%20(1).jpg?width=80&height=80&name=untitled%20(16%20of%2039)%20(1).jpg)
While ambiguous “Christ-centeredness” by its very nature fragments Christianity by way of its subjectivism, Christological commitments beget unity or, at least, move strongly in that direction.
In order to stay competitive in a crowded marketplace, today’s churches routinely placard their bona fides by deploying trending Christian clichés and buzzwords. For example, a church that desires that its website appear mainstream to potential parishioners will punctuate their pages with words such as “authentic,” “relevant,” and “connected.” Such verbiage means to impress upon readers and auditors alike that this church values or embodies such things.
Perhaps no words find wider employment than “Christ-centered.” One will read and hear of “Christ-centered preaching,” “Christ-centered worship,” “Christ-centered teaching,” Christ-centered community,” “Christ-centered ministry,” etc. The use of this term, and others like it including gospel-centered, are almost endless throughout contemporary Christianity.
But anything within the Church and everything that is theologically “Christ-centered” simply isn’t good enough. It doesn’t deliver the goods. And here’s why: the term itself is ambiguous. Sure, it identifies Jesus as somehow “central” to these things — preaching, worship, ministry — and yet it doesn’t say much else. The term itself effectuates a blurriness, a fuzziness or, simply, indefinition — it brings no clarity.
Anything “Christ-centered” isn’t good enough because its never objective or definitive.
Evidencing this fact are the words that attempt to define this indefinable moniker, words like “focused,” “oriented,” “based,” and “touchstone.” What precisely does it mean that “Christ-centered preaching” is “focused” on Christ”? How does it work that “Christ-centered worship” is Christ-“oriented”? In what way is Jesus the “touchstone” of “Christ-centered teaching or ministry”? To all of these questions there will be a myriad of answers and that’s because the term “Christ-centered,” along with all of its modifying descriptors, are perspectival, that is, they originate from the perspective of the one who adjudicates to what degree Christ may be the focus, the orientation, the touchstone. In other words, “Christ-centeredness” is always subjective. For this reason, anything “Christ-centered” isn’t good enough because its never objective or definitive.
When something is said to be “Christ-centered,” it is done from the all-too-human perspective of those who proportion the amount of “focus” or “orientation” or “basis” that there will be on Christ. “Christ-centered” thus amounts to little more than “we sense that Jesus is important to this topic insofar as …”. And it is at the point of ellipses (…) that a host of competing factors enter the conversation, ranging from anthropological considerations (e..g, the freedom of the will) to economic ones (e.g., consumerism). In this way, anthropology determines how the branches of theology are to be understood from the perspective of those who determine just how “Christ-centered” each theological branch is going to be. And when anthropology determines theology, then we are guaranteed that it will never be good enough, not only for us but especially for God himself, for whom perfection is the everlasting standard.
I propose that terms like “Christ-centered” are not only unhelpful, but actually harmful to a right understanding of Scripture and, so too, the Christian faith. Since each community and, indeed, each individual possesses the liberty to set their own meaning as to what “Christ-centered” means, we cannot but have endless fuzzy opinions with resulting endless ill-defined options. The term itself is meaningless Christian-speak and yields nothing but hazy content. Consequently, “Christ-centered” Christianity begets a smorgasbord theology done from the bottom up, no matter how “Bible-centered” such “Christ-centered” preaching, teaching, and worship may be.
But there is a better way. It has been known to the church from the time of Jesus, and from time to time it needs to be reasserted. It was championed by the likes of Saint Paul in Ephesus, Leo the Great at Chalcedon, St Anselm in Canterbury, and Martin Luther in Heidelberg, and it needs reassertion. Luke the Evangelist shows us the way, saying:
And he said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. (Luke 24:25-27)
And again,
Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. (Luke 24:44-47)
Here Jesus Himself doesn’t say that he is at “center” of the Scriptures and thus at the “center” of theology or preaching or worship. No, Jesus says that he, as the Christ of God, the very Word of God incarnate, determines our interpretation of Scripture. Christ determines redemption and preaching and the sacraments and thus the ministry of the holy liturgy. The term for this is “Christological.” It means that Christ determines the theological topic at hand and he perfectly fulfills that theological topic. All theology, then, is Christology, with the implication that each and every branch of theology and all of its liturgical expression, along with the Christian living, is determined by Christ. He objectifies the content and the meaning. It is not left for individuals to decide and there are no competing considerations. The disciples on the Emmaus road in Luke 24 were not given a variety of options as to how they might interpret Moses and the prophets and the Psalms. They were Christologically determined. The logic of Christ applied was determinative with the resultant understanding that every aspect of creation, the fall, the promises of redemption, the role of Israel, the Prophets, and Kings would culminate in Christ Jesus, the Son of God and Son of Mary. Here, then, we have clarity: “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me” (John 5:39).
Two branches of theology provide examples. First, ecclesiology — the doctrine of the church — isn’t an anthropological phenomenon, that is, the gathering of people and such a gathering constitutes the Church per se. No. Humanity doesn’t “make” church happen. Rather, Christology determines from Scripture that the generating and manifesting of the Church is the activity of Christ who pours out the Holy Spirit and gives himself through the sacramented liturgy (Matt. 18:10; 28:18-20). Christology determines ecclesiology — not an episcopacy, not a congregation, and certainly not the individual Christian. Since only Christ can purely preach the gospel to regenerate but also enhance faith; and since only Christ can administer the sacraments in accordance with the gospel purposes that he determines, then the instantiation of the Church is the result of what Christ Jesus does in the midst of believers. After all, Christ came to create for himself a Bride — “having cleansed her by the washing of the water with the word” (Eph. 5:25).
Indeed, even the confession of the “one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church” terminates in the activity of Christ. For only Jesus the Son can justify, sanctify and glorify the Church to render His Bride “one” and “holy” (Eph. 4:4; 5:25-27). Jesus alone renders the Church universal wherever he, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, determines the efficacy of the gospel. Jesus exclusively chose and equipped his Apostles and committed to them the Apostolic kerygma. From beginning to end, ecclesiology is determined by Christology.
While ambiguous “Christ-centeredness” by its very nature fragments Christianity by way of its subjectivism, Christological commitments beget unity or, at least, move strongly in that direction.
Second, sacramentology — the doctrine of the sacraments — isn’t decided by Augustine, Aquinas, Zwingli, Calvin or Luther. Jesus determines the gifts of the gospel and they summarily consist of divine self-giving (Luke 22:19-20; Matt. 26:26-28; John 6:48-51, 53-58). The Son of God, who brings with him the Holy Spirit and fellowship with the Father, is the greatest and most necessary gift that each of us need and in fact receive in Holy Baptism, but also the Word and other Sacraments. The gifts are Christ himself. Not things. Not stuff. Not mere status. Not ideas. Not metaphors. Not tropes Christ is the supreme sacrament who sacramentalizes the sacraments through his self-giving with the Holy Spirit. Christology determines sacramentology.
While ambiguous “Christ-centeredness” by its very nature fragments Christianity by way of its subjectivism, Christological commitments beget unity or, at least, move strongly in that direction. In fact, if all denominations and churchmen were obedient to Christ’s determination of Scripture and therefore all the branches of theology, then all would have a shared understanding of the faith handed down through the apostolic tradition.
Espousing “Christ-centeredness” requires minimal responsibility given its ambiguity, which may account for why it's bantered about everywhere and by everyone. On the other hand, a commitment to Christological theology and liturgy drives pastors and parishioners toward a Christianity codified in the ecumenical creeds and councils of the Church. And it is there, among the creeds and councils of the Church, rearticulated in the sixteenth century Augsburg Confession and its Apology amidst fresh challenges, that we find Christ determining the branches of theology. And when that’s the case, its more than enough because he is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
%20(1).jpg?width=36&height=36&name=untitled%20(16%20of%2039)%20(1).jpg){kind=small}
