Comments on: Christopher J.H. Wright on “False Dichotomies of Mission”

By: Jack Horton

Jack Horton — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:48:12 +0000

I believe Wright was at his best when he addressed the ongoing (30 years) debate over the primacy of evangelism in his book, Mission of God. He takes the discussion to a whole new level with his preference for the term “ultimacy” over “primacy”. I believe a reveiw of this section of his book will address your concerns.

By: Christopher Wright: false dichotomies in mission « The Wanderer

Christopher Wright: false dichotomies in mission « The Wanderer — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:28:56 +0000

[...] a comment » An interesting couple of posts (highlighted by Timmy Brister) in which Christopher Wright (author of The Mission of God and The God I Don’t Understand) [...]

By: Darby Livingston

Darby Livingston — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:58:25 +0000

I think to come to the proper conclusion on the issues that Wright has taken up, we have to look at ultimate purposes for this creation. Vos and Edwards both did a good job at this in the past. Ephesians 3 says that everything was created so that the church could display the manifold wisdom of God. So if we start with anything other than rescuing people from this fallen world and delivering them to the age to come, then we’ll go astray. We’re on a rescue mission plain and simple. Discipleship is the ongoing process of getting delivered from this age to the next.

I like to illustrate this using the Titanic. Once the ship hit the iceberg, that was it – life was unalterably interrupted. The main mission from that point on was getting people off the ship (personal salvation). However, if someone was running around freezing on deck while the lifeboats were being filled, surely he should be given a blanket (act of loving service). And if while the lifeboats were being loaded, an evil man tried to take advantage of the situation by trying to violate another person, then he should be restrained or punished (order and justice). Neither helping others with practical needs, nor maintaining order and justice replaces the rescue mission in priority.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:33:23 +0000

Thanks for this. I found both Wright’s material and your interaction profitable.

By: Alan Cross

Alan Cross — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:45:51 +0000

Our uncomfortableness with Wright might come from exactly what he is opposing: a false dichotomy between word and deed. Everytime someone starts talking about good works, we get scared that they are diminishing the preaching and believing of the gospel as necessary for salvation. We continue to react to the liberal social gospel to our own harm. I like Chris Wright a lot and have read a couple of his books. He presents a positive approach to God’s saving work and the implications of the gospel (never confusing the two but also not making the implications optional). He presents a very positive both/and scenario and I think that he should be listened to from what I have read (I haven’t read all that he has written – just parts, but his thesis seems appropriate).

Thanks for linking to this.

By: Stuart

Stuart — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:58:19 +0000

If I’m not mistaken, Wright views election in a more corporate sense similar, I think, to Newbigin. The working out of that view is probably where we who hold to a “Reformed” faith might get uncomfortable with Wright, when so much of else of what he says would normally resonate.

Personally, I’ll err on the side of the “charitable” look at Wright, as I’m more than a little bit grateful for his body of work.

By: Todd Benkert

Todd Benkert — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:57:48 +0000

“In the Church’s mission of sacrificial service evangelism is primary. World evangelization requires the whole Church to take the whole gospel to the whole world.”
– Luasanne Covenant, Paragraph 6 — http://www.lausanne.org/covenant

“Seldom if ever should we have to choose between satisfying physical hunger and spiritual hunger, or between healing bodies and saving souls, since an authentic love for our neighbour will lead us to serve him or her as a whole person. Nevertheless, if we must choose, then we have to say that the supreme and ultimate need of all humankind is the saving grace of Jesus Christ, and that therefore a person’s eternal, spiritual salvation is of greater importance than his or her temporal and material well-being.”
– Lausanne Occasional Papers #21, Part 4, D — http://www.lausanne.org/all-documents/lop-21.html

By: Bryant King

Bryant King — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:49:45 +0000

I am going to break my self imposed rule of not revealing my ignorance on blogs and respond to this one.

I think the strength of Wright’s 4th point, is his 5th point, and I think discomfort with his 4th point will be resolved with a resolve to see his 5th point fulfilled.

I strongly wonder if we aren’t reading into Scripture so much of our American(?) autonomous “Army of One” mentality when it comes to preparing disciples. If we are looking to raise up single person, fully autonomous, completely self-contained evangelobots I think we are typically going to come up short. Depending on how individuals are gifted, they will play different roles in the body. I am thinking of Ephesians 4: 1-16 http://bit.ly/VSmf7

To take the analogy of the body perhaps one step too far I think sometimes the mouth of the body looks at the hands and wonders why they aren’t speaking more, and it wishes the hands would quit slapping it and telling it to help out more. Meanwhile, the hands of the body is angered that the mouth doesn’t help out more and is tired of the mouth gnawing on the hands and telling them to speak more. My illustration may be silly, but I think it plays out in American Christianity. I am becoming increasingly convinced that the answer is not just better prioritized and trained individuals, but a more cohesive, cooperative body. I think this is what Wright is suggesting.

In my mind, Ephesians 4:16 solidifies it for me: “from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.”

Of course, I could just be reading my biases and misunderstandings into his essay.

Bryant King