On page 013 of Rob Bell’s book Velvet Elvis it is set forth that “…every generation has to ask the difficult questions of what it means to be a Christian here and now, in this place, in this time.” This idea appears prevalent within the emergent movement and in circles of modern evangelicalism but is the question of what it means to be a Christian in each generation a legitimate one? What is the nature and extent of these changes? What is the motivation?
Rob Bell explains the nature of the change as follows:
By this [need to keep repainting and reforming] I do not mean cosmetic, superficial changes like better lights and music, sharper graphics, and new methods with easy-to-follow steps. I mean theology: the beliefs about God, Jesus, the Bible, salvation, the future. We must keep reforming the way the Christian faith is defined, lived, and explained. (012)
For many Christians, the current paintings are enough. The churches, the books, the language, the methods, the beliefs—there is nothing wrong with it. [….] But this book is for those who need a fresh take on Jesus and what it means to live the kind of life he teaches us to live. I’m part of a community, a movement of people who have been living, exploring, discussing, sharing, and experiencing new understandings of Christian faith. (014)
And the motivation behind change:
…the painting works for their parents, or it provided meaning when they were growing up, but it is no longer relevant. It doesn’t fit. It’s outdated. It doesn’t have anything to say to the world they live in every day. It’s not that there isn’t any truth in it or that all the people before them were misguided or missed the point.
Times change. God doesn’t, but times do. We learn and grow, and the world around us shifts, and the Christian faith is alive only when it is listening, morphing, innovating, letting go of whatever has gotten in the way of Jesus and embracing whatever will help us be more and more the people God wants us to be. (010)
If I understand Bell correctly it would seem everything is on the palette and the intent is to obtain a fresh, relevant, and up to date “painting” (theology) that speaks to the world and generation we live in today. For Bell this is the intent behind the doctrine semper reformanda.
I believe in semper reformanda (always reforming) but Bell misrepresents and misunderstands it. It is unfortunate he attempts to use the work of Luther to add support to his concept of repainting the faith. Douglas Wilson briefly describes the doctrine in Mother Kirk:
God not only saves His Church in history, calling her out from the world; He also sanctifies the Church over the course of history. And of course, sanctification is the process of removing sin. [….] The historical Church grows and matures over time. [….] Until the end of history, the Church will always be characterized by reformations. [….] …new issues will always arise, as well as ‘new’ variant corruptions of the old issues.
Certainly we desire and strive to sanctify the church of erred or poorly articulated doctrine that leads us to sin; moreover, we grow and mature over time as we learn from our history. The goal of this sanctification, growth, and maturity is to honor God as a faithful bride manifesting His Kingdom here on earth through the discipleship of the nations. It is not change for the sake of change. It is not about relevance, being outdated, or the need for some fresh experience. Reforming sanctification presupposes a standard to which we set our gaze. This is a standard set by God who does not change and thus the standard does not change from generation to generation.
When we apply the concept of “repainting” to the commands of God we find it of no avail. How does the command to, “love the Lord your God…” or to “love your neighbor as yourself.” change from generation to generation?
Perhaps one might argue in the area of worship but this is problematic. It assumes the bible says nothing about how we are to worship our Lord but it does. The sacrifices and ceremonies of the Levitical priesthood are not an arbitrary invention to burden man; they are fulfilled once for all in Christ but still they serve as a model to instruct us and our worship now. More could be said on this and The Lord’s Service by Jeffrey Meyers fits the bill.
Applying the concept to theology and doctrine in general is of no avail as well. Gresham Machen points this out in Christianity and Liberalism:
If the Church were led to wipe out of existence all products of the thinking of nineteen Christian centuries and start fresh, the loss, even if the Bible were retained, would be immense. [….] In no branch of science would there be any real advance if every generation started fresh with no dependence upon what past generations have achieved. Yet in theology, vituperation of the past seems to be thought essential to progress. (46)
Perhaps, one may suggest we are not talking about wiping out all of the Christian tradition or starting from scratch despite the analogy of painting and words like innovation. But when we begin to see our beliefs about “God, Jesus, the Bible, salvation, [and] the future” as things to be innovated, morphed, and freshened up one begins to wonder whether or not all of it is merely a show of philosophical ideas rather than a relationship with an existent Personal God who communicates with us.
Finally, don’t we want to be able to communicate and be relevant to the world? It is true we want to preach the gospel and make disciples of the nations but becoming like the world is not the ticket. The world, with its cultures and philosophies, is what it is because it rejects God. The Church is the bride of Christ with its own story and culture; it’s infidelity and idolatry to exchange it for the futility and darkness of the world. Paul teaches we are not to rely on the wisdom of men but in the Spirit.
Christianity is not a product subject to the philosophy of consumerism prevalent in our culture. It isn’t a clothing line in need of a face lift every season to increase sales. You don’t teach patience to a child by giving him everything he wants; you make him wait. Similarly, if the faith once delivered and handed down by the saints is too stale, boring, and certain for over stimulated postmodern relativism you don’t innovate; you conform your mind by the Word of God and learn to submit in humility.
The question is not: what does it mean to be a Christian in this generation or time? The question is: where has the Church sinned so we can learn, grow, mature, and be sanctified.
