Book Review
Paradigm Shift in the Church : How Natural Church Development can Transform Theological Thinking
by Christian A. Schwarz
Christopher R. Gillespie
Intro to Missions
Dr. Moeller
V.11.2006
In his book, "Paradigm Shift in the Church" author Christian Schwarz attempts to link systematic theology with the principles presented in his text "Natural Church Development" published in 1995. He begins by describing two existing paradigms, institutionalism and spiritualism and compares them to his ideal Bipolar paradigm. This paper will survey his text and discuss a few of its concepts in relation to Lutheran theology.
In describing his Bipolar paradigm he sees a reciprocal relationship between the static pole of the church (doctrine, sacraments, offices) and the dynamic (faith, fellowship, and service). He further describes this comparison in terms of organization (static) and organism (dynamic.) The organization is the church and its institutions and the organism are ever changing, growing.
Puzzling is why Schwarz uses such language when existing Biblical language of tree/fruit and vine/branches could have been used. Later in his text he describes an interdenominational approach which might lead him to use terminology which does not convey multiple connotations.
Schwarz describes doctrine, sacraments, and office as static yet he sees faith, fellowship, and service as producing and modeling the static. How static is doctrine if it is altered by faith? Lutheran theology would describe the static elements as instituted by God. For Schwarz's conflict with institutionalism, he fails to see institutions as often mandated by God. He is right in criticizing the Roman church for "creating" institutions which are not divinely ordained. Certainly in a Lutheran context rites such as confirmation which are adiaphron should always be on the table for consideration. When they fail to be reconciled to our faith then they no longer serve benefit within the institution.
Because Schwarz believes both these "poles" of the church are visible, he also believes that the organization must reflect our perception of the organism. This includes looking for 1) empowering leadership, 2) gift-oriented ministry, 3) passionate spirituality, 4) functional structures, 5) inspiring worship service, 6) holistic small groups, 7) need-oriented evangelism, and 8) loving relationships. (21) While all the above are noble and useful pursuits, the failure to perceive any of the above is not necessarily indicative of the failure of the organization. For example, all the above may be deemed present and yet the church is losing members as purely a result of its physical location. Schwarz does not see the above criteria as normative but useful to ascertain the health of the congregation.
Schwarz at length criticizes both the institutionalistic paradigm (with our favorite punching bag, the Roman church) and the spiritualistic paradigm (with the radical Charsimatics.) Both are useful evaluations to consider. He sees a conflict between the two as described in chapter 4. A better descriptor's would be a pendulum. It appears as if few wish to be at the bottom of the pendulum swing but seek to polarize to one extreme or the other. Schwarz's bipolar paradigm respects this tension and attempts to find the balance between the two.
The key doctrine which in Schwarz's opinion is the root of all misconception is the nature of God. (ch. 5) Here he strongly criticizes a disconnected and unhistorical God. He believes this to be a consequence of Hellenization of the text. Schwarz prefers a historical and personal reading of Jesus. To articulate as such he uses Melancthon and Luther (55). According to Luther God's Work is really "what God works in us." Schwarz could have used both Luther's understanding of baptism and vocation to further his cause. Luther saw baptism as a daily event in the present tense, "I am baptized." As well he saw vocation as the daily life of Christ lived through us in love to the neighbor. Schwarz later criticizes the infant baptismal practice of Luther and so it is no surprise that it remains absent here.
Schwarz's doctrine of sin which is discussed briefly betrays his personal belief and runs contrary to his stated goal later of being interdenominational. (60-61) In order to provide your paradigm from an interdenominational perspective (ch. 7) it is poor choice to lump Romans and Lutherans together with Augustine on the doctrine of original sin. As well to discuss theology and indeed, to discuss God without God's Word is folly. Schwarz tries to articulate systematic doctrine using only reason and little scriptural foundation. He intends to avoid the perception of him as a fundamentalist yet by using little scripture falls into his other trap of relativism.
Schwarz sees scripture as inherently functional. His primary text is 1 Corinthians 10:23: "Everything is permissible but not everything is beneficial. Everything is permissible but not everything is constructive." This is first major scriptural foundation given within his text and it does not come until 25% into the text. Even so it useful to see that our practice and implementation of functional ideas are only useful insofar as they build up the church of God. Schwarz would prefer to rest his faith on the visible manifestations of the spirit (the eight forms as listed above.) Lutherans typically look to that which God has given us assurance is where He will be. This is in his Word, Sacraments, and offices. If the church appears to be failing it does not assume the Spirit is not present or that the institutions are prohibiting the work of the Spirit. It may consider such ideas but puts no assurance in them.
It is ironic that Schwarz would find conflict with consider historic church practice and theology within his "natural church development" scheme yet holds aloft the 16th century Reformation and the Pietism movement as stepping stones to his "third reformation." While he regards their efforts as both incomplete and distorted in modern times, he does integrate key philosophies from both into his ideal reformation.
Part Two is the lengthiest portion of Schwarz's text but also the meatiest. Schwarz compares his paradigm to the two established paradigms to a number of different theological doctrines. These concern his three dynamic characteristics of faith, fellowship, and service. The doctrines and concepts expressed include: correct doctrine (108-9), scripture (121-2), law and liberty (133-4), baptism and communion (148), tradition and change (157-8), church planting and cooperation (169-70), gifts and office (185-6), Christians in politics (197), and evangelism, and conversion (209). Typically his idyllic Bipolar paradigm offers a reasonable conclusion. Unfortunately, often his systematic theology to reach said conclusion is flawed. The scope of this paper limits our ability to discussion in great detail. Within the reaction portion of this paper, a few specifics will be mentioned.
Within Part Three, Schwarz finally feels confident to describe the practical work of the church within the bipolar paradigm. Here, we find the most conflict in practice versus typical Lutheran practice. Lutherans do not use their intellect to determine a course of action by a "learning from creation." (218) All his use of "biotic principles" will raise the hackles of the orthodox Lutheran. Schwarz even suggests the use of new age movement philosophy as practical wisdom. (230) His overriding assumption is that God's will for the church on earth is made manifest by witnessing nature. How can Schwarz reconcile his concept with the natural forces of flood, hurricane, tsunami, tornado, hail, firestorm, and the like? Those seem fairly destructive in practice, and yet God is loving, correct?
Under Schwartz's scheme, laity are given more authority than in a purely institutional paradigm (as is often the case for Lutherans.) Discernment and critical approach to practice left to all and not the institution and its clergy. (231) This follows a C.F.W. Walther model of voter supremacy. Unfortunately, Schawarz's scheme excludes any real identification with catechesis or teaching of the laity so that they are qualified in such a role. He is right is assessing that many a pastor would see such teaching as weakening his job security.
Schwartz's description of natural church development begins partly three, chapter two. He rightly begins with "God as Helmsman." (235) His five concepts within this scheme are testimonies, model, principles, program, and strategy. He returns to his eight characteristics as listed earlier. Then he gives six "biotic principles." This language is so foreign to the church context that its application will throw most heads in a spin. His six principles are interdependence, multiplication, energy transformation, multi-usage, and symbiosis. While foreign to Lutheran language, all six goals seem worthy ones. Schwarz does believe them to be biblical principles and yet provides little biblical witness (246) as was the case before. (121) This lack of real application of Scripture as norm throughout casts doubt on its legitimate usage and source.
Ultimately, this text presents a rational and logic methodology. Yet for a historical church whose slogan is to "never to reinvent the wheel," application of Schwarz's text would prove difficult at best. While the emergent church movement was a reaction to the church growth movement, Schwarz has created a synergy between the two. As with the emergent church, the standards for judgment of success and failure are subjective. While the subjective should not fall outside the use of a Lutheran, it offers him no comfort. Schwarz has articulated a confidence in practice because of visible result. This cannot truly coincide with Lutheran and catholic theology. Our cooperation is not in salvation but in ministry on this earth. (254)
Another conflict for the orthodox Lutheran is the statements about no static, timeless truth (110) and no infallible doctrine (108). This theology would prevent quia subscription to the Lutheran Confessions and suggest there are no transcendent creeds like the Nicea-Constantinople which are true for all people in all times. Yes, many responses of both texts were to cultural implications no longer present. Yet, we have our own set of cultural conflict that these texts speak although they were no the intent originally.
Even so Schwarz is right to suggest that canon law and its ilk are far too limiting to faith. For Lutherans, reading Luther's Genesis lectures are refreshing in light of the dogmatic texts Pieper, Mueller, and the like. Within Luther doctrines are never compartmentalized, explicitly defined, and restricted. Rather we hear echoes of various doctrines in Luther but in an integrated and fluid way and not in a systematic fashion.
More topics are touched on throughout the text which are worth mentioning. These include: the Christocentricity of scripture (113), canonicity (114), scripture is normative (116), historicity of scripture (117), and biblical revelation (121).
Challenges of integrating Schwarz's scheme for natural church development within a Lutheran context include many language barriers, different theological premises, trust and confidence in the subjective. Even so, his bipolar paradigm has many virtues. Namely, it emphasizes a strong integration of faith, life, and practice (128-9), avoidance of trust in dogmatic constructs, the rite of confirmation, and similar limiting institutions, growth in faith and love is a lifelong process (133), and avoidance of a disconnect between faith and practice (174). Lutherans have a fear of failure and so fear of experimentation. Lutherans fear because they know the danger of experimentation without understanding of the tradition you are superseding. Often, the good is thrown out with the bad. The strong is substituted with the weak. The Lutheran doctrine of invisible and visible church provides an easy parallel to Schwarz's bipolar paradigm. The church as organization is visible and organism is hidden in love toward neighbor. Lutherans live on the knife's edge between traditionalism and relativism. Schwarz's relevant post-modern discussion which while irreconcilable with the Lutheran institution, provides useful insight into the perception of our social world.
