The death of John Stott has led to a veritable flood of
accolades and uncritical adulation over the last few months. A recent example was the memorial service for
him at Wheaton College which raised a number of questions in my mind. One was the issue of what Stott himself would
have thought of it. I never met him but
he seems to have been a modest and unassuming man by all accounts; it was thus
probably a relief to him not to have to be there and listen to the hyperbolic
claims being made for him and his ministry by others. We can presumably assume that one who did not
live for the praise of men during his lifetime is probably not too bothered
about it afterwards either.
The second question, or perhaps better, observation, was why
the art of critical appreciation seems to have disappeared from the culture of
the modern world, especially the modern evangelical (for want of a better term)
world.
Even as I write, I have just been passed an article from USA Today in which Stott is described as
one of the Christian church's `most universally beloved figures.' Only an American could have written
that. Back home in Britain, Stott was a
more ambiguous figure, great man though he undoubtedly was. Like all great men, his faults were as
dramatic as his virtues, from his conscientious objection to war service in
World War II to aspects of his theology to his ecclesiastical strategy. Keep Reading >>>
No comments:
Post a Comment