Biblical Theology: Past, Present, and Future (I)
Southwestern Journal of Theology
Volume 55, No. 2 – Spring 2013
Managing Editor: Terry L. Wilder
By Todd J. Billings. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011. 192 pages. Paperback, $19.99.
Billings’ purpose in this book is “to highlight key present-day implications of a Reformation doctrine of union with Christ” (3). In contrast to his former historical-theological work and other contemporary books written on union from a polemic, philosophical, or doctrinal perspective, Billings’ book contributes not only to academia, but also to the church through his resolution of problems posed by contemporary Western Christianity through the application of union with Christ to these dilemmas.
The main feature of Billings’ method is his characterization of his approach as “a theology of retrieval” (2). The term “theology of retrieval,” is a relatively new designation coined by John Webster to refer to “a mode of theology, an attitude of mind … a cluster of theologies which reach a broadly similar set of judgments about the nature of systematic theology” and includes such more familiar theological designations as “post-liberal, post-critical, restorationist,” palaeo-orthodox, intratextual [and] even postmodern” (Webster, The Oxford Handbook of Systematic Theology, 584). Billings’ “theology of retrieval” approach seems to be the mental attitude of engaging with pre-modern sixteenth-century Reformation texts as cross-cultural conversation partners. Through the cultural clash with contemporary Western Christianity, the conversation is aimed at enabling current theologians to see Scripture with “new eyes” or “shake up our modern categories” (3-8, 168).
A secondary feature of his method is to offer an exposition of union with Christ followed by an application of it to resolve one of two general types of contemporary Western Christian problems: “moralistic therapeutic deism” and the various false polarities created by the fundamentalist-modernist controversy (8-10).
Rather than being a carefully constructed argument that expands on a thesis, Billings’ work is “a series of thematic essays” (2) which represent various “reflections” (114) on the theme of union with Christ. In one essay, by relating union to adoption and Calvin’s double grace of justification and sanctification, Billings stresses that union involves the impartation of a new identity and the empowerment to “live into” it (15-21). Billings uses Christian Smith’s two sociological studies (Soul Searching and Souls in Transition) to define the current American cultural theology as “moralistic therapeutic deism” (MTD) (21-22). In MTD, religion is moralistic because God only helps people to be good rather than saving them, and religion is therapeutic and deistic in that God is distant except to resolve the crises of individuals (22). Union resolves the problem of MTD by replacing moralism with salvation in justification, therapy with “living into” a new identity in sanctification, and God’s distance in deism with intimacy in adoption (26-34).
In perhaps his most significant essay, Billings demonstrates from Scripture and the Reformed tradition that the bondage of the will or total depravity “mirrors” or is the necessary counterpart of union with Christ (36-40). A contemporary problem is that both Calvinists and their detractors misunderstand the TULIP acronym, with its emphasis on total depravity, as indicating that predestination is the “central dogma” (57-58) or “theological core” (170) of Reformed theology. Union with Christ clears up this misunderstanding when those in the Reformed camp and its detractors recognize that it was not the original Reformers or later Reformed scholastics who lost the parallel between the bondage of the will/total depravity and union with Christ, but rather contemporary Calvinists (57-58, 170-71).
In his closing essay, Billings argues that while the incarnational ministry model has developed a number of significant insights, it is based on the faulty theological premise of imitating the “unique and unrepeatable … saving event” of the incarnation. As a result, its valuable insights are best preserved by basing them on the alternate foundation of ministry in union with Christ (14, 124).
Throughout the book, Billings demonstrates his expertise in the topic of union with Christ and historical theology. In his essays, Billings seems to cover nearly the full multidimensionality of the concept of union with Christ by dealing with its soteriological (65), pneumatological (152-56), ecclesiological (15-27), mystical (67, 83), ethical (48), and eschatological (153-55) dimensions in the context of detailed arguments through the writings of various historical figures. However, this book seems better suited for those with at least some basic working knowledge of the discussion about union with Christ rather than beginners. One reason for this assessment is that Billings does not give an in-depth explanation of what union with Christ is, presumably because he assumes that his readers already know.
Billing’s various analyses of contemporary Western Christianity seem to be on the mark. For example, Billing’s summary of Smith’s studies as “MTD” appears to be an accurate description of the current state of popular theology in America. While Billings does an excellent job of describing contemporary theological and cultural problems as well as expositing the various historical concepts related to union with Christ, the main value of his work does not seem to be his use of union to resolve contemporary issues. Rather, his work seems more important for its demonstration of how certain well-known theological and ministry ideas in Scripture are related to union with Christ.
One exception may be his second essay. While arguing on different grounds, Billings’ claim that both Calvinists and their detractors misunderstand the TULIP acronym as indicating that predestination is the “central dogma” (57-58) or “theological core” (170) of Reformed theology mutually reinforces Kennedy’s (Union with Christ and the Extent of the Atonement in Calvin) claim that union rather than predestination is central. Billings argues that TULIP is a bad summary of Dort and Reformed doctrine because: (1) Dort did not summarize the Reformed faith, but rather responded to the Arminian Remonstrance and “supplemented” the Dutch Reformed confession of faith found in the Belgic Confession, (2) Dort dealt with election, sin, and the assurance of salvation, but never mentioned the “limited” atonement, and (3) Dort emphasized sin more than communion with God, while the Belgic Confession placed more emphasis on the latter (58-59). Kennedy argues that the structure of Calvin’s Institutes indicates that union rather than predestination is central since union is included in the main discussion of the application of the benefits of salvation in Book III of the Institutes, and predestination only occurs in the subsequent secondary location as an answer to the ancillary question of “why not all are saved” (151). An important question would be whether Billings and Kennedy represent a growing new consensus regarding the center of Calvin’s thought.
