Our own circumstance is not as turbulent as Baxter’s, and our writing is rarely as lively. Nevertheless, our church is beset by controversies, and the contentious ecclesiastical climate reflects a changing, often divided society. Americans today confront ecological threats, terrorist attacks, questions about unbalanced American international power, and the rise of Islamist radicalism, as well as both promising and troubling scientific advances. They find themselves in the midst of changing patterns of global economy and immigration, increased educational and employment opportunities for many women, new communication and information technologies, prominent (mostly urban) professional and secular enclaves, contested gay marriages, traditionalist reactions, and a plurality of social-moral authorities. Culturally speaking, the center seems to be fragmenting rather than holding. Accordingly, "established" denominations such as our own, which once had their niche in an earlier cultural synthesis, are rendered insecure. They are no longer certain just what to legitimate and what to de-legitimate. Denominational politics are passionate and sharp, and passionate and sharp politics almost inevitably develop some unattractive sides, e.g., self-righteous posturing, vicious caricatures, spurious charges, and occasionally irresponsible journalism.

Under these circumstances, and taking a page out of Baxter’s book, many Presbyterians sense that theology matters. For one thing, comments on the challenges, issues, and changes confronting our society are offered by very many institutions and communities – from the political parties, the newspapers, and the networks, to the AARP, NOW, NAACP, the Sierra Club, business and professional associations. The distinctive thing that churches have to offer is an explicitly theological consideration of current practices, issues, and events. Even more fundamentally, perhaps, it is only by fostering genuine theological inquiry and discussion that the church is able to relate its deepest convictions and beliefs to contemporary life.

Today, however, one also sometimes detects an additional, more wishful motive among Presbyterians for supporting theological discussions, namely, the hope that they will foster greater unity and agreement. The idea is not without merit, and it is easy to see why it should surface in a denomination divided by controversies. But, especially in contentious times, it seems important to cut our confidence down to size. Despite all the committees and commissions, despite all the attempts to foster sustained conversation among "pastor-theologians," we should not assume that paying more attention to theology necessarily will promote unity and peace.

Part of the reason has to do with the persistent connection between Christian theology and church teaching. Broadly speaking, Christian teaching is instruction in a Christian way of living. It is training intended to help people interact with other persons, objects, situations, and realities in a manner that is faithfully responsive to the God disclosed in Jesus Christ. That is, the church has an interest in helping people interact with their families, their possessions, governments, forests, fishes, and more in a manner that is also faithfully responsive to God. The church tries to help people live faithfully.

For our purposes, here, the critical point is that the enterprise of building up people in a faithful way of life itself requires some reflective activity. It requires that we articulate a vision or a picture. This is so because we need a vision or a picture of objects and others in relation to God if we are to know how to interact with them in a manner that is faithfully responsive to God. If we are to interact with families, possessions, governments, forests, and fishes in a manner that is faithfully responsive to God, then we need to have some picture of how these things are related to God. This is where Christian theology comes in. Christian theology is the reflective attempt to picture or envision ourselves, as well as the many objects and others with which we interact in relation to the God disclosed in Jesus Christ. And, this is not an optional ecclesiastical "head-trip," but an intellectual activity that remains indispensable for those who wish to make a faithful witness.

Consider any number of contemporary challenges and issues. The church has a stake in encouraging us to ask how we might respond to economic interests as well as to delicate natural ecologies in a manner that is faithfully responsive to God. It has an interest in asking how we shall engage international politics in a manner that is faithful. Questions such as these require that we interpret environments, persons, institutions, and practices in relation to God. They require that we engage in theological reflection. And, our theologizing often is improved by conversations and debates. Still, in the course of theological conversations and debates, very many different things can happen.

Take, for example, our current differences over gay ordination, same sex unions, and gay marriages. Many people point out that there are important exegetical questions involved, as well as more general understandings of scripture and its authority. But, in fact, there is a host of additional questions lurking just below the surface. Some have to do with creation, christology, and theological anthropology. Others concern how to make use of the Bible in moral and theological arguments, as well as whether and how we shall make appeals to personal accounts, biology, psychology, and cultural studies. Not to mention questions about sin, grace, law, justice, and the doctrine of the church.

The church is and ought to be a community of theological discourse, and it makes sense for Presbyterians to discuss all of these things and more. Occasionally, we may find that some people agree about sin and grace even though they differ on gay ordination and / or interpretative questions surrounding Romans 1:26-27. We may also find that some people entertain deep exegetical differences but nevertheless agree that scripture is authoritative. Others, although they agree in supporting gay ordination and same-sex marriages, may have sharp disagreements when it comes to christology as well as the significance of empirical studies for Christian theology and ethics. Still others may be led to the realization that they differ, not only on the quite significant practical issues of gay ordination and gay relationships, but also on how to understand the Bible, God, creation, Jesus Christ, the Gospel, grace, sin, and the church.

Obviously, some of these discoveries may help some people to identify shared ideas and convictions, as well as to articulate why they elect to stay together in the same church despite significant differences. It therefore makes sense to have a measured confidence in the ability of theological study and conversations to strengthen church unity. But it should come as no surprise to Protestants that, sometimes, theological study, conversation, and debate serve only to sharpen our awareness of extraordinarily deep differences and disagreements. Theology matters, but it does not always foster ecclesiastical unity and peace and, indeed, it cannot be reduced to a means to these ends. As Baxter well knew, theology matters when it fosters peace and unity in the church and also when it doesn’t. It matters because it is integral to the church’s attempt to foster and to make a faithful witness to the only God. So, let a thousand theological conversations bloom, but don’t be surprised if, at the end of the day, there are still debates to join and critics to answer.

¹ The Practical Works of Richard Baxter in Four Volumes (Ligonier, PA: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 1990), vol. 1, p. 5.