"We believe in film" is not heard uncommonly in circles I frequent. Oh, of course there are a few things that can be done in film that cannot be accomplished in digital (split printing, for example). But the venue of film is today relegated to a handful of hobbyists, students, and very serious artists. Those artists have maintained some of the unequaled film features, such as Pl/Pt printing. Still, there are so few people using film that the availability of film has detracted from opportunity. No more Agfa APX 100 4x5 or 8x10. (My favorite.) No more Panatomic-X. No more Plus-X. All that remains is a few of us hobbyists. But there are no real "true believers" remaining.
In the early 1980s there was something called "CP/M," though you may not have heard of it. It was the operating system that came before Mac, MS-DOS, and Windows. It was good. We had a great database (dBase II) and office software (WordStar & VisiCalc) along with lots other good applications. But the computers that ran CP/M were "8-bit" and once the 16-bit computers (IBM PC) came out, CP/M died. But it took a few years. I found a couple of people still using their Osborne and Kaypro computers around 1990, but just a couple. The rest of the computers are either buried in attics and basements or are in the hands of collectors. Nobody is in the CP/M church. Even the true believers have left.
A movement that is fading is relegated to the true believers. Everyone else has gone. The church and the pews are empty but for those few True ones. Computing is finished with CP/M. The film world differs little.
An Excursus Into Reason
At this time I remain confident about the future of the Christian faith. I only remain pessimistic about how the Western/American church is dealing with the problem of Rationalism. I went through some of the issues here. But there is more to say, and next I would like to attack a way of reasoning which seems destructive. Let's start with what appears to be almost axiomatic:
This is not to suggest that there is a possible universe where all floors are moving and the situation has become untrustworthy. It's more like combining H and O to obtain H2O. It works, but not at 0K (absolute zero). And not on the surface of the sun (roughly 10,000F). The formula does not always work. Inductive arguments can only take us to a "best explanation" by inference -- IBE.
We cannot get to God through induction; we do not arrive at faith through reason. We can not. Certainly we can logically get to theism, but there it ends. This is at the core of evidential apologetics. From that position the Mormon, the Islamist, the Jew, and the Christian may all take their leads and present their contiguous explanation for all that follows. Theism may be best, but after that the results are
I hope you can see that at this point we have not left human capacity and staked any claim in revelation. Reason is not enough. And lest we of the presuppositional stripe fall into the same trap, neither is ascent. It is not the rightness of an idea which is most important, but the facts behind it which subsequently produce real knowledge and real faith.
The Results of Training
Try this analogy: You are a hiring manager and you have two candidates for a VP position. Both, in fact, have worked for you for a number of years. Both see your business through the X lens -- they understand your processes and agree with your direction and goals. The difference between the candidates, though, is striking. Candidate 'A' is as faithful as any employee could be. 'A' even teaches them at a local community college. But Candidate 'B' has taken your financial principles and applied them to his family budget and also taught his children how to start and run their own businesses. 'B' has not only made these beliefs his own but has also applied them to change and improve the lives of others close to him. 'B' "owns" them.
John Fletcher Hurst describes[1] some of the situation around the Thirty Years' War in a similar fashion:
The instruction of children in the doctrines of Christianity, as we have already said, had been sadly neglected, because the pastors of the church had committed the task to less competent hands. Spener determined that he would assume complete control of the matter himself, and, if possible, teach the children during the week without any coöperation. His labors proved a great success; and his reform in catechetical instruction, not only in Frankfort, but thence into many parts of Germany, eventuated in one of the chief triumphs of his life. But he had further noticed that the customary preaching was much above the capacity, and unsuited to the wants, of the masses. He resolved upon a simple and perspicuous style of discourse, such as the common mind could comprehend. But, seeing that this was not enough, he organized weekly meetings of his hearers, to which they were cordially invited. There he introduced the themes of the previous Sabbath, explained any difficult points that were not fully understood, and enlarged on the plain themes of the gospel. These meetings were the Collegia Pietatis, or Schools of Devotion, which gave the first occasion for the reproachful epithet of Pietism. They brought upon their founder much opposition and odium, but were destined to produce an abundant harvest throughout the land. Spener entertained young men at his own house, and prepared them, by careful instruction and his own godly example, for great ministerial usefulness. These, too, were nurtured in the collegia, and there they learned how to deal with the uneducated mind and to meet the great wants of the people. The meetings were, at the outset, scantily attended, but they increased so much in interest that, first his own dwelling, and then his church, became crowded to their utmost capacity.Of course it is difficult to find any church where the sermon is much more than window dressing. Some take the next step and some level of sermon interaction. But little serious instruction takes place. And while not everyone should be treated as a college or seminary student, there is a lot more to be done than simple Bible study. Some basic doctrinal training. Some practical training in handling temptation and lust. Some challenge to ministry and missions. A sermon should fit into an educational framework and not stand alone. When it does it becomes a weak monologue.
Sometimes I wonder if the church does not do the things necessary because the faith is weak? Is it easier for a pastor to be a manager? Most pastors that I have known, those who were faithful in their work, were also excellent teachers. But the situation seems to be akin to the "Peter Principle" where one is promoted just beyond his greatest skill. Pastors often get stuck doing things that they may be good at in against doing the things that they are best at.
A lack of structure is appealing to many. After all, if the Lord is coming back at any time then why would we be spending our time doing any long-term work? Some set about social work. Some set about to do revivals and evangelism. Few set their minds on education and long-term training. There are things to teach regarding apologetics, doctrine, and living. Education can be both serious and tailored to the character of each individual fellowship.
Let us not through neglect reduce our churches to untrained and unprepared true believers.
[1] Hurst, John F.. History of Rationalism (Kindle Locations 1197-1210). manybooks.net.
0 comments:
Post a Comment