{"id":2042,"date":"2014-08-29T03:10:18","date_gmt":"2014-08-29T03:10:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/?p=2042"},"modified":"2014-08-29T03:10:18","modified_gmt":"2014-08-29T03:10:18","slug":"book-review-nicholas-m-healy-church-world-and-the-christian-life-practical-prophetic-ecclesiology-kindle-edition","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/book-review-nicholas-m-healy-church-world-and-the-christian-life-practical-prophetic-ecclesiology-kindle-edition\/","title":{"rendered":"BOOK REVIEW. Nicholas M. Healy – Church, World And The Christian Life, Practical-Prophetic Ecclesiology (Kindle Edition)."},"content":{"rendered":"

Author’s note. \u00a0The Kindle edition of the book provides “locations” rather than “pages.” \u00a0In-text citations are reflective of this.<\/em><\/p>\n

For many, the discipline of ecclesiology is neither practical nor prophetic.\u00a0 Rather, ecclesiology is understood by most to be primarily and essentially reflective, pondering the historical progression of the church in an attempt to understand it in its present (whenever that may be) form.\u00a0 Matters such as the functions and forms of the church and its posture relative to culture may be examined but the adjective \u201cpractical\u201d is not normally found anywhere near a description of\u00a0 ecclesiology.\u00a0 Further, it serves no easily identified prophetic (in the functional, corrective understanding of the word \u201cprophetic\u201d) or predictive function and as such, many Evangelicals view it as a discipline valuable only to the academy, with little real-world usefulness.\u00a0 In his important work Church, World and the Christian Life, Practical-Prophetic Ecclesiology, <\/i>Nicholas M. Healy offers a challenging argument against this disposition and for the necessity of critical reflection on ecclesial life. \u00a0<\/i><\/p>\n

Healy contends that, while most \u201chorizons\u201d of ecclesiology have not been as \u201chelpful as [they] could be\u201d (loc. 59), ecclesiology, if undertaken from the perspective of a \u201ctheodramatic\u201d horizon, can be both practical and prophetic, providing essential correctives to the church as a matter of course.\u00a0 Over and against \u201cepic\u201d or \u201cblueprint\u201d1 ecclesiologies, where the theologian stands on the outside, viewing the church with an almost scientific disposition, a theodramatic perspective postures the theologian squarely in the middle of the narrative, causing the ecclesiological inquiry to come to life.<\/p>\n

A theodramatic approach allows for the different-ness of the church and others, as well as the different-ness of the various iterations of church, to be fully embraced and even celebrated!\u00a0 We should be able to recognize that Christianity and world religions or non\/anti-religions are unique from each other and, at the same time, embrace authentic respect for one another.\u00a0 We usually do not do this very well.\u00a0 The church needs <\/i>to engage in dialog — fierce debate even\u00a0— with entities outside of itself.\u00a0 This is in fulfilling both requisite functions of the church to make disciples and fervently witness to our Lord.\u00a0 Healy contends that the church can, in fact, learn important things from those outside of its purview, even things of a theological nature.\u00a0 The church does not hold the monopoly position of wrong and right.\u00a0 Throughout the book it is demonstrated that merely having a theoretical\/spiritual understanding of righteousness has not always translated into right behavior among the \u201cpilgrim\u201d2 church.\u00a0 \u201cTo acknowledge the need to listen and learn is to deprive Christians of the comfort and security of knowing that they have, or have access to, all the answers\u201d (loc. 904).\u00a0 This flies in the face of the church\u2019s normal, hubristic self-view.<\/p>\n

Historically, any meaningful reformation within the church has been predicated upon crisis or scandal.\u00a0 Healy posits that a full embrace of theodramatic ecclesiology would offer a necessary corrective to this trend.\u00a0 \u201cIt acknowledges the church\u2019s sinfulness and errors, not only when it is obliged to do so by others, but by actively seeking out and bringing to light anti-Christian practices and beliefs and by proposing suitable reforms\u201d (loc. 2429).\u00a0 Most would agree that repentance for sin, however public and emotional it may be, can be viewed as somewhat suspicious when it comes only in response to being caught in some misdeed. \u00a0 It seems that, if nothing more, from a purely public-relations standpoint, Healy offers a refreshing adjustment in methods.\u00a0 This correction alone moves his brand of ecclesiology into the category of \u201cpractical\u201d even if his mode of presentation is not.<\/p>\n

Healy makes full and robust use of the English language, sparing no words even when fewer could have presented some very important matters in a more accessible manner.\u00a0 His succinct presentation of the distinctions between the ecclesiological \u201chorizons\u201d of pluralism, inclusivism and exclusionism in chapter four is excellent.\u00a0 Because of his efficiency of words in this section, these may be the most helpful three paragraphs in the entire text.\u00a0 He clearly explains that for the pluralist, all religions\u2019 aim is the same \u2014 some variant of salvation \u2014 while the exclusivist \u201cinsists that membership in the church is necessary for salvation\u201d (Loc. 1021).\u00a0 Inclusivism seeks to forge a union of the previous two while maintaining Christian superiority among world religions.\u00a0 He illustrates in this brief section that, when he so chooses, he can provide a treatment of important subject matters without the density of words otherwise pervasive in the text.<\/p>\n

One theme found throughout the pages is the idea that the church should readily and quickly recognize its sin and error, repent of them, and make progress toward meaningful change.\u00a0 This is the \u201cprophetic\u201d in Healy\u2019s practical-prophetic ecclesiology.\u00a0 I whole-heartedly agreement with this in principle<\/i>, yet find myself struggling to understand how (functionally) he proposes that individual members of the church (local) can effectively repent for the sins of the collective (catholic).\u00a0 This is a central theme, warranting extensive doctrinal discussion yet I find only one, brief explanatory statement likening the church (\u201csufficiently self-identical\u201d is his terminology) to ancient Israel to serve as authorization for an individual member to carry the full weight of repentance for the church, both historical and present-day.\u00a0 This important book calls the church to an everyday practice of ecclesiological reflection and repentance that will offer a credible witness to the gospel of Christ.\u00a0 This is important!\u00a0 I would have liked to have seen more attention given to how an individual\u2019s penitence can be effectual toward demonstrating the authentic repentance of the entire church.\u00a0 That kind of discussion could provide a powerful polemic against the prevailing individualism of the western church.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

__________________________
\n1 For Healy, epic forms of ecclesiology position the theologian outside the narrative of the church, describing in the third-person.\u00a0 Blueprint variants of the discipline also offer a third-person perspective but rather than telling the story of what is, they offer preferred descriptions of what the church should be, generally leaning on contrast to argue their points.<\/p>\n

2 The church\u2019s response to such travesties as the Pol-Pot and Hitler regimes, slavery in the United States and Apartheid in South Africa are but a few examples.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Author’s note. \u00a0The Kindle edition of the book provides “locations” rather than “pages.” \u00a0In-text citations are reflective of this. For many, the discipline of ecclesiology is neither practical nor prophetic.\u00a0 Rather, ecclesiology is understood by most to be primarily and essentially reflective, pondering the historical progression of the church in an attempt to understand it […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":36,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[473,472],"class_list":["post-2042","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-book-review","tag-nicholas-m-healy","cohort-lgp5"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2042","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/36"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2042"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2042\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2047,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2042\/revisions\/2047"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2042"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2042"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2042"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}