In talking about the relationship between faith and culture, or about what some call "contextualization," i.e., how does a person of faith live out that faith in a particular context, we inevitably get into defining the faith we are talking about.
I am within the Christian tradition. It has a long history, and a wide range of phenomena which come somehow under that broad ("Christian") heading. In talking about a particular person or group of people, one might ask, "what does it mean for me (us) to call ourselves 'Christian'?" And another question which inevitably arises is, "what is 'Christianity'?" (I'm somewhat surprised by the degree to which Christian authors refer to "Christianity," but they do, and thus the question arises.)
Here is one author's attempt to address that latter question:
"What is Christianity? For our purposes, I'll define Christianity as the body of believers who assent to these [the Apostle's, Nicene, Chalcedonian, and Athanasian] great ecumenical creeds. They believe that the triune God created the world, that humanity has fallen into sin and evil, that God has returned to rescue us in Jesus Christ, that in his death and resurrection Jesus accomplished our salvation for us so we can be received by grace, that he established the church, his people, as the vehicle through which he continues his mission of rescue, reconciliation, and salvation, and that at the end of time Jesus will return to renew the heavens and the earth, removing all evil, injustice, sin, and death from the world.
"All Christians believe all this - but no Christians believe just this. As soon as you ask, 'How does the church act as vehicle for Jesus' work in the world?' and 'How does Jesus's death accomplish our salvation?' and 'How are we received by grace?' Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Christians will give you different answers. Despite the claims of many to be such, there are no truly 'generic' nondenominational Christians. Everyone has to answer these 'how' questions in order to live a Christian life, and those answers immediately put you into one tradition and denomination or another."
A couple of reflections on this quote:
1. I find the use of the term "Christianity" awkward. I still find myself thinking that I don't believe in such a thing as "Christianity." Perhaps - and this would fit with the second paragraph above - it would be more appropriate to speak of "Christianities," i.e., the various working out by different people calling themselves "Christian," through the ages. I myself do not see "Christianity" as something which descended from heaven, i.e., which exists in the mind of God, a religious system that has been given to mankind to follow, etc.
2. Keller himself immediately switches from "Christianity" to "Christians," and talks about what Christians agree on and where they differ. I think, both from an anthropological perspective and from a faith perspective, that this is more productive.
3. I would be more happy talking about "Christian [or Christ-centered] faith" (by which I would mean the faith of people who follow the Bible and specifically the teachings of Jesus), than "Christianity" (which, again, smacks of religion or a religious system); or, of Biblical faith, which takes us back to a specific reference point, the Bible, and what we find in it.
All of that aside,
4. This is an interesting attempt to show what you might see as the "essence" or heart or core of Christian faith (the faith of those calling themselves Christian), and how that essence might be worked out in different human (sociocultural, historical) contexts.
5. Note that in choosing the Creeds, he is defining Christianity by belief. One might argue for other definitions, e.g., defining Christians by relationship with Jesus (Jesus himself said, "if you love me, you will obey my commands," and talked about "following" him and other relational and behavioral terms, in addition to talking about believing in him). Is this, then, a comprehensive and adequate definition?
6. I also wonder, would all Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox Christians agree with this definition? Some of the language sounds distinctly Protestant, perhaps even evangelical. And I'm not sure it expresses the essence of Jesus' teaching and mission completely. For example, take the phrase, "Jesus accomplished our salvation for us so we can be received by grace." What is meant by "salvation"? I know of Christians who might say something more like, "Jesus came to usher in the Kingdom of God, offering 'life' to those spiritually 'dead' to God - a life that begins now, as we experience the transforming work of God's spirit, and that continues on after death..." Is this just another way of saying "accomplished our salvation for us," or is it something more? It's difficult, it seems, to concisely define the essence of Christian faith / Jesus's teaching; and it is certainly impossible to escape our cultural vantage point and perspective, in attempting to do so.
But perhaps that's what makes it so interesting to think and talk about...
I am within the Christian tradition. It has a long history, and a wide range of phenomena which come somehow under that broad ("Christian") heading. In talking about a particular person or group of people, one might ask, "what does it mean for me (us) to call ourselves 'Christian'?" And another question which inevitably arises is, "what is 'Christianity'?" (I'm somewhat surprised by the degree to which Christian authors refer to "Christianity," but they do, and thus the question arises.)
Here is one author's attempt to address that latter question:
"What is Christianity? For our purposes, I'll define Christianity as the body of believers who assent to these [the Apostle's, Nicene, Chalcedonian, and Athanasian] great ecumenical creeds. They believe that the triune God created the world, that humanity has fallen into sin and evil, that God has returned to rescue us in Jesus Christ, that in his death and resurrection Jesus accomplished our salvation for us so we can be received by grace, that he established the church, his people, as the vehicle through which he continues his mission of rescue, reconciliation, and salvation, and that at the end of time Jesus will return to renew the heavens and the earth, removing all evil, injustice, sin, and death from the world.
"All Christians believe all this - but no Christians believe just this. As soon as you ask, 'How does the church act as vehicle for Jesus' work in the world?' and 'How does Jesus's death accomplish our salvation?' and 'How are we received by grace?' Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Christians will give you different answers. Despite the claims of many to be such, there are no truly 'generic' nondenominational Christians. Everyone has to answer these 'how' questions in order to live a Christian life, and those answers immediately put you into one tradition and denomination or another."
Timothy Keller, The Reason for God
A couple of reflections on this quote:
1. I find the use of the term "Christianity" awkward. I still find myself thinking that I don't believe in such a thing as "Christianity." Perhaps - and this would fit with the second paragraph above - it would be more appropriate to speak of "Christianities," i.e., the various working out by different people calling themselves "Christian," through the ages. I myself do not see "Christianity" as something which descended from heaven, i.e., which exists in the mind of God, a religious system that has been given to mankind to follow, etc.
2. Keller himself immediately switches from "Christianity" to "Christians," and talks about what Christians agree on and where they differ. I think, both from an anthropological perspective and from a faith perspective, that this is more productive.
3. I would be more happy talking about "Christian [or Christ-centered] faith" (by which I would mean the faith of people who follow the Bible and specifically the teachings of Jesus), than "Christianity" (which, again, smacks of religion or a religious system); or, of Biblical faith, which takes us back to a specific reference point, the Bible, and what we find in it.
All of that aside,
4. This is an interesting attempt to show what you might see as the "essence" or heart or core of Christian faith (the faith of those calling themselves Christian), and how that essence might be worked out in different human (sociocultural, historical) contexts.
5. Note that in choosing the Creeds, he is defining Christianity by belief. One might argue for other definitions, e.g., defining Christians by relationship with Jesus (Jesus himself said, "if you love me, you will obey my commands," and talked about "following" him and other relational and behavioral terms, in addition to talking about believing in him). Is this, then, a comprehensive and adequate definition?
6. I also wonder, would all Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox Christians agree with this definition? Some of the language sounds distinctly Protestant, perhaps even evangelical. And I'm not sure it expresses the essence of Jesus' teaching and mission completely. For example, take the phrase, "Jesus accomplished our salvation for us so we can be received by grace." What is meant by "salvation"? I know of Christians who might say something more like, "Jesus came to usher in the Kingdom of God, offering 'life' to those spiritually 'dead' to God - a life that begins now, as we experience the transforming work of God's spirit, and that continues on after death..." Is this just another way of saying "accomplished our salvation for us," or is it something more? It's difficult, it seems, to concisely define the essence of Christian faith / Jesus's teaching; and it is certainly impossible to escape our cultural vantage point and perspective, in attempting to do so.
But perhaps that's what makes it so interesting to think and talk about...
No comments:
Post a Comment