Considering Pastoral Polemics

I began reading The Future of Justification by John Piper yesterday.  So far it is very good.  In his introduction, Piper confesses “we all wear colored glasses” and that his “temptation is to defend a view because it has been believed for centuries.  His (Wright’s) temptation is to defend a view because it fits so well into his new way of seeing the world.”  He lays some cards on the table right up front.  Piper is not claiming to be unbiased, but is open about his theological bias.

He also lays out some of the issues he will be addressing in the book, the “head-turners”.  He wants to be fair to N.T. Wright (to whom he gave an early manuscript, received a lengthy response which resulted in a lengthier book).  “(T) confusion is owing to the ambiguities in Wright’s own expressions, and to the fact that, unlike his treatment of some subjects, his paradigm for justification does not fit well with the ordinary reading of many texts and leaves many ordinary folk not with the rewarding ‘ah-ha’ experience of illumination, but with a paralyzing sense of perplexity.”

In his footnotes, he quotes both Jonathan Edwards and John Owen on the idea that some men are saved despite not believing some important doctrines.  However, they say that the more one resists attempts to correct their faulty understanding the less likely it is that they are truly saved.  This notion begins with both charity and an honest estimation of the process of maturity in faith.  New believers know little of the truth, and and they study God’s Word their views should become more and more conformed to biblical teaching.  If they don’t … there is cause for concern.

In an unnumbered chapter On Controversy, Piper explains why he believes in the need for what I’ll call “pastoral polemics.”  As a pastor he doesn’t need to bark at every person or animal on the street, but only at those close enough to potentially represent danger.  His parishoners won’t be reading guys like Sanders or Dunn.  But since Wright is an evangelical, and has made many solid contributions to the church, his people might read Wright’s material on justification and potentially be harmed.  Note that Piper does list Wright’s many positive contributions as an evangelical scholar.  He is not demonizing Wright, but taking issue with him on a particular topic.  This is not a “shock and awe” attack meant to rob N.T. Wright of any shred of credibility.  It is an attempt to understand his views on this matter, and address those ways in which Wright has drifted too far from the biblical text & meaning.

Piper quotes Dr. Roger Nicole’s essay Polemic Theology: How to Deal With Those Who Differ from Us.  “We are called upon by the Lord to contend earnestly for the faith (Jude 3).  That does not necessarily involve being contentious; but it involves avoiding compromise …”

He also quotes from John Owen (again) and J. Gresham Machen about the need to defend truth from a love of truth.  It is here that our theology can be refined, clarified and others come to a saving knowledge of truth.

But that is all less than the testimony and example of Scripture.  The letters of the New Testament are filled with polemics for pastoral reasons.  What many fail to realize is that the peace of the church is broken by error and sin.  To be put back right, truth and repentance must be pursued by clear proclamations of the truth, refutation of error and exposure of sin.  Paul repeatedly connects both peace and love with truth- they cannot really exist apart from truth.

“He (Paul) is like a parent to his churches.  Parents do not correct and discipline their children only for felonies.  Good parents long for their children to grow up into all the kindness and courtesy of mature adulthood.  And since the fabric of truth is seamless, Paul knows that letting minor strands continue to unravel can eventually rend the whole garment.”

So here we see the need and purpose for pastoral polemics (the peace has been broken, and the desire for maturity in Christ).  We also see the manner in which it is to be carried out (charity, gentleness, firmness).  This is the tone and agenda with which Piper sets out to respond to N.T. Wright on this particular issue of justification.