My friend, Travis McMaken (almost  PhD from Princeton Theological Seminary and new Professor of Religion at Lindenwood University) has cyber-inked an excellent clairvoyant little piece on the place and need for the continued existence for theologians in and for the Church of Jesus Christ (not the LDS 😉 ). This is something, in some ways, that I have personally struggled with; my heart is for God’s people (so pastoral), and it appears that my drive and gifting is to think rather deeply or more acutely for those same people (God’s people, the Church). I say that this is a struggle because I often feel conflicted about this; my angst has been because within my “Evangelical” sub-culture there is a de-valuation of dogma and theology, and a valuation for application and Christian living (the “relevant” stuff). Unfortunately there seems to be a dissonance between the fact that good theology (orthodoxy) actually impinges upon good Christian living (orthopraxy), and vice-versa. This is the sub-culture of Christianity that I inhabit, and so often I sense that there is a need for an apologetic for the need for theologians therein. Travis’ points provide a great summation, and little argument, for why the Church needs theologians (Biblical and/or Systematic . . . both!). I wanted to post what Travis said in full, but he would not let me 😉 ; so I’m simply going to post a couple of his points (and a link to his post where you can read all of his points in full), and then I will try and provide a brief constructive statement myself at the end of Travis’ points. McMaken says:

First, what is theology? Considered formally, theology is the church’s critical reflection upon its proclamation, in word and deed, of the good news of Jesus Christ – the Gospel. Considered materially, theology is the attempt to describe with conceptual care what this Gospel means for how we understand ourselves and our relationships – with each other, with creation, and with God. Theology is thus the province of a particular community – the church – but is an activity performed for the sake of the world.

And:

Third, why theology? The purpose for theological existence should now be clear – the church must critically reflect on its proclamation of the Gospel. But, let us take this question as referring to that particular endeavor undertaken by the professional theologian. In this case, the church identifies among its members those who are particularly gifted for the theological task, setting them apart for the task of intensive theological thinking. The task of such a “theologian” is to do what the rest of the church does, only with greater intellectual care and rigor. The professional theologian then, regardless of what other loyalties the academy or society might foist upon her – and these may well be important responsibilities – is first and foremost a servant of the church. (link to full post from Travis, here)

I gave you his first and third points, you will need to click over to Travis’ for his second and fourth (final) points. What is instructive about Travis’ reflection, is that he not only identifies that there is a place for ‘professional’ theologians for the church; but that all Christians are theologians! That said, and as noted in his point three above, there is a legitimate place for so called professional theologians (Karl Barth’s “informal theologians”) for the edification of Christ’s body, the church; and not only for the church, but to the extent that the church is for the world, in Christ, for the world too! The Apostle Paul’s dictum would fit here:

And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, 12. for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; 13. until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. ~Ephesians 4.11-12

I would suggest (and even argue) that for the church to be a disciple making and replicating church (thus fulfilling the missio Dei, the mission of God’s personal life; cf. Mt. 28.19-20); that it needs to intentionally make place for her theologians (pastor-teachers — John Calvin sees a distinction between these two; i.e. that there are pastors and then there are teachers for the church, in rarer occasions there are those who are both [Calvin himself being one of those exceptions]). In fact, to be adventurous, I might even argue that insofar as all Christians are theologians (per Travis’ point 2, see his full post at his blog); that the fulfillment of ‘The Great Commission’ takes place when the “church’s” theologians replicate themselves, and produce other theologians until we all reach the unity of the faith (I am positing that being a disciple of Christ and a theologian for the church of Christ are interchangeable things at their most base and denotative level).

My proposal, is that the church, the “Evangelical church” in particular, needs to recognize the place of both theology and theologians if she hopes to ever be a thriving healthy body of Christ who serves as His vicar for itself and the world; seeking her constant sustenance from the true bread of heaven (cf. Jn. 5) alone! If the church is going to be the church, if we are going to participate, truly, in eternal life (cf. Jn. 17.3); then theology and theologians need to take a central place within the life of the church. I wonder what heaven will be like for all the non-theologians of the church? I would gather it might be somewhat  hellish, since all we are going to be doing is theology for all eternity. Why not get an early start, eh?