Credits: Denislav Stoychev

In my short time studying theology I have learned that, in the western mindset, there tend to be faults within our system of theology that naturally did not exist, at least in the typical fashion, within the Jewish or early Jewish-Christian mindset. One such example of this is the meaning of heart in the Jewish philosophies verses its meaning in the western or Greek philosophies. Today, I write as a means of examining another major shift in philosophies which, in the recent century, has become increasingly noticeable. This shift is individualism.

Leopoldo A. Sanchez M., in an essay about individualism and self indulgence, examines the effects of our increasing need to be unique in comparison to those around us. Throughout the essay, Leopoldo draws striking conclusions by differentiating the manners and lifestyle of Christ to those that we, as modern western Christians, pose.

One of the first major points, which Leopoldo makes known in the first paragraph, is that there has been an increase, within the theological mindset of our day, to demand that all theological reflections take into consideration me. This, of course, stems from the drastic shifts our society has made towards individualism. So much so, that our individualism can, and should be, seen as self-centeredness.

He is, however, quick to point out that seeing our individualism only as such is to view it with only one eye. He makes sure that the reader understands that there is yet another half to the picture of individualism, one which holds good in the differences of the many scriptural interpretations and spiritual gifts.

A second point, one which I have found enlightening and view changing, is that what Christians think of as the mission field are the lost, atheists, or secular members of our society and world. What this, in my opinion, has bred is a view that it is the duty of a Christian to merely reach out to these people with the gospel. This, in turn, has set in place a church that does not find engaging, or loving, their neighbor to be important, but that only bringing in “the lost” is of importance.

One of the major problems this has caused within the modern church is to stretch our individualism into indulgence, something which our modern society has done for many years now. Thus, we live in a church that has given itself to the very ill natured lifestyle of the world. This, as many would agree, is a stark contrast from how Christ lived. Having made himself nothing and taking on the very form of man, Christ refused for himself indulgence.

In addition, Christ has set an example in which he shows love to his neighbors and denies himself, even to the point of death, that he might bring good upon all who choose to accept it. How then can we, claiming to be followers of this very same man and to be attaining to his likeness, uphold ourselves to the exclusion of our neighbor.

Of course, I am well aware that many would argue about the Church’s great interest in its neighbors. After all, how many times a year does each congregation hold, within its own building, an event to which the unsaved of their community are invited to come and enjoy? This, however, is a fault because we, having given ourselves to the thinking that our mission field is merely “the lost”, accept that a simple invitation of an already individualistic and indulgent friend is means, sufficient enough to say that we have served our god.

It is high time that we realize that our goal in missions is not to simply reach “the lost”; but to show care, concern, and love to our neighbors. Most importantly, we must show this to the poor and marginalized. If we, as followers of Christ, were to actually follow his example, we would find that our view of the mission field is not the atheist or secular person but instead the hungry, the needy, and depraved. Like Christ, our goal should be to go into the world, casting off our individualism, as it has become self-indulgence, and seeking to love, care, and give all we have for the benefit of those who need it and would, in turn, be most receptive to the good news that is Christ Jesus.

There are many who argue that the Church plays its part in this by sending out missionaries to other countries or by engaging their youth in mission trips around the globe and the country. However, of these missionaries, how many lack indulgence to the point that they have given themselves and their family up the way Christ has, even unto death? I believe the numbers are marginal. I know many missionaries who live in the same comfort that we here in America live every day. It shames me enough that we do it, let alone that our missionaries do it as well. I also know missionaries who have given up much, even their lives, to love, care, and preach to the needy and depraved of this world.

Even if we were to accept that all missionaries live their lives the way that Christ has modeled, this is a minute reflection of the church at large. We cannot be willing to accept that since a few are willing, the church is doing fine. If it is within you to sit around and watch the depravity of this world go by, while you lie in comfort, you are a wicked man, who knows not the love of Christ. I pity you on the day of reckoning and weep for your end.

So, has our church been and what shall we do to change it? Shall we sit by and watch the world die as we allow ourselves to give money to nothing but our own indulgences and individual beliefs? By no means! We must come together and love our neighbors, the poor, the downcast, and the wicked.

I leave you with this, a quote form the end of Leopoldo’s essay:

One often hears of speakers who talk about self-care. The point is usually that unless you take care of yourself you cannot really take care of others. In these talks, one often gets the sense that the overworked people have a right to be indulgent. Supposedly, hard working people deserve to get something they want. They have earned freedom to make some choices. Without minimizing the real concern for refreshment behind these attitudes, one should also realize that self-indulgence is in some ways a commodity that North Americans can afford. In a culture that values choice and is given to excesses, indulgence becomes another way to exercise one’s freedom to consume and possess. By contrast, there are hard working people in many parts of the world, and many in the United States too, who simply cannot afford indulgence. Those who are better off and talk about taking care of self cannot but sound selfish by comparison. A little or big indulgence might be a pragmatic way of relief. But there is simply no permanent rest and refreshment in a little indulgence. Where then do we go?

This quote, and other paraphrases are taken from an essay entitle “Individualism, Indulgence, and the Mind of Christ: Making Room for the Neighbor and the Father”, by Leopoldo A. Sanchez M.

Will the Theologian Please Sit Down

In my previous review of one of David Bercot’s books, Will The Real Heretic Please Stand Up, I had to step forward and praise him for the masterpiece that he crafted. In contrast, I cannot do the same for Will The Theologians Please Sit Down.

In comparison, the writing and rhetoric techniques used by Bercot in this book were atrocious at best standing next to the hope he brought in his other book. A large portion of the book was spent repeating what had already been said and dragging on the statements to no end. In short, he took the argument nowhere, succeeding only in opening the reader’s thirst but ceasing to quench the fire.

The idea behind the book is prolific. Bercot had the opportunity to take the argument in numerous directions, bringing the book to a complacent finish. Instead, he chose to argue against two specific subjects and even became guilty of his own accusations.

The first major point he makes in the book is that theologians spend to much time focusing on language and using it to twist and turn the text of the bible to fit their own needs. This I agree with, however, what I can’t agree with is using these same methods as a means of discrediting theologians.

For example, Bercot states that we do not understand what doctrine actually is. Today when we think of doctrine we think of a theological idea. He then proceeds to say that we do not understand that the word doctrine actually means teaching just like the word doctor actually means teacher. These, of course, are the words original intended meaning. Therefore, our new conception of a theological doctrine is completely different than the conception of early christians some two thousand years ago.

All I have to ask is this, isn’t an idea conceptually the same thing as a teaching? Bercot finds his way around this loophole by replacing the statement “theological idea” with “theological fact” and instead of “teaching ideas”, we actually “say facts”. My problem is that last time I checked most theology, beyond core principles, is considered ideas not fact but rather one denominations doctrine (by this I mean there beliefs). Also, as far as anyone is concerned when you teach, it is the same as saying or stating. What happened to not using linguistics to twist the text into fitting your own needs?

Finally, the second argument he focused on throughout the book was the how commentaries have ruined doctrine. Now I understand his point. Over a thousand years later, Calvin finally wrote the first commentary and didn’t quite have his head on straight. I’m not a big fan of theologians and I don’t care for the idea of christianity’s development having been based on writings that came so far after the time of Christ and the early church leaders. However, that point was easily summed up in one chapter. It was irritating that it became the hanging point for the book and the carrying argument against systematic theology. Surely, the author could have done better.

After reading this book, I wouldn’t recommend it as quality read. It certainly helped to open up my view points and introduce me to some different thought. However, there is certainly other books that could and have done this much better.

Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up

About five months ago, I began researching what it took to start a church. This research, of course, opened up many questions, concerns, and insights into the Christian faith (particularly in regards to 21st century americans).

Part way into my studies I stumbled upon this book, by David Bercot, which was written as a way to correct and educate the Christians of this era. I must say, after reading the book’s descriptions, I had a number of reservations while getting into the text. My first thoughts were that David Bercot was just some other guy out there writing about his angry feelings with the church, and he wasn’t capable of saying much of anything that had biblical truth.

After much study and a thorough read through, however, almost all of these reservations were completely lifted. If I had to sum up how I felt in one sentence I would say: This book is exactly what I have been waiting for since the start of my theological studies. It took no more than the few pages of this book, before I was hooked on what was being said. The stories and statements made were so intense and so drastically different than the ‘church way’ I, and many others, grew up in.

Despite my total interest, I will admit that I took nothing in this book to heart until I thoroughly researched and read the early christian texts cited in this book. After my studies, I went through and read the book a second time. By the time I was finished, it was as if God himself had dared me to change and to become a person worthy of being called a Christian.

From a strictly literary standpoint, the book was extremely well crafted and versed in many areas. The author insistently refused to hold back on early church citations as proof and tellings of the stories and truths he brought forth. The author was also capable of writing in a manner that was both intellectual and easily comprehensible. All in all I was very pleased with this book and after two read throughs, I have not walked away without learning and changing myself for the better. As far as Christian literature is concerned, this book is by far one of the best reads.