Thrownness Grabs a Frisbee: Part I

Part of the purpose of this blog is the launching of a project which I have had in mind for a few years: contemporizing the Scottish Presbyterianism of the 1630s and 1640s. That's an ambitious goal, I know (or possibly an insane one). I've been pondering precisely how to do it for a long time, and at this point I'm entirely sure that I do not know how. But I do have some ideas on the manner in which it should be done. Here are some reasons for desiring its accomplishment, a tentative model for its method, and some preconditions for its success.

I. Who Gives a Rodent's Posterior?

Why bother? Aren't we surrounded by the droppings of dead white guys anyway? Haven't there been any advances in Christendom since the 1640s? What makes the theology of a bunch of backwater European late medieval/early modern pastors in funny collars special? Wasn't the Reformed movement international in its scope and bicentennial in its span?

First, I am a member of a Presbyterian church, and the sworn creed of that church happens to be the Westminster Standards, which happens to have been the brainchild of-you guessed it!-those Scottish guys. If I have any inclination to take my church's confession seriously, I need to know (a) what that confession says and (b) what that confession means. A subset of (b) is the meaning of that group of documents in the situatedness of my present time. (I'm going to skip over hermeneutical considerations at this point and assume that, to some extent, this scheme is epistemically feasible.) Note that both (a) and (b) are also vitally important for polity considerations, i.e. it is impossible to govern a confessional church which is ignorant of the content and significance of its confession.

Second, I believe that there is something inherently valuable in the achievements of the Scottish Second Reformation (same white dudes). This is one of the great Protestant traditions, and, simply from an aesthetic perspective, it deserves to be sustained; it certainly does not merit a death from neglect (unlike, say, Moravianism). Presbyterianism is one of the distinct incarnations of the Reformation, said Reformation never having had any real existence outside of its various bodily forms. What I am saying is that there has never been a generic "I'm just Reformed" option-except in the post-World War II world. The post-war option, having always been devoid of a genuine referent, is steadily losing any meaningful content.

Third, and most importantly, I believe that the Scottish Second Reformation represents, at least seminally, the church's most acute understanding of the Holy Scriptures. Ever. Which explains why I'm a Presbyterian instead of a Campbellite. But this proposition has a lot more luggage than T.U.L.I.P. and infant baptism. To borrow from Nicholas Wolterstorff, there is a world behind the work. (And contra Doug Wilson, James Jordan, et al., the world behind the Presbyterian work is not an Anglican or a Lutheran one.)

There is a Frisbee from the 17th century that is worth catching. There are those of us who are ecclesiastically committed to catching it. Our thrownness makes that difficult. So what should our technique be?

To be continued....