What do you think?
Rate this book
Household of God
This book discusses the question that the author regards as central in the present ecumenical the nature of the Church itself. He thus describes the plan of the The First chapter sketches the present context of the discussion and touches on the Biblical meaning of the word "Church." The next three chapters examine the three answers to the central question, which may be roughly categorized as Protestant, Catholic, Pentecostal. The last two chapters argue that the Church is only to be understood in a perspective that is at once eschatological and missionary, the perspective of the ends of the earth.Bishop Newbigin's evaluations are provacative, scholarly, and filled with profound passion and insight. He is concerned with the searching questions men today are Is there in truth a family of God on earth to which I can belong, a place where all men can be truly at home? If so, where is it to be found and how is it that those who claim to be spokesmen of that holy fellowship are themselves at war with one another as to the fundamentals of its nature? I think there is no more urgent theological task than to try to give plain and simple answers. This he does, drawing deeply upon biblical sources.
223 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 1953
9 people are currently reading
215 people want to read
About the author
Lesslie Newbigin
92 books102 followersBishop James Edward Lesslie Newbigin was a British theologian, missiologist, missionary and author. Though originally ordained within the Church of Scotland, Newbigin spent much of his career serving as a missionary in India and became affiliated with the Church of South India and the United Reformed Church, becoming one of the Church of South India's first bishops. A prolific author who wrote on a wide range of theological topics, Newbigin is best known for his contributions to missiology and ecclesiology. He is also known for his involvement in both the dialogue regarding ecumenism and the Gospel and Our Culture movement. Many scholars also believe his work laid the foundations for the contemporary missional church movement, and it is said his stature and range is comparable to the "Fathers of the Church".
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
November 29, 2020
Doesn't claim to be exhaustive, and perhaps a bit sanguine about the ecumenical project in the conclusion, but still I think it's my favorite book I've read on the church:
“I think it must be frankly admitted that when, in the name of a purer faith or a richer experience, Christians have felt compelled to break with the continuing structure, and have therefore claimed a primacy for faith or experience over order, their children and grandchildren have inherited from them new structures based upon some particular formulation of faith or experience which have allowed less spiritual and intellectual freedom than that which the reformers took for granted. In the New Testament faith and order are given together. When, because of sin, situations arise where men apparently have to choose between them, and faith is given a theoretical primacy over order, the eventual result is a new order based upon a particular and partial formulation of faith, and the new order is inevitably less free, because less catholic, than the old. It is perhaps needless to say that this may and almost certainly will apply to both sides of the rift, and that when order is given priority over faith the effect is equally disastrous" (79).
“is it not necessary also to insist that all personal relationships are given to us in an impersonal context and conditioned by impersonal factors? Is it not significant that the deepest, most fruitful, and most satisfying personal relationships are those in which the impersonal factors are at their maximum, in which the personal is most indissolubly connected with physical, biological, and economic factors-namely in marriage and the family? And must we not assert that the attempt to isolate the personal, and to set it over against the legal and institutional, does violence to its nature? Must one not say that the attempt, in the conditions of human nature, to have a personal relation divorced from its proper impersonal context is futile? It is surely congruous with the whole nature of man that Christ, in giving us Himself, has given us a Church which is His Body on earth and therefore marked by visible limits and a continuing structure, so that fellowship with Him should be incorporation in it" (82).
“I believe that when a prospector first strikes oil there is often a violent eruption of the oil which sometimes bursts into flames and burns for many days before it is brought under control. Later on there will be no room for such displays. The oil will all be pumped through pipes and refineries to its destination, and a desire to go back to the early fireworks will be rightly regarded as infantile. But the early displays did at least prove something; they proved that oil was there, and without this all the peeps and refineries in the world are merely futile. My illustration is a crude one, but it will serve well enough to make the point that what I have called the Pentecostal Christian has the New Testament on his side when he demands first of all of any body of so-called Christian, ‘Do you have the Holy Spirit? For without that all your credal orthodoxy and all your historic succession avails you nothing'" (99-100).
“Only those who have never borne the heavy burden of pastoral responsibility will mock at the cautious spirit of the ecclesiastic. But on the other hand let us admit that according to the New Testament we are summoned precisely to the task of ‘discerning the spirits'" (106).
“[The redemption of Jesus Christ's] law of working is not the direct approach of God to every man in the solitude of his own soul, an approach which would leave man still alone and therefore still unhealed, but the mediated approach through the neighbor and through the created world, an approach which in the very act of his response binds him to the neighbor and relates him truly to the created world. The means which God employs for our salvation are congruous at every step both with the nature wherewith He endowed us, when He created us and the world of which we are a part, and with the end to which He leads us, which is that all things should be summed up in Christ" (110).
"participation in Christ means participation in His mission to the world, and... therefore true pastoral care, true training in the Christian life, and true use of the means of grace will precisely be in and for the discharge of this missionary task" (167).
“I think it must be frankly admitted that when, in the name of a purer faith or a richer experience, Christians have felt compelled to break with the continuing structure, and have therefore claimed a primacy for faith or experience over order, their children and grandchildren have inherited from them new structures based upon some particular formulation of faith or experience which have allowed less spiritual and intellectual freedom than that which the reformers took for granted. In the New Testament faith and order are given together. When, because of sin, situations arise where men apparently have to choose between them, and faith is given a theoretical primacy over order, the eventual result is a new order based upon a particular and partial formulation of faith, and the new order is inevitably less free, because less catholic, than the old. It is perhaps needless to say that this may and almost certainly will apply to both sides of the rift, and that when order is given priority over faith the effect is equally disastrous" (79).
“is it not necessary also to insist that all personal relationships are given to us in an impersonal context and conditioned by impersonal factors? Is it not significant that the deepest, most fruitful, and most satisfying personal relationships are those in which the impersonal factors are at their maximum, in which the personal is most indissolubly connected with physical, biological, and economic factors-namely in marriage and the family? And must we not assert that the attempt to isolate the personal, and to set it over against the legal and institutional, does violence to its nature? Must one not say that the attempt, in the conditions of human nature, to have a personal relation divorced from its proper impersonal context is futile? It is surely congruous with the whole nature of man that Christ, in giving us Himself, has given us a Church which is His Body on earth and therefore marked by visible limits and a continuing structure, so that fellowship with Him should be incorporation in it" (82).
“I believe that when a prospector first strikes oil there is often a violent eruption of the oil which sometimes bursts into flames and burns for many days before it is brought under control. Later on there will be no room for such displays. The oil will all be pumped through pipes and refineries to its destination, and a desire to go back to the early fireworks will be rightly regarded as infantile. But the early displays did at least prove something; they proved that oil was there, and without this all the peeps and refineries in the world are merely futile. My illustration is a crude one, but it will serve well enough to make the point that what I have called the Pentecostal Christian has the New Testament on his side when he demands first of all of any body of so-called Christian, ‘Do you have the Holy Spirit? For without that all your credal orthodoxy and all your historic succession avails you nothing'" (99-100).
“Only those who have never borne the heavy burden of pastoral responsibility will mock at the cautious spirit of the ecclesiastic. But on the other hand let us admit that according to the New Testament we are summoned precisely to the task of ‘discerning the spirits'" (106).
“[The redemption of Jesus Christ's] law of working is not the direct approach of God to every man in the solitude of his own soul, an approach which would leave man still alone and therefore still unhealed, but the mediated approach through the neighbor and through the created world, an approach which in the very act of his response binds him to the neighbor and relates him truly to the created world. The means which God employs for our salvation are congruous at every step both with the nature wherewith He endowed us, when He created us and the world of which we are a part, and with the end to which He leads us, which is that all things should be summed up in Christ" (110).
"participation in Christ means participation in His mission to the world, and... therefore true pastoral care, true training in the Christian life, and true use of the means of grace will precisely be in and for the discharge of this missionary task" (167).
December 15, 2025
Lesslie Newbigin is among my favourite theologians - I always find him insightful. His mining of scholars like Michael Polanyi and experience in the mission field in India gave him a unique voice that challenged the conventions of the fundamentalism and neo-evangelicalism of his day.
These lectures on ecclesiology (and ecumenism), delivered in the mid-20th century, still remain vibrant and fresh. Given the times, I was surprised he was so complementary to pentecostalism (he distinguishes pentecostalism as a third stream of Christianity from Roman Catholicism and Protestantism) though he also critiques its excesses (largely its too zealous tendency to sweep aside tradition and structure). Although he was a paedobaptist, he challenges the belief that infant baptism is commensurate with circumcision; he rightly points out that if this were so, Paul would have appealed to baptism in his Epistle to the Galatians as the key reason why they no longer had to continue in circumcision but he never mentions this at all.
These lectures on ecclesiology (and ecumenism), delivered in the mid-20th century, still remain vibrant and fresh. Given the times, I was surprised he was so complementary to pentecostalism (he distinguishes pentecostalism as a third stream of Christianity from Roman Catholicism and Protestantism) though he also critiques its excesses (largely its too zealous tendency to sweep aside tradition and structure). Although he was a paedobaptist, he challenges the belief that infant baptism is commensurate with circumcision; he rightly points out that if this were so, Paul would have appealed to baptism in his Epistle to the Galatians as the key reason why they no longer had to continue in circumcision but he never mentions this at all.
May 5, 2022
In defining the Church, Lesslie Newbigin insists that the Church be considered as a visible community or congregation: “There is an actual, visible, earthly company which is addressed as ‘the people of God’, the ‘Body of Christ’.” He acknowledges that “that which constitutes the Church is invisible,” but insists that the Church itself is visible. If then, the Church is a visible body, two crucial questions arise: First, where is the Church found? Second, what is the manner of our ingrafting into Christ? Newbigin outlines three (non-exclusive) responses: “The first answer is, briefly, that we are incorporated in Christ by hearing and believing the Gospel. The second is that we are incorporated by sacramental participation in the life of the historically continuous Church. The third is that we are incorporated by receiving and abiding in the Holy Spirit.”
In what has been recognized as his most signal contribution to the ecclesiological discussion, Newbigin then categorizes these under the rubric of Classical Protestantism, Catholicism, and Pentecostalism, and unpacks these streams over the next three chapters. In each chapter, Newbigin begins by discussing the biblical foundations of the view being presented, provides a succinct statement of the view in answer to his driving question, and then highlights the problems that tend to accrue to the tradition that privileges that one aspect over the others.
At the end of surveying each of these three answers to the question of how one is ingrafted into Christ, the general conclusion is this: each emphasis is thoroughly biblical, but not only are none of them exclusively normative, none of them can even be true to itself apart from the others. The Church’s message, structure, and Spirit are mutually informing and sustaining. There are not two poles, one of which must have the priority; there are three sides, each equally necessary to form the “triangle” of the Church’s essential nature. The application of this insight is that each of the three representative streams of Christianity must be present at the ecumenical table, and the hope is that when “three-cornered” debate and discussion begins to happen, new possibilities for unification may emerge that were not evident in previous primarily bi-polar discussions.
After this work of ecclesiastical triangulation, Newbigin discusses the Church considered eschatologically, further explaining the dynamic nature of the Church through a series of three paradoxical pairings that he believes sustain a proper eschatological tension: life through death, having and not yet having, and ‘I live, yet not I but Christ.’ These paradoxes are different ways of describing man’s situation in the flesh: simul justus et peccator, sharing the Divine life and experiencing Divine love really but not fully, by way of foretaste, not full possession.
In view of this fundamental tension, Newbigin comes to argue against “the attempt to define the Church’s esse in terms of something that it has and is….Every attempt to define it by marks ascertainable by simple observation and apart from faith, violates the law of its being. The Church exists, and does not depend for its existence upon our definition of it.” In other words, the marks of the Church are descriptive, not constitutive – provisional identifiers rather than precisionist ontological pre-conditions. Because the Church has an eschatological dimension, she cannot be defined in exclusively historical categories or identified in history by visible marks alone. Her being cannot be considered apart from her doing and (in her doing) her becoming.
Newbigin then extends this into a consideration of mission, arguing that “[t]he implication of a true eschatological perspective will be missionary obedience.” He grounds this connection in an exposition of Acts 1:7-8, in which the decisive factor is the promise of the Spirit’s power as both a sign of the coming age and as the means by which the Church will carry out her witness in such a way as to “lead this present age to its consummation.” More than something to wait for, or something to do while she waits, the apostolic commission is to bring about the eschaton by “bringing all men and all nations to the obedience of faith.”
This work of salvation through the Church determines the nature of the Church. Since it is a cosmic and corporate salvation, it must be witnessed to in a cosmic and corporate way. The Church is more than a messenger talking about the coming age; she is herself a foretaste of the coming age, and so Newbigin writes: “A gospel of reconciliation can only be communicated by a reconciled fellowship.”
Thus for Newbigin, “mission and unity must be prosecuted together.” This conclusion leads Newbigin to a three-fold articulation of the Church’s task: one, to renew the Church’s acceptance of her missionary obligation; two, to increase missional co-operation; and three, to “unwearyingly” pursue ecclesial reunion “…until all who in every place call upon the name of Jesus are visibly united in one fellowship, the sign and instrument of God’s purpose to sum up all things in Christ, to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit be all the glory.”
In what has been recognized as his most signal contribution to the ecclesiological discussion, Newbigin then categorizes these under the rubric of Classical Protestantism, Catholicism, and Pentecostalism, and unpacks these streams over the next three chapters. In each chapter, Newbigin begins by discussing the biblical foundations of the view being presented, provides a succinct statement of the view in answer to his driving question, and then highlights the problems that tend to accrue to the tradition that privileges that one aspect over the others.
At the end of surveying each of these three answers to the question of how one is ingrafted into Christ, the general conclusion is this: each emphasis is thoroughly biblical, but not only are none of them exclusively normative, none of them can even be true to itself apart from the others. The Church’s message, structure, and Spirit are mutually informing and sustaining. There are not two poles, one of which must have the priority; there are three sides, each equally necessary to form the “triangle” of the Church’s essential nature. The application of this insight is that each of the three representative streams of Christianity must be present at the ecumenical table, and the hope is that when “three-cornered” debate and discussion begins to happen, new possibilities for unification may emerge that were not evident in previous primarily bi-polar discussions.
After this work of ecclesiastical triangulation, Newbigin discusses the Church considered eschatologically, further explaining the dynamic nature of the Church through a series of three paradoxical pairings that he believes sustain a proper eschatological tension: life through death, having and not yet having, and ‘I live, yet not I but Christ.’ These paradoxes are different ways of describing man’s situation in the flesh: simul justus et peccator, sharing the Divine life and experiencing Divine love really but not fully, by way of foretaste, not full possession.
In view of this fundamental tension, Newbigin comes to argue against “the attempt to define the Church’s esse in terms of something that it has and is….Every attempt to define it by marks ascertainable by simple observation and apart from faith, violates the law of its being. The Church exists, and does not depend for its existence upon our definition of it.” In other words, the marks of the Church are descriptive, not constitutive – provisional identifiers rather than precisionist ontological pre-conditions. Because the Church has an eschatological dimension, she cannot be defined in exclusively historical categories or identified in history by visible marks alone. Her being cannot be considered apart from her doing and (in her doing) her becoming.
Newbigin then extends this into a consideration of mission, arguing that “[t]he implication of a true eschatological perspective will be missionary obedience.” He grounds this connection in an exposition of Acts 1:7-8, in which the decisive factor is the promise of the Spirit’s power as both a sign of the coming age and as the means by which the Church will carry out her witness in such a way as to “lead this present age to its consummation.” More than something to wait for, or something to do while she waits, the apostolic commission is to bring about the eschaton by “bringing all men and all nations to the obedience of faith.”
This work of salvation through the Church determines the nature of the Church. Since it is a cosmic and corporate salvation, it must be witnessed to in a cosmic and corporate way. The Church is more than a messenger talking about the coming age; she is herself a foretaste of the coming age, and so Newbigin writes: “A gospel of reconciliation can only be communicated by a reconciled fellowship.”
Thus for Newbigin, “mission and unity must be prosecuted together.” This conclusion leads Newbigin to a three-fold articulation of the Church’s task: one, to renew the Church’s acceptance of her missionary obligation; two, to increase missional co-operation; and three, to “unwearyingly” pursue ecclesial reunion “…until all who in every place call upon the name of Jesus are visibly united in one fellowship, the sign and instrument of God’s purpose to sum up all things in Christ, to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit be all the glory.”
October 31, 2025
Very powerful, and beautiful, book on what it means to be a follower of Christ. My only critique, which actually is a complement about his mind, is that the book is hard to read. He is so intelligent he has sentences a paragraph long. I had to stop and dissect many times.
July 21, 2018
I greatly enjoyed this series of lectures by Newbigin later turned into a book (and one of his first) on the nature of the church. His primary foci are the unity of the church and its missionary nature. Newbigin makes strong arguments for the necessity of the unity of Christians as being an outgrowth of the Church's missionary task (a la Jn. 17). He takes a very interesting approach to the various emphases in differing Christian traditions, breaking things down into the Catholic (in which likely the Orthodox approach would also be implied), the classic Protestant, and the Pentecostal categories as emphasizing authoritative community, doctrinal teaching, and spiritual encounter respectively. While I cannot go as far with the ecumenical argument as Newbigin seems comfortable with going (one should not forget that he wrote these lectures in the 1950's), there is much that is positive to consider in his words. His argument that neglecting any one element (community, doctrine or Spirit) is devastating to the church and thus there is need to evaluate our own tradition (whatever it may be) in light of the others is on point.
At the root of this call to unity is the missionary nature of the Church. He quotes Brunner saying "The Church lives by mission as fire lives by burning." While Newbigin does give the caveat that the church does not exist only for mission, he sharply and rightly critiques the western church that too often (especially at that time) sees mission as merely a ministry department rather than vital to the nature of the church in the world. His thinking in this regard has been foundational for much of the more recent (and fortunate) turn towards the nature of the church as a missional community. While this was not my favorite book by Newbigin (that place would go to either "The Gospel in a Pluralist Society" or "The Open Secret"—both better choices for an intro to Newbigin than this work), it is certainly packed full of much needed insights.
At the root of this call to unity is the missionary nature of the Church. He quotes Brunner saying "The Church lives by mission as fire lives by burning." While Newbigin does give the caveat that the church does not exist only for mission, he sharply and rightly critiques the western church that too often (especially at that time) sees mission as merely a ministry department rather than vital to the nature of the church in the world. His thinking in this regard has been foundational for much of the more recent (and fortunate) turn towards the nature of the church as a missional community. While this was not my favorite book by Newbigin (that place would go to either "The Gospel in a Pluralist Society" or "The Open Secret"—both better choices for an intro to Newbigin than this work), it is certainly packed full of much needed insights.
January 29, 2025
Newbigin gave the lectures that gave rise to this book in 1952 - nearly 75 years ago. I’m not sure anything has been written on the church that surpasses this text since. This is Newbigin at his best - keenly aware of reality, propelled by authentic missionary zeal, and abounding in biblical, trinitarian constructive thought.
And, this book is heartbreaking. Newbigin calls the church to unity with a passion and erudition that is unassailable and inspiring - and yet, who can say that in the 73 years since this book was published that the church has done anything but become less unified? The remedy is here, if the Church would hear it - an eschatological call that brings together the best that Protestantism, Catholicism, and Pentecostalism have to offer. Lord, forgive us our petty and pusillanimous divisions. Make us one, and may we endure the cost and burden of that unity even as you did, once for all.
And, this book is heartbreaking. Newbigin calls the church to unity with a passion and erudition that is unassailable and inspiring - and yet, who can say that in the 73 years since this book was published that the church has done anything but become less unified? The remedy is here, if the Church would hear it - an eschatological call that brings together the best that Protestantism, Catholicism, and Pentecostalism have to offer. Lord, forgive us our petty and pusillanimous divisions. Make us one, and may we endure the cost and burden of that unity even as you did, once for all.
June 16, 2025
A biblical argument about what the church in the world is to be: missional, unified, hopeful. Interesting, earnest, engaged and thoughtful. Classical Protestantism has taken as its core the proclamation of the Word, Catholicism has taken as its core the historical connection to the Apostolic Church and its sacraments, and fringe Pentecostals have taken as their core the leading of the Holy Spirit as distinct from established forms. We all need to be able to recognize one another as the church and work toward unity in real ways or else we are failing the New Testament model. He's probably right.
“When we claim we possess a religion so spiritual that we can see past these visible signs to their meaning, and therefore can dispense with them, the inevitable result is that we lose a certain simplicity and a certain awareness of ultimate mystery which belong to the very heart of man’s true response to God.”
“When we claim we possess a religion so spiritual that we can see past these visible signs to their meaning, and therefore can dispense with them, the inevitable result is that we lose a certain simplicity and a certain awareness of ultimate mystery which belong to the very heart of man’s true response to God.”
May 10, 2025
It was okay. Newbigin gives lots of critique without providing much solution. He correctly calls the misplacement of values for the Protestants and the Catholics in their definition of church and posits a “Pentecostal” vision, not as modern Pentecostals but somewhat related. I appreciated the critiques but his lack of solution and his downplaying of ecumenism I found frustrating.
I think the best lecture is probably the fourth one in this book, because he gets quickly to his point and then five and six help flesh out what a “Pentecostal” church looks like.
On a plus side I think much of the global church and the church in the post-Christian West has basically figured a lot of this charitable vision out (besides twitter weirdos.) Also, I liked his quotations from the reformers, especially his use of Calvin to discuss charity.
I think the best lecture is probably the fourth one in this book, because he gets quickly to his point and then five and six help flesh out what a “Pentecostal” church looks like.
On a plus side I think much of the global church and the church in the post-Christian West has basically figured a lot of this charitable vision out (besides twitter weirdos.) Also, I liked his quotations from the reformers, especially his use of Calvin to discuss charity.
March 6, 2019
I would give this book 10 stars. Newbigin is hands down my favorite writer of theology and mission (which he would never separate)
I wish every church leader would read this, though it might be too late in the deeply established churches. Church planters and leaders who are hungry for a church that is wholly dependent on Jesus and knows it’s core essence is mission MUST read this book. There are too many profound quotes to pick the best. Here is one that speaks to me given my calling: “A gospel of reconciliation can only be communicated by a reconciled fellowship.”
I wish every church leader would read this, though it might be too late in the deeply established churches. Church planters and leaders who are hungry for a church that is wholly dependent on Jesus and knows it’s core essence is mission MUST read this book. There are too many profound quotes to pick the best. Here is one that speaks to me given my calling: “A gospel of reconciliation can only be communicated by a reconciled fellowship.”
December 30, 2020
This book is pretty solid. It's dense and I was reading off and on with my small children running around, so I didn't get as much out of it as I would have on a more focused reading. But even though this was written last century, some of his points really resonate with the church today. We really hide the appeal of the gospel when we are characterized by bickering and infighting rather than putting aside the non-essentials to be on mission together.
May 31, 2017
Compelling case for the centrality of the parish church as the potential power plant that, through the ordinary rule of faith, becomes the way God fulfill His mission in the world. Highly recommended.
December 6, 2017
The setting may be somewhat dated, but the concepts are timeless. Provocative, but wise insights - I know I'll be revisiting the book to let it sink further in for continuing reflection.
March 23, 2021
I could say many things about this, but I'll sum it up with: it was really, really good.
Read
March 19, 2016Newbigin is a great thinker and missionary. What he writes about he does so with intellect and warmth.
I had been meaning to read this book for a while. The book is a classic in ecclesiology and ecumenism. He begins by noting that we must think further about the nature of the church. The church is suffering because of its division and because of the individualistic culture that is breaking down the west. Christendom has shattered, and Christians need to think coherently about their witness and organization together in order to witness well.
So Newbigin meditates on three modes or types of churches he sees: Protestant (gathering around the notion of justification by faith and incorporation by doctrine), Catholic (gathering around the notion of Christ's body in sacraments and the episcopacy), and something he sees as the Pentecostal type (gathering around experience of the Spirit). Of course, every type would never claim they do not include the other modes (i.e. a Lutheran would never claim they have neglected the sacraments or the Spirit), but the reality is the three modes emphasize certain priorities over others. These have obvious advantages and flaws. Newbigin's delineation of the flaws are well done. A congregation that defines itself by doctrine will have a hard time thinking critically or revising its doctrine. Luther caused a dichotomy between the interior and the exterior (corporate works) in his understanding of justification by faith, which is problematic. A church that centers on the sacraments and episcopacy will have a hard time criticizes this authority structure. A church that gathers around the experience of the Spirit can devolve into emotivism. Pentecostals have routinely ignored ecumenical work, viewing non-charismatic forms of Christianity as sub-par.
While I like his notion of modes of emphasis, my own thought on this is why stop at three modes?
There is surely more: liberal or progressive versus conservative or fundamentalist modes. These modes effect the ecclesial expression Liberal or progressive expressions see their identity as unfixed, able to be revised based on the Spirit's calling, reason, or ethical logic. A conservative expression would not see itself as able to be revised, and a fundamentalist expression can have a notion of purity and authority that pose all sorts of important challenges to them selves and others.
James McClendon saw Newbigin's third mode describing a "baptist" (Anabaptist or radical reformation) type, which he saw included all those expression that did not fit into the first two. The Pentecostal type that Newbigin delineates, by neglecting the baptist contribution, omits the free church ecclesiology that is very important as it pertains to the question of the necessity of the episcopate. A free church sees itself called by the word, into a community of equals, united by bonds of association and partnership, not necessarily a single institutional unity like Catholicism.
I think we are seeing a massive challenge to ecclesiology in a time of online services and multi-site mega-churches. These pose massive questions to the nature of the church. What does it mean to be a member of a church when the influence of a single church an span the globe?
Newbigin continues on to reiterate that Christ is the head of the church and the source of its salvation, both at the cross, in the present, and in the final day. He notes that the church ought to be eschatologically oriented as it goes on mission, and as it focuses on that vocation it best understands what it is.
I had been meaning to read this book for a while. The book is a classic in ecclesiology and ecumenism. He begins by noting that we must think further about the nature of the church. The church is suffering because of its division and because of the individualistic culture that is breaking down the west. Christendom has shattered, and Christians need to think coherently about their witness and organization together in order to witness well.
So Newbigin meditates on three modes or types of churches he sees: Protestant (gathering around the notion of justification by faith and incorporation by doctrine), Catholic (gathering around the notion of Christ's body in sacraments and the episcopacy), and something he sees as the Pentecostal type (gathering around experience of the Spirit). Of course, every type would never claim they do not include the other modes (i.e. a Lutheran would never claim they have neglected the sacraments or the Spirit), but the reality is the three modes emphasize certain priorities over others. These have obvious advantages and flaws. Newbigin's delineation of the flaws are well done. A congregation that defines itself by doctrine will have a hard time thinking critically or revising its doctrine. Luther caused a dichotomy between the interior and the exterior (corporate works) in his understanding of justification by faith, which is problematic. A church that centers on the sacraments and episcopacy will have a hard time criticizes this authority structure. A church that gathers around the experience of the Spirit can devolve into emotivism. Pentecostals have routinely ignored ecumenical work, viewing non-charismatic forms of Christianity as sub-par.
While I like his notion of modes of emphasis, my own thought on this is why stop at three modes?
There is surely more: liberal or progressive versus conservative or fundamentalist modes. These modes effect the ecclesial expression Liberal or progressive expressions see their identity as unfixed, able to be revised based on the Spirit's calling, reason, or ethical logic. A conservative expression would not see itself as able to be revised, and a fundamentalist expression can have a notion of purity and authority that pose all sorts of important challenges to them selves and others.
James McClendon saw Newbigin's third mode describing a "baptist" (Anabaptist or radical reformation) type, which he saw included all those expression that did not fit into the first two. The Pentecostal type that Newbigin delineates, by neglecting the baptist contribution, omits the free church ecclesiology that is very important as it pertains to the question of the necessity of the episcopate. A free church sees itself called by the word, into a community of equals, united by bonds of association and partnership, not necessarily a single institutional unity like Catholicism.
I think we are seeing a massive challenge to ecclesiology in a time of online services and multi-site mega-churches. These pose massive questions to the nature of the church. What does it mean to be a member of a church when the influence of a single church an span the globe?
Newbigin continues on to reiterate that Christ is the head of the church and the source of its salvation, both at the cross, in the present, and in the final day. He notes that the church ought to be eschatologically oriented as it goes on mission, and as it focuses on that vocation it best understands what it is.
February 20, 2018
Excellent book laying out Newbigin’s ideas on ecclesiology and the importance of ecumenism and mission in the teleology of the Church. For those interested in understanding Lesslie Newbigin’s theology, “The Household of God” is a great introductory work to his theory behind the practice.
March 10, 2020
If I had quit reading before the 3rd chapter I would've given this a lower rating but once he got started going in his ecclesiology he offered (repetitively) a compelling vision of the call of the Church and its place in the world. His analysis and proposals regarding certain issues especially in the first half of the book are dated but much of what he writes later is valuable still for today.
August 11, 2014
It's difficult to dislike Newbigin's ecclesiastical-pastoral polemics. This work is no different. I have read it twice completely and various chapters dozens of times. This classic never gets old.
July 22, 2014
Great book - still stimulating as a discussion of the nature of the church. Offers a three-fold typology that should be considered alongside Dulles's "models."
July 9, 2015
Amazing book, i'll have to read it a few more times before I really even know what to say about it. So much good stuff here
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews