Items tagged trueman

Soul Patches: a Defence of the Trueman Hypothesis

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 19:58:54 GMT

Some may remember that a few months back I argued that soul patches on ministers were a sign of pathetic middle aged men in the uncoolest and untrendiest calling on earth trying to pose as -- say it ain't so -- cool and trendy. Well, a friend in Grand Rapids has challenged that thesis.

An Interview with Carl Trueman

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:05:54 GMT

by Derek Thomas

An Interview with Carl Trueman on John Owen

Fri, 30 Nov 2007 07:06:05 GMT

The Conventicle interviews Carl Trueman on John Owen. Here's the final question:

What relevance might Owen have for the contemporary evangelical church?

He offers a model for doing theology which connects biblical exegesis and systematic theology in a way that respects trajectories of previous theological discussion while at the same time grounding everything in pastoral concerns. He also demonstrates how the doctrine of the Trinity should permeate Christian thinking and devotion. Above all, he understands the holiness of God and shows how theological thinking should proceed in this context.

I get so tired of modern evangelical writers, whether biblical or theological, who have no grasp of the holiness of God and who treat scripture just like any old book, theology as a kind of entertaining crossword puzzle, and themselves as God’s gift to the church. God is not mocked, especially by those for whom theology seems to be little more than an idiom for self-promotion and patronizing previous generations. Owen was not a perfect theologian; but he knew the importance of that with which he was dealing, and his own comparative unimportance in the grand scheme of things.

Trueman's new book is entitled, John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man.

(HT: Jim Grant)

Westminster Preaching Conference

Thu, 08 Nov 2007 01:41:40 GMT

The audio for the 2007 Westminster Theological Seminary Preaching Conference has just been posted.

An Exposition of a Biblical Narrative
Dr. Dan Doriani
Tuesday, October 23, 7:30 PM
The Theory and Practice of Preaching Biblical Narrative
Dr. Dan Doriani
Wednesday, October 24, 9:00 AM
The Preacher’s Story and the Quest for Godliness
Dr. Dan Doriani
Wednesday, October 24, 10:30 AM
Princeton Portrait - Archibald Alexander
Dr. James Garretson
Wednesday, October 24, 3:30 PM
What Do You Preach The Day After the King Is Executed?
Dr. Carl Trueman
Wednesday, October 24, 2:00 PM
Narrative Preaching
Dr. Tuck Bartholomew
Wednesday, October 24, 2:00 PM
Beyond the Sacred Page: When The Story Doesn’t Quite Say What You Wish
Dr. Dan Doriani
Wednesday, October 24, 10:30 AM
They also point to Dr. Doriani’s Putting the Truth to Work: The Theory and Practice of Biblical Application.

Beckwith vs.Trueman

Mon, 28 May 2007 02:20:14 GMT

Carl Trueman mentioned today on the Ref21 blog that he and Francis Beckwith will participate in a discussion forum at this year's American Academy of Religion annual meeting.

More from Carl Trueman

Tue, 22 May 2007 14:50:08 GMT

At Martin Downes' blog.

Trueman Interview Pt 3

Wed, 23 May 2007 12:15:16 GMT

At Against Heresies.

Sin in High Places: An interview with Carl Trueman, part 1

Mon, 21 May 2007 07:30:15 GMT

Over the next few days I will be posting my interview with Carl R. Trueman, professor of Historical Theology and Church History at Westminster Seminary, Philadelphia,

As you reflect back on your student years and involvement in conservative evangelical organisations in the UK, were there men who started out with evangelical convictions who later moved away from the gospel? How did you cope with that?

I always find it hard to speak or to write about such things. It is sad to see friends fall. Of course, I have known a few such figures; and, Martin, we have both worked together enough in the past to share a number of friends who are now nowhere in terms of orthodoxy and their Christian walk. In my experience, such friends and acquaintances have fallen into two broad categories. There are those who fell into serious immorality, homosexuality, adultery, bitterness of spirit, etc., and whose views seemed to shift almost as a result of the practical moral move, a way of getting out from under the demands of truth. Then there are a few who really do seem to be driven by intellectual crises and problems.

How have I coped? The fall of a friend or a respected mentor is hard to stomach; but there are a number of things which help us to understand these tragedies. I have a high view of human sin. I know that, left to themselves and placed in the perfect storm of circumstances, anyone is capable of anything. Remembering this basic fact means that, though we can be disappointed and surprised by individual falls, we should not see them as failures of the gospel but failures of sinful human nature. It is what I jokingly call Zen-Calvinism: once you are enlightened about and understand the universal power of sin, you can never be wrong-footed by the fall of another. Further, it should also prevent us from standing in pharisaic judgment on such friends. Sin needs rebuking and, if necessary, church discipline; but we do this in a spirit of love to God and out of a desire to see the fallen one restored.

I must say, I do feel great personal sadness and some responsibility when I think of particular friends who have fallen and not, so far, returned to the church. It is always sobering to ask ourselves if we have failed as Christian friends in such circumstances: could we have been more available? Should we have intervened at an earlier stage when we saw the start of a self-destructive path? Why were we not the kind of people to whom our friends were able to turn with their struggles and doubts? Did we preach the gospel to our friends as we should have done? There are names I won’t mention of friends who have fallen and who will always lie somewhat heavy on my conscience. Of course, everyone must take responsibility for their own actions and thoughts, but such questions are helpful in preventing self-righteous smugness relative to the failings of others.

Have you ever been drawn toward any views or movements that time has shown to have been unhelpful or even dangerous theologically?

I dallied briefly with Barthianism and then with Berkouwer’s theology in the late 1980s. Studying at the University of Aberdeen, I found the dominant theology to be Barthianism refracted through the writings of the Torrance brothers. Berkouwer’s The Triumph of Grace in the Theology of Karl Barth was helpful in giving me a critical handle on Barth and helping to free me from that particular dead-end; and his Studies in Dogmatics also gave me an appreciation for doing theology in a self-consciously historical manner. However, as my knowledge of confessional Reformed Orthodoxy developed in the early 1990s, through reading widely in the primary texts and the relevant secondary literature, and as I came to grips with the wider sweep of Western theology as I had to teach courses on medieval thought and on Thomas Aquinas at the University of Nottingham, I began to see how Berkouwer too had absorbed a lot of Barth and how this distorted his reception of theological tradition. At that point, I started to develop a much more carefully worked out confessional theology.

In practice, the theologies of Barth and Berkouwer have really proved sterile as ecclesiastical programs. The best one can say is that they failed to stop the collapse of vital church life in Scotland, Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. For all of their criticisms of the 'static' God of orthodoxy, Barthian preaching is, in my experience, sterile and dull, and fails miserably to confront listeners with the God of the Bible. I personally know of no church which has really grown through Barthian preaching.

So I would summarise by saying that I am very grateful to Barth and Berkouwer for directing me to serious dogmatics, for fuelling my interest in theology and doctrinal history, and for raising big and important questions in my mind; and I still enjoy reading them on occasion for the tremendous intellectual stimulation and challenge they provide; but I have ultimately found little of any real use, theological or practical, in the actual content of their theologies.

How should a minister keep his heart, mind, and will from theological error?

No magic bullet here. The minister needs a good theological education, and then needs to maintain the basic disciplines of the Christian life – prayer and Bible reading, love to God and to neighbour. Of course, the minister does not sit under the preaching of the Word week by week, so accountability is even more of a problem for him than for others in the congregation. Presbyterianism has a structure of ministerial accountability in its church courts, but these are often impersonal and rather procedural gatherings. Even the Presbyterian minister still needs to make himself self-consciously accountable to others, a small group of one or more intimates.

One of the secrets of great leadership in any walk of life is to place those close to you who are not simply yes-men but who are prepared to be honest with you when they see you making a mistake. This is absolutely critical in the church: having true friends who speak the truth in love is vital.

I think of church leaders who simply became such objects of adulation by their people and by the wider evangelical world that, when they fell, it was clear that they had simply come to be regarded as too big to be held accountable. Nobody dared call them to account; nobody ever even suspected they needed to be held to account. I can think of others who simply started to believe their own propaganda and saw any and every criticism as a personal attack. Such people were disasters waiting to happen; and their problem was that they lost sight of the basics of the Christian life and made themselves accountable to no-one. And I am always amazed at the cronies such people manage to gather around themselves: there is always someone willing to stroke the ego of such types, to tell them how wonderful they are whatever shenanigans they get up to; yet a true friend knows the necessity of speaking the truth out of love in all circumstances.

Trueman on Theology and Church History

Fri, 04 May 2007 12:35:10 GMT

The following lectures were delivered in September 2006 by Carl Trueman at the Theology for All Conference in the UK:

Theology and Everyday Life: The Reformation and Beyond
Contemporary Challenges to Theology and Church Life
What should a theological church look like?
Q&A

Carl is always worth listening to!

(HT: Dave Bish)

Carl Trueman Strikes Again

Sun, 25 Mar 2007 23:44:09 GMT

As readers of this blog know, I greatly admire Carl Trueman's insight into things cultural and historical. This analysis of postmodernity is one of his best bits of work.

Conferences and the Church

Sun, 25 Mar 2007 23:44:07 GMT

Last year, Carl Trueman published a very funny and yet very serious post on the Reformation21 blog, raising questions about the role of conferences in the lives of Christians. While it may have been a little "dangerous" raising these questions on the blog for the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, around the time of their sponsored PCRT, still the points Trueman raised are valid and need to be considered more thoughtfully and thoroughly.

One of the realities of evangelical Protestant life has been the multiplication of conferences; these conferences tend to represent particular market niches within the Reformed and evangelical world--the Gospel Coalition; Augusta Conference; Twin Lakes; Ligonier; Shepherds Conference; Resurgence; Together for the Gospel; PCRT; Desiring God; Banner of Truth (those are the ones that I came up with from the top of my head). As such, these conferences bring together the like-minded to hear solid preaching that ultimately encourages and reinforces particular aspirations, beliefs, practices, and stories--in other words, these conferences serve an important purpose in identity formation.

I think we've seen this most clearly in the recent debates over the Federal Vision--regardless of where one falls on those issues, it cannot be denied that the Biblical Horizon and Auburn Avenue conferences played a large role in forging a particular way of looking at the world for those who participated and adhere to their proposals--and this, I believe, speaks to issues of identity. It is the same way for frustrated boomers in the PCA, who have met in an invitation-only group for years, and now for frustrated Gen X-ers, who are doing the same. Bringing together like-minded individuals to conference on issues of concern is a long-standing way of forging identity.

On the surface, there is nothing "wrong" with conferences; I attend them as well. And yet, ultimately, these conferences are not "the Church"; and because this is the case, conferences may actually be fostering the division in the church that so many X-ers decry and yet may be unwittingly perpetuating. This is the case for the very reason that these conferences bring together the like-minded, the already-convinced, the insiders. They set the like-minded against the others--whether it is a "Reformed" doctrine conference against all the loosy-goosy Arminians or a non-denominational pastors conference that sets people against all the amillennialists.

And yet the Church is bigger than that--in the church, you have to learn how to work together with those with whom you agree and with those with whom you disagree. In the church, you serve on committees with those who trust the Church and the work of the Spirit through her and with those who distrust the Church and believe that it tends to abuse of authority. In the church, you worship with the high-church, the blended, the contemporary, the traditional, the low-church, the charismatic (and this is just the PCA) and somehow you have to see them all as brothers and sisters in Christ. In the church, you have to work to protect and negotiate the interests of builders, boomers, X-ers, Millennials, Y-ers; it's not possible simply to serve one group. In the church, you must be patient, you must believe all things, you must bear all things, even the thorns of ministry--because in the church, you truly learn to love as you love those with whom you have so little in common.

As we have our identities formed by our lives together as the Church, as opposed to issue-identity conferences, we truly image forth Christ's own body--where heads, hands, feet, eyes, and everyone else are vitally necessary. We learn to value those remarkably different from us, who see issues different us, who value worship different from us. We learn to live through the polity of our church, which best expresses the unity and diversity of the church. And we learn to confess that the "one, holy, catholic, apostolic church," even as represented by this little Presbyterian denomination, is a little bit bigger and messier that we knew--and that's a good thing.