One of the reasons I undertook this area of study is because I grew up in a Christian tradition that was continually saying things like, “We need to get back to the original meaning of the biblical text,” or “We need to model ourselves after the New Testament Church.” While context is important when reading the scriptures, the truth is that Jesus Christ is the Word of God, and we best understand the scriptures as we read them through the lens of Jesus Christ and see where they are leading us now in the trajectory of God’s love and grace. In other words, we continue to discover meanings relevant to our own context. Too, I had to ask myself, after which New Testament congregation are we to model ourselves? All of them were just as confused and dysfunctional as we are. Consequently, I have reflected over the last ten years or so on how I and the communities of which I am part can be the presence of Christ in the world. It is not responsible, simply to proclaim, that we are the Church and that’s that. Gimme that old time religion. Amen!
David Brown, the proponent of the views I wish to convey writes, “Arguably one of the major sources of the continuing strength of religion is its realization that one must change in order to remain the same.” [2]
The ideas and writings of theologian David Brown shape the content of this paper. David Brown is an Anglican priest. He was born in Scotland and educated at Edinburgh University, Oxford and Cambridge. He trained for ministry at Westcott house, which positions him squarely in the Anglo-Catholic wing of the Church of England. Brown has taught at Oxford, Durham University and the University of St. Andrews. He has also served as a college chaplain and Canon of Durham Cathedral. He is a Fellow of the British Academy and the Royal Society of Edinburgh. He retired from his academic posts in 2015.
David Brown is representative of a tradition, with which, I identify- Critical Catholicism. Critical Catholicism appreciates the contributions of philosophy and theology, natural theology and special revelation. It takes a critical approach to the Scriptures and maintains a commitment to Nicene Christianity, but adjusts, when necessary, in the light of new knowledge. Brown positions himself between philosophy and theology, liberal and conservative and Protestant and Catholic polarities.[3]
There are others who espouse similar views. Keith Ward comes to mind. Ward often points out the differences and changes that we encounter within the Hebrew scriptures and the New Testament, as well as the history of the Church. On that basis, he advocates for continuing change in the Church and its practices, if, they are rooted in the love of Christ. For Ward that is the deciding factor. Brown, however, confronts what we find in the scriptures and the tradition of the Church and calls us to continue the arcs and trajectories we find there. He would even go so far as to say that revelation continues.
In the introduction to Discipleship and Imagination, Brown writes, “Current debates between modernism and postmodernism, the significance of other religions, the function of myth in the classical world and the changing attitudes to revelation, all played their part in shaping how I suggested we perceive the revelation between the Bible and the Church’s subsequent history. So far from setting them in opposition to one another, I argued that a developing tradition needed to be seen as the motor that kept both engines running, and thus granted the Church the potential to respond effectively to changing social condition. Revelatory insights were thus by no means to be confined to the canonical dispensation, but instead God must be seen as continuing to speak equally across the subsequent two millennia.”[4]
Regarding Biblical trajectories, Brown asserts two problems. “First, we do not have definitive, independent access to the mind of Christ as it now is, and so the question of continuity with that original life has still constantly to be raised and some answer given. That is where the whole issue of trajectories and their subsequent modification raises itself. Life would have been much simpler had every biblical trajectory been allowed to follow its own natural path to a conclusion, but what in fact we find is some doing so, while others are either modified or radically undermined by the impact of new perspectives given by fresh cultural contexts; not that these contexts achieve automatic priority over the biblical witness, but they can require alterations both small and large, as the pronouncements of scripture are seen in a new light. There is no simple pattern.”[5]
Secondly, “there is the issue of what it means to relate to Christ in our own quite different context, no longer the world of first-century Judaism.” [6]
Brown offers several examples of change that has occurred as the Church has interacted with the surrounding culture. I will address three of these examples. Although he acknowledges some were less than desirable changes, overall, he views them as mostly positive for the advancement of the Church.
The first example is the Church’s interaction with pagan philosophy. Brown says, “It is doubtful whether Christianity would ever have won the battle with the classical world had it not shown a willingness to translate its message into the terminology of pagan philosophy.”[7] During the Patristic period, the Church hammered out many of its essential doctrines. Transformation through adapting Greek philosophy to a Christian context made the faith intelligible to the culture of the people. For this reason, even beginning students of theology know the difference between homoiousious and homoousiouis.
This wasn’t all positive. Some philosophical ideas crept into Christian theology that led to misunderstandings about God, which are not faithful either to the biblical witness or the revelation of God in the person of Christ. The impassibility of God, which was an idea that dominated theology for too long, denied that God can feel or suffer or is changed in any way by interaction with God’s creation. You don’t find this in the prevailing witness of scripture, and it is refuted by the witness of Christ.
Brown also argues that the hierarchical structure of the Church developed, in part, to combat the heresies that the early Church faced. As a result, Christianity had an organizational strength that paganism lacked and transformed Christianity into a world religion. Today, we cannot naively assume that biblical thought and practice necessarily suit what may be very different historical circumstances. Continued change based on experience, tradition and scripture will be necessary to face fresh challenges. Again, Brown writes, “This is not to challenge the definitive character of the Bible for a Christian account of salvation, but it is to remind the reader of my earlier point that it is sometimes necessary to change in order merely to remain the same. New forms of authority had to be introduced if Christian unity was to be preserved across the great expanse of the Roman Empire. A similar question can be raised about Christianity’s encounter with pagan philosophy and the infiltration of its language into the Nicene Creed, as in the phrase that Christ is ‘ of one substance with the Father.’ Christianity emerged out of what was regarded as one of its less civilized parts, and so if it was to make intellectual headway in the pagan world, it had to take seriously the sorts of issues they took seriously.” [8] For instance,” it would have been very easy to present Christ as just another intermediary and everyone would have been happy. But that would have been simply to accommodate oneself to one’s culture, not to engage actively in dialogue with it by challenging it. The Church chose the more difficult course, because it believed it had something profound to offer the world, the claim that God himself in Jesus had entered into the human condition. The Church asserted this in a way to continue the dialogue rather than abandon it.” [9]
A third example is the Reformation. According to Brown, “without some attempt like the Reformation to come to terms with the new individualism of the Renaissance, it is hard to see how Christianity could have maintained its hold on Western thinking for as long as it has.” [10]
Brown argues the Renaissance produced similar reactions in both the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Counter-Reformation. For instance, both movements were influenced by the underlying social trend towards increasing individualism. Referencing John Bussy’s work Christianity in the West 1400-1700, he notes,” the very word Christianity had changed its meaning from a body of people to a body of beliefs – something one person could hold and this privatization of religion he sees as something that affected the Counter-Reformation as much as the Reformation.” [11]
Brown concludes his Discipleship and Imagination with this “Tradition does seem….to have been the imaginative motor that has ensured the continuous adaptation of God’s revelation to the world under new circumstances and conditions. The process was a messy one since it entailed God’s deep involvement with people like ourselves, and so a fallible bible, a fallible Church interacting with a no less fallible wider world. That is why it has proved impossible to place any absolute priorities between the various criterion except in relation to specific instances. But discipleship if it is about anything, is surely not so much about instantaneous results as about a continuing process of transformation, as both individuals and as a community we gradually learn more deeply of God’s meaning and purpose for our lives.” [12]
Now this brings me to my own observations. We are amid massive cultural shifts, here in our own country and around the world. So, this topic is of prime importance to the Church as we seek to live for Christ and announce, “The Kingdom of God is here.” Personally, I have often felt that I am on the defense, because my views, our views and beliefs are often attacked and castigated not by the pagans, or the philosophers, but by professing Christians in the dominant Evangelical and Fundamentalist Church culture. But I am becoming more convinced of a few things.
There are three that I want to share with you. Please keep in mind that I am not making assertions that are dependent on our abilities. I believe the work of the Holy Spirit is necessary for each of these things to be accomplished.
One, Our Church is the vanguard for loving, embracing, including and affirming all God’s people. I observe a lot of denominations, and most are divided over who they are going to accept. We are not. We should boldly embrace that; we are a Gospel people. We should be the Church which people gravitate toward if they want to find inclusive places for fellowship, communion and ministry.
Two, we are rooted in historic Christianity. We have vibrant relationships with God through Jesus Christ. And we are open to fresh ways God is revealed and at work in the world. We need to continue to work out where those biblical trajectories are going. For instance, Brown makes the point that equality of regard is taught by Jesus and the New Testament, but not equality of status. This is still the case in many conservative and Evangelical churches. It is the basis of their doctrine of Complementarianism. That is why they say things like, “Men and women are equal before God, but not in function in the Church.” It is only by following the trajectory that is latent in the teaching of Jesus and the New Testament, interaction with the culture and fresh, imaginative consideration of what that revelation should mean today, that we arrive at equality of status for all in the Church. The same could be said for marriage equality. You do not get there from the New Testament alone. You must consider the meaning of the scriptures as they are lived in the human experience. I previously referred to Keith Ward. Ward wrote in his book What the Bible Really Teaches, “The principle of freedom from law to walk in the Spirit, which reminds us that all written laws are to be tested by whether they encourage relationships of loyalty, trust, honesty and friendship. We do need to explore with great sensitivity the extent to which and the ways in which, same-sex love, for example, can be expressed in conformity with the love of others and of God. But we do not need to worry about the fact that explicit condemnations of it are found in the Bible, because the Bible teaches that we can reject any written rule that is in conflict with the love of Christ, (Romans 10:4) for “Christ is the end of the law.” [13]
Three, we have a solid, sacramental foundation for our ministry. We are a spiritual people in touch with the people, places, and things the Holy Spirit uses to bring the Kingdom of God into the world. Because all people are sacred, we should strive to minister to them wherever they are at in life, with special attention to the poor, the sick and the oppressed. Because places are sacramental, we should espouse and act in specific ways to care for the environment, and our communities. And God uses the things we find in Church every week, the vessels, the vestments, the bread, the wine, the water to impart grace to us. We should emphasize this in a world that is fast losing touch with real, sensory experiences. With adverse developments, such as virtual reality churches, where participants are represented by avatars, it is imperative that we fully embrace our identity as a sacramental Church.
Considering my three assertions, I close with questions for you to consider. In this time of radical change in our world, how do we maintain the historical continuity of our faith and how do we alter our emphases and expressions as a Church, so that we can deeply engage with the culture while preserving the essential content and message of our faith? The answers we give will shape the future for the EACA.
For Further Reading: Works by David Brown
Invitation to Theology
Tradition and Imagination
Discipleship and Imagination
God in a Single Vision
[1] Brown, D. (1989). Invitation to theology. Blackwell.
[2] Ibid
[3] Rutledge, J. (2020, April 8). Escaping flatland: The philosophical theology of David Brown by Robert MacSwain. BLOGOS. Retrieved July 13, 2022, from https://blogos.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/2019/07/02/escaping-flatland-the-philosophical-theology-of-david-brown-by-robert-macswain/
[4] Brown, D. (2007). Discipleship and imagination: Christian tradition and truth. Oxford University Press.
[5] Ibid
[6] Ibid
[7] Brown, D. (1989). Invitation to theology. Blackwell.
[8] Brown, D. (1989). Invitation to theology. Blackwell.
[9] Ibid
[10] Ibid
[11] Brown, D. (1989). Invitation to theology. Blackwell.
[12] Brown, D. (2007). Discipleship and imagination: Christian tradition and truth. Oxford University Press.
[13] Ward, K. (2004). What the Bible really teaches. SPCK.
Author
Fr. Kevin Everett
Church: Chapel of the Holy Spirit; also affiliated with The First United Methodist Church, Belen, NM
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/kevin.everett.507
I was born and raised in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma and I grew up in a Christian home. Having confessed my faith in Christ at an early age, I committed my life to ministry at the age of sixteen and pursued an education in theology and ministry. I have been married to my wonderful wife, Donna for thirty years, and we have four grown children, and one grandchild. I served as a pastor of Baptist churches for over twenty years in Oklahoma and Texas, however, my theology became more sacramental and I sought a place of ministry where I could serve and be true to my convictions. In 2014, I was ordained as a deacon and then as a priest in apostolic succession as part of The International Free Protestant Episcopal Church, which was part of the Anglican Free Communion. In 2018, this jurisdiction had become very small and the bishop dissolved it. In December 2018, I sought incardination in the EACA. I completed a Doctor of Ministry degree in 2001 and have done work toward a Ph.D with the Graduate Theological Foundation and the continuing education department of Oxford University through the Summer Theology Program at Christ Church College, Oxford. I have served as a correctional chaplain since 2015, and I am currently a chaplain with the New Mexico Corrections Department, serving at the Penitentiary of New Mexico in Santa Fe.