“Americans, as a whole (and evangelicals are little different in this), are not given to thinking much… This is especially true about doctrine. We are pragmatic. We demand quick solutions. We define success in measurable quantities. We have little patience with doctrinal precision. And we pastors who are infected with the pragmatic virus tend to justify our indifference to doctrine mainly by the fact that such reflection is not what the audience is looking for. Besides, it is stressful for relationships…
…As a whole, and in the dominant shaping forces of evangelicalism, the criticism of Harry Blamires in 1963 is probably more true than ever: “There is no Christian Mind…. The Christian Mind has succumbed to the secular drift with a degree of weakness unmatched in Christian History.
The increasing abandonment of truth and moral absolutes in our culture, as militant diversity threatens all firm conviction, has dramatically influenced the evangelical mindset. The political spin doctors who specialize in deflecting attention away from truth onto feelings and relationships and styles have their counterpart in the evangelical tendency to avoid doctrinal disputes by casting issues in terms of demeanor and method rather than truth. Serious disagreements are covered over, while vague language and pragmatic concerns preserve hollow unity at the expense of theological substance and Biblical clarity and power.”
John Piper; God’s Passion for His Glory, pages 23-24
On the whole, I think this statement is true. A friend of mine wondered aloud recently whether or not the role of the Mind – or perhaps just thoughtfulness – is needed in the life of the Christian. Of course we are to ‘Love God with all of our mind,’ and to be ‘wise as serpents, innocent as doves.’ For some, doing studies in doctrine and theology is natural, but this is not the case for everyone. ‘Watch your life and doctrine closely,’ indeed, for then we will be saved ourselves and helpful to our hearers. But how much precision is warranted, and how much do we need to be correct about? This is a real question for me.
In some ways, my friend was commenting in a reactionary way. We have had a few apologists around recently who seem to think that rational argument gives “evidence” for God’s existence and that faith is the rational conclusion to this evidence. Were this the case, faith would need to be redefined, for it isn’t Abrahamic at all! Argumentation can help the theist to know that he’s not a dope, and that he need not resign his rationality in order to believe in God. However, being convinced of the possibility of God’s existence is not tantamount to faith – arguments can only go so far.
This, of course, is not speaking directly to ‘Precision & Pragmatism,’ but the two are closely related. I think that pragmatism, unless it is a philosophical position dubbed ‘utilitarianism,’ is a close cousin to anti-intellectualism. Were the church to go too strongly in the way of such pragmatism, we would find ourselves in trouble very quickly I suspect. Let me know what you think.