Bevans's Six Models
So it's been over a month now since I decided to work through Bevans's Models of Contextual Theology and, while I've played around with the subject since then, I haven't actually gotten to the meat of the book yet or why I think it's significant for the emerging church. Hey - at least I've stuck with it this time! At any rate, I thought I'd post a brief description of each of the models that Bevans uses along with a few of his caveats and then, using this as a springboard, talk about why the emerging church rubs some folks the wrong way. And if I can do it without making anyone too angry, so much the better. ;)
Bevans says this about models:
[I]t is my contention that no one model can be used exclusively and an exclusive use will distort the theological enterprise. While every one of these models is in some sense a translation of a message, an adequate theology cannot be reduced to a mere application or adaptation of a changeless body of truths. Even the biblical message was developed in a dialogue with human experience, culture, and cultural and social change, and a theology that neither issues forth in action nor takes account of the way one lives one's life can hardly be theology that is worth very much. At the same time, any theology that is not in some sense countercultural cannot be a truly Christian theology. (p. 33)So with that in mind, Bevans outlines the following models by which we can approach the question of contextual theology:
- The Translation Model - This model focuses on the gospel as an unchanging message, and seeks to translate that message into the verancular of the context in question. The context matters only insomuch as it sets the agenda for the translation.
- The Anthropological Model - This model sees cultures as the places of God's revelation, and approaches each context asking the question, "Where is God already at work here?" It emphasizes present experience moreso than received tradition.
- The Praxis Model - Bevans has a great quote here; I'm tempted to steal it for my tagline. He describes praxis as "acted-upon reflection and reflected-upon action" (p. 72). Theology arises from this interplay of reflection and action - it is a model in which thought and deed are linked.
- The Synthetic Model - Bevans describes this as sort of a middle-of-the-road model, one that tries to take seriously both the tradition that has been received while taking seriously the context in all ways, including, as he states, the fact that context sets the theological agenda in some sense. He goes on to further describe this as a dialectic in some sense between faith and culture, with each informing and correcting the other. (I think I'm doing justice to him here - this one was somewhat vague.)
- The Transcendental Model - Ok, I'm going to confess right away that I didn't particularly follow this one at all. What I gathered here is that this model is more concerned with how one goes about the theological task than it is about what is decided or understood. It seems to be rooted primarily in the experience of revelation as an event or happening instead of as something received or passed on. Bottom line - I wasn't experiencing much of anything except frustration here.
- The Counter-Cultural Model - This model focuses on the challenge that the gospel issues to every culture. But, Bevans notes (rightly, I believe), that while the gospel offends, we should take care that the offense is from the gospel itself and not from our own poor attempts at enculturation. This is an absolutely significant point, one that I'm going to return to eventually. Suffice for now to say that Newbigin and Hauerwas, two of my significant conversation partners in my own theological journey, were both mentioned here, as was the Gospel in Our Culture Network.
Technorati Tags: books, emerging church, contextual theology, Bevans
Email this post | Bookmark this post on del.icio.us
Scott: Does Bevans define the term "theology" for the purposes of these models? Just curious. It would help to put models in context I think.
"Acted-upon reflection and reflected-upon action" would be a super tagline!
Good question. He really doesn't per se. Early on, he does say this:
Classical theology conceived theology as a kind of objective science of faith. It was understood as a reflection in faith on the two loci theologici (theological sources) of scripture and tradition, the content of which has not and never will be changed...But what makes contextual theology precisely contextual is the recognition of the validity of another locus theologicus: present human experience.So I'd say that he's looking at theology as reflecting in faith on scripture, tradition, and present experience - which is sort of half a definition, I think, because it doesn't address the why, but he doesn't really go there. Then again, it leaves me free to appropriate his models and supply the why myself, I suppose. ;) Posted by ScottB on February 13, 2006 10:40 PM
Thanks!
Being able to appropriate another’s ideas and supply the why myself has always been liberating. Things always make more sense this way :-) .
Posted by blind beggar on February 13, 2006 11:18 PMIf we take theology as "knowledge of God" (derived at least in part from the meaning of the Greek theos and logos) then something interesting is seen in the six models:
The Translation model is what happens when a preaches takes the Bible and interprets its message for his congregation (the hearers) during the sermon (or homily if you prefer older terms).
The Anthropological model is in force when the preacher is preparing the sermon and seeks to interpret the message to find its application to today (*I* would remember that culture is A place of God's revelation - not THE place ...).
The aim of preaching (it seems) is to have the congregation exercise the praxis model in the way they live in their culture.
The synthetic model is where we check our message against the doctrinal stance of the Church in our present society and ask: "Does this message reflect what Christ has said to societies in the past when they faced this situation?"
The counter-cultural model is where the preacher has identified a cammonly accepted practice (like a business decision to decrease wages below the level to make a decent living, because the workers can expect to make extra on tips) and shows how it is contrary to biblical principle.
What's left? The personal interaction between God and the believer. From your explanation that could well be what is meant by the transcendental model. A preacher should both *have* a personal relationship with God and seek (in his preaching) to inculcate a personal relationship with God in his hearers.
If I have understood you correctly, it would appear that Bevan has found six aspects of Christian life and identified church's theologies which stress one of these without keeping all six in balance. ALL are equally important in a well-rounded church and in a sound theology (or knowledge of God - contextual or otherwise).
Posted by Kaitiaki on February 15, 2006 08:21 PMI think that's a good way to approach it. I think what Bevans is getting at is that it's difficult to do all of these at once from the perspective of theology in a larger sense - it's simply too broad. That's why he's, I think, concerned to state that no one model is THE model, but that all are appropriate in certain contexts, and that there are always elements of each model in play in a healthy approach. This might make more sense when I finish my post on the emerging church's models - it's pretty abstract at this point. ;)
Posted by ScottB on February 17, 2006 10:25 AMBut I would assume that the task of inculturation goes beyond the homiletic ministry of the church. It is not something we do as we preach, it is something we preach about because we do it. Consciously or not, we're always applying one of these methods. The challenge is being able to identify the one that seems to characterize our present approach to the context right next to us and beyond, and take it to its fullest potential, both in the Church's preaching and the rest of its ministerial work.
