There have been a few recent articles examining the relationship between two significant puritan figures, John Owen and Richard Baxter. John Steven’s recently commented on Facebook about their falling out and described them as “puritan greats”.
This led to one person challenging whether or not we could describe Baxter as “a great”, his assessment was that whilst he looked to Richard Baxter as a great pastor, he was a poor theologian.
This prompted two questions in my mind which I then asked:
1. Which of those two (pastor or theologian) matters more/do we value more.
2. Is it really possible to be a great pastor and a poor theologian?
His response was along the lines that whilst we appreciate the great pastor at the time but the great theologian matters more in posterity. He also thought that yes it is possible to be a great pastor and a poor theologian. I respect that view and can see the case for it. However, I’m not convinced. I guess that my response would fall into the “it depends category.” Anyway, here are some reflections, not by way of out and out disagreement but hopefully that might encourage further conversation.
First of all, I wonder to what extent our answer to the first question may reflect our own theological leanings and temperament. Specifically, I kind of expect those from a reformed/conservative evangelical disposition to lean more towards valuing the theologian. I also wonder too whether this reflects tendency towards introversion among those involved in conservative evangelical church leadership.
But I also wonder whether or not this can filter into our own priorities. How we spend our time, what we read, how we go about preparing to preach, If we write and how w write. I am very aware that I am someone who does a lot of writing. Do we first and foremost want to be though of as good pastors or good theologians? Are we primarily focused on our affect on a congregation now or on posterity? Is there a place for wanting to have a longer term impact on the wider church? My gut feeling is that the answer to the last question is that it isn’t necessarily a bad thing but we need to be alert to our shadow visions and to be reminded that our identity is in Christ.
Secondly, it may be that we do appreciate the pastor at the time and the theologian from posterity in a way that suggests the theologian is valued more in the long run. However, I’m not so convinced that the pastor’s impact is only temporary. Rather, I want to push back against this and suggest that the faithful pastor, working quietly away in some backwater might be having just as much of a long term impact as the theologian, even if he doesn’t produce books that are read around the world and down through history. If it is true that for some people, theire books are their people, then the local pastor serving a church of about 150 over 30 years (allowing for movement of people in and out) in effect may write a thousand or so “books.” Those “books” themselves write books as they disciple others. So, that church might send out people to pastor elsewhere in the country and to be missionaries overseas and so on. Indeed, the pastor serving in the local church may not be known by name around the world and even if he is , then his name might be quickly forgotten but he may have as large and wide a legacy as that theologian whose books are still selling 200 years later.
In terms of my second question, this is where the response “it depends” really comes into its own. It depends first of all on what we mean by “theologian.” If narrowly we mean someone who engages in academic study, teaching and writing, then perhaps it is possible to be a poor theologian and a great pastor. There are many men who should never write books or lecturer but boy can they preach and pastor.
However, there is a sense in which each and everyone of us, especially those involved in preaching, teaching and pastoring are theologians where theology is simply about the knowledge of God. In those terms, every pastor is a theologian and so the real question is about whether or not they are a good one or a poor one.
Secondly, it depends on what we mean by “poor”. We may mean by this that their methodology is poor, this would relate to the perception that they are not right for lecturing and writing. However, we may mean that their content and conclusions are wrong. It is worth noting that there are many people who we might substantially disagree with on major points but consider them “great theologians” in that we can recognise their methodological talent. At the same time, we may recognise someone as a great theologian because we see their methodological skill and agree with much of their content but disagree seriously with them on one or two important issues.
If we mean that a person is a poor theologian because they are seriously deficient in their theology (and to be honest, I think that this is what we should be prioritising, then I would argue that you cannot be a great, or even a good pastor and a poor theologian. It is close to being a contradiction in terms.
We can see why this is practically so when we remember the motif of this site, that what we believe affects how we live. What a pastor believes (his theology) will affect how he pastors. Indeed, I suspect that if we see weaknesses in Baxter’s pastoral approach (and I think that there can be a form of legalism that creps into the Reformed Pastor methodology), then those deficiencies arise out of his deficient theology, especially around justification and Law.
Furthermore, what we believe (our theology) will affect what we teach and preach. Indeed, most Christians do not get their theology from reading or hearing the professional theologians. They get their theology from the songs they sing and from the teaching they hear in Church.
Now, all of this means, I think, that we do not need to worry as pastors and preachers about trying to be a great theologian in terms of being recognised for our skill in the discipline but we cannot afford to be poor theologians. We need to at least be competent theologians in order to be competent pastors (and whilst we don’t need to worry about having that reputation of being a great pastor, we don’t want to be a poor one. We want to be competent).
Faithroots 
1 comment
Comments are closed.