Debate focuses on Justice, God's wrath and the Atonement

By Robert McGovern and Tim Nafziger

If you'd like to share your own perspective on the debate we'd love to hear it. Just go to the Lost Message of Jesus Debate discussion forum.

It's not every Wednesday evening that you find a thousand Christians together, passionately debating theological concepts, but the 7th of October was one of those evenings. The Emmanuel Christian Centre was nearly filled for a debate on Steve Chalke's The Lost Message of Jesus, sponsored by the Evangelical Alliance.

The main thrust of Chalke's book is that the radical messages of Jesus have been lost over the years. While it is wide-ranging in its examination of Jesus' message, it is Chalke's views on atonement that has caused the most controversy. In chapter 10, Chalke looks at the message and meaning of the cross and indirectly discusses penal substitution, or the idea that the purpose of Jesus' death was to placate a wrathful God who can only be satisfied by the sacrifice of his own son.

The evening was an attempt by the Evangelical Alliance to respond to the controversy in a constructive way, by bringing both sides of the controversy together for a conversation. The evening was divided into two halves. The first half was a panel presenting their cases for and against. On that panel were Rvd Steve Chalke and his secondary Dr Stuart Murray Williams. On the opposing side it was Dr Simon Gathercol, seconded by Rev Dr Anna Robbins. The second half of the debate was a chance for people from the floor to ask questions which had been submitted on paper between the halves.

Chalke opened the evening by emphasizing that The Lost Message of Jesus was not just about atonement, the issue that his critics have most seized on, but also about rediscovering Jesus' call to radical discipleship and peace. He admitted that his book had gaps as it was not meant to be an academic or even theological book. “I wrote this book for those who don't know Christ yet,” he said, “We [Christians] are considered to be guilt-inducing and judgemental.” Our focus on penal substitution is part of that problem, he said.

By focusing simply on God's wrath and appeasement through the cross we paint a distorted picture of Gods character. We portray him as a someone bent on retribution rather than someone who loves us deeply but who is upset by our actions. Furthermore, Chalke said, penal substitution perpetuates the myth of redemptive violence.

Chalke clarified that he does believe in substitutionary atonement on the cross but not penal substitution. He also outlined the notion of Christus Victor which sees Christ's life, death and resurrection all together as victory over the powers of evil, both spiritual and earthly.

Gathercol responded with an assessment of a number of areas. First he felt that the book was too one sided and needed more balanced discussion. He said that Chalke's renderings of the Gospel made the future life a pale second best to now. “My concern with Steve's view is that it has very little to do with saving us for eternity,” said Gathercol, “[Jesus] does talk a heck of a lot about the final judgement.”

Responding to Chalke's critique of penal substitution, Gathercol made the point that it was Father and Son working in unison undertaking to bear weight of sin that we alone cannot. He suggested that it was not a unilateral decision on God's part to have Jesus go to the cross. He quoted on Mark 10:45 and said that the story of Jesus and the cross are biblical and inspiring and that Jesus is paying a ransom for us, arguing that you cannot simply get rid of a doctrine just because it was badly treated by some.

Gathercol echoed the concerns of many Evangelicals when he suggested that Chalke relativizes Jesus' message too much. “Steve has gone to town on what sounds good in our context,” he said. “Jesus anticipated that people weren't always going to lap up the message.” He went on to argue that the book is a serious revision of Jesus' message that does not fit with the picture of the “rescue mission” that is portrayed in John 3:16.

Chalke responded to Gathercol's criticism by saying that his message was not simpy “God loves you so take it easy.” However, at the other extreme he called on the church not to reduce Jesus' message to the “sinner's prayer” as a key to heaven. “In the end, if you believe in penal substitution, the cross is not primarily about God's love, but about God's anger,” he said.

Murray Williams opened his statement with a review of the early history of the church, noting that the early Christians had no real theories of atonement and it was only when they became associated with Constantine that they began to create theories of atonement. Until then, the focus of Christianity was on Jesus as an example and a teacher, not as a sacrifice. Murray Williams noted than many of the early teachings of Jesus became troublesome to a church that was becoming powerful, wealthy and had to look after an empire. Ideas like "love thy neighbour" took on a personal aspect but had to be "forgotten" on national levels. In the Nicene creed, Murray Williams pointed out, Jesus' influence has been reduced to his birth and death, leaving out the importance of his life. He outlined his six main problems with the penal substitution model. (see Murray Williams' statement for more details)

Robbins also echoed fears of cultural relativism and criticized what she described as the rebranding of atonement. She cautioned that this could lead to a Christ of human creation in the misguided attempt to fit in with the “Spirit of the Age.” She also said that it is important the penal substitution is rightly understood and pointed to J.K Mosely's work in 1915.

God demanded justice, Robbins said, but he also provided a way that justice could be met. “He must see a penalty exacted for sin,” Robbins said, “Otherwise, justice is not done.” She went on to argue that penal substitution is essential to a Christian social ethic because, she said, “It allows us to be able to love even when we can't on our own strength.”

All but one of the ten question from the floor clearly disagreed with Chalke. Many challenged him with verses about God's wrath, his punishment, fear of God and penal substitution. The questions did not reflect a sympathetic viewpoint, which judging by the audience, was also present.

Joel Edwards ending the evening by affirming the commitment of the Evangelical alliance to the penal subsitution model of atonement, despite what appears to be a commitment only to "subsitutionary atonement" in its official literature.

Photos courtesy of the Evangelical Alliance

Stuart Murray Williams on the Lost Message of Jesus

This is the text of Stuart Murray Williams' statement at the debate on Steve Chalk's book The Lost Message of Jesus sponsored by the Evangelical Alliance on the 7th of October, 2004. You can also read a report on the debate from Anabaptist Network members.

For nearly 300 years, following the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, Christians were on the margins. They were multiplying and spreading across the ancient world, but they were a powerless and counter-cultural community, which every so often the authorities decided to persecute.

For nearly 300 years, these Christians were committed to taking Jesus seriously, not only as their saviour but as their teacher and example. In the Alpha or Christianity Explored courses of their day, enquirers and new converts were taught, not just the meaning of Jesus’ death, but the meaning of his life and his message.

For nearly 300 years, these Christians were uninterested in developing theories of the atonement. They knew Jesus had died to save them, they preached ‘Christ crucified’ and they celebrated his resurrection triumph over the spiritual and political powers that oppressed them. They drew on various images the New Testament uses, but they did not insist on one formula or explanation. Certainly not penal substitution, of which there is little trace in the early centuries.

For nearly 300 years, the church grew rapidly, lived distinctively and witnessed graciously. This was by no means a perfect church, but it was a church inspired by the life and message of Jesus.

Then, very unexpectedly, early in the fourth century, the emperor decided to become a Christian and to make Christianity the imperial religion. Taken by surprise and with little time to think through the implications, the church accepted Constantine’s invitation to move from the margins to the centre.

In an astonishingly short period, the church became powerful, wealthy and influential. Free from the fear of persecution, no longer a powerless and deviant minority, they celebrated the triumph of the gospel over the empire. Christendom had arrived!

But there was a price to pay. Power brought corruption. The church became violent and coercive. Biblical teaching was distorted. The counter-cultural and non-violent life and message of Jesus was very awkward in this new context. And the political dimension of his death – crucified by the same Roman state that had now adopted Christianity – was profoundly embarrassing.

So the fourth-century Alpha course changed dramatically. Precisely defined doctrine became more important than faithful discipleship. The social, political and economic implications of the life and death of Jesus were abandoned. His message was ignored or domesticated to support the new status quo. The great fourth-century creeds ignored his life and message and moved straight from his birth to his death (the Nicene Creed, for example, moves from the statement ‘was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary and was made man’ to the statement ‘and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate’). No mention of the life and message of Jesus!

In fact, the price the church paid to move from the margins to the centre was that the message of Jesus was moved from the centre to the margins.

The Lost Message of Jesus: Steve’s book has prompted tonight’s dialogue. The focus so far has been on how we understand the atonement, the saving work of Jesus on the cross. This is really important – but most of the book is actually about the message of Jesus.

When was this message lost? Answer: during the fourth century, when the church compromised with the empire and exchanged faithfulness for power.

Ever since then, Christian movements on the margins of the church have tried to recover this lost message, to encourage each other to take Jesus seriously again. The Anabaptist tradition in which I stand is one such movement.

Previously such recovery movements have been crushed by the mainstream church, which still finds Jesus’ message very threatening. But the end of Christendom and the return of Christians to the margins in western societies are provoking more and more attempts to recover the message of Jesus. And this is vital for our mission or even our survival: in a culture that has rejected institutional Christianity but is still intrigued by Jesus our only hope is to recover and live out his revolutionary message.

Steve’s book is saying absolutely nothing new. It draws heavily on the careful scholarship of Tom Wright, a leading evangelical New Testament scholar, but it is rooted in the tradition of recovery movements calling the church back to the message of Jesus.

I hope we don’t get so caught up in debating theories of the atonement that we fail to respond to this challenge. There’s too much at stake.

But what about our understanding of the atoning work of Jesus? Is penal substitution the only interpretation of the death of Jesus that evangelicals can endorse? Is it the best way to read the relevant biblical texts? Is it good news in contemporary culture?

Let me say four things.

First, that I understand why many people – on both sides of the debate – feel strongly about this issue.

Some of you have found it liberating to discover that there are other ways of understanding the life and death of Jesus and you are here to register your support for what Steve and several other evangelicals are saying about the atonement.

For others, the notion of moving away from penal substitution seems to threaten the heart of the gospel and you are here to register your deep concern. For many years I accepted and taught penal substitution. In fact, I wasn’t really aware of other ways of interpreting the death of Jesus. And even when I discovered other interpretations I saw them as (at best) subsidiary ideas: penal substitution was what it was really all about. I no longer believe this, but I respect those who do and I understand why any critique of penal substitution is so worrying.

Second, in no way do I want to downplay the seriousness of human sin, the reality of divine anger or the wonder of Jesus dying on the cross as substitute and sacrifice.

But I am simply not persuaded that penal substitution is an appropriate way of interpreting or integrating the biblical teaching on these issues. I find it theologically and ethically problematic. However I have heard it explained (and there are different versions of it among evangelicals), it leaves me with serious concerns, many of which Steve has already outlined. Let me mention six of these concerns:

1. Punishing an innocent man – even a willing victim – is fundamentally unjust.

2. Biblical justice is essentially about restoration of relationships rather than retribution.

3. Penal substitution is inherently violent and contravenes central aspects of the message of Jesus.

4. Penal substitution raises serious difficulties for our understanding of the Trinity.

5. Penal substitution fails to engage adequately with structural and systemic evil.

6. If penal substitution is correct, neither the life of Jesus nor his resurrection have much significance.

I have heard and read responses to these points, but I have not found these responses persuasive. No doubt we will continue to examine some of them this evening.

Third, in light of what I said earlier about Christendom, about the centre and the margins, about the impact of where we stand on what we believe, I simply note that those who have objected most strongly to penal substitution are those who have felt marginalised by church and society – Black Christians, feminist Christians and Anabaptists.

For them it has not seemed good news. In fact, it has enhanced their experience of powerlessness and victimisation. I think we need to listen to these brothers and sisters and ask how we explain the death of Jesus to those on the margins, the abused, the victims, the sinned-against, in a way that brings hope and liberation.

Fourth and finally, how does our understanding of the atonement equip us to engage with crucial contemporary challenges? Two sample questions:

In a world threatened by religious, political and ideological divisions, and by deep mutual distrust, what understanding of the cross will equip followers of Jesus to be peacemakers?
In a world where revenge, retribution and the myth of redemptive violence have hugely increased suffering and insecurity, what understanding of the cross can offer alternatives to the present unimaginative and disastrous policies in relation to Iraq, the Middle East and terrorism and break the vicious circle?

Penal substitution – a relative newcomer among attempts to interpret the meaning of Jesus’ death – has captured the allegiance of most evangelicals. But it is rooted in the Christendom system, in imperial and coercive Christianity, in a church colluding with the powers rather than offering a prophetic challenge or an alternative vision of justice and peace.

As Christendom unravels, I believe we will need to look again at many deeply held convictions which are less biblical than we think and more influenced by a fading and oppressive culture than we realise.

Maybe this dialogue will be just one among many as evangelicals sift carefully the Christendom legacy and rediscover other aspects of the lost message of Jesus. May God give us the grace and courage to follow Jesus into this challenging but exciting new environment and to hold on to one another as fellow pilgrims.

The Lost Message of Jesus

Update: You can now read our Report on the Lost Message of Jesus Debate as well as Stuart Murray Williams statement from the evening or share your own vies in the Lost Message of Jesus Debate discussion forum.

We are pleased to announce a public debate sponsored by the Evangelical Alliance to explore the issues raised in The Lost Message of Jesus, a new book by Baptist minister Steve Chalke, which suggests his thinking is becoming increasingly ‘Anabaptist’. His book invites readers to take Jesus seriously and questions interpretations of the life and death of Jesus that imply God condones the use of violence for redemptive purposes.

You may also want to read the first chapter of The Lost Message of Jesus which is available on the internet here.

Stuart Murray Williams will be taking part in this debate and other members of the Anabaptist Network are planning to be there. If this is of interest to you, book a place.

Evangelical Alliance Press release

The Evangelical Alliance has arranged a public debate on issues raised by Steve Chalke's controversial new book, The Lost Message of Jesus. The Alliance has received a lot of correspondence about the book, both negative and positive, and has organised the meeting so that key points of disagreement can be addressed in a constructive way. As well as Steve Chalke himself, speakers will include Simon Gathercole, Lecturer in New Testament at the University of Aberdeen, Stuart Murray, Chair of the UK Anabaptist Network and author of Post-Christendom, and Anna Robbins, Lecturer in Theology and Contemporary Culture at London School of Theology. The meeting will be chaired by David Hilborn, the Alliance's Head of Theology. Discussion will focus on the atonement, and will also cover the doctrine of God, sin, salvation, and the relationship between church, kingdom and mission.

Looking forward to the event, David Hilborn said, "We are keen to see the important questions raised by Steve's book tackled in depth by people well qualified to do so. We also feel it right to give Steve the opportunity to respond to the considerable criticism which he has received since the book appeared, as well as to suggest why it is selling so well. Rather than relying on second-hand opinions, we want people to read the book and then come to the debate, so that they can formulate their own view."

In addition to formal presentations by the speakers, there will be a panel discussion with questions from the floor.

The 'Lost Message' Debate will take place on Thursday 7th October, 7.30pm at Emmanuel Christian Centre, Marsham Street in Westminster, London. Tickets £3. Booking is advised, as places are limited. To reserve a place, contact Julia Murphy on 020 7207 2114 or email acute@eauk.org. To pre-pay, send a cheque marked 'Evangelical Alliance' to Julia Murphy, 'Lost Message Debate', Evangelical Alliance, Whitefield House, 186 Kennington Park Road, London SE11 4BT. The Lost Message of Jesus is published by Zondervan (£8.99). It is available at amazon.co.uk, and at selected booksellers.

The Lost Message of Jesus Debate

Having made a round trip of 400 miles in order to attend The Lost Message of Jesus debate, I would now like to comment on both the debate and what Steve Chalke has written. Firstly, I think it is unfortunate that in his book Steve chose to describe the penal substitution theory of the atonement as "cosmic child abuse". Like me, Steve has grown up in the evangelical sub-culture and must have known what the effect would be of using such emotive language. If he didn't then, he certainly does now. Sadly, in the resulting storm of controversy other important themes, not least Jesus' teaching on non-violence, have been side-lined. I would have preferred that Steve had made a much more thorough biblical and theological case against penal substitution before he decided to open Pandora's box.

However, to be fair, writing in the September issue of "Christianity" magazine, Steve has latterly made a cogent case against penal substitution, drawing attention to its neo-pagan origins whilst at the same time giving a good thumb-nail sketch of the alternative Christus Victor understanding of the atonement, acknowledging for example the work of Gustav Aulen. (Fortunately, Bishop Aulen's seminal work, "Christus Victor", was reprinted in paperback in 2003 by Wipf and Stock and so is easily available for those who wish to read it for themselves.)

Turning to the debate itself, it is clear to me that those who spoke against Steve Chalke and Stuart Murray Williams do not seriously wish to examine the philosophical, theological and political origins of their favoured model of the atonement, nor its ethical implications. This in turn has serious implications for those Christians who do wish to and there will be members of the Evangelical Alliance's constituency who may well need to reconsider their position as supporters of this organisation.

Why did Christ die? Symposium Report

On 6-8 July 2005 nearly 200 people were involved in a theological symposium held at the London School of Theology and organised with the Evangelical Alliance to follow up the debate in October 2004 sparked by Steve Chalke and Alan Mann’s book, The Lost Message of Jesus. Two members of the Anabaptist Network were there – Lloyd Pietersen and Stuart Murray Williams. Stuart presented a seminar on the subject of ‘Penal Substitution and the Myth of Redemptive Violence’.

Papers from the symposium are available on the Evangelical Alliance website (in the Theology section): see www.eauk.org. These were generally of high quality, arguing persuasively for or against penal substitution as the central or at least a necessary understanding of atonement. Some explored exegetical issues, especially in relation to Isaiah 53, Romans and Hebrews. Others investigated the place of penal substitution in the history of evangelicalism (arguing that it has always been present but has been challenged at various stages) and the doctrinal statements of the Evangelical Alliance (with a tortuous analysis of the current, but soon to be updated, statement from which ‘penal’ was omitted at the last minute for reasons not fully explained). Other papers examined the theological, ethical and missional issues involved in our interpretation of atonement.

The atmosphere of the symposium was generally warm and friendly, with courteous contributions and disagreements, although there was a detectable undercurrent from certain quarters that broke surface in the penultimate session with a public call for evangelicals who reject penal substitution to repent of ‘grave and serious error’ and endorse the doctrine. While many involved in the symposium seemed uncomfortable with the attitude and language of this session, a straw poll of participants indicated that a large majority of those present regarded penal substitution as a vital and foundational understanding of atonement.

Perhaps the most significant paper was a keynote address by I Howard Marshall, in which he presented a statement of penal substitution around which he hoped the great majority of evangelicals could unite. It may well be that this is the way forward that the Evangelical Alliance will choose in order to hold together the broad network of evangelicals they represent. His paper was certainly an attractive, carefully nuanced presentation that minimised the objections that some present had to penal substitution. However, there were three aspects of his paper that left some of us wondering:

• Was he really describing penal substitution as this is taught and understood in most churches and by at least some evangelical writers? It sounded more like substitutionary atonement than penal substitution. Those of us who are happy to endorse substitutionary atonement but resist the notion of penal substitution (for various reasons) may be drawn to this formulation, but we may remain suspicious that this presentation airbrushed out aspects that most evangelical scholars and certainly most evangelical Christians include within their notion of penal substitution. If Marshall is right in his interpretation, there is a huge gap between scholarly and other expressions of penal substitution! This needs urgent attention. But is he right? Or was this a non-representative presentation of penal substitution?
• Marshall insisted that penal substitution was not only one valid understanding of the atonement alongside other equally biblical and significant models, but the underlying, central and vital understanding that integrated all the others. Even if his interpretation of evangelical understandings of penal substitution is correct, some of us would still baulk at ascribing this model such centrality.
• The paper made no connection between the death of Jesus and his human life and teaching. In response to a challenge on this point (from Lloyd), Marshall accepted that the life of Jesus was significant but explained that his task was to expound the theology of atonement. This is exactly the point that continues to cause some of us concern: is it legitimate to discuss the theology of atonement in isolation from the life of Jesus? Isn’t this one of the problems with penal substitution – that it does not relate to the life and teaching of Jesus?

Other issues raised for some of us by this symposium include:

• How should we respond to the groundswell of support expressed for those who have challenged penal substitution over the past few months? Whatever the outcome of this symposium – and it seems likely that evangelicals will be urged to unite around the new Evangelical Alliance statement of faith that, like the previous one, implies but does not explicitly affirm penal substitution – in many churches we know there are Christians who feel deeply uncomfortable with this theology of atonement (especially if it is taught as the central model). However, they feel unable to challenge their leaders on this issue for fear of censure. We know of people who have been effectively excommunicated for even daring to question penal substitution (let alone rejecting this).
• How do we continue to address the ethical and missional issues that for us are caught up with our theology of atonement? Only Joel Green’s paper raised in a plenary context at the symposium the issue of violence and in seminars where these issues were raised there was reluctance to explore them in any depth. So what can we do to ensure that the key ethical and missional dimensions of this debate are not submerged under exegetical discussions? Perhaps this is an area where Anabaptists can continue to challenge conventional ways of thinking.
• How do we encourage people to wrestle with hermeneutical as well as narrow exegetical questions? The most vociferous proponents of penal substitution at the symposium wanted exegetical issues to be at the forefront, but surely there is a prior question about our hermeneutics. How do we read the texts? What are the connections between the life of Jesus and theological explanations of his death? Is Scripture flat or is Jesus the focal point? What difference does a Christocentric Anabaptist hermeneutic make to this discussion?
• How can we find ways of discussing issues like the theology of atonement that are truly multi-voiced and participative? One of the disappointing features of the symposium was the lack of space for interaction and dialogue. There were opportunities for questions and comments after plenary speeches, but these were very short; there was no significant opportunity to hear speakers engage in dialogue together; and the programme was so full that there was little time even for informal discussion. The symposium appeared to be stereotypically Reformed/evangelical in its structure and ethos: authoritative presentations with limited interaction. How might Anabaptists have structured it?
• There were statements during the symposium to the effect that the event was not a consistory court with power to discipline recalcitrant participants, or that this was not an occasion for the evangelical ‘thought police’ to operate. While grateful for this assurance, it left some of us wondering about when those who organised the symposium felt such activities might be appropriate. Given the accusations of heresy against some participants in the penultimate session, has the evangelical constituency entirely broken free of the Christendom mindset and the inherent tendencies to coercion and persecution that characterised the Reformed tradition out of which evangelicalism emerged? While we do not suspect the organisers will attempt to exercise discipline in the way suggested during the penultimate session, Anabaptists are perhaps more sensitive than many traditions to this issue. How can we foster an ethos of gracious dissent and open-heartedness to fellow Christians who disagree with us?

We welcome comments from others who participated in the symposium or who have read the papers. Please also see the atonement survey on this website and register your convictions there.

After Christendom: A Study Guide

developed by Stuart Murray Williams

Note: You can find a downloadable version of this guide at the bottom of this page.

Introduction

Since Post-Christendom was published by Paternoster in March 2004 to launch the ‘After Christendom’ series of books, a number of people have suggested to me that a study guide would be useful to help them work their way through the many issues the book addresses. This might include:

• A timeline to show how Christendom developed and its relation to other historical events.
• A short chapter-by-chapter summary to help those who struggle with book-length arguments.
• Diagnostic exercises to help us identify Christendom-oriented thinking.
• Practical examples of how the Christendom legacy continues to influence us.
• Further questions to consider (beyond those at the end of several chapters).
• Bible studies to encourage us to reconsider interpretations unduly influenced by Christendom.

My initial response was that Post-Christendom is only the first of several books in the ‘After Christendom’ series. It contains much more historical material than the other books will and lays foundations on which others will build. Later books in the series will unpack its ideas and explore many issues in more detail. Maybe further resources are not necessary at this stage.

Early responses to Church after Christendom, since its publication in February 2005, indicate that many people have found this second book in the series more accessible. It seems to have addressed some of the issues a study guide might have covered. This may also be the case with books that have yet to be published, which will provide further insights and resources on issues that Post-Christendom mentioned only briefly.

However, as I have reflected on the responses to Post-Christendom, I have warmed to the idea of a study guide with at least some of the resources requested. The best way forward seems to be a web-based resource that is freely accessible and also available in a form that can be downloaded for personal or group use. So I hope what follows is helpful and meets the needs of those who have approached me over the past year or so. And I welcome suggestions for improving and developing this.

Timeline and Maps

The approach of the ‘After Christendom’ series is to divide the history of the church in Western Europe into three periods:

• Pre-Christendom (from the birth of the church until the first part of the 4th century)
• Christendom (from the 4th to the 20th centuries)
• Post-Christendom (from the 20th century onwards)

This is, of course, over-simplified (as all such schemes tend to be) and the shifts from pre-Christendom to Christendom and from Christendom to post-Christendom cannot be dated precisely. But the authors of the series argue that there are major differences between the approaches of Christians in these periods to the topics they cover – faith and politics, worship and mission, church and society, etc. We find it surprising that those who trace the history of the church and its mission do not more often comment on the significance of these shifts. See further on this, if you are interested, an article by Alan Kreider entitled ‘Beyond Bosch: the Early Church and the Christendom Shift’ at http://www.anabaptistnetwork.com/articles

There are several websites with timelines, maps and other resources that illustrate the major incidents and characters in church history. Although these sites do not use the threefold division we are advocating, they provide very helpful background material that can easily be cross-referenced with the books in the series and the other resources we provide here. It does not seem necessary to try to duplicate here the resources of these websites, so we are simply listing some of the more interesting sites:

http://www.churchtimeline.com: an extensive collection of resources covering the whole era.

http://www.olivetree.com/history/: a timeline that covers the biblical period as well as an overview of significant figures in church history.

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Pines/7224/Rick/chronindex.htm: a century-by-century timeline with commentary on significant events and people.

http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/jc.html: a detailed timeline from Jesus to Constantine (313).

http://www.tredways.org/church_history/: timelines that provide a simple overview and (by clicking on the period of interest) more information as required.

http://www.cwo.com/~pentrack/catholic/chron.html: timeline of the whole of church history from a Roman Catholic perspective.

http://justus.anglican.org/resources/timeline/: various timelines grouped under subject areas and all from an Anglican perspective.

http://www.saintignatiuschurch.org/timeline.html: a timeline from the perspective of the Orthodox Church, which regards most of western Christendom as a deviation from the true church.

http://www3.la.psu.edu/courses/worldreligions/maps-christianity.htm: simple maps of the biblical era and the spread of Christianity.

http://www.culturalresources.com/Maps.html: an enormous set of links to maps of all kinds, including many that illustrate the context of church history in Western Europe.

http://historymedren.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.eu... a collection of maps showing Europe at the beginning of every century from 1 to 2000.

http://www.roman-emperors.org/Index.htm: a similar resource to the previous one, showing Europe (and North Africa and the Middle East) from 1 to 1500.

Post-Christendom: A thumbnail sketch

The basic argument of the book can be summed up in the following steps:

Chapter 1: The End of Christendom

• The church in western societies is experiencing a significant culture shift and is moving, slowly and unsteadily, into uncharted territory (the ‘strange new world’ of the book’s subtitle).
• Although this culture shift has many different components, including the shift from modernity to postmodernity, one key element is the end of Christendom.
• We experience this as a period of decline and discouragement as the church in western societies (but not in many other parts of the world) loses ground in terms of numbers and influence.
• We may be tempted to indulge in nostalgia, to bury our heads in the sand or to pin our hopes on revival, but it may be better to welcome post-Christendom as a new opportunity for faithful discipleship and creative mission.
• In order to understand the significance of post-Christendom, we need first to explore the Christendom era that is now fading and the legacy it has left us.

Chapter 2: The Coming of Christendom

• The beginning of the Christendom era can be traced to the 4th century and the decision of the emperor Constantine I to adopt and promote Christianity.
• Historians argue about the nature of Constantine’s conversion and his motives in championing Christianity, but his influence was profound, bringing the church in from the margins to the centre of society.
• The church had been growing very rapidly during the previous century, but Constantine’s decision took church leaders by surprise and they acclaimed him (almost unanimously) despite questions about his character and intentions.
• As a result of the patronage of the church by Constantine and his successors, including substantial financial support, the church grew in numbers and social status during the 4th century.
• Conversions were due to several factors: the intellectual appeal of Christianity, the church’s care for the poor, growing social pressure, better career prospects and some forms of coercion.
• At the end of the 4th century the emperor Theodosius I effectively outlawed all other religions so that Christianity became the official imperial religion.
• But was the church right to accept the patronage of Constantine and to allow itself to be co-opted as the imperial religion?

Chapter 3: The Expansion of Christendom

• At the start of the 5th century, Christians were at the centre of society but still as a privileged minority, rather than a majority.
• Over the next few centuries remarkable efforts were made to strengthen the hold of Christendom upon its heartlands and to extend its influence across the empire and beyond its boundaries.
• Gradually paganism and most other religions were eradicated (the Jews were allowed to continue but were often under pressure) and in 529 Justinian made conversion compulsory.
• As the Roman Empire collapsed and Europe entered the so-called Dark Ages, the church functioned as a unifying and civilising force, successfully making the transition into a new era.
• Christendom spread through various methods: gradual infiltration, missionary enterprises, inter-marriage, conquest and coercion. The conversion of Europe was finally completed late in the 14th century.
• In theory everyone believed, behaved and belonged within Christendom, but the catechesis (introductory teaching)of new Christians was now very limited.
• Christendom had triumphed and its achievements were wonderful, but how Christian was Christendom and its missionary methods?

Chapter 4: The Christendom Shift

• Before tracing the history of Christendom into the Middle Ages, we need to examine carefully the nature of the 4th-century shift from pre-Christendom to Christendom.
• The theological architect of Christendom was Augustine of Hippo. Although he was ambivalent about the empire, he accommodated the church’s theology and practices to the new situation, introducing numerous innovations.
• The Christendom shift was profound, involving in effect a re-engineering of the church’s DNA in the areas of faith and discipleship, church and society, church life, mission and ethics.
• Further details of this critical shift can be found here.
• Two potent illustrations of this shift are the dramatically changed meanings of both baptism and the cross.
• Despite the overwhelming support of the church for this shift, there were some who objected, including the monastic movement, the Donatists and Pelagius. Their concerns were dismissed at the time but resurfaced in later centuries.
• But what were the costs and benefits of the Christendom shift, and were there any alternatives in the 4th and 5th centuries?

Chapter 5: The Heart of Christendom

• The culture of Christendom that flourished during the Middle Ages was rich and remarkable, but it was also oppressive towards any who dissented.
• The outworkings of the Christendom shift became entrenched in society, as pre-Christendom approaches to issues such as truth-telling and violence were superseded by oath-taking and participation in warfare.
• Christendom required that people read the Bible in ways that supported the status quo, gave precedence to the Old Testament and marginalised Jesus.
• Church life also reflected the Christendom shift as large congregations were dominated by a clerical caste, who performed services and gave monologue sermons, and who operated in a hierarchical structure that imposed punitive church discipline.
• In the Christendom era the emphasis was on institutional maintenance rather than mission. Where evangelistic mission occurred it was generally delegated to specialist agencies and sometimes involved coercion. Other dimensions of mission involved offering counsel to the state and christianising culture.
• But throughout this era there were marginal movements that protested against the Christendom system, advocating and practising alternative approaches to the Bible, church and mission. These included the Waldensians and Lollards.
• How do we listen to both the mainstream and the margins from this era? What can we learn from each?

Chapter 6: The Disintegration of Christendom

• By the 16th century Christendom was in turmoil – economic, political, social and spiritual – and was starting to disintegrate.
• The Protestant Reformation offered one way forward, retaining most of the assumptions of the Christendom system, including state churches, but trying to reform this system.
• The reformers, however, made only limited changes on the issues of biblical interpretation, church life and the nature of mission.
• Catholicism also underwent a process of reform and reorganisation, with the result that different versions of Christendom – Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed and Anglican – emerged. Christendom fragmented into competing and hostile mini-Christendoms.
• Another way forward was the Anabaptist movement, the heirs of the medieval marginal movements, which rejected the Christendom system as beyond mere reform and planted new churches free from state control.
• Anabaptists developed alternative approaches to biblical interpretation, church life and mission, but they were persecuted by both Catholics and Protestants.
• How do we respond when we perceive problems within the church – remain in the current structures and work for renewal, or come out and build anew on fresh foundations?

Chapter 7: The Christendom Legacy

• Between the 17th and 20th centuries the demise of Christendom took place, as various factors undermined its legitimacy.
• These included: the Enlightenment reliance on reason rather than revelation, the impact of industrialisation and urbanisation, the arrival of postmodernity, the persistence of dissent and the globalisation of the church and its mission.
• However, there are numerous vestiges of Christendom that have outlasted the political entity, both in the church and in society.
• Further details of these vestiges can be found here.
• As we identify these various vestiges, we need to consider their significance and decide whether to endorse, ignore or challenge them.
• More pervasive, though less obvious, is the Christendom mindset that guides our thinking and reactions on a range of issues.
• Further details of this mindset can be found here.
• There are different ways of responding to the Christendom legacy: denying it, defending it, dismissing it, dissociating ourselves from it, demonising it or disavowing it.
• Disavowing is the best option, which involves disentangling the many threads, deciding what to retain and what to reject.
• In what ways are we influenced by the Christendom mindset or enmeshed in Christendom vestiges, and how will we respond to these?

Chapter 8: Post-Christendom: Mission

• Although the Christendom era was characterised primarily by maintenance rather than mission, in the latter part of the era mission returned in various forms.
• Mission took place beyond the boundaries of Christendom as Catholic and then Protestant missionaries accompanied those who explored and conquered the New World.
• Despite noble exceptions, these missions were marred by cultural imposition and considerable violence.
• Mission also took place within Christendom as concern grew about the low level of morality and spirituality within an officially Christian society.
• Evangelism is problematic in post-Christendom, not least because of the very ambiguous legacy of mission within and beyond Christendom in the previous centuries.
• Despite the temptation to abandon it, we need to rehabilitate and reconfigure evangelism for post-Christendom.
• There are important challenges facing us as we engage in mission in a plural society and learn to engage creatively with other faith communities.
• We also will need to learn fresh ways of engaging in social transformation as a marginal community that no longer wields social power of the kind we were used to exercising.
• And we will need to renegotiate our relationship with the state, succumbing neither to delusions of past status nor temptations to disengage.
• What will it mean to be reconstituted as a marginal missionary movement in the strange new world of post-Christendom?

Chapter 9: Post-Christendom: Church

• Reconstituting ourselves for mission also involves rethinking what kind of church can incarnate the good news in post-Christendom.
• Across western culture, fresh expressions of church are emerging, energised by longings for more authentic forms of community, worship and mission.
• Examining these emerging churches through the post-Christendom lens both affirms their significance and poses significant questions for them.
• But the vast majority of Christians belong to inherited forms of church and the shift to post-Christendom offers opportunities to take a fresh look at practices that were rooted in the Christendom system and challenged by the dissidents.
• These include the clergy/laity divide, monologue sermons, church discipline and attitudes to war and economics.
• Church after Christendom will need to be relatively simple if it is to survive.
• But simplicity does not mean banality. We need to re-imagine church for post-Christendom.
• We might re-imagine the church as a community stirred by poets and story-tellers, a monastic missionary order and a safe place to take risks.
• Are the immediate prospects of the church in western societies best summed up as revival or survival?

Chapter 10: Post-Christendom: Resources

• There are many more questions than answers in the current transitional period between Christendom and post-Christendom.
• Our responses to contemporary challenges need to be provisional and we will need to appreciate many kinds of resources.
• We can draw on pre-Christendom, anti-Christendom (dissident), Christendom and extra-Christendom (global) movements.
• We will need to think carefully about how we interpret the Bible, recovering marginalised texts and questioning received interpretations, rejoicing in the new angle of vision available to a marginal community.
• We may need to reconsider important theological commitments and ethical stances, suspicious of the influence of Christendom on them.
• Some images may help us come to terms with our current situation, including marginality, liminality, exile, pilgrimage and church on the edge.
• And our terminology may need adjusting as we reflect on the language used in the Christendom era and its suitability (or lack of this) in post-Christendom.
• Most fundamentally, post-Christendom offers us an opportunity to recover the radical Jesus whom Christendom marginalised and follow him courageously onto the margins of this strange new world.

The Christendom Shift

Chapter 4 of Post-Christendom contains a long list of issues that were impacted by the 4th-century Christendom shift. It is not possible to summarise these, so here is the list in case it is useful in this form for further study:

The transformation in how the church understood itself and its role in society was not accomplished in one generation. Some developments had roots predating Constantine and would take centuries to develop fully. Over time, however, the Christendom shift involved:

• The adoption of Christianity as the official religion of city, state or empire.
• Movement of the church from the margins to the centre of society.
• The creation and progressive development of a Christian culture or civilisation.
• The assumption that all citizens (except Jews) were Christian by birth.
• The development of a ‘sacral society’, corpus Christianum, where there was no freedom of religion and political power was divinely authenticated.
• The definition of ‘orthodoxy’ as the belief all shared, determined by powerful church leaders with state support.
• Imposition, by legislation and custom, of a supposedly Christian morality on the entire society (though normally Old Testament morality was applied).
• Infant baptism as the symbol of obligatory incorporation into Christian society.
• The defence of Christianity by legal sanctions to restrain heresy, immorality and schism.
• A hierarchical ecclesiastical system, based on a diocesan and parish arrangement, analogous to the state hierarchy and buttressed by state support.
• A generic distinction between clergy and laity, and relegation of laity to a largely passive role.
• Two-tier ethics, with higher standards of discipleship (‘evangelical counsels’) expected of clergy and those in religious orders.
• Sunday as an official holiday and obligatory church attendance, with penalties for non-compliance.
• The requirement of oaths of allegiance and oaths in law courts to encourage truth-telling.
• The construction of massive and ornate church buildings and the formation of huge congregations.
• Increased wealth for the church and obligatory tithes to fund the system.
• Division of the globe into ‘Christendom’ and ‘heathendom’ and wars waged in the name of Christ and the church.
• Use of political and military force to impose Christianity, regardless of personal conviction.
• Reliance on the Old Testament, rather than the New, to justify these changes.

The foundation of Christendom was a theocratic understanding of society and a close, though sometimes fraught, partnership between church and state, the two main pillars of society. The nature of this partnership varied. Over the centuries, power struggles between popes and emperors resulted in one or other holding sway. Previous chapters have revealed one emperor presiding over a church council and another submitting to a bishop’s authority. But the system assumed the church was associated with a status quo understood as Christian and had vested interests in its maintenance. The church provided religious legitimation for state activities; the state provided secular support for ecclesiastical decisions.

Christendom excluded or reinterpreted elements of New Testament teaching that had been important in pre-Christendom:

Faith and discipleship

• Faith in Christ was no longer understood as the exercise of choice in a pluralistic environment where other choices were possible without penalty.
• The term ‘conversion’ mainly described, not the start of the Christian life, but entrance into a monastic community.
• Discipleship was interpreted as loyal citizenship, rather than commitment to the counter-cultural values of God’s kingdom.
• Preoccupation with individual eternal destiny replaced expectation of the coming of God’s kingdom.

Church and society

• There was no longer any significant distinction between ‘church’ and ‘world’.
• The state was no longer accorded a limited preservative function but had replaced the church as the bearer of the meaning of history.
• Church was defined territorially and membership was compulsory, with no room for believers’ churches comprised only of voluntary members.
• Such voluntary communities, called ‘churches’ in the New Testament, were now called ‘sects’ and condemned as schismatic.
• The church largely abandoned its prophetic role for a chaplaincy role, providing spiritual support, sanctifying social occasions and state policies.
• The idea of God’s kingdom was reduced to a historical entity, coterminous with the state church, or relegated to the future.

Church life

• Believers’ baptism as the means of incorporation into the church was regarded as appropriate only for first-generation converts from paganism.
• Church services became performance-oriented as multi-voiced participation and the exercise of charismatic gifts declined.
• A sacramental and penitential system developed that enabled the church hierarchy to control and dispense ‘salvation’, often at a price.
• Clerical power and the disappearance of the ‘world’ meant church discipline was punitive, even lethal, rather than expressing pastoral care and mutual admonition.

Mission

• The church’s orientation was now towards maintenance rather than mission, and mission was carried out by specialist agencies, not congregations.
• Pastors and teachers were honoured, while apostles, prophets and evangelists were marginalised or regarded as obsolete (cf. Ephesians 4.11).
• Mission within and beyond Christendom was accomplished by top-down methods, including coercion and offering inducements.
• The vision of a new Christian nation, corpus Christi, scattered through the nations was replaced by a vision of an earthly Christian empire.

Ethics

• The church became more concerned about maintaining social order than achieving social justice.
• Because the church exercised control, ethical choices were justified by anticipated outcomes or consequences rather than inherent morality.
• Pleas for religious liberty were forgotten and persecution was imposed by those claiming to be Christians rather than upon them.
• Enemy-loving and peacemaking were replaced by the formation of a Christian army and the ‘just war’ theory or ‘holy war’ ideology.
• The cross was less a reminder of the laying down of life than a symbol carried into battle by those who would take the lives of others.

Assessing the Christendom Shift

Look again at the above summary of the impact of the Christendom shift on church and society.

How are we to assess this shift and its consequences? Here is a simple exercise to help us consider the possibilities.

Work through the summary and place by each item a number representing one of the following assessments:

1. This was a positive development that evolved quite naturally from the traditional thinking and practice of the pre-Christendom churches.

2. This was a positive development that was a deviation from traditional theology and practice but was justified by the changing circumstances.

3. This was a necessary development in the changing circumstances that had neither particularly positive nor particularly negative consequences.

4. This was a necessary development in the changing circumstances that had negative and regrettable consequences.

5. This was an illegitimate development that contravened the theology and practice of the pre-Christendom church and is difficult to square with the spirit of the gospel.

6. This was an illegitimate development that compromised the church and its message and led to horrendous consequences in the coming centuries.

You might also want to construct further categories (7, 8, 9 etc.) if these do not give you all the options you want to work with.

Once you have completed this assessment of the Christendom shift, you may want to identify the issues that concern you most and consider how you or your church might grapple with these.

Alternatives to the Christendom Shift

Chapter 4 of Post-Christendom challenges the suggestion that the church in the fourth century had no option but to accept the invitation to becoming the imperial church. It suggests that there were other ways fourth-century Christians might have interpreted Constantine’s adoption of Christianity and responded to his invitation:

• They might have recognised that all Roman emperors had used religion to impose order on the empire: Constantine was acting in a typically Roman (not Christian) way.
• They might have questioned his continuing allegiance to the Unconquered Sun and the nature of his allegiance to Christ.
• They might have challenged him to become a catechumen (novice Christian) earlier and to have prepared for baptism before he became terminally ill.
• They might have encouraged him to behave as a true Christian, rather than a normal emperor, accepting this might have resulted in his reign being brief.
• They might have reflected on their survival and growth through 250 years of intermittent persecution and decided they did not need imperial protection or patronage.
• They might have differentiated between toleration and imperial endorsement, welcoming the former and courteously but firmly refusing the latter.
• They might have explained to Constantine that massive basilicas and lavish bequests were inappropriate for followers of Jesus.
• They might have insisted the cross symbolised sacrificial suffering and was inappropriate as a military standard, explaining that Jesus’ followers were a peaceful people, who would not fight to defend the empire.
• They might have recalled their own experience of persecution and historic commitment to religious liberty and refused to persecute or pressurise others.
• They might have listened to dissenting voices warning that the theological reinterpretations of Augustine and others were leading them away from their roots and core values.

Another exercise: rank these suggestions in order, according to your judgement as to how realistic they seem to be. Then, starting with what you consider to be the most realistic, assess what impact this might have had on the development of Christendom.

And some further questions:

1. Some claim that the phenomenal growth of Christianity in this period means that, if not under Constantine, under one of his successors Christianity would have become the numerically dominant religion. Do you agree?

2. If so, need a numerically dominant religion become a state religion?

3. Might Europe have been christianised from the bottom up rather than from the top down, and what difference might this have made?

4. If the continuing numerical growth of the church had not been turbo-charged by state endorsement, might effective catechesis have continued, and what effect might this have had on church and society?

5. What can we learn from the history of the church in the Persian Empire, which never had a Constantine figure (but was very viciously persecuted once Constantine declared the Roman Empire Christian)? After centuries of mission, during which it became more numerous and widespread than European Christianity, it was eventually eradicated from large areas of Asia. Is this inevitable for a non-state religion?

6. If in the future the church in Europe again becomes numerous, even numerically dominant, what are the alternatives to re-inventing Christendom? Is faithfulness only possible for marginal communities, or is there a truly Christian way to handle power?

Vestiges of Christendom

Chapter 7 of Post-Christendom contains a long list of Christendom vestiges. It is not possible to summarise these, so here is the list in case it is useful in this form for further study:

Ecclesiastical vestiges

• The Church of England is the established church, acknowledging the monarch as supreme governor and claiming official status by its very name, which by implication excludes other denominations.
• The self-identity of the non-established Church of Scotland is of a national church.
• The monarch appoints Anglican bishops, on the recommendation of the prime minister, from a shortlist of candidates the church prepares. The state can veto episcopal appointments.
• Church leaders participate in state ceremonies, during which they engage in acts of worship (although increasingly representatives of other faiths also participate).
• Some decisions of the Church of England’s General Synod require state endorsement (the requisite majority of the ‘three houses’ approved the decision to ordain women, but this needed ratification by both Houses of Parliament).
• The parish system symbolises and implements the ubiquity of the established church, regardless of the presence of other congregations.
• The Church of England is legally obliged to provide marriage and funeral services. Clergy of many denominations act as state registrars.
• The Church of England is a major landowner and, despite falling income and rising costs, a very wealthy institution.
• The Chi-Rho symbol, Constantine’s labarum, adorns many churches and chapels instead of the cross.
• The cross is associated in many communities with conquest and coercion, not suffering and self-giving love.
• Many church buildings contain military paraphernalia, including regimental flags, plaques commemorating war casualties and soldiers’ graves.
• Most denominations endorse the ‘just war’ theory.
• Though many denominations have more members elsewhere than in Europe, representatives of historic Christendom nations dominate their structures and culture.
• Many denominations and agencies maintain structures that perpetuate outdated ‘sending nations’ and ‘mission fields’ concepts.
• Infant baptism is still widely practised (not only in the state church), but there are concerns about indiscriminate christening.
• Leadership structures in many newer denominations mirrors Christendom arrangements (albeit with different titles).
• The dominance of monologue sermons is evident in all denominations (with longer sermons in newer churches).
• The popularity of tithing in newer churches is encouraging Anglicans and Catholics to return to an abandoned Christendom practice.
• Church discipline is not taught in theological colleges, congregations are not equipped to practise this and attempts to exercise discipline are frequently ineffective or authoritarian.
• Inherited or chosen architectural styles of church buildings maintain aspects of Christendom ecclesiology. Many resemble lecture halls or theatres, disabling multi-voiced worship.
• Special clothes continue to designate a clerical caste with special powers and privileges.

Social vestiges

• The monarch’s coronation takes place in Westminster Abbey and involves senior church leaders, who present a Bible as a ‘rule for the whole life and government of Christian Princes’, anoint the monarch with oil with reference to Old Testament kings, present a sword for the monarch to ‘protect the holy Church of God’ and bestow a ring with a ruby cross, urging the monarch to be the ‘defender of Christ’s religion.’
• The monarch swears to ‘maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel’; ‘maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law’; ‘maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England’; and ‘preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them.’
• The National Anthem combines unquestioning support for the monarch with prayer for military success.
• Coins carry inscriptions committing the monarch to defend the (Anglican) faith (D.G.REG.F.D).
• The Union Flag comprises crosses of St George, St Andrew and St Patrick, the ‘patron saints’ of England, Scotland and Ireland.
• Remembrance Day ceremonies offer prayers of thanksgiving for military success.
• State-funded chaplains serve in the armed forces and accompany them to war, implicitly supporting their actions.
• Christian prayers take place daily in both Houses of Parliament.
• Two archbishops and twenty-four diocesan bishops are ‘Lords Spiritual’ sitting in the House of Lords.
• The English legal system includes ‘canon law’, which governs church affairs, and ecclesiastical courts.
• Anyone on the parish electoral role (whatever their religious views) may vote to elect church wardens.
• The launching of ships involves a ‘christening’ ceremony, invoking God’s blessing on the vessel.
• Blasphemy laws (though rarely invoked) protect only the Church of England, not other denominations or religions.
• Churches enjoy the presumption their activities are charitable and so receive significant tax benefits.
• Schools must provide daily acts of collective worship ‘wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character.’
• School, college and bank holidays are planned around or associated primarily with the Christmas and Easter festivals.
• Despite continuing erosion, there are still restrictions on economic and social activities on Sundays.
• Use of oaths in the courts and legal processes (although affirmation is now available) remains normal.
• Oaths of allegiance are sworn by people in various institutions. Members of the police force, for instance, swear oaths in an annual service.

Responding to the Vestiges of Christendom

Look again at the above summary of the vestiges of Christendom in both church and society.

Here is an exercise to help us consider how to regard these vestiges and engage with them. Work through the summary and place by each item a number representing one of the following assessments:

1. This is a practice derived from the Christendom era that is wholly welcome, despite the demise of Christendom, and worth defending and retaining.

2. This is a practice derived from the Christendom era that, despite being rooted in an outdated and flawed system, has become a valued part of our cultural heritage and is worth retaining (albeit for other than the reasons it was originally introduced).

3. This is a practice derived from the Christendom era that no longer makes sense in a post-Christendom society but has no harmful effects and is not worth challenging.

4. This is a practice derived from the Christendom era that is regrettable and damages the church and its witness but which there is yet no realistic prospect of eradicating.

5. This is a practice derived from the Christendom era that is regrettable and damages the church and its witness so seriously that we should take action to eradicate it.

6. This is a practice derived from the Christendom era that is unjust and inappropriate in post-Christendom and that church and society should take action to eradicate.

You might also want to construct further categories (7, 8, 9 etc.) if these do not give you all the options you want to work with.

The Christendom Mindset

Chapter 7 of Post-Christendom contains a list of aspects of the Christendom mindset. It is not possible to summarise these, so here is the list in case it is useful in this form for further study:

• Orientation towards maintaining (but perhaps tweaking) the status quo rather than advocating radical and disturbing change.
• Wanting to control history and bring in God’s kingdom (even coercively) rather than trusting the future to God.
• Assuming Christians would govern nations more justly and effectively than others or that having more Christians in influential positions (especially in politics) would be beneficial.
• Over-emphasising church and internal ecclesial issues at the expense of God’s mission and kingdom.
• A ‘moral majority’ stance on ethical issues, assuming the right of churches to instruct the behaviour of those beyond the church.
• A punitive rather than restorative approach to issues of justice and support for capital punishment as ‘biblical.’
• Disgruntlement that Christian festivals (particularly Christmas and Easter) are no longer accorded the spiritual significance they once enjoyed.
• When reading the Bible, identifying naturally with the perspective of the rich and powerful.
• Readily finding analogies between Old Testament Israel and Britain (or America) as a ‘Christian nation’, reapplying biblical prophecies.
• Confusion about the relationship between patriotism and ultimate loyalty to God’s kingdom and the transnational Christian community.
• A ‘mainstream’ interpretation of church history that marginalises the laity, dissident movements, women and the poor.
• Euro-centric theology that marginalises other perspectives on mission, church and biblical interpretation.
• Inattentiveness to the criticisms of those outraged by the historic association of Christianity with patriarchy, warfare, injustice and patronage.
• Using ‘spiritual warfare’ language without reflecting on issues of violence and insensitivity to its effect on users and observers.
• A latent persecution-mentality that lacks theological or ethical objections to imposing beliefs or behaviour on others.
• Partiality for respectability, top-down mission and hierarchical church government.
• Predilection for large congregations that support a ‘professional’ standard of ministry and exercise influence on local power structures.
• Approaches to evangelism that rely excessively on ‘come’ rather than ‘go’ initiatives.
• Thinking the Christian story is still known, understood and widely believed within society.
• Reluctance to conclude Christendom vestiges inoculate rather than evangelise.
• Celebrating survey evidence that 70% of the population claim to be Christian, as if such notional Christianity is significant.
• Assuming churchgoing is a normal social activity and that most people feel comfortable in church buildings and services.
• Attitudes towards church buildings that imply these are focal points of God’s presence.
• Orientation towards maintenance rather than mission in ministerial training, congregational focus and financial priorities.
• Proliferation of church activities that are inappropriate and exhausting for marginal communities in a mission context.
• Preferring authoritative pronouncements, preaching and monologue over dialogue, conversation and consensus.
• Pontificating and lecturing, often in a sanctimonious tone that understandably irritates others.
• Discomfort among church leaders if members ask questions or express doubts or disagreement.
• Performance-oriented services and the tendency of short-lived multi-voiced developments to revert to the default mono-voiced position.
• Solemnity, formality and even morbidity when breaking bread and sharing wine in contrast to the joyful and domestic informality of the early churches.
• Despite decades of decline and marginalisation, triumphalist theology and language (especially in our hymnody).
• Consequentialist and utilitarian approaches to ethics, more concerned with outcomes than right motives and means.
• Attitudes to other faith communities that vary from opposition to tolerance but assume Christianity should be accorded centrality and privileges.
• Expectations that imminent revival will restore the fortunes and influence of the churches in society.

Detecting Christendom Toxins

The language of Christendom ‘toxins’ is used in Church after Christendom, so you may want to consult that book too, but the toxic mindset of Christendom is illustrated by the above summary from Post-Christendom.

Here is an exercise to help us consider how to regard these attitudes and assumptions, and how to engage with them.

1. Work through the list. Are you convinced that each item represents the legacy of Christendom? Might some be authentically Christian, or unconnected with the issue of Christendom? Place ? beside any items you are not convinced about.

2. Work through the list again. How significant are these items? Place ! beside items you regard as particularly important.

3. Work through the list you have highlighted. Choose 5 of these and put together a proposal for how each of these might be addressed by an individual or a church.

4. Work through the hymnbook or song collection of your own church/denomination. Note down any Christendom toxins you discover.

5. Listen carefully to sermons, prayers and conversations during one month. Note also any books or magazines you read during this month. What Christendom toxins, if any, do you detect? How might you respond to what you discover?

Reading the Bible after Christendom

The fifth book in the ‘After Christendom’ series will be written by Lloyd Pietersen. This will investigate the influence of the Christendom shift on biblical interpretation and ask how we might read the Bible with fresh perspectives after Christendom.

However, earlier books have already indicated that familiar interpretations of various biblical passages may need to be reconsidered now that Christendom is coming to an end. The influence of power, wealth and status on the church during the Christendom era may have distorted its understanding of many texts. We face the disturbing but exciting challenge of looking afresh at the Bible from our post-Christendom position on the margins of society.

While we wait for Lloyd’s book, it might be helpful to ponder a few sample passages, asking whether we have allowed the Christendom mindset to impact the way we have interpreted these. We will concentrate on passages from the Gospels.

Matthew 5:13

1. What are the various ways in which you have heard the term ‘salt’ interpreted?
2. Which of these have you found most helpful or persuasive?
3. Do any of these interpretations make sense of the term ‘earth’ (soil, ground)?
4. Do any of these interpretations make sense of the context – the climax of the Beatitudes?
5. Did you know salt was used in ancient times as a fertilizer? Might this make more sense of the verse and its context?
6. Why do you think ‘salt as preservative’ was a more popular interpretation during the Christendom era than ‘salt as fertilizer’?
7. Which makes better sense in post-Christendom?

(NB: for further resources on this passage and its interpretation, see Alan Kreider’s article at: www.anabaptistnetwork.com/node/291)

Matthew 5:38-42

1. What do the phrases ‘turn the other cheek’ and ‘go the second mile’ imply when used today?
2. How is this interpretation good news to oppressed and victimised people?
3. Might our interpretation of this passage be different if we realised ‘do not resist’ really means ‘do not resist violently’?
4. How would our understanding of Jesus’ teaching by affected by discovering that:
(a) A blow on the ‘right cheek’ suggests a master disciplining a slave with the back of his hand and turning the other cheek might represent passive resistance?
(b) Poor people in first-century Palestine wore only two garments?
(c) Roman soldiers could force people in occupied territory to carry their equipment for only one mile and would risk punishment if this went further?
5. What might it mean to behave in such ways today?

(NB: for further resources on this passage and its interpretation, see Walter Wink: Engaging the Powers, pp175-193)

Matthew 13:24-30; 36-43

1. Within the Christendom church this passage was used to justify a mixed church made up of believers and unbelievers. Is this legitimate?
2. Where does the term ‘church’ appear in this parable? Can it be inferred?
3. In dissident groups a different interpretation was given. What do you think this was?
4. What do you think is the message of this parable and its contemporary application?
5. Can you think of other biblical passages where the focus is on the kingdom of God (v24) but the Christendom shift identified this with the institutional church?

Matthew 21:33-46

1. Who do you think the various characters in this parable represent?
2. What is the moral and teaching of this parable?
3. Would your interpretation be any different if the word translated ‘landowner’ was instead translated ‘mafia boss’?
4. Would your interpretation be any different if you knew that absentee landlords who extorted income from peasant farmers with threats of violence were deeply resented and sometimes violence was met with violence?
5. Is it possible that the son who is killed does not represent Jesus?
6. What, then, would be the point of this parable? Might Jesus be proposing another way that challenges the violence on both sides?
7. How does this parable equip followers of Jesus for mission today?

Mark 12:41-44

1. Is this incident simply about the extraordinary generosity of a poor widow?
2. What difference, if any, do the verses (38-40) immediately before this passage make?
3. What difference, if any, do the verses (13:1-2) immediately after this passage make?
4. Why are the political, social and economic implications of this passage rarely mentioned in sermons today?
5. How does this parable equip followers of Jesus for mission today?

Luke 1:1-2:40

1. Read carefully through Luke’s account of the birth of Jesus.
2. During the Christendom era most people assumed God worked from the top down rather than from the margins. In this passage how many instances can you find of God working from the margins?
3. You might want to make a similar list from Matthew’s account (1:18-2:23).
4. What political implications of the coming of Jesus do you detect in the story (note especially the songs of Mary and Zechariah and the comments of Simeon)?
5. What is the significance of ‘peace’ in this story? Note the various references to this word.

Luke 18:18-30

1. With which character in this passage do we generally identify? Or do we detect only one character apart from Jesus?
2. What do we understand as the good news in this passage?
3. What happens if we identify, not with the rich ruler, but with ‘the poor’ (v22) to whom his treasures are to be distributed?
4. What would Jesus’ hearers likely have assumed about the reason why this ruler was rich, despite living in occupied territory?
5. How does the conversation between Jesus and Peter (vv28-30) affect the way we interpret this incident?
6. Is there any support in this passage for the frequent distinction made between our actions and our attitudes in relation to our possessions?

Luke 19:11-27

1. Who is the hero in this parable and who is the villain?
2. What kind of behaviour is this parable advocating?
3. Is it possible that the king is not Jesus or God? What sort of character is he?
4. What difference would it make to your interpretation if you knew that the hated Archelaus, a Herodian puppet king, had recently rushed off to Rome to be confirmed as ruler of the Jews (contrary to popular demands against this)?
5. What difference does the context make (the encounter with Zacchaeus in verses 1-10 and the entry into Jerusalem and clearing of the temple in verses 28-48)?
6. What is Jesus trying to communicate about the nature of God’s kingdom (v11)?
7. How does this parable equip followers of Jesus for mission today?

Church after Christendom: A thumbnail sketch

The basic argument of the book can be summed up in the following steps:

Part One: Shape: Prologue

• The first section of the book explores the shapes church after Christendom might need to take in a changing culture.
• The core biblical text for this section is Acts 11:1-18, in which the early church grappled with a profound paradigm shift.

Chapter 1: Church after Christendom: Belonging/Believing/Behaving

• As Christendom gradually disintegrates, the relationship between believing and belonging is unravelling in various ways.
• Beyond the churches there are various degrees of alienation from the church and its message.
• Understanding the complexity of this relationship is important for mission and church life.
• An additional factor is behaving, which raises questions about the meaning of conversion, baptism and membership.
• Centred set churches are becoming popular but these require a strong core as well as open edges.

Chapter 2: Church after Christendom: Comings and Goings

• As Christendom fades, it is helpful to understand why people are leaving and joining churches in a changing culture.
• There is considerable research available on church leavers, which needs to be examined critically in order to understand the various factors involved.
• How churches respond to church leavers is important, both for the well-being of the leavers and for the churches themselves.
• Listening to the concerns of church leavers can reveal key issues for churches to address in order to be more attractive and authentic.
• Understanding why people join churches is important both for mission and for reflection on church life.
• Cross-referencing lessons from leavers and joiners focuses attention on some critical issues for healthy church life.

Chapter 3: Church after Christendom: Will it Emerge?

• The demise of Christendom has been accompanied by both fragmentation of the church and a search for unity.
• During the late 1990s, a new wave of churches began to emerge, prompting some to suggest church after Christendom will emerge rather than evolving.
• Although categorising emerging churches at this stage is risky and inexact, a threefold division into mission-led, community-led and worship-led may be helpful.
• Different expressions of emerging church interact in different ways with the post-Christendom agenda.

Chapter 4: Church after Christendom: Will it Evolve?

• Some regard emerging churches as less promising, suggesting that church after Christendom is more likely to evolve from inherited forms of church.
• It may be that the strongest hope consists in partnership and mutual learning between inherited and emerging churches.
• All churches are in some senses both inherited and emerging; conversations can help various kinds of churches draw on each other’s resources.
• The global dimension is also important, as inherited and emerging churches learn from churches elsewhere and from missionaries and ethnically diverse churches in Europe.
• But what evolves or emerges must be about the ethos of the church, not just its style or shape.

Part Two: Ethos: Prologue

• The second section of the book explores the ethos church after Christendom might need to develop in a changing culture.
• Perspectives from both inherited and emerging churches (and church leavers) should inform this discussion.
• The core biblical text for this section is Ephesians 4:1-16, which offers a glorious vision of a healthy and participative church.

Chapter 5: Church after Christendom: Mission

• Church after Christendom will need to make a decisive shift from maintenance to mission in its basic orientation.
• This will involve action at a translocal as well as congregational level, so that institutions take on aspects of being missionary movements.
• Denominations, training institutions and other agencies need to move beyond missional language to substantive changes.
• The centre of post-Christendom society is contested, with competing claims being made for secularity and spirituality.
• Church after Christendom must embrace its marginality and develop strategies appropriate to mission from the margins.
• This will involve rehabilitating and reconfiguring evangelism.

Chapter 6: Church after Christendom: Community

• Interest in church growth has in recent years partly been superseded by concern for church health.
• Church after Christendom needs to identify the Christendom toxins and flush these out of its system.
• Induction processes and ongoing training is needed to build healthy churches.
• The neglected and maligned practice of church discipline is crucial if honest and loving communities are to evolve and emerge.
• Interactive and fully participative church life builds healthy and harmonious communities.
• Leadership models need to be reassessed and reconfigured in church after Christendom.

Chapter 7: Church after Christendom: Worship

• During the Christendom era, worship predominated over both community and mission, but these elements need to be re-balanced in post-Christendom.
• Emerging churches offer fresh and instructive perspectives on worship.
• Some are proposing that gathering together becomes less important, but this is unwise in post-Christendom.
• Inherited churches offer rich resources and long experience that church after Christendom will need to draw on and rework.

Chapter 8: Church after Christendom: Simple and Sustainable

• Church after Christendom must be both sustaining of Christians in emerging culture and also sustainable.
• Questions need to be asked about the focus, frequency and extent of church activities.
• Church after Christendom must be simple, but not simplistic, and capable of sustaining hope.

Church after Christendom: Some Questions

1. In what way can people belong before they believe in your church?

2. What are your church’s core values and how do you sustain these?

3. How do you engage creatively with those who leave your church?

4. What are you doing to encourage conversations between emerging and evolving churches?

5. In what ways can your church become more truly missional?

6. How do you induct new people into your church?

7. What practices in your church sustain healthy community life?

8. What activities in your church might you do less often or stop doing?

9. When you change the shape or style of your church, how do you engage with the question of its ethos?

10. What five things might your church do in response to the issues raised in this book?

You can download this study guide in .pdf format here:

After Christendom: A Study Guide (22p, 110KB)

After Christendom: The Series

The Anabaptist Network is working in partnership with Paternoster to produce over the next few years a major series of books on the meaning and significance of the end of Christendom in western culture.

Many Christians have focused on the challenges and opportunities of the perceived shift from modernity to postmodernity in recent years, but fewer have appreciated the seismic shifts that have taken place with the disintegration of a nominally Christian society. Although the term 'post-Christendom' is used more often now, it is generally not used with great precision and is frequently confused with postmodernity.

The 'After Christendom' series will explore the implications of the demise of Christendom and the challenges facing a church now living on the margins of western society. The various authors all write from within the Anabaptist tradition and draw on this long-marginalised movement for inspiration and insights. They see the current challenges facing the church not as the loss of a golden age but as opportunities to recover a more biblical and more Christian way of being God’s people in God’s world.

The series will address a wide range of issues, such as social and political engagement, how we read Scripture, peace and violence, mission, worship and the shape and ethos of church after Christendom.

These books are not intended to be the last word on the subjects they address, but an invitation to discussion and further exploration. One way to engage in this discussion is via the After Christendom Forum hosted by this website: www.anabaptistnetwork.com/AfterChristendom.

Post-Christendom: church and mission in a strange new world by Stuart Murray

The first volume in the series was published in 2004. This investigated the coming of Christendom in the fourth century, identified the main components of the 'Christendom shift' and traced the development and subsequent decline of Christendom over the following centuries. After explaining why Christendom as a political entity disintegrated during the twentieth century, the book examines the Christendom legacy, which consists of vestiges in church and society and a mindset that may persist long after Christendom itself is defunct. Three final chapters suggest ways in which church and mission may be reconfigured in light of the end of Christendom. Post-Christendom raises numerous issues that will be further explored in the books that follow.

To read the first chapter of Post-Christendom go to www.anabaptistnetwork.com/endofchristendom

Church after Christendom by Stuart Murray

The second book was published in 2005. It explores various questions. How will the Western church negotiate the demise of Christendom? Can it rediscover its primary calling, recover its authentic ethos and regain its nerve? The author surveys the ‘emerging church’ scene that has disturbed, energised and intrigued many Christians. He also listens carefully to those who have been joining and leaving the ‘inherited church’. Interacting with several proposals for the shape the church should take as it charts a new course for its mission in post-Christendom, the author reflects in greater depth on some of the topics introduced in Post-Christendom and the practical implications of proposals made in that book. Church after Christendom offers a vision of a way of being church that is healthy, sustainable, liberating, peaceful and missional.

To read the first chapter of Church after Christendom go to www.anabaptistnetwork.com/node/260

Faith and Politics after Christendom: the church as a movement for anarchy by Jonathan Bartley

For the best part of 1700 years, the institutional church has enjoyed a hand-in-hand relationship with government. Indeed, the church has often been seen as the glue that has stopped political systems from disintegrating into anarchy.

But now for the first time in centuries, the relationship has weakened to the point where the church in the UK can no longer claim to play a decisive part in government. Faith and Politics after Christendom, published in 2006, offers perspectives and resources for Christians and churches no longer at the centre of society but on the margins. It invites a realistic and hopeful response to challenges and opportunities awaiting the church in twenty-first century politics.

To read the first chapter of Faith and Politics after Ch