Puppies, Patristics, Fruit, and Phronemas

Dogmatic detours on the way to the Kingdom

In 1969, my senior year of high school, I converted from Roman Catholicism to the church of Christ (Campbellite Restoration Movement). A friend invited me to a “Youth Rally” held in a tent in the parking lot of his congregation. A popular youth minister, Mid McKnight (yes, that was his real name) was the preacher.

I still remember his sermon. Well, actually I just remember the “altar call”. He told a story about a young boy who had a puppy and they grew up together. They loved to go fishing in his rowboat together. The dog would jump in the water and swim around and then back to the boat where his best friend would pull him back in. Eventually the boy and the dog were getting old. And the boy knew it was nearly “that time”. He took the dog out fishing. He helped the old, feeble dog over the side of the boat into the water. The dog struggled to swim. He paddled back to the rowboat and put his paw up on the edge for his friend to pull him in. The boy reached onto the floor of the boat, pulled up an axe and cut off the dog’s paw. The dog looked confused and put his other paw on the edge of the boat and looked at his friend. The boy cut off his other paw. The dog looked at his best friend sadly and the dog sank into the lake. “And THAT is what YOU do to Jesus when you sin! He loves you! He’s your best friend! And you crucify him again and again!”

Kids flowed to the front in tears (I was not particularly impressed with emotional manipulation even back then, so I was not one of them). But, I began attending the church and eventually was convinced of “the truth once for all delivered to the saints” and was baptized.

I believed that the church of Christ that I converted to was “the one true church” and it alone was based solely on Scripture without the additions of “doctrines and traditions of men”. It was rabidly “Rome-o-phobic”. There was a study Bible with a Bible dictionary/concordance in the back. It had entries like “Pope: Not in Bible”. “Rosary: Not in Bible”. “Perpetual Virginity of Mary: Not in Bible". “Praying to Saints: Not in Bible”.

So, ALL other churches were denominations and ours was not a denomination, but just “The Church”. We claimed that “we speak where the Bible speaks, and we are silent where it is silent”. “We have no creed but the Bible” was The Creed. (I recall someone saying it was the shortest and worst creed they’d ever heard….)

Eventually I discovered the churches of Christ were not monolithic nor were they united on all points of doctrine and interpretations of Scripture. I was in the acapella, non-instrumental (conservative) expression. I assumed it was the correct, original, faithful restoration of New Testament apostolic Christianity, so our “brand” was the benchmark of true doctrines. But, I discovered that the “liberal” Disciples of Christ and Christian Church were also products of the Stone/Campbell Restoration Movement (in fact the “liberal” Disciples (Presbyterian Lite) were actually closer to Alexander Campbell’s original movement, which made sense because he was Scottish Presbyterian). But even within our own conservative group we had divisions like one cup communion groups, non-cooperation (hyper congregationalistic, no support of common ministries like colleges, orphanages, missionary work, etc.), no kitchen in the church building groups, no Sunday School groups, divisions over divorce and re-marriage, the roles of women, cessationism, ecumenism (what doctrines of denominations can be accepted)… well, you get the idea.

In 1973 I went to Bible college in Lubbock, TX. I was going to study the Bible, but I ended up studying commentaries about the Bible (written by both church of Christ and denominational scholars), Theological Journals, church publications, listening to sermons by popular expositors, and collecting books. One of my professors quipped in a class, “Your library will be your biggest ego trip as a preacher.” Perhaps not THE biggest, but he was not wrong. The irony of proclaiming to have no creed but the Bible and to “speak where the Bible speaks” while quoting theologians and commentators (but passing it off as my own “bible study” and never attributing the sources) in classes and sermons was not lost on me.

I became fully aware that “we must obey God rather than men” was actually, “we must obey God as interpreted by my favorite men.” And I did not shrink from pointing that issue out to my congregation in my Bible classes. I have two stories that pretty much sum up what got me fired from my associate ministry job and eventually paved my path out the door.

I took our church songbook and read some of the table of contents and the composers of many of our popular hymns. There were Baptists, Lutherans, Catholics, and lots of non-church of Christ composers. Our church teaching was that no one outside of the church of Christ is saved nor has the Holy Spirit because the Holy Spirit was ONLY bestowed to people after they were baptized correctly IN a church of Christ (Acts 2:38), by someone in the church of Christ (the “right brand” of the church of Christ, BTW…).

I asked, “How is it that we sing songs about God, Christ, the church, and salvation by people who are going to hell, have no relationship with God, Christ or the church and do not have the Holy Spirit? How can non-Christians write songs, hymns and spiritual songs for OUR worship and edification (Ephesians 5:19)?” (These classes usually resulted in an Elder’s Meeting with me on Monday nights).

The other story is this: I took the Nicene Creed and jumbled it up (I substituted “universal” for “Catholic” in that phrase, otherwise it was verbatim). I told the class, “I’m going to read some statements and if you agree with them say “AMEN”! As I read the statements, everyone would say “AMEN!” (particularly rousing at “one baptism” and “one universal church”). Then I said, “We just affirmed the Catholic Nicene Creed (I didn’t know about Orthodox church history then) which is read and affirmed in every Catholic, Anglican, Episcopal, Methodist, Lutheran and liturgical church in the world every Sunday. Why then do we think they are going to hell if they agree with us on these fundamental doctrines?” (LONG Elder’s Meeting….)

Anyway, there were a LOT more classes like those but that’s not the main point of this blog post. I’m actually here to talk about “phronema”. It’s being tossed around a LOT these days. There’s books on what a phronema is and how to get one, YouTube videos and blogs about who has one and who doesn’t, what is and is not evidence that you have the right one or not, and which elders have the best phronema to follow. The Orthodox church has 2,000 years of phronema formation and for someone whose baptismal gown is still in the dryer it’s a lot to try to wrap their heads around, but that does not stop a lot of them from claiming to have one. It seems in the past couple years influencer phronema flexing has become somewhat of an internet competition and gets a LOT of traffic among inquirers and the newly illumined.

Interestingly, “phronema” isn’t something an Orthodox monk invented. I knew from my Greek studies in Bible college that St. Paul used the word in Romans 8 (and other places), “the mind/phronema of the Spirit” (as opposed to the mind of the flesh). In the church of Christ the “mind of the Spirit” came through Bible study because the Bible was the “sword of the Spirit” and discerned and rightly divided our thoughts (we…or our branch of it… taught that the Holy Spirit only worked through “the Word”, there was no longer any direct revelation or supernatural influence, ie., charismatic movement stuff, of the Holy Spirit on the individual after the Apostles died (that’s the doctrine of cessationism, it goes back to the 3rd century). So, the Holy Spirit guides us into “all truth” through the Word, the Scriptures, and all we need to do is rightly interpret them (according to our hermeneutic). But, as you can see from my experiences in the church of Christ, that doesn’t work out in practice quite as neatly and cleanly as some hope or believe it can or does…. unless, of course you just dig in and believe that whatever YOU believe is actually THE TRUTH and everyone else is a hell-bound heretic. That makes “true faith” very simple, neat and tidy and clear. Which has its attraction to a lot of people.

So a few days ago this meme popped up in my Facebook feed.

It occurred to me that this is, in a nutshell, the manifesto of “one true phronema folks” and, in as many words, it is also the manifesto I was taught in the churches of Christ:

1. No earthly synod, consensus, or human authority must be believed or obeyed if it disagrees with my interpretation or understanding of what is “the word of truth” (whether Scripture or Patristics).

2. My personal understanding of what is “obedience to Christ rather than to men” is ultimately the arbiter of who is teaching truth and who is a heretic.

3. It assumes the primacy of the individual’s competence and ability to rightly divide the “word of truth” in the face of conflicting interpretations of the same "Fathers” or even inconsistent or contradictory pastoral applications of the Church’s teachings across 2000 years.

4. The anecdote of the exile of St. John shows that church history does indeed demonstrate that a Synod can make a wrong decision, and that church history has ultimately vindicated St. John. But the meme implies and assumes (and virtually directs) that WE, in the present moment of OUR controversies, have the ability to and must discern whether OUR Synod is heretical and thus can be disobeyed, publicly reviled, or ignored. It gives us affirmation of our assumption that, in OUR current controversy, WE are on the “right side” of things and our judgment of the Synod’s teachings vindicates our disregard for our ecclesiology based on our “own research” and our limited and immature understanding of 2000 years of church “phronema”.

I am hard pressed to find a difference between this “Holy Mountain” meme and my church of Christ experience of “we must obey God rather than men” that was actually, “I obey God as interpreted by my favorite men.” If we substitute “sola scriptura” with “sola patristics” we have the same issues. The “sola” is about infallibility and a perfect message that can be perfectly interpreted and thus we can be assured we are right before God and can judge others. Sola scriptura has to prove the inerrancy and perfect harmony of scripture in order to stand. Sola patristics seeks to prove absolute inerrancy and lock step unity of “The Fathers” in all things dogmatic, pastoral and ecclesial to stand. (Why inerrancy in an imperfect world is so important to us is another blog post some day….)

But, as I discovered in the church of Christ, no one truly does “sola scriptura”. What I think is the “clear teaching of Scripture” is ALWAYS mediated through other “men”, a church culture, an ethos, a philosophical framework, a “phronema” that guides a hermeneutic (methods and assumptions of interpretation), and the influences of commentators or teachers that WE like, resonate with us, and we choose to believe and follow based on our personal proclivities, baggage, limited knowledge and fallible understandings. What I’ve discovered is we have the same interpretational issues plaguing Orthodox teachings, especially on the internet. If one pays even cursory attention to comments on a controversial issue it quickly becomes evident which holy elders, internet influencers, celebrity clerics, which “mountain” or Facebook groups someone follows, or what flower or field they are gathering their “patristic nectar” from.

The fact of the matter is that church history, patristic writings, monastic wisdom, and Scripture tells us that someone can be a priest and a clueless shepherd, a monk and drowning in passions, a bishop and a heretic, a patriarch and an anti-christ, dogmatically precise and a legalistic, godless Pharisee. …And a recent convert usually falls into the snare of the devil through pride. (I Tim. 3:6). Nothing. I repeat, NOTHING… ordination, seminary, pilgrimages, tonsures, services, knowledge, zeal or number of followers is an infallible sign or guarantee of “Orthodoxy”. Nor does my personal understanding qualify me to infallibly discern or judge whether the people I am following are truly “Orthodox”.

So. Does all that mean there is no true “Orthodox phronema” that we can attain? Are we hopelessly trapped in a solipsistic rabbit hole of knowledge and faith?

(Morgan Freeman voice): No we are not…

I would say there absolutely IS a true Orthodox phronema just as there is a “phronema of the Spirit” and a “phronema of the flesh” (or passions).

The issue is “what is truth”? And how do we know if we or anyone really “knows it”?

I think very simply it is this: Ultimately, God (and Truth and dogma) is pastoral, not merely intellectual assent to creedal statements. St. Paul in Romans 2 says those who are ignorant of revealed truth but who intuitively live according to the image of it within them (created in the image of Christ) are closer to God than those with correct knowledge but no Christ-imaged life.

So, God is not reducible to syllogisms. Our dogma teaches that He ultimately reduced himself to visible, tangible human flesh: God becomes flesh, not just a thought, a word, a book or a concept, to seek lost human beings, heal them, and unite them to Himself (theosis). As Vladimir Lossky says, EVERYTHING about “Orthodox theology” and experience is about that alone. God is not merely a dogmatic assertion or solipsistic spiritual experience. The Church and all its dogmas point to and explicate that “God is love” and the lover of mankind, and in His image and in union with Christ we too mystically and experientially manifest that love to all we encounter whether we intellectually grasp the fine nuances of the dogma or not. We are called to be craftsmen of the spiritual life, building the household of God according to the gifts we are given, not just scholars.

How do we know we have the “phronema of the Spirit”? Jesus said, by your fruits you shall be known: The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. (Galatians 5:22-23). If your dogma is not manifested in this way, your dogma is serving the phronema of your flesh: vainglory, conceit, provoking, engaging in fruitless disputes, and not restoring the lost in a spirit of gentleness, looking to your own sins. (Galatians 5:24-26, Timothy, Titus).

The Orthodox phronema, explicated over 2000 years through creeds, canons, liturgy, sacraments, holy elders, bishops, monastics and laity is simply this: Salvation is not a passing grade on a dogmatics seminary exam, it is the life you learned to live after you were offered a mysterious, free cure for your cancer from your Creator who loves you to death.

In the end, it is not wrong to study the cure, it is wrong to not take the medicine.