Wrestling with Newbigin
2008 June 24
Here are some reflections on Lesslie Newbigin – or my current take on how he thought about the church:
The church community is called into existence to be:
- a sign and witness to the resurrection of Jesus,
- a foretaste of the restoration of all things, and
- an agent and instrument of God to help bring about that restoration.
These are three points of reference that help us know how to ‘be’ the church. We can think about our life together by asking these guiding questions:
- Does our life together bear witness to the reality that Christ is risen and therefore the Lord of everything?
- Does our life together give us a glimpse of what God intends in his remade heaven & earth?
- Does our life together have a practical overflow of giving, serving, engaging, and setting things right in the world?
Would you add or change anything in this summary?
I’m not familiar enough with Newbigin to know how well these points summarize his thoughts on the church. However, I would probably press the first point a bit. Much biblical language characterizes the church as more than a sign and/or witness to the resurrection of Jesus. Indeed, Ephesians goes so far as to say the church is the (resurrected?) body of Christ, and also says that God “made us alive together with Christ…raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” I can’t try to explain all of this, but I do want to point to the very strong association of the church and the resurrected Christ. It’s more than a sign/witness; the very identity of the church is a resurrected one.
Thanks Chris,
I think Newbigin agrees with you – I see how my summary is a bit weak in that direction.
Newbigin says things like the church is the presence of Christ on earth – that the church is called the ‘body of Christ’ because it is both visible/invisible (or fully human/divine). Does that get at the Ephesians description better?
Whoa. It’s easy to say these things right… “The church is the resurrected Christ!”
But, how do we unpack that? What does this look like?
How do we go about being “agents” and “instruments” of restoration and change?
I wish it came as naturally to me as writing poetry! =)
Rustin: That does resonate with Ephesians more closely. Ephesians, of course, is not the only word on the church in the NT. It just happens to be one of my favorite and the one that most enmeshes the church’s identity with Christ’s.
Kris: Yes, it is easy to say these things. I’m not sure they can ever be completely unpacked. I am fairly certain that your last two questions cannot be answered adequately, but Paul does his best in a good many of his letters. In short, how we go about being agents and instruments is quite simple: live into our identity as the body of Christ (Ephesians uses a lot of other images as well to shape its readers’ identity). What this looks like will depend largely on who we are, where we are, to whom/what we are encouraging restoration and change, etc. None of this will come naturally, as Paul was well aware. That’s why Paul prayed for “his power that is at work within/among us,” that is, “the power to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth and length and height and depth…”
Dig your summary.
I think witness/sign is strong enough language in my book. As I understand the sign theology of say the Gospel of John and the OT.
This is extremely helpful and great questions that our churches could wrestle with and hopefully go beyond to attempt to answer them with all that we are.
peace.
Reading through the Roxburgh book you gave me, he said “God intended the local church to be a sign, witness, and foretaste of where God is inviting all creation to Himself through Jesus Christ.”
He is using much of the same words, but leaves out the instrument part. And the way that I read that statement. Roxburgh is putting sign, witness and foretaste together as things that are looking forward. Whereas Newbigin is placing the church in a past, present, future framework.