theologians but they have a low profile, and their recipients are all in church pews. Their theology lacks innovation and novelty, because it is the exercise of old truths. This makes their work less publishable. I, myself belong to a branch of a mainstream denomination which has forgone the self-justifying esoterica of which Pastor Hiestand writes. While our alternative denominational branch creates innovative ways to placate modernism, or postmodernism, or self-contradictory manifestations of both, and makes headlines by ordaining homosexuals, we toil in obscurity preaching merely Christ and Him crucified.