Objective #4

Critique competing narratives of the world charitably from a historically informed Christian theology.

1. Identify and analyze Christian and non-Christian narratives of the world.
2. Recognize the diversity of Christian approaches for articulating the relationship between the church and culture.
3. Demonstrate critical skills marked by thorough, fair, and charitable interaction with others.
4. Engage the theological task in active and gracious dialogue with contemporary Christians and historical Christianity.

Revised Objectives

By the end of the Bible Minor, students should be able to:

1. Identify and recall basic biblical content and theological vocabulary, categories, and concepts.
2. Study and apply the Scriptures using the essential skills of biblical interpretation.
3. Analyze personal, cultural, and global issues by applying basic theological skills.
4. Critique competing narratives of the world theologically and charitably.
5. Develop Christian wisdom to pursue theologically informed redemptive action in the world.
6. Formulate an integrative and holistic approach to the life of discipleship that displays (embodies!?) faithfulness to Scripture.

Current Shape of Minor Objectives

Here are the objectives as they currently stand. Beat them up, make suggestions, etc.

By the end of the Bible Minor, each student should be able to:

1. Identify and recall basic theological vocabulary, categories, and concepts.
2. Examine and relate biblical content using the essential skills of biblical interpretation.
3. Analyze personal, cultural, and global issues by applying basic theological skills, including vocabulary, categories, and concepts.
4. Propose solutions to personal, cultural, and global challenges while pursuing theologically informed redemptive action in the world.
5. Critique theologically competing narratives of the world.
6. Formulate an integrative approach to the life of discipleship that displays adherence to key biblical principles.

Aaron's Email

The following is an email from Aaron on the importance of historical theology:

Bible minor committee guys,

 

Pardon me for briefly crashing the party.  Tim sent out the link to the Bible Minor blog a couple of weeks ago to everyone in the department, so I took that as an invitation to offer some feedback.  I was going to post this on the blog but couldn't figure out how to start a new post.  Thus the email. 

 

In reflecting on the objectives for the Bible minor, and on future program revisions for majors (insofar as the Bible minor serves as something of a core set of courses for our majors), I want to offer a practical case for why historical theology is necessary.  Below are five reasons. 

 

Our students, both our majors and non-majors in the Bible minor, need a basic grasp of Christian theological history, not just systematic and biblical theology.  Christian theological history is not only a discipline-specific requirement for those who may be pursuing graduate level education.  It is a practical, "real-world," relevant requirement for all students for the following reasons:

1.       Our goal is for students to be able to read and apply Scripture well.  In order to achieve that goal, students must be able to identify the theological voices that inform how they read Scripture.   Their (and our) interpretations of Scripture are shaped by patterns of thought and interpretation that are themselves historically shaped by a number of factors, both good and bad.  Students need to be able to trace the development of their theological contexts in order to be able to hear Scripture well, rather than letting unexamined and unidentified theological voices overpower Scripture itself. 

2.       There is much to be valued from our evangelical heritage, and instruction in historical theology can help our students properly value their tradition.  However, our students also need to see how historical developments have shaped in negative ways their evangelical approach to Scripture and theology.  For example, our students tend to embrace a pervasive anti-intellectualism when it comes to theology that can be largely traced to the conjunction of Revivalism and frontier Christianity.  Our students need to be able to recognize the great value of the Revivalist tradition, while recognizing that its anti-intellectualism is an aberration in the long trajectory of historic Christianity. 

3.       Related to #2 above, we want our students to wisely engage contemporary issues.  However, our students’ pervasive anti-intellectualism presents a major obstacle to their ability to wisely integrate Scripture and theological reflection with those contemporary issues.  Furthermore, an essential task of wisely engaging contemporary issues is being able to frame the issues in the context of those issues’ historical development, and the historical development of Christian theological reflection on those issues.   Put differently, very few contemporary issues are truly new issues.  Christians have long reflected on war, wealth, human identity, medicine, the arts, technology, etc., and students must be able to situate contemporary responses to issues in the context of Christianity’s past reflections in order to help our students see how their own cultural blind spots may distort their interaction with Scripture on the issue, and the central tension points of the issue. 

4.       Denominational affiliations are losing their formative power over the lives of students.  Irrespective of whether this is a positive or negative development, it results in students having a wider exposure to different Christian traditions than they might have otherwise.  In order to help them navigate those ‘invisible’ traditions they need to be able to place those traditions in the context of the wider historical Christian trajectory.  Furthermore, they need to be able to place their own denominational tradition (if they have one) on the map of historical Christianity in order to be able to constructively (as well as critically) engage other traditions. 

5.       Finally, a basic grasp of the historical development of Christian theology is necessary for our students to engage global Christianity.  They need to see that from the beginning Christianity was global, with voices from Africa (e.g., Augustine), from the Middle East (e.g., John Chrysostom), as well as from Europe and western Asia.  Furthermore, there are voices in global Christianity that are not heard by Western Christians, for example various Eastern modes of Christianity (e.g., Syriac and Coptic).   Being aware of the basic historical development of the multiple voices of historic Christianity is necessary to help our students situate both their own North American Christianity, and their engagement with contemporary expressions of global Christianity in, for example, Latin America, Africa, and eastern Asia.  Situating global Christianity in the context of its historic development will help our students see that North American and Western European Christianity, while an important voice, is still one voice among many in the global Christian conversation.  Recognizing that North American and Western European Christianity is one voice among many provides the context both for critical engagement with this western tradition, as well as constructive appropriation and valuation of what is true and good about North American and Western European Christianity.  

C. S. Lewis on good reading habits

"There is a strange idea abroad that in every subject the ancient books should be read only by the professionals, and that the amateur should content himself with the modern books. Thus I have found as a tutor in English Literature that if the average student wants to find out something about Platonism, the very last thing he thinks of doing is to take a translation of Plato off the library shelf and read the Symposium. He would rather read some dreary modern book ten times as long, all about "isms" and influences and only once in twelve pages telling him what Plato actually said. The error is rather an amiable one, for it springs from humility. The student is half afraid to meet one of the great philosophers face to face. He feels himself inadequate and thinks he will not understand him. But if he only knew, the great man, just because of his greatness, is much more intelligible than his modern commentator. The simplest student will be able to understand, if not all, yet a very great deal of what Plato said; but hardly anyone can understand some modern books on Platonism. It has always therefore been one of my main endeavours as a teacher to persuade the young that firsthand knowledge is not only more worth acquiring than secondhand knowledge, but is usually much easier and more delightful to acquire.
This mistaken preference for the modern books and this shyness of the old ones is nowhere more rampant than in theology. Wherever you find a little study circle of Christian laity you can be almost certain that they are studying not St. Luke or St. Paul or St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas or Hooker or Butler, but M. Berdyaev or M. Maritain or M. Niebuhr or Miss Sayers or even myself.
Now this seems to me topsy-turvy. Naturally, since I myself am a writer, I do not wish the ordinary reader to read no modern books. But if he must read only the new or only the old, I would advise him to read the old. And I would give him this advice precisely because he is an amateur and therefore much less protected than the expert against the dangers of an exclusive contemporary diet. A new book is still on its trial and the amateur is not in a position to judge it. It has to be tested against the great body of Christian thought down the ages, and all its hidden implications (often unsuspected by the author himself) have to be brought to light. Often it cannot be fully understood without the knowledge of a good many other modern books. If you join at eleven o'clock a conversation which began at eight you will often not see the real bearing of what is said. Remarks which seem to you very ordinary will produce laughter or irritation and you will not see why—the reason, of course, being that the earlier stages of the conversation have given them a special point. In the same way sentences in a modern book which look quite ordinary may be directed at some other book; in this way you may be led to accept what you would have indignantly rejected if you knew its real significance. The only safety is to have a standard of plain, central Christianity ("mere Christianity" as Baxter called it) which puts the controversies of the moment in their proper perspective. Such a standard can be acquired only from the old books. It is a good rule, after reading a new book, never to allow yourself another new one till you have read an old one in between. If that is too much for you, you should at least read one old one to every three new ones.
Every age has its own outlook. It is specially good at seeing certain truths and specially liable to make certain mistakes. We all, therefore, need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period. And that means the old books. All contemporary writers share to some extent the contemporary outlook—even those, like myself, who seem most opposed to it. Nothing strikes me more when I read the controversies of past ages than the fact that both sides were usually assuming without question a good deal which we should now absolutely deny. They thought that they were as completely opposed as two sides could be, but in fact they were all the time secretly united—united with each other and against earlier and later ages—by a great mass of common assumptions. We may be sure that the characteristic blindness of the twentieth century—the blindness about which posterity will ask, "But how could they have thought that?"—lies where we have never suspected it, and concerns something about which there is untroubled agreement between Hitler and President Roosevelt or between Mr. H. G. Wells and Karl Barth. None of us can fully escape this blindness, but we shall certainly increase it, and weaken our guard against it, if we read only modern books. Where they are true they will give us truths which we half knew already. Where they are false they will aggravate the error with which we are already dangerously ill. The only palliative is to keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds, and this can be done only by reading old books. Not, of course, that there is any magic about the past. People were no cleverer then than they are now; they made as many mistakes as we. But not the same mistakes. They will not flatter us in the errors we are already committing; and their own errors, being now open and palpable, will not endanger us. Two heads are better than one, not because either is infallible, but because they are unlikely to go wrong in the same direction. To be sure, the books of the future would be just as good a corrective as the books of the past, but unfortunately we cannot get at them."

C. S. Lewis, "Introduction" to Athanasius' On The Incarnation

Objectives Thus Far

It's only day one, but here's what we have so far. Let's continue to morph these, refine them, add to them, subtract from them, IN THE BLOG (ahem, *Ryan*, ahem), and also in our meetings over the next few weeks. I don't know exactly how to state these just yet, so I'll leave them in "raw" form:

1. Bible content and skills.
2. Theological content and skills.
3. Spiritual growth (develop an ethical vision, cultivate character, or some such).
4. Address global and cultural issues theologically.

We need to state 1 and 2 better, which may not take long. We also need to work on the wording for the other two. Number 3, well-stated, will capture a robust, variegated, and multi-faceted vision for the development of Christian charater and practices.

Number 4 may be subsumed under number 2, but that's as far as we got.

"Ethics" and the Bible Minor

Perhaps we should chat a bit about "ethics" as it relates to the Bible minor. While it tends to get used in a narrower sense, there is that older usage, which refers to a comprehensive theological understanding of the world and of the Christian role in it (e.g., Bonhoeffer's Ethik), it almost becomes a theology of culture. The advantage of this more comprehensive understanding is that it draws together both personal and public (social) ethics. I am reminded of McClendon's trilogy on theology: Ethics, Doctrine, Witness.

I wrote this in response to Ryan's email, which follows:

"We think of SpiFo and Integration as radically different subjects;Spifo: how to be Christian personally (privately); Integration (how to be Christian publically). What I'm saying by using the word "ethics" is that these are tightly related to one another. We need to see these two courses especially as integrated with one another!"

Desiring the Kingdom

Agreed. Thanks for the good discussion.

That said, I have a couple reservations about our dependence on Smith. Smith is writing from Calvin, a CRC school. (The CRC, as Shawn has noted, has been known to describe itself as the "brains" of the Body of Christ.) In that overintellectualized context, Smith offers a welcome corrective. But this is not our context! Our tradition has studiously avoided being overly intellectual! So, when we complain about going "back" to being primarily intellectual, I think we have made the following mistake: we think that at some point in our history we were like Calvin, and that our fill-in-the-blank notes and boring lectures were intellectual. Not so! We need more rigorous engagement of our students' minds. It may be that Noll's Scandal of the Evangelical Mind is still more apt for our context than Smith.

Moreover, take the following comment from the CT review: "It's meant to be a discussion that's descriptively thick, as in 'rich,' and in places it is. But often, it's thick like a milkshake: difficult to swallow and a little too sweet. Smith's hopefulness can come off as a touch pious and earnest; at times one is left wondering how reliable his sense is of our condition, circumstance, and prospect." We have tried and true resources in the Christian tradition for training the mind and heart. The whole discussion of human beings as primarily lovers is Augustinian through and through. Let's not suppose that a book fresh off the press should shape everything we do in the Bible Minor--we can't yet be sure he has given us the right tools for the job. Let's learn from him, but let's not depend on Smith's book to determine the contours of the Bible Minor. And if we are looking for further inspiration, let's return to Augustine.

By the way, Smith rightly emphasizes the role of practices, but, probably due to his context at Calvin, he wrongly deemphasizes the role of ideas and concepts. After all, reading this book, which presses an idea of education, is motivating action.

rp

Bible Minor Graduate Portrait

Our desire is for every graduate to know and love God and to be equipped for a life of vigorious, reflective, and thoughtful Christian discipleship. The Minor in Biblical & Theological Studies contributes significantly to this.

1. We want graduates to have a mastery of basic theological skills, including vocabulary, categories, and concepts.
2. We want students to have a mastery of basic biblical knowledge that is academically rigorous.
3. We want students to have a mastery of basic skills in biblical interpretation.
4. We want students to have the ability to think about life theologically, critically, and integratively. We want our graduates to have the wisdom to identify, and the desire to pursue redemptive action in the world.
5. We want graduates to understand and appreciate their Christian heritage and identify in relation to other historic and contemporary traditions.
6. We want graduates to understand and value the mission and identity of the church in the world, and to participate actively in a local church.
7. We want our graduates to have a theologically informed love for God and to have the skills to continually have their imaginations transformed by thoughtful engagement with Scripture. We want them to express their love for God through joyful commitment to their families, churches, and both local and global communities.

Seminaries, Bible Minor & True Integration

Not sure how applicable the following questions are to our situation at CU, but The Christian Century (as seen in Jesus Creed) has asked some penetrating questions about seminary curriculum today . . . and I wonder if they can offer some more fodder for our discusions about the Bible Minor.

If church leaders had the chance to fashion a seminary from scratch, what would it look like? Would it have its own campus? Would it be tied to a denomination or be fully ecumenical? Would the classical academic subjects be taught and, if so, how would that learning be correlated with the work of forming spiritual leaders and training them in the practice of ministry? Would greater emphasis be placed on supervised ministry? Might the entire curriculum be based on an apprenticeship model of learning?

....

Seminaries and their constituencies should use this moment to consider new pedagogical models as well. Take, for example, the longstanding disconnect between the practical fields of ministry and the academic disciplines of Bible, theology, ethics and church history. Curricular discussions have focused on how to help students integrate the practical and theoretical aspects of study, but most efforts end up maintaining the division and placing the burden of integration on the students more than on than the curriculum and the faculty. Is it time to organize courses around the life and mission of the church?

Systematic Theology Post from Ryan

Here's John Webster's take on the task of Systematic Theology and its importance--it is an effort at theological prolegomena. Great stuff.

 

Let me note three things in particular:

 

1) Theology should be conceived of in terms of contemplative intelligence rather than apologetics.

 

2) "A definition of theology and its various tasks thus rests upon teaching about God and the human good; and the deepest disagreements about the nature of theology comonly arise, not simply from divergent conceptions of scientia, but from differing understandings of God and the creatures of God."

 

3) "The Holy Trinity is the ontological principle (pricipium essendi) of Christian theology; its external or objective cognitive principle (principium cognoscendi externum) is the Word of God presented through the embassy of the prophets and apostles; its internal or subjective cognitive principle (principium cognoscendi internum is the redeemed intelligence of the saints."

 

Therefore, along with teaching the ontological principle (the Trinity) on the basis of the objective cognitive principle (Word of God) we need to ask how to help our students develop a redeemed intelligence (the subjective cognitive principle) in order to develop theological wisdom.

Graduate Portrait

Our desire is for every graduate to know and love God and to be equipped for a life of vigorous, reflective, and thoughtful Christian discipleship. The Minor in Biblical & Theological Studies contributes significantly to this, and our aim is that the ideal Cedarville graduate benefits from the Minor as follows:

1. We want graduates to understand and appreciate their Christian heritage in relation to other Christian traditions--both historic and contemporary--and with reference to our global situation.
2. We want graduates to understand and value the missional character of the Christian church, to commit to and to participate actively in a local church. Graduates will have a vision for service to both their church and their community.
3. We want graduates to have a mastery of basic theological vocabulary, theological categories, and concepts.
4. We want students to have a mastery of basic Scriptural knowledge that is academically rigorous and appropriate for a minor education.
5. We want students to have a mastery of basic skills in Bible interpretation.
6. We want students to have the ability to think about life theologically, critically, and integratively. We want our graduate to be able to think theologically about all aspects of life (vocation, relationships, church involvement, etc.) and have the wisdom and discernment to able to identify Christian action that is appropriate in any and every life situation.

Thinking Through the Philosophy Connection

While I recognize that our philosophy classes may be more applicable to our majors, I would like to see us address how the discipline of philosophy might impact our vision of a CU graduate,with a Bible minor. I know we are focusing on the "portrait" at this point, do we need some kind of input from the philo types to help us here?

Scott Dixon's Original Post (w/ comments)

Note the op-ed linked on the left (from the NY Times). The author is discussing Obama's K-12 education reform and argues for a different way of thinking about curriculum. What I find helpful is her desire to get away from a "checklist mentality" for curriculuar reform but rather an "ability" focus that would almost guarantee students could succeed in college (if mastered). She argues for a curricular reform focused on essential skills rahter than "information mastery" as assessed via tests. I know none of us is arguing for the information mastery approach - but her description of the ideal classroom seems to fit nicely into our thinking (at this stage) . . . what are the skills/abilities we would say are necessary for our graduates to "succeed" as thinking/obedient followers of Jesus . . . and what would the classroom look like that produces those abilities/skills?