Transcript
GILLESPIE: With all the saints in Heaven and earth, we declare that blessing and glory and wisdom and power and might and thanksgiving be unto our God forever and ever, Amen. Let us worship God.
(music)
GILLESPIE: Let us hear the Word of God. Now, concerning spiritual gifts, brothers and sisters, I do not want you to be uninformed, you know that when you were pagans, you were enticed and led astray to idols that could not speak. Therefore, I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God ever says, "Let Jesus be cursed." And no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit. Now, there are varieties of gifts, but the
same spirit. And there are varieties of services, but the same Lord. And there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. To each He's given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom and, to another, the utterance of knowledge, according to the same Spirit. To another, faith by the same Spirit. To another, gifts of healing by the one Spirit. To another, the working of miracles.
To another, prophecy. To another, the discernment of spirits. To another, various kinds of tongues. To another, the interpretation of tongues. And these are activated by one and the same Spirit who allots to each one individually just as the Spirit chooses. For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body; so it is with Christ, wherein the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body --
Jews or Greeks, slaves or free -- and we were all made to drink of one spirit. Indeed, the body does not consist of one member, but of many. If the foot would say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear would say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole body
were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? But as it is, God arranged the members of the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many members get one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you." Nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you." On the contrary, the members of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable. And those members of the body we think less honorable, we clothe
with greater honor. And our less respectable members are treated with greater respect. Whereas our more respectable members do not need this. But God has so arranged the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior member, that there may be no dissention within the body but the members may have the same care for one another. If one member suffers, all suffer together with it. If one member is honored, all rejoice together with it. Now, you are the body of Christ and, individually,
members of it. Here ends the reading of God's Word.
(music)
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 1: The board of trustees for Princeton Theological Seminary, upon recommendation (inaudible) has elected the following person to the rank of (inaudible) professor. And Dr. [Eldrich Wilhelm?]. The board of trustees for Princeton Theological Seminary, upon recommendation of (inaudible) has elected the following persons to the rank of [associate professor?]: Dr. Richard [Walker?],
(inaudible), Dr. Mark [Line Tater?]. For (inaudible) and associate professors, share a (inaudible) with their cause in the teaching, research, and plan and, in addition, have constantly (inaudible) to participate in the educational work of the institution. We now proceed to
give [four?] recognitions with these (inaudible). The board of trustees responsive to the requirement of the plan of the Seminary specifies that every person elected to a professorship or associate professorship in this institution answer affirmatively
to the following questions. Do you believe in one God, the Father, the Son, and Holy Spirit, and do you confess to [news?] of Lord Jesus Christ, (inaudible) Savior (inaudible), and acknowledge him (inaudible) over all things through the church (inaudible)?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 2: I do trust and acknowledge Jesus Christ. Through Christ, (inaudible).
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 1: And do you accept the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the unique and authoritative witness to Jesus Christ in the (inaudible) and by the Holy Spirit, God's word to you?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 2: I do.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 1: And will you perform the duties of a professor in this Seminary and obedience to Jesus Christ under the authority of the Scripture?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 2: Yes. (inaudible)
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 1: Have you been [induced?], as far as you know, [that your?] own heart to accept the call to the office into which you are now being inducted with a sincere desire to promote the glory of God and the Gospel [of His Son?]?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 2: (inaudible).
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 1: And are you willing to undertake the work of a professor in this Seminary, and [do what you promise?] to start the duties which are incumbent on you in this character as God shall give you strength? I ask you now to step forward and to inscribe your names on this book that bears the signatures of generations of trustees and professors whom have been elected to serve in this institution.
(silence)
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 1: It is my pleasure to announce that these professors are now orally installed in their office and we pray upon them the blessing of the great head of the church as they discharge their sacred responsibilities.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 3: Please join me in prayer. Praise us, God. We thank You for all of the diversity [you give us?], that You bestow on Your (inaudible). And especially to say thank You for the gifts You have bestowed upon this Seminary. Gifts of mind and body and spirit, of students and faculty and staff,
and in all those who have gone out from this place in servitude to the church (inaudible).
(unrelated material, not transcribed)
GILLESPIE: My esteemed colleagues, these words are for you, although others are free to listen in if they will. I need to say, first of all, I am plunging into water in these remarks that's far over my head. But when you're in over your head, it doesn't much matter whether it's 10 feet or 10 fathoms. Keep in mind the
story of the British preacher who, in the middle of an extemporaneous sermon, became lost in a convoluted sentence, stopped, and said to the congregation, "friends, I have long lost the nominative of this sentence. But I want you to know I am bound for the kingdom of God." It may
seem imperent [sic] -- impertinent of me to refer to the confusion of the church in ancient Corinth over authentic spirituality in this charge to you newly installed members of the Princeton Seminary faculty. But I do so in the hope that together we may see the similarity between the paradigm that characterized that ecclesiastical situation and the one that, today, I think, shapes our
own in theological education. So my hope also includes the possibility that the apostolic response to the Corinthian issues may [illumine?] and resolve the issues that, today, becks us. In the twelfth chapter of his first letter to the church in Corinth, Paul is clearly addressing a question posed to him by the congregation. The grammatical ambiguity of the [genitive?] construction
[toned the Maricone?] makes it unclear whether their question is about spiritual things in general -- [the neuter in domatica?] -- or spiritual people in particular -- [the masculine de maricoy?]. in either case, the underlying issue, as articulated in verse seven, is the manifestation of the Spirit. The manifestation of the Spirit in and through human life,
the formulation that conjoins spiritual things and spiritual people. For spiritual people are simply those in and through whom the Spirit manifests itself in and to the world. Now, the context of Paul's response, which includes chapters 13 and 14, makes it evident that at least some believers in Corinth were convinced that the Spirit is manifest in a particular
form of inspired speech, which the apostle designates, and he may be the one who designated it for the first time, as [glaso la langue?], speaking in tongues. To the consternation of Presbyterians and other so-called mainline Christians, Paul does not deny this claim. But he does argue that it is a myopic view. For the Spirit is infinitely
more creative and complex, not to mention clever, than these Corinthians are prepared to acknowledge. So the point he scores in verses four to 11 is simply that the Spirit is manifest in the work of the Spirit and this work, according to the sovereign will of the Spirit, is characterized not by uniformity but by diversity. There are thus words of wisdom and words of knowledge.
There is faith as well as gifts of healing and the working of miracles. Faith here, apparently, is the kind that moves mountains. There is also prophecy and the discernment of spirits, in addition to various kinds of tongues and the interpretation of tongues. Such diversity, however, for Paul is not an instance of pluralism. Not only did he not know that word, he did not recognize that reality.
Because this modern slogan celebrates variety without concern for an underlying unity. Paul speaks, rather, of diversity that presupposes unity; a unity grounded in the source of the diversity. Accordingly, he writes, there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are diversities of services, but the same Lord. There are diversities of working, but the same God works
them all in everyone. Moreover, this unity is evident in the community created by the Spirit through the Gospel. Now, you -- and folks in the South would say correctly, y'all -- you all are the body of Christ and individually members of it. This is a metaphor, of course, but it is no mere metaphor.
We have learned of late from Paul [Recours?] and others that metaphors are more than linguistic window dressings; metaphors are, as Janet [Martin-Soskas?] puts it, reality depicting. The church is not merely like a body. The church is, in a deep and profound sense, a body, the body of Christ. And as members of that body, we are individuals, but individuals in relation
to one another and not individuals in isolation from one another. Because the body does not consist of one member, but of many, no one member can say to another that is different, "I have no need of you." Just as the different organs of the human body serve necessary functions for the sake of the whole body, so also the different members of the church serve the necessary functions that the Spirit chooses
to work through each and every one for the common good. And that, Paul concludes, is as much a matter of faith as it is a fact of life. Now, what does all this have to do with modern theological education and with those who devote their professional lives to providing it? Just this. Theological education, conditioned as it is by the ethos of the modern university,
suffers from a confusion over the unity and diversity of truth and knowledge that parallels the Corinthian confusion over the unity and diversity of the manifestations of the Spirit. As the Corinthian enthusiast, we're guilty of reductionism by their limitation of the Spirit to a particular phenomenon. So the sciences of today seek to reduce all of reality to that aspect of it that concerns
each one of them respectively. So that we are told everything can be explained and understand in terms of physics or everything can be explained and understand in terms of biology or everything can be explained in terms of psychology or historic history or sociology or you name it. At least so it is claimed. All reality is reduced to one aspect. Paul's emphasis upon the diversity of the Spirit, of course, has its counterpart in the [pluriferation?]
of sciences and disciplines and specialty fields in the modern university. Recently, for example, I received a letter from the chairman of a search committee at a major European university inviting nominations for a distinguished chair in New Testament on its faculty. Not long later, I met and had lunch with the dean of that particular theological college and, in the course of our luncheon conversation, I asked him what kind of a New Testament scholar
they were looking for. His answer went something like this: "Well, we have someone in Jewish and Hellenistic backgrounds. We have someone in the synoptic tradition. I suppose we need a Pauline scholar." Too bad for John. So the following story, though apocryphal, and no doubt characterized by hyperbole,
still makes, I think, a genuine point. It's about a German professor who [not naturally a German professor?] who devoted his entire professional career to the study of the uses of the imperative and the subjunctive moods in the Pauline corpus. He became the world's leading authority on the uses of the imperative and the subjunctive in the Pauline corpus. He wrote not only [pro leganama?] but six volumes on the use
of the imperative and the subjunctive in the Pauline corpus. When he eventually retired, his former graduate students gave him a retirement banquet at which many of them spoke in the eulogizing way about his marvelous career and the great contribution he had made to knowledge. And finally, when it was his turn to respond to all these wonderful things that had been said about him, he was overcome with emotion. And finally,
one of the students says, "Herr Professor, what is the problem?" And he said, "My life has been wasted. Despite all the things you have said about me, my life has been wasted." And the students objected, "Professor, you are without a doubt the leading authority in the whole world on the uses of the subjunctive and the imperative in the Pauline corpus." And he says, "Yes, I know, but I should have specialized on the imperative."
Now, you know, there's more truth to that than poetry. And the result of this specialization in higher education has been the fragmentation of knowledge and the replacement of the university by the multiversity, in which people speak in unknown tongues. Where people in discipline really cannot understand people
in another science because they do not speak a common language. What is absent today from higher education in America is the sense of the whole and a basis for the unity of knowledge. And it's often lacking in theological education. Students are genuinely puzzled by how their studies in Bible and history and theology and practical theology cohere in a way that
makes sense. And where theological education has an edge on higher education in general is in its opportunity to look for the coherence of its disciplines and its specialty fields, not in the systems constructed by the human mind but in what Paul calls the mind of Christ. That is, in the one who is the source of all reality and the author of all truth. To paraphrase Paul, there are
diversities sciences, but the same Spirit. There are diversities of disciplines, but the same Lord. There are diversities of specialty fields, but it is the same God who makes them all possible. Bu the unity of truth in the [tri-une?] God has its counterpart in the community of scholars who, together, pursue that truth. In this regard, theological faculties are more like the church than they are like the university. For we too are
members of the body of Christ. And that con-- and that entails a commitment to one another not only on the personal level, but on the professional level as well. On a Christian theological faculty, the biblical scholar cannot say to the theologian, "I have no need of you." And the historian certainly cannot say to the practical theologian, "Who needs you?" Each department, each discipline each
specialty field serves a necessary function for the wellbeing of the faculty as a whole and, ultimately, for the wellbeing of the institution and, ultimately, for the wellbeing of the church. In his important book, The Fragility of Knowledge, which Professor Osmer just reviewed -- I read it last night -- Edward Farley speaks of the need in higher education to develop what he calls the ideal of synthetic relationality.
That's a high-powered phrase, but what it means is getting it all together. That represents an intellectual exercise that depends for its success upon the undergirding genuine relationality, not only of reality but of those who pursue the knowledge of it. Perhaps that is the profoundest of the word collegiality, a term that we often reserve for governance issues in the institution.
And as important as that is, the deeper issue of collegiality is the sense in which we nurture and encourage one another in our respective fields, by our own professional labors. This morning, the board of trustees has installed four new tenured members of the Seminary faculty. Interestingly, one in Old Testament, one in New Testament, one in Christian education -- practical theology -- and one in theology. All that's missing is the history department and we promise
to take care of that next year at this time. So my charge to you, my new and, in some sense, renewed colleagues, is very simple. I charge you on this occasion to pursue your respective teaching and research under the Pauline assurance, that to each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.
Amen.
(music)
GILLESPIE: And now go in peace and the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.
ALL: Amen.
(music)