Preliminary Review of Michael Horton’s “Christless Christianity” (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2009), pp. 9-27
The Rev. Dr. Mike Horton raises provocative, expansive, and important questions about American, if not English and Western, Christianity across seven short, fast and readable chapters. We ponder Mike’s opening salvo in Chapter 1. Mike has been thinking a long time on this proposition. In light of God's Being, Word, our Confessions and liturgies, what shall think?
We ponder chapter 1, pp. 9-27, Mike’s introduction and opening salvo. Chapter 1, “Christless Christianity,” is so entitled like the book itself, "Christless Christianity." As a Reformed and Calvinistic Anglican of an older sort than most readers, the questions Mike raises resonate but invokes wider questions. (As a Senior Churchman, this scribe comfortably calls him “Mike” rather than Dr., Professor, Rev’d, or the like. I easily call Bishops by their first names. I also call USMC Generals and USN Admirals by their first names. Never mind the Colonels and Captains. Mike won't get a pass, like other Profs.) Where is Mike going in chapter 1, his setting and setup for the remaining six chapters? Is his claim too expansive?
Mike’s theme is that America, across the theological divide, Protestant liberal or evangelical, is fast becoming “Christless.” Mike says, “In fact, my sense urgency...is pervasive, crossing the conservative-liberal spectrum and all denomination lines” (Horton, 27). That is the grand thesis, the widespread drift towards Christlessness.
If the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church, the church’s assimilation to the world—according to Mike—is the silencing of the biblical message. In short, here is Mike’s thinking: God and His redemptive story versus the narcissistic, American, co-hortative and trumping story of God as our life coach (supporting “our story”). Mike says:
Jesus has been dressed up as a corporate CEO, life coach, culture-warrior, political revolutionary, political revolutionary, philosopher, copilot, cosufferer, moral example, and partner in fulfilling our personal and social regimes. But in all of these ways, are we reducing the central character in the drama of redemption to a prop for our own play? (Horton, 25, emphasis added)
(The answer is preliminarily obvious.) This is an important question, the co-opting of the biblical message with redefinitions to suit modern predilections—ourselves and our own narcissistic narrative. Mike’s thesis is that these self-aggrandizing redefinitions define the grand, national, and trans-denominational narrative. Implicit is the sub-text that Americans are falling prey to the redefinitions, not due to lack of zeal, although that—itself—warrants examination. Can Mike sustain the enquiry and cross-examination? Mike’s thesis and cross-examination warrant inquiry.
Mike limits his thematic liabilities to four large caveats—caveats that are as wide as his fears and his singular claim. The defenses, or caveats, are quite large.
The caveats are as follows. First, Mike tells us, there are many faithful Pastors, congregations and Churchmen who are exempt from the claim. This single caveat appears to be as wide as the claim itself, to wit and in summary (and essence): “Let me, Mike, indict the entire nation, all publishing enterprises, all media centers of advertisement, all churches, all seminaries, all writings, all Professors, and all pulpits while excluding all those to whom the massive indictment might be imputed.” Big stuff! Mike’s claim cannot get much wider, but he makes it. Obviously, one shall require a wide set of sociological data to get at this…that awaits us. Second, the endpoint of “Christlessness” is not here, Mike avers, but “we are well on our way." Clear specifics are needed: definitions and specific dates, names, and quotes and needed. We are reminded of B.B. Warfield’s similar prognostications about Protestantism in the late 19th-century. How and where will Mike extricate himself, if at all? Third, the issue of zeal is not at bar, but rather: deeds rather than creeds. Aside from Mike, one thinks of Rick Warren’s infamous, famous, fatuous, anti-intellectual, non-confessional, anti-historic, anti-liturgical and gross, if not most highly stupid, claim to this effect…deeds not creeds. It is hard to believe that a pulpiteer would make this stupid claim, but Warren has and did: Deeds rather than creeds. Halfwits will approve, not careful and thoughtful Churchmen or Churchwomen. This ignorant claim finds roots in Protestant liberalism in the late 19th-early 20th century. Fourth, larger inquiries on the matter are referred by Mike to his three other books: Made in America, Power Religion, and Beyond Culture Wars. A brief summary by Mike would have been helpful here…even a paragraph. Ergo, Mike’s expansive claim needs those contexts for fairness. Clearly, Mike has been thinking about this thesis for years. Due to that alone, Mike warrants a careful ear. Is this book simply an update and rehash of the earlier ones? We’ll see. Mike’s concern is that evangelicalism is not just like theological liberalism, but is becoming theologically vacuous (Horton, 23). That is hardly novel. He quotes the evangelical Anglican, John Stott, to wit, “growth without depth.” That is hardly new. Mike’s four caveats in Chapter 1 are self-limiting propositions that insulate him from counter-objections and wider liabilities and rebuttals. Mike, that is convenient and unhelpful.
Having said that, Mike’s inquiry and proposition warrants additional scrutiny. Confessional Lutherans will, if catechetized, feel the force of Mike’s proposition. To the extent that a Presbyterian has ingested his Westminster standards, he or she shall feel the force of the inquest. Ditto, for Reformed Anglicans reared in the Reformed faith and the old Prayer Book. Baptacostals, we suppose, Mike's target audience, will not feel the force of the question, given their backgrounds. In fact, Mike seems to incessantly be arguing with his own non-confessional, non-liturgical, and broadly evangelical background--with American revivalists, Anabaptists, dispensationalists, and other non-confessional evangelicals. While that is not our background, it is Mike's and he is working it. Whatever the background, Mike's proposition MUST BE ENGAGED. Mike's question hangs in the air melodramatically, earnestly, liturgically, confessionally, biblically and with concern.
Rightly or wrongly, Mike's question and asseveration--notwithstanding his caveats--must be engaged and answered. Catholic Christians of the Reformation need to engage and answer Mike's challenges. To him, Mike, we are thankful. Thank you, Michael.
Yet, is it simply a re-baked thesis in search of publication? To wit, is it Baker or Horton simply seeking a rehatch of an old idea? As to Baker Books, we have little doubt that a $$-growth-narrative is involved. If a Baker-rehatch of an old idea from Mike's older books, this one from e.g. 2009, Mike had been working on a far more important project--The Christian Faith (1000 pages). While we distrust publishers in Grand Rapids, MI, Mike's concerns are not doubted, assuredly. We know his concerns from earlier years. More to follow.
The Collect.
O BLESSED Lord, who hast caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning; Grant that we may in such wise hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that by patience and comfort of thy holy Word, we may embrace, and ever hold fast, the blessed hope of everlasting life, which thou hast given us in our Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment