Union with Christ -- A Review
UNION WITH CHRIST: Reframing Theology and Ministry for the Church
. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011. Xi + 180 pp.
The author, Todd Billings, teaches Reformed
Theology at Western Theological Seminary in Holland Michigan and has written extensively on John Calvin. That probably should have been clue enough as
to the orientation of the author.
The
premise of the book is that the “central New Testament description of Christian
identity” is found in the image of “union with Christ” (p. 1). In fact, for Billings, union with Christ is
“short hand for the gospel.” This is the
good news – we have been given the opportunity to find our own identity in the
person of Christ, who is the unique incarnation of God. Billings explores this concept and applies it
to questions relating to sacrament, ministry, and church, by retrieving from
Reformed Tradition, especially John Calvin and to a lesser extent figures such
as Herman Bavinck and Karl Barth, the sources for understanding what it means
to be a Christian. As I noted, I’m not
part of the Reformed Tradition in the way that Billings is, so I found the book
to be helpful at points but far from where I find myself at this point in
time. As a historian, however, I do
appreciate Billings’s commitment to making history a conversation partner in
his theological work.
This
book begins with a premise that God is, in God’s self, incomprehensible to
humans. Thus, revelation of God must
come from God, and Jesus is that preeminent revelation. His emphasis on Christ as the unique
incarnation of God is foundational for the critique of “incarnational ministry”
at the end of the book.
Billings
begins his book with a chapter that affirms the concept that salvation is
adoption in Christ. Thus, to experience
salvation is to be adopted into the family of God, making one heir of God. He sees this as an antidote to the
pervasiveness of “moralistic therapeutic deism,” which a number of writers have
declared to be America’s creed. We’re a
moralistic people, seeking to be made to feel good, in relationship to a
distant, but convenient god – one we control in essence. But the idea of adoption changes our identity
– we are part of God’s family and recipients of God’s bounty.
Chapter
two wrestles with the concept of “total depravity,” which is one of those areas
of theology that many Christians either ignore or find problematic. Billings believes that the typical
expositions – that we are because of sin totally incapable of doing anything
good is incorrect. But, it does suggest
that everything about our lives is touched by corruption. Therefore, our will is not completely
free. Interestingly enough, he notes
that in our American political discussion – conservatives, with their
libertarian leanings, have a more positive view of human ability than do
liberals, who seek much more government regulation of human life – because they
don’t believe that humans, left to their own devices are capable of doing
good. So, who knew that the left was as
Calvinist as it may be? Where, however, is there ultimate hope? It is to be found in communion with God
through Christ – that is in “union with Christ.”
In the
third chapter, Billings moves on to the question of God’s nature – and thus
God’s incomprehensibility. We have
knowledge of God and God’s desires through God’s decision to accommodate God’s
self and vision to our abilities to comprehend.
Following Calvin, Billings asserts that only God truly knows God, that
humans have, as a result of accommodation, a partial knowledge of God; and God
desires communion with humanity. Thus,
as is true of Reformed understanding of the divine human relationship – God
seeks us, not the other way around.
Revelation is an act of “condescending love.”
Chapter
four is entitled “The Gospel and Justice.”
In this chapter Billings speaks to those on the left, whom he believes
collapse gospel into justice (human acts of justice), while on the right
justice is seen as an optional add-on.
Once we get our ticket to heaven, then we talk about justice, if we
want. Billings finds both perspectives
deficient. It is in this context that
Billings discusses the Lord’s Supper, for it is not only a place of communion
with Christ, but it also as a result of our communion with Christ a push
outward to love one’s neighbor. Justice,
thus, is an integral expression of our participation in Christ.
Finally
in the fifth chapter, Billings takes us into a discussion of ministry,
specifically a contrast between the idea of “incarnational ministry” that is
prominent in Missional circles, and his suggestion that we would better served,
theologically, if we understood ministry in terms of participation through
union with Christ. Ultimately, as I read
this chapter, from a perspective of one who is engaged in the missional
conversation, I didn’t see that in terms of actual practice there was much
difference between an “incarnational” view and a “participation” view. What Billings is concerned about is that if
we push the idea of incarnation too far then we supplant Christ as the
incarnation of God. It is our own
actions that define incarnation, and thus Jesus no longer stands at the
center. He becomes an example, but is
displaced as the unique incarnation of God in human form. I have to admit, I struggled with the
chapter, because I found much of the discussion rather semantic in nature. I think most missional thinkers would affirm
that ultimately we are not the incarnation of God, but that our engagement in
ministry is a reflection of what Christ did, and we understand that we do this
ministry not on our own, but in the Spirit who reveals Christ. I have no problem with the image of
participation in and with our union with Christ. If this better theological language, then so
be it. But does it change the nature of
ministry? I’m not sure that it does, so
is this an intramural debate or is it something of greater importance? Being that I’m not part of this Reformed
debate, I’ll leave the answer to the question to others.
In the
final analysis, this book has helpful aspects to it. It invites us to retrieve insights from the
past even as we move into the future. I appreciated the push back on the relationship of gospel and justice. This is a key insight. As to whether or not this is, as Richard Mouw writes in a blurb gracing the
back cover, a key to the comeback of Reformed theology, is for those in the
Reformed tradition to decide. If, like
me, you find yourself at a different place theologically, you might look
elsewhere for resources. The book is accessible,
well-written, but focused on a fairly specific audience – Reformed evangelicals
who have drifted off into “moralistic therapeutic deism.”
Comments