volf-ing emergent, emerging volf (part three)

a recap: thus far i've tried to show some of the beating heart of our recently concluded conference with emergent and my colleague mirosalv volf. it was awesome, deep, and worth pondering, and i'm trying to point to a few of the key ideas that i'll continue to work with as a result of the conversation. post one: 1. so many wonderful, diverse, people willing to embrace and discuss across all kinds of differences. 2. faith seen not primarily as a a set of doctrines but rather as a compelling way of life. post two: 3. being held by the truth, rather than trying to grasp, hold, and possess the truth. now on to the last post.

4. learning passionate relationship with god from the atheists. surely one of the most controversial and dramatic moments was on the second day when mirosalv went off a bit, sounding like john in revelation, critiquing christians for being lukewarm and indifferent to the treasure of faith and relationship with god. he thinks too many christians are lousy embracers, and he finds the indifference of believers towards god more troubling than atheists who are angry with god and thus deny god but in the process are passionately engaged with god. he said one can learn this from neitzche here, but also average people who have dismissed the church and reject god via complaint and lament. our culture in the u.s.a, especially, so drugs us with petty consumer pleasures that we do not take the big claims of life--god, faith, healing of the world--seriously enough. daniel, one of the respondents, said half-jokingly, there goes my evangelism sunday. and miroslav's riposte was 'to the contrary! engage the passion of the rejectors of god! and offend the settled sensibilities of those who have grown lukewarm in their faith!'

5. classic popular versions of substitutionary atonement are heresy. brian mclaren stood up at the end of day two, after we had heard miroslav out to some extent regarding his arguments about the atonement. and brian said that at least among evangelicals there is almost a litmus test regarding one's adherence to the "penal substitution" theory of the atonement which portrays god as a wrathful god because of human sin, and requiring sacrifice or punishment for that sin, and that rather than punish humans, jesus was the 'sacrificial lamb' sent in humanity's place, and by his suffering and death he frees all of us from our guilt. the issue, brian said, is 'who was punishing jesus on the cross?' if you look at it as a case of the romans or the religious leaders, then it fits with a sort of interpretation of the powers killing jesus to maintain their own power. god rejects such violence and injustice and the resurrection is a final 'no' to such evil and the first fruits of god's 'yes' to reconciliation and justice. but if you look at it as god punishing jesus because he was angry about our sinfulness, doesn't that make the christian community like a disfunctional family who pretend that the dad is nice all the while that same dad beats his kids in private? it makes for confusing god-relationships, it makes for fearful christians, and it makes of god one whose right it is to make people suffer when they've done wrong. in a powerful response, miroslav said simply that is heresy. there is no 'third party' who is punished on our behalf. the guilt is not 'transferable'. it is god in jesus who takes the evil and sin of the world and by taking it in, then can transform it once for all, and marking the deepest reality of the future glimpsed now--no place for retribution, for suffering, for tears and pain and death. and by our participation in the sufferings of god in christ we also die to such sin and are reborn a new creation, ready to move towards gods future of reconciliation. and he finished his response by saying that the church has never settled on a view of how christ saves (the meaning of the term atonement). while there is not debate about the trinity or the two natures of christ, we have provisional and multiple views of christ's saving work. that does not mean any view is possible--he quite clearly ruled one version out--but it does mean there is not ONLY one view possible of christ's saving work. very helpful discussion.

6. i am made god's by grace and the gospel first, not by the church. towards the end in a passionate plea miroslav distinguished between the church and the gospel in what amounts to a riff on paul in 2 corinthians 4:7. he said more or less that he is saved by grace, by the power of the gospel, and not by the church, even if it was through the broken vessel of the church that the gospel came to him. the church, therefore, is never ultimate. it deserves our energy and commitment not for its own sake, for the priority is on god; rather, there is a priority of the gospel over the church. this is not meant as an encouragement of individualistic spirituality shorn from the discipline of community nor is it meant to offer license to trash-talk the church. it is simply and clearly a marker of priority, of which comes first. here again he drew on martin luther and it offered a means to critique the prosperity churches that say, 'plant a seed if you have a need.' the problem with this is its image of god and the church in relation to god. that model sees the church as broker of blessings between you and god, and if you bless the church, then god will bless you (usually with implications of $$$). rather, miroslav said, god blesses the church, indeed makes the church, with a gift of grace in jesus christ and our task as ones made by that grace is to open our hands, be receptive to that grace, and become channels of that grace to the world god loves. we are, then, made god's by grace for grace, for the sake of a world in need. presumably a different sort of prosperity is thereby gained, of the sort that does not rust or rot but endures in that heavenly place we only know in glimpses.

thanks everyone for coming, if you are reading this as a participant, and i hope this summary of sorts helps those of you who didn't come get some sense of the richness and depth of the conversation. emergent will be podcasting the conversations from their website on a monthly basis. check here for more on that. in the meantime, peace to you.

Comments

[Mike]

Chris--

Thanks for these very detailed and helpful posts. And thanks for your hospitality and friendship at Yale. I'm really looking forward to reading your new book when it comes out.