Importance: 10%
The Big Idea
NOTE
Essay Imported from Josh Leborious
The Practical Theological Framework
Introduction
There are a variety of pastoral ministry resources that provide advice and guidelines for a diversity of ministry related topics. These resources are useful in providing answers for how to conduct worship, how to do evangelism, how to provide counseling, how to care for the dying, how to conduct a congregational meeting, and many other topics that might arise in ministry. However, no resource is able to address each specific aspect of ministry in a given context. Every ministry context is unique and requires an appropriate Godly approach. There are variables in ministry that canât be anticipated while sitting in a seminary classroom or reading a pastoral theology textbook. Ministry is not simply organized into easily understood categories with easy answers. Ministry can be messy and complicated because we are serving people with unique personalities, behaviors, thoughts, and passions. And these people live in communities that have their own personalities, behaviors, thoughts, and passions. Yes, we proclaim Christ, and we bring Christ to bear upon every situation that we encounter. Yet how do we faithfully attend to matters in the congregation and community in a way that will give God glory and serve our neighbor? During medieval times, the approach to attending to matters of church and society was called scholasticism. Scholasticism was a pedagogical framework used primary in the university setting with a dialectical learning approach. The approach included the following steps: identify a question, make arguments for and against, refer to philosophers, provide possible answers that bring the various disciplines together and demonstrate they are really saying the same thing. 1 Martin Luther was trained in scholasticism but rejected the approach in his 1517 Disputation Against Scholastic Theology. Luther was clear that scholasticism lacked the theological depth and relied too heavily upon philosophy for determining how we did theology. Luther stated in thesis 41 of his Disputation Against Scholastic Theology, âvirtually the entire ethics of Aristotle is the worst enemy of grace. This in opposition to the scholastics.â And in thesis 44, âIndeed, no one can become a theologian unless he becomes one without Aristotle.â The scholastic way of doing theology provided a framework, but with a philosophical foundation that left little room for Christ. A more recent approach to attending to questions of the church and society was proposed by Richard Osmer and his four tasks of practical theology. The four tasks included 1. The Descriptive Empirical Task of Priestly Listening, 2. The Interpretive Task of Sagely Wisdom, 3. The Normative task of Prophetic Discernment and 4. The Pragmatic task of Servant Leadership. 2 However, the limitations of this approach have provided an opportunity to develop a Lutheran framework. The Practical Theological Framework will give us a Lutheran structure to address the unique needs of the particular context in which we serve. The four pillars of the framework are:
1 Paul Robinson provides a summary of scholasticism in a video series provided by Concordia Seminary 2 Osmer, Richard R. Practical theology: An introduction. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2008.
ï· Attending to Self and the World ï· Interpreting First Article Wisdom ï· Discerning Theological Wisdom ï· Implementing Godly Guidance and Leadership
Attending to Self and World
Attending is the ability to be aware of what is going on in a particular context. We pay attention to what we see, what we hear, what we smell, what we taste and what we touch. Initially, the goal is not to find meaning or understanding but simply to be aware of what is going on. I have a dog named Buddy and we often go on walks in a park near our home. These walks in the park give me an opportunity to attend to a particular context. Sometimes Buddy and I will sit on a bench that looks over the park. We sit there and take in all the park has to offer. We watch the ducks swimming in the pond. We watch the irresponsible squirrels running around with their cheeks full of nuts. One early morning we sat quietly as three deer walked by and rabbits were jumping at their feet. Well, I sat quietly, Buddy decided to bark loudly at them, and they quickly moved away from us. But for that moment it was like a scene from Bambi. But definitely the most interesting things to watch in the park are the people. One fall day we watched a crazy lady wondering around in the trees picking up leaves and stuffing them into her pockets. We watched a group of reckless teenagers throw rocks at the ducks. We overheard a married couple arguing and the wife complaining that the husband did not spend enough time at home. On our early morning walks we observe a menâs support group that meets in one of the picnic shelters. On our evening walks I love the smell of meat being grilled by nearby neighbors. Biased Descriptions Go back and read my description of the park context again. Would you say that it was a non-bias or neutral description? You have heard people say that it is important to give a neutral description of what they see. A bystander who witnessed a car accident is expected to provide a neutral account of what took place. Journalist are expected to be nonbiased in their reporting of the news. An unbiased jury should listen to all the evidence and witnesses before they make a decision. Yet, when we see, hear, smell, taste, or touch something we canât do so with one hundred percent neutrality or being unbiased. Every observation we make is filtered through our biases. Many experiments have demonstrated how bias influences us. In one such experiment they paid 108 forensic psychologists and psychiatrists to examine case files. However, some of the research participates were told they were consulting for the defense and others were told they were consulting for the prosecution. Knowing who they were consulting for caused them to be biased. Those who believed they were consulting for the prosecution were biased and gave higher risk scores to offenders. Those who believed they were consulting for the defense were biased and gave lower risk scores to offenders. 3
3 Murrie, Daniel C., Marcus T. Boccaccini, Lucy A. Guarnera, and Katrina A. Rufino. âAre forensic experts biased by the side that retained them?â Psychological science 24, no. 10 (2013): 1889-1897.
I have a bias against squirrels because of my experience with them. That bias will impact how I think, speak and behave in relation to squirrels. Notice how I described the squirrels as irresponsible. I am painting the squirrels in a negative light while positively describing the deer and rabbits as if they jumped off a movie screen. My description of the squirrels, deer and rabbits is not neutral or unbiased. I am willing to stop and observe what is going on in the context, but my description is seasoned with my own knowledge and experience. I hate squirrels; yes, I am aware hate is a very strong word. It is my experience that squirrels are destructive. I would like to sit on my deck and watch the birds eat from my bird feeder. The stupid squirrels prevent me from this hallmark experience. I have bought all the fancy bird feeders that claim to prevent squirrels from eating the bird feed. I have watched many videos with tips and tricks to keep the squirrelsâ away. Nothing has worked. But what really made me boil over with hate for the squirrels is when they decided to chew holes in my house and live in my walls. I paid a roofing company an elaborate amount of money to help me with the squirrel problem. All they did was cover the hole with a piece of tin and painted it to match my house. And the worst of it- the squirrels were now trapped inside the house and spent a week chewing a new hole. Also notice how I described the lady picking up leaves as being crazy and the teenagers as being reckless. My experience with squirrels, women picking up leaves and teenagers influences how I describe what I see taking place in the park. Our lived experiences influence our descriptions of events. The park squirrels did not chew holes in my house and did not raid my bird feeder, but it is my assumption that all squirrels are the same and I hate them all. Assumptions Every day we make assumptions about the world around us. We may not always be aware of how we fill in the blanks, but itâs our brainâs way of helping us make sense of things without slowing us down to analyses every fine detail. However, sometimes our assumptions are wrong. Reread my description of the men who meet in the park and the couple arguing. In my description of these two observations, I have made some assumptions. I do not know if the couple are married, it is an assumption I have made. It is possible that they are brother and sister, a couple having an affair, a couple engaged to be married or roommates. What did you think of when I described the men as a menâs support group? To be honest, I have no idea why the men are meeting every morning. Yet in my description of the men, I said it is a menâs support group. All I have observed is a group of around 15 men meeting each morning. There is normally one man standing in front of the group talking about something. Men of various ages show up, yet it seems as if it is the same group of guys. Some are dressed in casual clothes, while others are dressed for work and may leave the meeting early- I assume to go to work. Perspectives
We may not always be aware of it, but our descriptions of everyday things are flavored with our own perspective of what we know, what we have experienced and the place from which we observe. Attending to our own perspectives is important because it shapes how we describe what is taking place. Buddy and I often sit on a bench that overlooks the park- this is a particular physical perspective of what is going on in the park. The place from which we sit impacts what we see, what we donât see, how we see it, and our description of what we see. I can see the crazy lady picking up leaves and stuffing them into her pockets, but I canât hear what she is saying, although I can see her lips moving. I can see the teenagers throwing rocks at the ducks but from my perspective it appears that there are no parents around- but I donât know this for sure. There are trees and bushes that block some of my view. I was able to overhear part of the coupleâs conversation because they passed right by us, but I was unable to hear the whole conversation because they walked away from us. Our knowledge and life experiences give us a specific perspective about what we are observing. Yet, the place from which we are observing what is going on will also influence our description of an event. Consider a worship service where the pastor sits upfront, the congregation sits together as an assembly, the ushers stand in back, and the organist sits in the balcony. Everyone is in the same building to worship but how they experience worship will be influenced by the physical perspective they have. My mother is a church organist, and many years of my life was spent sitting in the balcony; from this perspective you can have a birdâs eye view of the whole congregation. As a pastor I can look out over the congregation and see the ushers standing at the back doors of the church talking and smoking while I am preaching. The physical place from which you are positioned will make a difference upon what you can see, hear, smell, taste, or touch. Perspective however is not limited to our physical location. Perspective can be influenced by our assumptions. Geoffrey Cohen demonstrated that Democrats would endorse a Republican proposal if they thought the proposal came from Democrats. And Republicans would endorse a Democratic proposal if they thought it came from Republicans. 4 Some researchers promote perspective taking in order to reduce conflict among various groups. The goal is to take the perspective or see it from the other personâs shoes. The ability to take the perspective of another person has shown to reduce stereotyping. 5 However, perspective taking does not necessarily increase your understanding of the situation. Perspective taking encourages people to guess what the other person is thinking, feeling, or experiencing. Perspective taking is not helpful because it encourages you to predict and does not really give you an accurate understanding of what is going on. âAccurately understanding other people requires getting perspective, not simply taking it. To understand the mind of another person, we need to rely on 4 Cohen, Geoffrey L. âParty over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs.â Journal of personality and social psychology 85, no. 5 (2003): 808. 5 Galinsky, Adam D., and Gordon B. Moskowitz. âPerspective-taking: decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism.â Journal of personality and social psychology 78, no. 4 (2000): 708.
our ears more than our intuition.â 6 In order to get perspective you need to listen to what others are saying, you need to engage them. I knew our physical perspective on the park bench was limited so I decided to move closer to where the men in the park were gathered. Buddy and I made our way down the path toward the picnic shelter so that I could maybe overhear what was being said. Moving to a new physical location can help us have a different perspective. After eight years of being in the front of church leading worship and preaching, I left parish ministry and worked at the district level of my denomination. I no longer was leading worship on Sunday morning but sitting with my family in the pew- a whole new perspective and appreciation for my wife who normally sat by herself trying to attend to three small children. It was my plan to walk slowly by the men who had gathered in the picnic shelter. I might even stop and act as if Buddy needed to do his business. The picnic shelter was located right off the walking path so it would be easy enough to listen in. Notice that I had no intention to engage them, only to ease drop so that I could make some predictions about what they were doing. But when we arrived near the gathering of men Buddy got distracted by a rabbit that jumped out of the grass and ran up the path away from the picnic shelter. Buddy with all his might ran after the rabbit and pulled me along as I tried to hold onto the leash. I missed the opportunity to take advantage of a new physical perspective of the menâs group. Distractions Buddy got distracted by a rabbit. The ushers got distracted by the latest gossip and their smokes. As a child I would get distracted by watching people from the balcony. It is difficult to be fully attentive to things because of the various distractions that are around us. When we become distracted, we miss things and misunderstandings take place.
Pastor Mike Hill
This was the day that Mike Hill had looked forward to for many years. Now he was standing in the church fellowship hall surrounded by pastors from various local congregations. This was the day that Mike was going to be ordained and installed into the public ministry at Trinity Lutheran Church. The excitement that he felt was difficult for him to describe, but you could see it on his face. The vice president of the district announced that it was time to line up. And he gave the following instructions: The pastors would process in first and Mike would be the last one to enter the church. Mike would sit in a chair that had been placed in the center aisle right outside the altar area. After the sermon all the pastors would stand in the altar area and when prompted by the district vice president would lay their hands on Mike and speak a blessing. After Mike was ordained and installed as pastor, he would lead the closing of the service and lead the procession out of the church.
6 Eyal, Tal; Steffel, Mary; Epley, Nicholas. Perspective-taking doesnât help you understand what others want. (2018) Harvard Business Review https://hbr.org/2018/10/research-perspective-taking-doesnt-help- you-understand-what-others-want
The church was filled with congregation members, Mikeâs family and friends. It was an awesome sight to see all the pastors in white robes with red stoles. Mike could see his red stole draped over the communion rail. This stole was made by his grandmother and would always be special to him. The pastors processed into the church and Mike took his place in the chair placed in the aisle. During the sermon, Mike began to gaze upon the altar area. He noticed the fine linen draped on the altar, the polished candle sticks, the large crucifix hanging above the altar, the Lordâs Supper engraved in the altar, the banners with Christian symbols and Bible texts, and the American flag hanging from a pole in the corner of the⊠Wait a minute. Mike stopped his gaze upon the altar area and fixated his eyes on that American flag. He stopped listening to the sermon. A different voice was playing in his head. It was the voice of Dr. Weber from his seminary systematic class. âThe American flag has no place in the house of God.â âWe donât come to church to worship our country.â âThe American flag can represent so many things that are contrary to our faith.â Mike became very uncomfortable and could feel his face getting warm. His special day was being ruined by the presence of an American flag. It was time for him to be ordained and installed. Mike promised with the help of God to keep the ordination vows and be faithful to his call into the office of the holy ministry. The fellow pastors laid hands on him and shared a blessing. But the disgust of that American flag standing as a witness to this most holy service was welling up inside of Mike. Mike finished the service with the prayers and benediction. When the organist began to play the recessional hymn, Mike marched over to the American flag, took a hold of the pole it was attached to, and he marched it out of the church. Mikeâs intent was to be a perfect pastor. He told himself that if he did not remove this American flag, he would be causing the church to sin. He did not want anything to be a stumbling block to the faith of his members. It was his intent to protect his members from this unholy American flag. However, Mikeâs intent was not clear to the members of his congregation. The members were initially confused by their new pastorâs behavior. Was his intent to honor the American flag? Was his intent to illustrate some theological point? Was this a custom he had learned at the seminary? But this confusion quickly turned to anger after Mike preached his first sermon. Pastor Mike Hill preached his first sermon a week later on the importance of separation of church and state. He made this statement in the sermon âThe American flag is not welcome in this sanctuary because we do not worship a flag, we worship the Lord Jesus Christ.â We attend to what we see, what we hear, what we smell, what we taste, and what we touch. Pastor and congregational members need to be alert to the context in which they are placed and the context from which they came from. Pastor Hill was very aware of the seminary context. He knew the expectations of his professors and had a keen understanding of theology. However, he did not have a good understanding of his new context. He based his action of removing the American flag upon limited information from a context that was in his past. Pastor Hill was not attending to his current context. He was not paying attention to what could be heard, seen, smelled, tasted, and touched. He was projecting
the seminary context upon the members of Trinity Lutheran Church. When Pastor Hill was gazing upon the altar area and attending to all that he saw he was connecting his visual observation to the many things he had learned in the seminary context. The crucifix reminds us of the suffering of Christ on Good Friday, the altar reminds us of the empty tomb and the place where the Lordâs Supper is served. Everything he saw in this congregational context matched the seminary context except for the American flag. This caused dissonance within him. Yet, at this moment of dissonance he needed to pause rather than react. And it would have been helpful for him to have an attitude of curiosity. He might have said to himself, âWell, that is odd. That does not match what I learned at seminary. I will need to attend to this more.â This attitude of curiosity would have helped him to have a better understanding of his ministry context. In order to create a space of curiosity it is helpful to be aware of your own assumptions, biases, perspective and distractions. Being aware of them will help you to attend to something new. Edmund Husserl referred to this concept as Epoche. It is the ability to bracket or suspend your own ideas, experiences, judgments, opinions, and beliefs so that you can have a clear space for attending to something new. You may or may not agree with the new things you are attending. But the goal is not to agree, the goal is understanding. The first step is being aware of yourself. What are your ideas, experiences, judgments, opinions, and beliefs? Another way this could be stated, is being aware of your identity. After Pastor Hill identified something that was concerning to him, he should have spent time after the worship service writing down all his ideas, experiences, judgments, opinions, and beliefs about the American flag being in the church. This would get those voices out of his head onto paper and it would help him to organize his thoughts and determine a question that would assist him in attending to this further. Creating a good question will help us to narrow down what we want to attend to. It is not helpful to attend to everything. That would be overwhelming and not productive. If you find yourself with too many things you want to attend to, make a list of all those items and prioritize them. In the Pastor Hill example, he would create a question related to his concern with the American Flag. It might sound something like this âHow can I understand how the American flag impacts the worship life of Trinity Lutheran Church?â Once a question has been developed you can continue to observe and listen to the current context with a specific question at hand. Many people think they are good at this but in reality, we all struggle with listening skills. For example, eyewitness testimony is often not reliable. According to the Innocence Project, 358 who were sentenced to death beginning in 1989 were exonerated through DNA evidence. Seventy one percent of them were convicted based upon eyewitness testimony. This demonstrates that our observation skills are not full proof. Our listening skills are no better. Most people are not listening for understanding they are simply waiting for their turn to say something. Poor listeners will interrupt, use negative body language, jump to conclusions, change the subject, and give solutions or advice. Good listening skills attends to how the person says something, noticing what they donât say, noticing how many times they repeat something, noticing the emotion attached to what is being said.
Pastor Hill did not properly attend to what could be observed. He did not observe the engraved plaque attached to the bottom of the flag stand that said, âin honor and memory of all our members who faithfully served their country.â He did not observe all the confused, hurt, and angry faces of his members. He did not observe that there was an army base in the neighboring community. There were so many things he did not see because he was not attending to them. He got distracted by the American flag and was not able to look at the situation from a different perspective. Consider how many things we donât see because our perspective is blocking the view. We often donât see the immigrants, the elderly, the youth, the single parents, the poor, and many more. We are like vehicles speeding down the highway at high speeds with things passing by us in a blur and glancing at them in our rear-view mirror. But imagine traveling down the same highway on a bicycle. This would change your perspective and you would be able to see more things. Pastor Hill did not take time to listen to his members. He could only hear the voices in his head. But if he could have used the Epoche strategy this would have unstopped his ears to better attend to the situation. He would have heard them talk about the numinous members of the congregation that had served in the military. The men and women who have died that were members of the congregation. The men and women who are now retired from the military that are members of the congregation. The civilian men and women who work on the local army base. He would have learned that his intention to remove the American flag was very different from the congregationâs intention to have it in the sanctuary. When Pastor Hill marched that American flag out of church, he was marching out of the church every solider from that congregation that has faithfully served in the military. In this particular context that involved the majority of the members. Pastor Hill did not understand the context he was in because he did not take time to attend through observation and listening. Attending to self and Godâs creation allows us to be honest about our own ideas, experiences, judgments, opinions, and beliefs. So that we can practice the skill of Epoche and create specific questions that will narrow down our focus of attending. And finally observing and listening to the context in which he is placed. Attending to Self and World is an important first step in the Practical Theological Framework. The next two pillars of the framework will help us understand the particular thing we have been attending to. First Article wisdom will give us an understanding of how to interpret what is being discovered and said among various professions that attend to things in creation that are not specifically described in scripture. Theological Wisdom will help us discern how scripture and the doctrines of the church speak into the situation.
Interpreting First Article Wisdom 7 - Coram Mundo
The second pillar in the practical theological framework is to explore what non theological disciplines have explained or understood about the identified topic. How do psychologist, economists, lawyers, educators, politicians, historians, social scientist, and the medical field respond? In what ways can we better understand the issue through the lens of these various disciplines? The first article of the 7 The video has a second part.
Apostlesâ Creed reminds us that God created all things. There are many things about this creation that the Bible does not attend to. But we have the joy of discovering Godâs creation through various disciplines. First Article Wisdom provides us the opportunity to explore the topic from various perspectives and gain insights that will help us to better understand and answer the stated question. Pastor Hill might have benefited from understanding the situation from a Family System Theory perspective. This theory explores the complex emotional relationships between individuals and how members function within that system. Attachment Theory would be another possible way to understand the grief and loss of the members. This approach would have helped Pastor Hill to understand how humans are created to be in relationship with others. When someone dies or is distant from us, we grieve that loss of that connection. And we may attach ourselves to inanimate objects that remind us of the person. In the case of Trinity Lutheran Church, they attached themselves to the American flag. The flag represented members of the congregation who were detached from the congregation because of their service in the military. These two theories would have provided Pastor Hill a new perspective, a new way of looking at what was going on. Family System Theory and Attachment Theory could have helped Pastor Hill to interpret the situation so that he could better understand why the American flag was in the church. The scientific world (coram mundo) helps us understand the creation we live in. Think of science as a profession that is discovering the depth of Godâs creation. Scientists take a specific approach to complete their work and we need to be aware of the methods they use to do research. The scientific world approaches the interpretation of the world through research in a unique way that is different from how theologians interpret the world. Understanding the method used by science will help us to better appreciate the conclusions made by science. A theory in science is an interrelated set of concepts that is used to explain a body of data and to make predictions about the results of future experiments. Hypotheses are specific predictions that are derived from theories (which are more general and comprehensive). Currently viable theories are those that have had many of their hypotheses confirmed. How to Think Straight About Psychology p. 23 There is basic criterion that people of science use to help them interpret the world around them: Falsifiability Criterion This criterion proposes that for something to be scientific it must be able to be proven false. Anything that canât be proven as false is considered pseudoscience and has no scientific value. Operational Definitions Criterion This criterion requires a researcher to define the characteristics or variables in the study. Replication Criteria This criterion requires a step-by-step description of the study so that other researchers can repeat the same study.
âAny research effort should be replicable; that is, it should be able to be repeated by any other researcher at any time under precisely the same conditions.â
Practical Research, Leedy p. 79
Sampling Criteria
This criterion requires a representative sample of the research population. This is completed through the use of random sampling, purposive sampling, convenience sampling. Converging Evidence Criteria This criterion requires evidence from independent, unrelated research studies converge to support the same conclusions or theories. It is important that we watch out for the following pit falls: ï· Scientism - Adopts a worldview that science is the only source of human knowledge. ï· Separatism - Gives us a theology that is ignorant of human mind. Gives us a psychology that is ignorant of God. ï· Theodicy - Attempts to justify God to a suffering world. ï· Christianizing Science - Attempts to use science as a way of proving scripture. ï· Moralistic Therapeutic Deism - Attempts to keep God distant from natural science. ï· Moral Logic - Scripture is interpreted through the existing cultures understanding. First Article Wisdom informs us about the creation we live in. We can read research articles or textbooks to see what is being discovered but the data will always need to be interpreted. The interpretation of the data is where things can be difficult at times. You have probably heard some say that you can make statistics say whatever you want. Well, there is some truth in that saying. The presuppositions, agenda, and the perspective of the research does influence how First Article Wisdom in interpreted and reported. However, First Article Wisdom is only one perspective and it primarily is only concerned with matters of coram mundo. The world of coram mundo is limited in what it can observe and the scientific method limits what they can do with the data they collect. Therefore, we also need to attend to every situation through our discernment of theological wisdom.
Discerning Theological Wisdom - Coram Deo
God has not abandoned his creation but sends His Word to tabernacle in the midst of what he has created. From Genesis to the present time Godâs Word is a gift of life, salvation and forgiveness of sins. God sent his Word, Jesus Christ, to redeem his fallen creation. And there on the cross of Calvary Jesus accomplished that redemption. Everyone you encounter is someone that has been redeemed by Christ the crucified. This is not something that is discovered by professionals in the coram mundo by means of scientific methods. This good news is what God has promised and fulfilled through his Word. So, what is theology and who is a theologian? Theology is an academic discipline or a field of study that you can earn a degree in. The academic discipline of theology includes reading books, articles, listening to lectures, and the ability to read the bible in its original text. This might surprise some people but there are academic theologians that study faith and doctrine, but they do not believe in God.
Their identity is not shaped and formed by faith in God but in their academic accomplishments in their field of theology. Theology is also a habitus or a disposition. Theological habitus is a person who believes and practice their faith. Theological habitus does not require a person to be an expert academic on theology. However, how they think, speak and live out their life is reflected by what they believe. A person with a theological habitus is being shaped and formed by Godâs Word and it becomes their identity. They see themselves as a child of God redeemed by Christ and strengthened in that faith by the Holy Spirit. How one does theology, as either from the perspective of a Theological discipline or a Theological habitus is also significant. Martin Luther in his Heidelberg Disputation set the stage for doing theology as a theologian of the cross or a theologian of glory. A theology that is shaped by philosophy (Scholasticism) which glorifies the creation as something to be worshiped is a theology of glory. A theology that is shaped by Godâs word and work of redemption in Christ is a theology of the cross. A theology of glory will treat theology as a theory, an object to be studied as part of an academic discipline. While theology is a discipline it is more than just an academic exercise. A theology of the cross lets the theology become them. The theology shapes and forms their identity and how they live out their life as redeemed children of God. Luther states in thesis 21 of the Heidelberg Disputation, âA theology of glory calls evil good and good evil. A theology of the cross calls that thing what it actually is.â A theology of glory will call abortion, assisted suicide, pornography, sex outside the husband/wife vocation as good although God speaks of these things as evil. A theology of glory will idolize creation to define what is evil and good. A theology of the cross seeks God to define what is evil and good. And the theology of the cross understands that not everything is going to be glorious as we sinners live in this fallen creation. Distinguishing between theology as a discipline verses theology as a habitus and theology of glory verses theology of the cross will help to define the method for discerning theological wisdom. Lutherans always approach every situation with a theological habitus focused on the cross of Christ. This is the foundation upon which we explore theological doctrines that could speak into the questions of church and society. There are a variety of theological doctrines that could be helpful: Law/Gospel, Two Kinds of Righteousness, Idol worship, Theology of Cross/Theology of Glory, etc.⊠There are also various theological disciplines, exegetical theology, systematic theology, historical theology, and practical theology. Each of these theological disciplines also have a specific perspective that can give us a rich description of the situation. The historical perspective can describe when the American flag entered the church in relation to American crisis. The systematic perspective can describe how the church is interested in what is going on the in the world but be careful about how the world tries to shape the church through symbols such as a flag. The exegetical perspective can describe various places in scripture where a worldly influence is addressed. For example, Colossians 2:8 âSee to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the
elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.â Romans 12:2 âDo not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.â James 4:4 âYou adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore, whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.â A theological habitus focused on the cross of Christ does not ignore First Article wisdom but does not worship it. First Article wisdom informs us about Godâs creation, but it is Theological wisdom that shapes our identity in God as our creator, redeemer and sanctifier. Implementing Godly Guidance and Leadership Take a moment and review the three pillars of the Practical Theological Framework. Attending to Self and World provides created space to identify our personal ideas, experiences, judgments, opinions, and beliefs so that they could be bracketed through the process of Epoche. This opened up our ability to observe and listen to the situation or topic with fresh eyes and ears. Interpreting First Article Wisdom allowed us to appreciate the various worldly disciplines and understand the situation or topic from the perspective of coram mundo. Discerning Theological Wisdom encouraged us to dive deep into Godâs Word as theologians of the cross with a habitus that embraces faith. This brings us to the fourth pillar in the Practical Theological Framework, Implementing Godly Guidance and Leadership. This final pillar brings together all the previous work so that one can determine a way forward that will answer the question about the situation and give Godly guidance and leadership. In the Pastor Hill example, the ministry question was: âHow can Pastor Hill understand how the American flag impacts the worship life of Trinity Lutheran Church?â You look at the information that was gained by being attentive to First Article Wisdom and Theological Wisdom. It would be helpful to create a profile or a summary of the conclusions of Attending to Self and World, Interpreting First Article Wisdom and Discerning Theological. It might look something like this for Pastor Hill. He attended to the situation and learned that there is an enormous emotional connection to the American flag in the sanctuary. First Article wisdom helps him to understand that the attachment to the flag is a result of grief and loss of those they are closely connected. Theological Wisdom would caution any attachment to an earthly item that canât provide eternal salvation. And at times such an attachment could become idol worship. Therefore, Pastor Hill might consider leaving the flag in the sanctuary. Yet, he could preach and teach about the joy of Christ in the midst of grief and loss. He could brainstorm with the congregation about other ways the congregation could remember members who serve in the military. This might be regular prayer in worship. This might include a memory wall in the fellowship hall where the American flag is placed next to names of those members who have served in the church.
Conclusion
The Practical Theological Framework will give you a way to attend to various issues, situations and questions of church and society. The four pillars are not linear steps to be taken or tasks to
complete. The pillars provide a framework for doing theology. You never stop attending to self and world as you interpret First Article wisdom or discern theological wisdom. In the midst of Godly guidance and leadership you might need to address additional questions that were not clear when you began your work. The Practical Theological Framework provides a way to do theology that attends to the whole council of God when addressing topics of church and society that might come about in ministry.