Mark Noll: Nutzen und Gefahren der »Gospel Coalition«

Selbstkritik ist wichtig. Mark Noll hat in einem Interview der »Gospel Coalition« hilfreiche Tipps gegeben.

In as much as The Gospel Coalition represents the networking of various ministries and persons that grew independently of one another, there is a great opportunity to build confidence in its foundational principles, sharpen one another in the practice of ministry, and positively articulate the best of Augustinian/Reformed theology.

Some of these positives also represent dangers. The opportunity to put our best foot forward can create larger-than-life personalities and heroes, when in reality, such movements rarely survive the driving forces or persons that bring them into existence. These kinds of movements have strong short-term potential but minimal long-term influence. Without some transition from ad hoc cooperation to established, institutionalized relationships, the work of maturation and discipleship will happen elsewhere. A person can come and enjoy fellowship and teaching at a conference, but ought not to assume that such things can replace the learning and maturing that require years of pastoral practice and study with the accountability of a seasoned pastor or denominational board.

Then, there is also the danger of schisms. As a broad coalition with differing views on church government, the sacraments, the gifts of the Spirit, and practices of ministry, there is always the danger of schisms over any of these items or something that develops in the future. A recent historical example that comes to mind is that of John Stott and Martyn Lloyd-Jones.

Another reality to acknowledge is that the assumptions of much of American culture are not Calvinistic. So you would do well to fight against three things: the tendency to turn leaders into heroes, minimize the importance of institutions, and divide over secondary issues—all the while recognizing the pervasive influence of the dominant culture on religious life.

Hier das Interview: thegospelcoalition.org.

CD: JT

Kommentare

  1. Alexander meint:

    Carl Trueman bemerkt, dass nichts von dem, was im dritten Absatz oben aufgführt wird, zum Bruch zwischen Stott und Lloyd-Jones führte. Wichtig ist gleichfalls sein Hinweis, „schism“ sei im Kontext der GC nicht der passende Begriff:
    „Second, the use of the word „schisms“ is unfortunate. Schism is an ecclesiological word. It has no meaning outside of a church context. Is this perhaps a Freudian slip, revealing that the Gospel Coalition is unconsciously looked on as a church, precisely the problem which makes others wary of coalition bodies that might supplant the church?“
    zur Unterhaltung noch Truemans dritter Hinweis:
    „Third, given the fact that both my wife and I entered the world shortly after the 1966 split [i.e. zwischen Stott und L-J], we are both delighted to know that our births are `recent‘ and that we can therefore still make credible claims to youth. Thanks for that, Justin. It has made my wife’s day, brother! Though maybe I should demit my eldership — doesn’t Paul have something to say about a minister or elder not being a `recent‘ convert?“
    von hier: http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2011/04/a-touch-of-freud.php

Deine Meinung ist uns wichtig

*