By Alex Fogleman
It’s been gratifying to see the topic of catechesis appearing in several online news outlets and popular blogs lately. The instigator was a piece a few weeks ago in the Atlantic by Peter Wehner, called “Trump is Tearing the Evangelical Church Apart.” For this article, Wehner consulted a number of leading Christian voices, including Alan Jacobs at Baylor University, Tim Keller of Redeemer Church, and James Ernest, the Vice President and Editor-in-Chief of Eerdman’s Publishers, to understand why and how evangelicalism became co-opted by Trumpian politics in the last five years.
Wehner’s advisors consistently pointed to a failure of catechesis. I wouldn’t be able to get on board with some of Wehner’s claims, like “Jesus now has to be reclaimed from his Church,” though I understands what he means. But in any case, when an article in the Atlantic mentions the word “catechesis” nearly a dozen times, I cannot help but get that heart-warming evangelical vibe.
Those familiar with the writings of Jacobs and Keller will not be surprised to hear that, as Jacobs puts it, “culture catechizes,” and that Christians need a much more concerted effort at paideia to help combat the powerful forces of social media, entertainment, and mainstream journalism. Keller, too, has spoken about the important need for a catechesis for a secular age. These proposals are salutary and very much in accord with the aims of the IRCC.
In addition to his comments in the Atlantic piece, James Ernest wrote his own blog post about the current state of evangelicalism. “The discipleship failure is owing to catechesis failure,” he writes. He goes on to offer a winsome and comprehensive vision of catechesis:
“The mission of the church (read the end of the Gospel of Matthew again) is to “make disciples, teaching them to observe everything that I have commanded you.” That teaching is catechesis. It is indoctrination, though we are wary of that word because we often see it used in negative ways. New Christians have to be taught to observe, which means not just to be aware of what Christ did for them according to some particular doctrinal slogan, but to become observant in the sense of putting Christ first, ahead of every other loyalty. Key elements in catechesis would include knowing scripture and doctrine and practicing the sacraments and prayer—all in a way that purges away all contradictory and competing gods and spirits and loyalties and enables an integrated life of faith. ”
Within this more general diagnosis, Ernest proposes three key failures:
lack of Bible
lack of doctrine
lack of prayer
It is not only a dearth of quantity of biblical reading, he says, but also a lack of quality: “Most church attendees never learn basic principles of interpretation: how to read all of scripture, in its two testaments and multiple genres, coherently and constructively.” Instead, they get bits and pieces— moral precepts scattered here and there, often disconnected from the larger scriptural narrative and its Christological core. Likewise with a lack of doctrine: Christians are often left without a comprehensive framework for understanding God, the world, or the church’s vocation. Preachers often select verses that reinforce particular hobby horses, but often give no sense of the shape of a Christian perception of reality.
Finally, there is lack of prayer, without which we are prone to self-righteousness and a refusal to acknowledge our own sins and vices, both social and individual. “There are pockets of interest in spiritual formation,” Ernest writes, “but there the risk is getting lost in hyperspiritualized self-absorption in which one absolves oneself of all responsibility for re-emerging to do the Lord’s work in the world; or if one does re-emerge into mission, that mission does not include participating as a well-formed Christian citizen in civic affairs. Evangelicals don’t know how to live life together in the constant presence of God in the midst of life in the world.”
Amen to that.
In addition to Wehner’s journalistic and Ernest’s theological accounts, Chris Gehrz at the Patheos blog Anxious Bench, has added the historian’s voice to the mix. Gehrz echoes the laments voiced by others of an increasing biblical illiteracy among college students over the past 20 years. But he also says that, while upping our doses of Bible, doctrine, and prayer are good, catechesis can also benefit from the historian’s craft.
Gerhrz writes: “Even if our work takes us far from the history of Christianity itself, historians can help Jesus-followers better understand the world into which they are called, the world God created, loves, and restores: to see that world with both clarity and empathy, neither nostalgia nor fear.”
In particular, the historian can question narratives that our present moment takes for granted. He agrees with Ernest that catechesis is “a difficult process, powered by the Holy Spirit and deliberately fostered, cultivated, by teachers and pastors, older sisters and brothers in the faith, according to inherited patterns.” But he also says that historians are especially needed to call into question false narratives that we take to be simply orthodoxy.
“Sometimes historians need to disrupt patterns that have been inherited from the past. Sometimes historians need to point out how evangelical churches that do emphasize catechesis have inculcated doctrines that distort ‘the life of the people of God in the world.’”
Gehrz quotes Marty Duren to make the point that: “historians are showing heretofore unacknowledged social consequences from the American version of evangelicalism, consequences concerned Christians should evaluate—and be eager to do so.”
He also lists other historians like Kristen du Mez, Aaron Griffith, Lauren Turek, and David Kirkpatrick who have made a concerted effort to show “how certain evangelical ways of understanding God have warped evangelicals’ understanding of the world and misshaped their way of living in it as God’s people. They illustrate how Christians who pray, read the Bible, and emphasize doctrine can nonetheless abet racial injustice and patriarchy, neglect the poor, and seek after political power at the expense of Christian witness.”
Gerhrz concludes about the historian’s critical task: “that kind of teaching is catechesis, too. So if you agree that your evangelical church could do better at teaching disciples of Jesus Christ to follow him into the world, think about how to invite historians into the process.”
Once again, I am thrilled with the attention that these voices are giving to catechesis. They show that from a variety of perspectives, catechesis is a subject we seriously need to consider.
On the whole, though, while I realize the need for lament and for calling the church to account for its failures, I also wonder: What are the positive, constructive roles that historians, theologians, and pundits can play in renewing catechesis?
As a preternaturally disposed late adopter, I’m inclined to agree with these critiques of the contemporary state of evangelical discipleship and catechesis. But what we also need is a compelling and beautiful vision of the church at work and worship. What sorts of theological and historical witnesses can we call upon to help with all this?
Obviously, the work of the IRCC is dedicated to just these topics, but there is more and other kinds of work to be done. I think of my friend Paul Gutacker and the work of the Brazos Fellows in Waco, TX, for instance. They mentor and disciple college graduates over an academic year and help to integrate these young men and women into the historical and theological imagination of the church and its spiritual practices. I think, too, of the work of the Robert Webber Center at Trinity School for Ministry in Ambridge, PA, and their new Catechist Formation Program. I think, too, of the many faithful catechists and teachers who do the patient work of catechesis in local churches week-in and week-out, without the resources of high-powered institutions or popular presses, many of whom I’ve been so blessed to know through the work of the IRCC.
In short, there are many reasons to be skeptical about evangelicalism’s future. But there are also many reasons to be hopeful—both for the future of evangelicalism and for the renewal of catechesis. At the center is the good news that Jesus is faithful to his church, that it is Christ who is the true Catechist, calling us out from sin, ignorance, and vice. Moreover, Christ calls us all to join him in this work. Everyone has a role to play: pastors, catechists, bishops, teachers, theologians—even, God bless them, historians. Parents, journalists, godparents, too—all are part of the work of re-catechizing the church. What role will you play?