—Chris Krycho
Several months ago, I wrote a post called “Preach Hard Things.” At the time, I mostly focused on deep, theological topics—an area that has been neglected too often in our preaching. There are many other issues which are not theologically deep but still terrifically complex that many preachers fail to handle with Biblical justice. We must be willing to grapple with all areas of faith and practice, even—and perhaps especially—those that challenge us.
When an elder glosses over or oversimplifies difficult subjects in his preaching, he does the congregation a disservice. The whole of the Word of God is profitable and helpful, but some of it is clearer and more easily understood than other parts are, especially when it comes to application. Is Genesis 1 to be understood as six 24-hour days, or as indicating (in non-scientific terms) the manner in which God prepared the earth over a long period of time? Are the charismatic gifts still active? Can paedobaptists and credobaptists coexist in the same church, or should they each view the other as preaching a false doctrine?
It is often easier for pastors to simply handle these topics quickly, without dealing with their complexity or challenges. Moreover, in some of these areas, Scripture allows for interpretation or flexibility in application. The elders at a church must develop a clear position on these topics, even if that position is that Scripture leaves room for disagreement. They must then preach and teach that view carefully and discerningly to the congregation. Teaching clearly on a complex topic may require spending a considerable amount of time on the issue.
There are, I think, three distinct categories among these complex topics. While each church must decide which issues belong in which category, I will use a few examples for illustration. (My views on where particular issues fit will be covered in a later post.)
- Debated and divisive: As I noted recently, the requirements for church membership and church discipline should be thought through carefully . Some typical issues that are both hotly debated and historically divisive are mode of baptism, practice of the charismatic gifts, views on the role of men and women in the church and home, Calvinism and Arminianism, and church government. Once the elders and church have decided on a particular position, it needs to be clearly articulated, even if that is ultimately unpopular with visitors or culture.
- Debatable but not divisive: Many doctrinal and practical issues may be important yet not ultimately be points over which churches should split. Many churches have a variety of views on the end times, music, creation, and ministry practice represented among their members and even their leaders. This sort of diversity is not just acceptable; it is healthy and worth welcoming. Unity amongst church members with diverse views on secondary issues demonstrates the Holy Spirit’s transforming work in a community.
- Merely nuanced or difficult: These issues may or may not be divisive, but they do require a great deal of wisdom. Churches need to carefully consider what (and when and whom) to teach about sex. They need to deal carefully and faithfully with Scripture’s teaching on drinking alcohol. The biblical range of views on whether remarried men can be deacons or elders should be presented, as well as the church’s position and its reason for holding that view. Elders need to preach confidently on these issues, but carefully so that the congregation understands the nuances of the subject. This category is perhaps the most challenging of the three, because here is where it is easiest for elders to make simplistic pronouncements without doing justice to the fullness of the biblical text.
Leaders of the church have the responsibility of leading their congregations carefully into all that God has said. It may be easier to condemn neutral areas as evil than to teach people to exercise wisdom, but we are not called to ease. It may be easier to proclaim, “Sex is bad!” than to teach people the joys of both marital sex and celibacy, but we are not called to ease. It may be easier to say “that’s how we’ve always done it” than to explain (much less rethink) our approach to a theologically illiterate congregation, but we are not called to ease. We are called to excellence.
Let us stop putting aside or adding to the commands of God and be faithful to what he has said—no matter how hard that is. Let us teach theology and grapple with hard texts and confront the messy challenges of real life and do so in a way that honors God and the supremacy of his Word.
3 comments:
"The elders at a church must develop a clear position on these topics, even if that position is that Scripture leaves room for disagreement."
Would you be so kind as to clarify what you mean here? I was taken aback when I read this, as if it were a suggestion that the Word of God is up for debate by anyone who chooses to do so.
Perhaps it's just the Catholic in me, and I confess that I don't know much about the Protestant views on Authority past the fact that y'all don't have a Magesterium, but I may have read you completely wrong, so I'd just like a little clarification.
First, thanks for dropping in and commenting!
Scripture itself is not up for debate, by any means. Its authority is something we assume. However, we recognize that there are areas where Christians can legitimately reach different conclusions. Ultimately, one of those conclusions is correct and the others are wrong; that does not necessarily mean that the answer is immediately (or indeed ever) clear.
There are a number of areas where the teaching of Scripture leaves some room for interpretation—a prominent example in our my writing recently being the question of whether previously divorce and remarried men may serve as elders. Scripture is somewhat ambiguous on the point. Accordingly, I would argue that one legitimate conclusion for the elders to present is that, well... Scripture doesn't answer this one definitively, so there is room in the church for a variety of positions. The same might be said for our view of the end times; very good arguments have been made for each of post-, a-, and premillennial views. One of them is right; Scripture, however, leaves us enough room that there is nothing wrong with believers reasonably disagreeing on that particular issue.
We certainly have a different view of authority in Protestant circles; that said, PJ and I have a much higher regard for tradition and the input of church history than mainstream evangelicals do. I think you'd find that many younger lovers of theology are increasingly interested in patristics and tradition as informative to (though certainly not definitive of) our understanding of Scripture. Accordingly, on issues like the charismatic gifts, we might let the historical teachings of the church inform our understanding, even as we hold Scripture itself to ultimately be authoritative over and above tradition.
While reading this, I kept thinking over and over about how we are working to please God, and not man--doing everything as unto him. I've often wondered what it would look like for a church to depend so thoroughly on Scripture--sola scriptura-- that they make it very clear they do not believe there is room for argument on different topics. I can imagine myself in such a situation--I might be offended by something I didn't want to hear, but I actually think that would help spark profitable conversation between me and other members of the church, including elders I might not otherwise talk to. If people are handling the text with godliness and Godward-ness in mind, it shouldn't veer off into empty and angry debate.
Post a Comment
We welcome your comments—whether you agree or disagree with us—as long as they are polite, kind, and thoughtful. Please supply your name, and if you have a website, provide a link!
Personal attacks, trolling, spam and anonymous posts will be deleted. See our full comments policy for details and clarification.
If you are writing a particularly long comment, you may want to check it against the 4000-character limit.